Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1895-12-21
1T Is Sent by President Cleve.
land to Congress.
MONROE DOCTRINE UPHELD
England Must Keep Her Hands on
Venezuelan Territory.
Lord Salisbury Having Refused to Arbi-
trate the Boundary Dispute with von-
ezuela, the United States VIII
~. See that No Territory
Is Grabbed by
John Bull.

WASHINGTON, Dec. lS-Ihe president
yesterday sent to congress the Venez-
uelan correspondence, accompanied by
the following significant message:
To the Congress-In my annual message ad-
e-essed to the congress on the Sd inst, called
attention to the pending boundary controversy
between Great Britain and the republic of Ven-
ezuela and recited the substance of o repre-
Sentation made by this government to her
Britannia majesty's government, suggesting
reasons why such dispute should be submitted
TO arbitration for settlement and inquiring
whether it would be so submitted The answer
of the British government, which was then
awaited but has since been received together
with the dispatch to which 1t is a reply, Is here
TO appended.
Such reply is embodied in two communioa-
tions addressed by the British prime minister
to Sir Julian Pnuncefote, the British smbassa-
dor at this capital One Of these communica-
tions is devoted exclusively to observations
upon the Monroe doctrine and claims that in
the present instance q new and strange extern
sion and development of this doctrine is in
sisted on by the United States; that the rea-
sons justifying an appeal to the doctrine enun-
ciated by President Monroe are generally inap-
plicable Ito the state Of things In which we live
at the present day." and especially inspplica-
BILE to q controversy involving the boundary line
between Great Britain and Venezuela.
Without attempting extended argument in
reply to these positions IL may not be amiss to
suggest that the doctrine upon which We stand
is strong and sound because its enforcement Is
important to our peace and safety nation,
and Is essential to the integrity OF our free in
stitutions and the tranquil maintenance of our
distinctive form OF government. It in
tended to apply to every stage OF our national
life. and cannot become obsolete while our re-
public endures. II the balance OF power Is
Justly o cause for jealous anxiety among the
governments OF the old world and subject for
our absolute non-interference, none the less is
an observance of the Monroe doctrine OF vital
concern to our people and their government
Assuming, therefore, that we may properly in
slst upon this doctrine without regard to 'the
state of things in which We live" or any
changed conditions here or elsewhere 1t is not
apparent why It's application may not be in
voked in the present controversy.
II q European power, by an extension OF Its
Boundaries, takes possession OF the territory of
one OF our neighboring republics against its
will and in derogation OF its rights, 1t is diff
cult to see why, to that extent, such European
power does not thereby attempt to extend its
system OF government to that portion of this
continent which is thus taken. This is the pre-
else action which President Monroe declared to
be dangerous to our peace and safety" and 1t
can make no difference whether the European
system is extended by an advance OF frontier or
otherwise
1t is also suggested in the British reply that
we should not seek to apply the Monroe doc
trine to the pending dispute because it does not
embody any principle OF international law,
which is founded on the general consent OF
nations and that mo statesman, however en-
inent, and nation however powerful, are
competent to insert into the code of interna-
tional law q novel principle which was never
recognized before. and which has not since been
accepted by the government of any other coun-
try"
tend has peculiar II not exclusive relation to
the United States. 1t may not have been ad-
mitted in so many words to the code Of interna-
tional law, but since in international councils
every nation is entitled to the rights belonging
to IL. II the enforcement OF the Monroe doctrine
is something we may Justly claim it has its
place in the code Of international law as GER
.ainly and us securely as II specifically men
toned. and when the United States Is q suitor
before the high tribunal that administers inter-
national law the question to be determined is
whether not we present claims which the
justice OF that code OF law can lind 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 nation shall
have its rights protected and its just claims
enforced or course, this government Is entire
ly confident that under the sanction OF this doc
trine we have clear rights and undoubted
claims. Nor Is this ignored in the British reply
The prime minister, while not admitting that
the Monroe doctrine is applicable TO present
conditions states: I'm declaring that the Uni
ted States would resist any such enterprise II
il was contemplated President Monroe adopt
ed n policy which received the entire sympathy
of the English government OF that date" He
further declares: Though the language Of
President Monroe is directed to the attainment
of objects which most Englishmen would agree
to be salutary II Is impossible to admit tha
they have been inscribed by any adequate au'
thority in the code OF international law"
Again he says; They Cher maiesty's gov
fu1l with the view which
President Monroe apparently entertained, thai
any disturbance OF the existing territorial dis
tribution in that hemisphere by any fresh &C.
quisitions on the part Of any European state
would be highly inexpedient change"
In the belief that the doctrine for which W,
contend was clear and definite; that 1t wa!
founded upon substantial considerations anC
involved our safety and welfare; that 1t wa.
fully applicable to our present conditions ant
TO the state OF the worlds progress, and that
was directly related to the pending controversy
and without any conviction as to the tina
merits OF tho dispute but anxious to learn in 1
satisfactory and conclusive manner whethe
Great Britain sought under claim OF bound
ary to extend her possessions on this continen
without right. or whether she merely sough
possession OF territory fairly included within
her lines OF ownership, this government pro
posed 10 the government OF Great Britain a re
sort to arbitration as the proper means OF set
thing the question, to the end that vexatiou
boundary dispute petWeeu inc Two cOnIeStaut
might be determined and our exact standing
and relation In respect to the controvers.
might be made clear.
II will bo seen In the correspondence here
with submitted that this proposition has bee
declined by the British government upo
grounds which in the circumstances seem to m
to be far from satisfactory. 1t is deeply disap
pointing that such an appeal actuated by tn
most friendly feelings toward both nations di
reotly concerned, addressed to the sense OF jus
tico and to the magnanimity OF one OF the grea
powers OF the world and touching its relation
Co one comparatively weak and small, shoul
have produced no better results.
The course to be pursued by this governmen
In view OF the present condition does not appea
to admit of serious doubt. Having lahore
faithfully for many years to induce Great Brit
ain TO submit this dispute to impartial arbitra
tion and having been now finally apprised c
her refusal to do so nothing remains but to &C
cept the situation. to recognize Its plain re
quirements and deal with 1t accordingly. Grea
Britain's present proposition has never thu
far been regarded as admissible by Venezuela
.f k<s. n1nsk fxul.ta