The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1895-12-18

W AGitlNhL LOGNI ~ VI 4JtC' IL ls
President to-day sent to Congress a
strong message dealing with the Brit
Venezuelan boundary dispute and
the application OF the Monroe doctrine
to the case In point. The Monroe doc
trIne is emphat!cally enunc!ated. and
the position taken that England should
not DO permitted to acquire any terri
tory claimed by Venezuela to which
she is not rIghtfully entitled. The mes
sage follows:
To the Congress-
In my annual message addressed to
the Congress on the Sd inst, called
attention to the pending boundary con-
trovorsy between Great Britain and the
republic OF Venezuela, and recited the
substance Of representation made by
this government suggesting reasons
why such dispute should be submitted
to arbitration for settlement, and In
quiring whether It would be so submit
ted.
The answer to the British govern
ment, which was then awaited, has
since been received and together with
the dispatch to which It is a reply, is
hereto appended.
Such reply IL embodied in two COM
munications addressed by the British
prime minister 20 Sir Julian Paunce-
fotc. the British ambassador at the
capital. II will be seen that one OF these
communications Is devoted exclusively
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 In
sisted on by the United States: that
the reasons justifying an appeal TO the
doctrine enuncIated by President Mon
roe are generally inapplicable ito the
state OF things In which we live at the
present day." and especially inappllc-
able TO controversy involving the
boundary line between Great Britain
and Venezuela.
Without attempting extended argu-
ment In reply to these positions 1t may
not be amlss 10 suggest that the doc
trlne upon which we stand Is strong
and sound because its enforcement Is
important to our peace and safety as n
nation, and Is essential to the integrity
of our free institutions and the TRANQUIL
maintenance OF our distinctive form of
government. II was intended 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 q cause for Jealous anxiety
among the governments OF the world
and subject for our absolute non-in-
terference, none the less Is an obser-
vance OF the Monroe doctrine Of vital
concern to our people and their gov
crnment.
For the Monroe Doctrine.
Assuming, therefore, that we may
properly insist upon this doctrine with
out regard to "the state Of things in
which we live" or any changed con-
ditlons here or elsewhere It is not APP
parent why its application may not be
invoked In the present controversy II
q European power, by an extension OF
It's boundaries, takes possession OF the
territory OF one of our nelghboring re-
publlcs against It's will and In dero-
cation of its rights, II Is difficult to sec
why, to that extent, such European
power docs not attempt to extend Its
system Of government to that portion
OF this continent which Is thus taken.
This Is the precise action taken which
President Monroe declared to be dan
gerOus to our pence and safety" and It
can make no difference. whether the
European system is extended by an I'D
vance Of frontier or otherwise.
II Is also suggested In the British
reply that wn should not seek to apply
the Monroe doctrine to the pending dis
taN IN
principle OF international law which "is
founded on the general consent OF M
tlons," md that mo statesman, how
ever eminent, md no nation however
powerful, HrO competent to insert into
the code OF international law novel
principle which was never recognized
before. and which has not since been
accepted by the government OF any
other country"
Practically the principle for which
we contend has peculiar " not, e&ciu-
sive relation to the United States. 1t
may not have been admitted In 40 many
words to the code OF International law,
but slncc In International councils,
every nation lB entitled to the rights be-
longing TO II, II the enforcement OF the
Monroe doctrine Ia something We may
Justly claim, II has It's place In the
code of international law, ns certainly
and ns securely M II II were specifically
mcntIOnCd. and whom the United Stntos
In a sultor before the hlEh tribunal that
administers international law, the
onoation 10 be determined Ia whether or
not wo present claims which the Justice
Of TINT code OF law can find to be right
and yalldS
kCicnr and Definite.
Tho Monroe doctrine finds It's rccog-
milton In those principles Of intcrnu-
tlonul Inv, which arc bnsod upon the
theory that every nation shall have ita
rights protected and It's just claims en-
forced. OF course this government is
entirely confident that, under tho sane
ton Of this doctrine, We have clear
rlghtp aud unduubtCd claims, Nor "
this IGNORED In the british reply, The
prime minister, while not admitting
ihnt the Monroe doctrine ls applicable
10 present conditions. Rtntca. I'm ,dn.
clnrlng that the, United states would
rcilBt any such enterprise II II wnH con.
tcmplatcd, President Monroe adopted
n policy witch received the entire sym.
phthy Of the Engllrh government OF
that date" lie further declares;
"Thnuph the lunEnngc " President
Monroe W directed tu the Wtnlnmcnt nt
objects which most ilhRllHhincn would
nlgtco To be gnlutny. II " Impossible
to admit that they have been lnHcrluCu
by uuy adequate authority ~ lhc code
OF international laws" Again he anyal
"Thoy, her mrJcGlyn government fully
concur with the View which ItcAlucut
A..