Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1895-12-18


accepted by the government OF any
other country
Practically the principle for which we
contend has peculiar if not exclusive
relation 10 the United States Tic may
not have been admitted in so many
words 10 me code of international law,
but since I'm international councils,
every nation is entitled 20 the rights be-
longing TO il. If the enforcement Of the
Monroe doctrine is something We may
justly claim. it has its place in the code
of international law. as certainly and as
securely as ii it were specifically men,
toned. and when the United States IS
a suitor before
THE HIGH TRIBUNAL
that administers international law. the
question TO be determined is whether or
not we present claims which the justice
OF that code of law can md TO be right
and valid
The Monroe doctrine finds its recog>
milton I'm those principles Of interna-
tioual law which are based upon the
theory that every nation shall have its
rights protected and IT'S just claims en-
forced or course this government is
entirely confident that under the sane
tiOn of this doctrine. we have clear
rights and uudou5Jed claims. Nor is
this ignored n The British reply. The
prime minister while not admitting that
the Monroe doctrine is applicable TO
I present conditions. states. In declaring
that the United States would resist any
such enterprise If it was contemplated,
President Monroe adopted a policy
. farr Of
the English government Of that date.
He further declares: Though the lam
guace of President Monroe is directed
90 the attainment of objects which most
Engl lshmeu would agree to be salutary.
10 is impossible 20 admit that they have
been Inscribed by any adequate au~
tlOrity i'm the code of international
law" Again he says: They. her ma
f iesty's government fully concur with
the views President Monroe apparently
entertained. that any disturbance Of
The existing territorial distribution in
that hemisphere by any fresh acQuisl-
ti0ns on the part of any European State,
would De a highly ineXpedient change.
I'm the belief that the doctrine for
which we contend was clear and defin-
tie. that it was founded upon substantial
considerations and involved our safety
and welfare. that it was fully applicable
90 our present conditions and to the
state OF the worlds progress and that
it was directly related to
THE PENDING CONTROVERSY
and without any conviction as to the
final merits OF the dispute, bu, anxious
to- learn I'm o satisfactory and c0nclu-
sive manner whether Great Britain
sought under claim of boundary to eX-
tend her possessions on the continent
without right. or whether she merely
sought possession Of territory fairly in
Guided within the limits Of ownership,
this government proposed TO the gov
erument of Great Britain to resort TO
arbitration as The proper means Of set
tling the question. to the end that
veXatious boundary dispute between
the two contestants might be deter
mined and our exact standing and rela-
. ,ion in respect 90 the controversy might
De made clear
To viii be seen from the correspond
ouCe herewith submitted that this pro-
position has been declined by the Brit
ism government. upon grounds which,
in the circumstances. seem 10 me TO be
far from satisfactory. il is deeply dis
appointing that suCh an appeal, actIat-
ed by the most friendly feelings toward
both nations directly concerned. ad
dressed 20 the sense of justice and the
maglinimity of one OF the great powers
OF the world and touching its rela-
ti0ns to one comparatively weak and
small should have produced no better
results.
Tl. course 90 be pursued by this
/ government. in view of the present con-
tCCl. does not appear TO admit OF
serious doubt Having lab0red faith
fully fer many years 20 induce Great
+ Britain ro submit this dispute
/ TO IMPARTIAL ARBITRATION.
snd having been now finally apprised
oil her refusal ,o 10 SO. nothing remains
but 10 aco p- The situation, to recog-
r.ze the plain requirements and deal
with it accordingly. Great Britain
present propCs on has never thus FAR
/ been regarded rs admissible by Nene-
zuela. though any adjustment or the
boundary which that country may deem
for her advau age and enter into or
her own free w.lL cannot, Of course, be
, objected 10 by the United States.
/ Assuming however. that the attitude
f of Venezuela VIII remain unchanged.
I The 9.-0u-a has reached such stage
I rs I'd msS7 e now incumbent upon the
+ Trt-e1 Sa-es I'd take measures 90 de-
+ -a~m.ue with su6 e'en c'r,3inty fer its
. irs ifcadou what is the true divisional
F line ba.ween the republic OF Nenezue.a
and British Guiana. The inquiry 10
that end should. Of course be conduct
f eI carefully and juj.c.ally. and due
I weight should De given 70 all available
evidence. records and facts 10 support
Of the ella ms O, both parties.
I'm order that such an examination
slcu'f be prosecuted I'm a thorough and
satisfactory manner, I suggest that the
/ congress make an adequate appropr-a-
/ -ton for the expenses Of a commission TO
, DO 9nDcinled by the executive, who shall
make the necessary investigation and
~,oorr uD9n the matter with the least
D,esih1e delay. When such report IS
I -,,5o oDd accented. &c VIII 'l my opin-
I ,,D bs the duty Of the United States 10
/ r,-fs- NV every means IN its power
/ wfiful aggression upon its rights and
Interests the appropriation by Great
/ p-.-afr Of any lands or the exercise Of
/ governmental jurisdiction over any Ter
ri-1rv which. after invest -gauon, we
have determined Of riSht
BELONG TO VENEZUELA.
In making these recommendations l
ON, rurv alive to che responsibility n
c,,-~sd and keen,y realize all the con-
/ seorerces that may follow. / am never
/ -5srass firm m my conviction that
o-bus it is a grev.ous thing 20 con-
"-. -Lo -,,o or,aa+ EnglfSh-Snaak-