Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1895-12-26

the Code of International Law
Salisburys Reply a Flat Refusal to
Submit to Arbitration-Cong to
Act.
Washington, d. c., Dec. 1S.-The
president sent to congress yesterday
afternoon Great Britain's reply to the
note of the United States asking that
the boundary dispute between Great
Britain and Venezuela be submitted
to arbitration, together with a special
message on the subject. The messag e
says: THE reply is embodied in two
communications. 1t will be seen that
one Of these is devoted exclusively to
observations upon the Monroe doc
trine. Great Britain claims that in
the present instance a new and
strange extension OF this doctrine IS
insisted on by the United States; that
the reasons justifying an appeal to
the doctrine as enunciated by Presi-
dent Monroe are inapplicable to the
state of things in which we live at
the present day,'-especially to the
controversy involving the boundary
line between Great Britain and Vene-
zuela."
Without attempting an extended
argument, says the president, it may
not be amiss TO suggest that the doc
trine upon which we stand is strong
and sound because its enforcement is
inn, to
a nation and essential to the integrity
of our free institutions and the tran
qu4I maintenance of our distinctive
form of government. 1t was intended
to apply to every stage Of our ma
tional life and cannot become obsolete
while our republic endures. If the
balance of power is a just cause for
jealous anxiety among the govern
ments of the old world and a subject
for our absolute non-interference, none
the less is the observance of the Mon
roe doctrine of vital concern to our
people and government. We may,
therefore, declares the president, prop
erIy insist upon this doctrine without
regard to ''the state Of things in which
We live" or any changed condI,ons
here or elsewhere. 1t is not apparent
why it's application may not be in
Yoked in the present controversy. If
a European power by the extension Of
it's boundaries takes possession Of the
territory of one Of our neighbOring re-
publics against it's will and in deroga-
ton OF it's rights it is difficult to see
why to that extent such European
power does not thereby attempt to eX
tend it's system of government to that
portion of this continent thus taker.
This is the precise action which Presi-
dent Monroe declared to be danger
Gus to our peace and safety and It
can make no difference whether the
European system is extended by an
advance of frontier or otherwise.
It is also suggested in the British
reply that we should not seek to ap-
ply the Monroe doctrine to the pend
ing dispute because it does not en-
body any principle of international
law founded on the general consent
of the nations and that no statesman,
however eminent and no nation how
ever powerful, is competent to insert
into the code of international law
novel principle never recognized be-
fore which has not since been &C
cepte- by the government Of any
oIDer country" Practically, says the
president in reply, the principle for
which we contend has peculiar if not
exclusive relations to us. 1t may not
have been admitted in so many words
to the code of international law, but
since in international councils every
nation is entitled to the rights be-
longing to it, if the enforcement OF the
Monroe doctrine is something we may
justly claim, it has place in the code
of international law as certainly and
securely as though specifically men
toned, and when the United States is
a sutton 1fore the high tribunal that
administers international law the
question to be determined is whether
or not we present claims which in
Justice that code can find right and
valid. The Monroe doctrine finds rec
ignition in the principle OF interna-
tional law based on the theory that
every nation shall have its rights
protected, it's just claims enforced. Of
course this government, continues the
president, is entirely confident that
under the sanction of this doctrine we
nave clear rights, andoubted claims.
Nor is this ignored in the British re-
ply, for the prime minister states: IN
declaring that the United States
would resist any such enterprise
President Monroe adopted a policy
which received the entire sympathy OF
( the English government at that date.
! The British minister further de-
. clares: Though the language o.
President Monroe is directed to the
attainment of objects which most Eng
lishmen would agree to be salutar1
it is impossible to admit that the!
have been inscribed by any ADEQUATE
authority in the code of internationa
law" Again he says: Her ma
jestys government fully concurs witt
the view which President Monroe ap
parently entertained, that any disturb
i -