The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-12-24
A. rrro.roiS VIEW.

vlduals who have allowed their minds
| TO be Ted away from the true issue IN
the Venezuela case. They say that the
publications they have read seem to
make out a case Of Great Britain nav
Ing at one time or another practically
conceded 20 Venezuela the right to part
OF the territory In dispute. Lord Sails
bury's reply to Mr.. Oineys dispatch COM
plotely disposes Of al such claims. and
makes IL perfectly clear that Great Brit
ain has never for one moment abandoned
one iota Of her original claim Since the
schomburgk line was drawn. IN 1870. she
has never once conceded that Nene-
zuela could, by any possibility, have any
sitle to any part OF the territory in
cluded within that line. She has made
several suggestions of ceding several
points within the line to Venezuela, pro
vided Venezuela would do certain things
agreeable TO her, but she has never con-
coded that Venezuela could by any posi-
bility have any title of her own 20 any
part Of the territory included in that
the contemplation Of the Monroe doc
trine The whole idea Of the Monroe
doctrine is that a European power shalt
not institute system here that has
as its ultimate object the overthrow OF
republican institutions, and the substitu-
ton for them Of despotic institutions.
Now. whatever steps concessions. sur
voys, and what not may have been lad
in the course of the dispute between
Venezuela ana Great Britain II through
the whole Of them there was in fact a
bona hde claim upon the part Of Great
Britain 10 territory that she believed to
De hers by reason Of Hollands grant
TO her. and that was the whole of her
contention, then it is impossible 10
say that her conduct in the controversy
has been a cloak for design 10 over
throw republican Institutions on this
continent. In that case, there would
have been nothing whatever political in
what she has been about There would
have been nothing but an attempt 20
become undisputed owner Of slice Of
territory that her title 10 had been
heretofore disputed. and If that has
been her whole purpose. no one would
say that the Monroe doctrine touched
the case in any way whatever Now.
In Lord Salisbury's answer 10 Mr.. Olney's
dispatch of last July. he states that In
1863 the States General Of Holland, adj
dressed a memorial 10 the Spanish Gov
eminent I'm which il claimed that an
Of the territory now in dispute was part
Of Dutch Guiana, and that the Spanish
Government practically conceded the
claim. II this be a fact, then it cannot
be said that England. in only continuing
a claim thus made by the Dutch Govern
ment has the secret design of over
throwing republican institutions In Amer
lea and substituting monarchical govern
ment there for IL. 1t would be pre-
posterous TO make such a claim.
The individuals we have referred to In
the outset Of this article must see. there
fore. that they are beside the question
when they concern themselves with in
quiries about the details of the dispute
between Venezuela and England. If. i'm
their investigations. they find that IIol-
land and Great Britain together have
always been claiming the disputed ter
ritory, as part Of Dutch Guiana. then
they must concede that the controversy
is nothing but a dispute over the right
full ownership of certain number OF
acres Of ground. and not dispute that
has any elements of politics in it at all.
and if that is the character Of the dis
pute, then the Monroe doctrine confessed
~ has no application TO the case.