The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1895-12-18
A SPECIAL MESSAGE
PRESIDENT NTCLEyELAND WRITES
ABOUT THE VENEZUELAN
DISPUTE.
OuR.RONOR MUST Be MAINTAINED

UUkshUNUh MUSI bE MAIN lAtNED
England Having Refused to Submit
the Matter to. Arbitration il is Re-
commended That a Commission be
Appointed to Fix the Boundary Line
Between Venezuela and British
Gainia and That il be Maintained by
the United States.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 17.-The Presi-
dent to-day transmitted to Congress
the correspondence between the gov
ernments of the United States and
Great Britain with regard to Nenezu-
ella, together with the following special
message:
TO THE CONGRESS-:
In my annual message addressed to
the Congress on the Sd instant, called
attention to the pending boundary con-
troversy between Great Britain and
the republic of Venezuela, and recited
the substance of a representation made
by this government to Her Brittanic
Majesty's government suggesting rea-
sons why such dispute should be sub
mitted to arbitration for settlement,
and inquiring whether it would be so
submitted.
The answer Of 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 is embodied in two com
munications addressed by the British
prime minister to Sir Julian Paunce-
fote. the British ambassador at this
capital 1t will be seen that one OF
these communications is devoted eX-
clusivelv to observations upon the
Monroe doctrine, and claims that in
the present instance new and strange
extension and development OF this doc
trine is insisted on by the United
States: that the reasons Justlfylng an
appeal TO the doctrine enumerated by
President Monroe are generally map
plicable Ito the state OF things III
which We live at the present day, ana
especially inapplicable to controFer-
sy involving the boundary line between
Great Britain and Venezuela. With
cut attempting extended argument IN
reply to this position, 1T may not DE
amiss to suggest that the doctrine up
ON which we stand is strong and sound
because ilS tuloISthNiI IL HoA oeAAA
10 our peace and safety as nation and
IS essential to the integrity OF our free
institutions and the tranquil mainten-
ance of our distinctive form of govern
ment. 1t was intended to apply to es-
ery stage of our national life and can
not become obsolete while our repub-
lie endures If the balance of power is
Justly cause for jealousy among the
governments of the old world and
subject for our absolute non-interfer-
ence, 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 insist upon this doctrine
without regard to 1.-The state of things
in which we live" or any change IN
the conditions here or elsewhere, 1T Is
not apparent why its application may
not be invoked in the present contFo-
versy.
If European power, by an eXten-
sion of its boundaries, takes posses
sion of the territory of one of our
neiehboring republics against its will
and in derogation of its rights it is diff
ficult to see why, TO that extent, such
European power does not thereby at
tempt TO extend its system of govern
nent to that portion of this continent
which. is thus taken. This is the pre-
else action which President Ionroe
declared TO be dangerous TO our peace
and safety" and it can make no df-
ference whether the European system
is extended by an advance of frontier
CT otherwise.
It is also suggested in the British
reply that We should not seek to apply
the Monroe doctrine to the pending
dispute because ii does not embody
any principle of international law
which sis founded on the general con
sent of nations" and that mo states
man, however eminent, and no nation,
however powerful, are competent to
insert into the code of international
law novel principle which was never
recognized before, and w\ch has not
since been accepted by the government
of any other country"
Practically the principle for which
we contend has peculiar if not eNclu-
siye relation to the United States. 1t
may have not been admitted 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 it, if the enforce
ment OF the Monroe doctrine IS some
thing we may justly claim has its place
in the code of international law rs GER
tainIy and as surely as il it were speci-
ficaIly mentioned and when the Uni
ted States is a suffer before the high
tribunal, that adminiters interna-
tional laws, the question to be deter
mined is whether or not we present
claims which the justice of that code
of law can find to be right and valid.
The Monroe doctrine finds its recog-
milton in those principles Of interna-
tional law which are based upon the
theory that every nation shall have its
rights protected and its just claims en-
forced.
OF course this government is entire
ly confident that under the sanction OF
this doctrine we have clear rights and
undoubted claims. Nor is this ignored
in the British reply. The Prime Min
lister, while not admitting that the
Monroe doctrine is applicable to present
10. 4 ,at