Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1895-12-24
Mr.. cleveland Serves Notice
Upon John Bull.
Monroe Doctrine Rea6irmed.
WIN Resist British Aggressions IN
Venezuela.
Hioorous Words in a Message Sent
to Congress.

gress the following message
To NE Coag,ess:-In my annual message auT
s-essed 10 the Congress on the 90 instant l
caiied attention to the pending boundary CON
,rnversy between Great Britain aud the he
nnhi;c of Venezuela, and recited the substance
n : reuresentation made by this government
~ nor Rritannic majesty's government sug-
restinp reasons why such dispute snouia DC
snbmitted to arbitration for settlement ana IN
oniring whether it would be so submitted.
The answer of the British government,
xvbich was then awaited, has since been re-
N.Hrsd and together with the dispatch to
which 1t Is a reply is hereto appended.
Such reniy Is embodied in two communica-
,,ena addressed by the British prime minister
to Sir Julian Pauncefote, the Brltish ampassa-
5or at this capital. 1t will be seen that one
of these communications is devoted exeiu-
siyeIv To observations upon the Monroe doc
trine and claims that in the present instance
n new and strange extension and Development
of this doctrine is insisted on by the United
States, that the reasons 9ustiylng an apRenl
roe are generally inapplicable ITO the state OF
things in which we live at the present DAY,
and sspecially inapplicable to a controversy
involving the boundary line pet"een oreas
Britain and Venezuela.
Without attempting extended IN
reply to these positions, 1t may not pc amlss
To suggest that the doctrine upon which we
Stand Is strong and sound because us ENFORCE
nsnt ia important to our peace and safety ms
a nation. and is essential to the integrity OF
our free Institutions, and the tranquil mann
tcnance of our distinctive form OF government.
It was intended to apply to every stage OF our
national life, and cannot become obsolete WINE
onr republic ndures If the balance oil power
Ia instly a cause for jealous anxiety among
the governments OF the ola worlo anu asuoJ Il
for onr absolute non-interference, none the
less is an observance of the Monroe doctrine
of vital concern to our people and their gov
eminent.
irsist nnon this doctrine without regard TO
s.the state of things in which we live" or any
CHANGED conditions here or elsewhere, Ills not
apparent why its application may not NC u
yoked in the present controversy
III n European power, by an extension OF lts
boundaries. takes possession OF the territory
of one of our neighboriug republics against
It's will and in ~derogation OF It's rlgnts. ltls
dif,c,It to see WHY, to that extent, such Euro
mean power does not thereby attempt 10 OK
tend It's system of government TO that p0reloh
| of this continent which Is thus take1. Lnisis
the precise action which President Monroe de-
clnred to be dangerous to our peace and
%safety,'' and it can make no difference whether
| the European system is extended by an au-
vance of frontier or otherwise.
II IA also suggested in the British reply that
wa should not seek to apply the Monroe doc
trine to the pending dispute because IL does
not embody any principle oil international raw
which sis founded on the general consent OF
nations. and that "no statesman, however
eminent. and no nation. however powerful,
are competent to insert into the code OF inter-
national law q noxel pr anS : ppss;cS has not
since been accepted by the government OF any
\ other country. a
tend has peculiar, If not exclusive, relation 10
the United States. 1t may not have been ad-
! mitted in SO many words to the code OF inter-
natiouaII law, but since in International conn
ellis every nation Is entitled 70 inc rignts :.
longing to It, If the enforcement ofthe Mionroe
Idoctrine is something we may justly claim, IL
mas its place in the code of international law
as certainly and as securely as If 1t were spe,
| cifcalIv mentioned, and when the United
States is a sutton before the high tribunal that
| administers international law the question 10
be determined is whether or not we present
claims which the justice OF u at CODE OF ia"
can find to be right and valid.
The Monroe doctrine finds its recognition IN
those principles of international law which
are based upon the theory that every nauon
shall have its rignts protecVeu anu ls JUST
claims enforced.
OF course, this government is entirely con-
ddent that under the sanction of this doctrine
we have clear rights and undonoted ciai III
Nor is this ignored in the British reply. The
nrime munster, while not admitting that the
Monroe doctrine is applicable to present con,
ditions, states SIN declaring that the onltea
| States would resist any such enterprise IL II
was contemplated President Monroe adopted
a policy which received the entire sympathy
of the English government OF that date" He
futher declares, Though thong Q IN tne eb ian ag1 ! oc rie Of
objects which most English would agree to be
saintsry. it is impossible to admit that they
have been Inscribed by inadequate authority
in the code of international law"
AGAIN he says: 'They Cher majesty's govern
ment) fully concur with the view which Pres
idcnt Monroe apparently entertained, tnat
any disturbance OF the existlng terFitorlai
distribution in that hemisphere by any fresh
lacquisition on the paIt of any European state
would be a highly fnexpedient change"
In the belief that the doctrine for which we
contend was clear and definite, that it was
founded upon substantial considerations and
/ Sn-AIxu.1 nTr 81 fpfy md welfare that it was
fully applicable to our present conditions ana
to the state of the worlds progress, and that
1t was directly related to the pending controT
versy, and without any convictions as TO the
final merits of the dispute, but anxious to
learn in a satisfactory and conclusive manner
whether Great Britain sought, under a claim
of boundary, to extend her possessions on this
continent without right, or whether she mere
lly sought possession of territory fairly in
Guided within her lines of ownership, this gov
ernment proposed to the government of Great
Britain a resort TO arbitration as the proper
means of settling the question, to the end that
u vexatious boundary dispute between the W
contestants might be determined and our cx-
act standing aud relation in respect to the
controversy might be made clear
1t will be seen from the correspondence
herewith submitted that this proposition has
been declined by the British governmc ut, upon
grounds which, in the circumstances, seem to
me to be far from satisfactory 1t Is deeply
disappointing that such an appeal, actuated by
the most friendly feelings toward both nations
/ uiIGCIlN HSds aAAA - SSS Va
Justice and to the magnanimity of one of the
great powers of the world and touching its re-
iations to one comparatively weak and small,
should have produced no better results.
The course to be pursued by this govern
ment, in view of the present condition, does
| not apDear to admit OF serious doubt. Having
labored faithfully for many years to induce
Great Britain to submit this dispute TO Impair
tial arbitration, aud having been now finally
appraised, of her refusal TO do so, nothing re-
mains but to accept the situation, to recognize
it's plain requirements, and to deal with it &C
cordingly. Great Britain's present proposition
has never thus far been regarded us admissible
by Venezuela, though any adjustment of the
boundaries which that country may deem tor
her advantage and may enter into of her own
free will cannot, of course, be objected to by
the United States.
Assuming. however, that the attitude of
Venezuela will remain unchanged, the dispute
has reached such a stag as to make 1t now
incnmben nj upon the United States to take
measures to determine with sufficient certainty
for its justification what is the true divisional
line between the republic of Venezuela and
British Guiana. The inquiry to that end
should, of course, be conducted carefully and
judiciaIIy, and due weight should be given to
all available evidence, records and facts i'll
support of the claims of both parties.
In order that such an examination should be
prosecuted in n thorough and satisfactory
manner, / suggest that the Congress make an
adequate appropriation for the expenses of Il