The Cape Girardeau Democrat. (Cape Girardeau, Mo.) 1876-1909, 1895-12-28
Presidents Message to Congress
on the Venezuelan Question.
He Suggests the Authorization by Con-
gresS Of a Commission to Determine
the Status of Venszuela's
Contention,
And on the Acceptance of the Report of
that Commission the United States
Stand Firmly as Against VII
ful Aggression.

senI 10 the venezuelan CORE
spondence accompanied by the follow
ms significant message:
TO THE CONGRESS: In my annua! message
addressed to the congress on the third instant.
4 called attention 10 the pending boundary
controversr between Great Britain and the re-
public Of Venezuela, ana recItcd the substance
OF a representation made by this government
70 her Britannia maiesty's government. Sug-
gestlng reasons why such dispute should be
submitted To arbitration for settlement and in
Qulring whether it would be 50 submitted.
The answer Of the British government, which
was then awaited, but has since been received,
and together with the dispatch to which il is z
reply, is hereto appended.
Such reply is embodied in Two communion
lions addressed By the British prime minister
TO Sir Julian PauacefOte. the British an:baSSa-
dor at this cap;;lI. It will be seen that one Of
these communication IS devoted exclusively
TO observations upon the Monroe doctrine. and
Claims that III the present Instance . new and
strange exteasIo. and development Of this
doctrine is insisted on b. the United States:
that the reasons 5uStifying al appeal 70 the
doctrine 2Ggarlate2 b. President Monroe are
generally iHappIicahIe Ito the state o. things
In which We live At the present day." and eS-
pcci%iiy inG1p.irabia 70 a controversy iETO.v-
ing the boundary line between Great Britain
and Venezuela.
Without attempting extended argument in
reply TO these positions. 1t may not be amiss TO
suggest that the doctrine upon which we stand
Is strong Iai S)u2.. because its enforcement
Is important II our peace and safety Is a IA
1iOH ana i cssent.a. to the integrity of our free
institutions and the Tranquil maintenance o.
our distinctive form o. government. /. WI,
tntendc Ia apply to every stage NJ cur rational
life. ana en- no. become obsolete while oar re
pubic cL!HrC-- 7! the ba.auce Of mower j.
justly . cause for Jealous aaxieir among the
ynEsgHgfs.Es- - ~ = - 49, .-= 70 .-r-.-
for our absolute Eo.-ircertererc none The Joss
tsan observance %: The Monroe doctrine of vital
concern 20 "Gv reDyie and their government.
ANNuial--. t,"rcs .-c, that We nay properly
insist poa this doctrine w:tha-- -e-1-t - -Ec
state uf t-..-si l.: which we live. ora--c ~aa.-cl
condition nrsa ~ n.,"w-cre. t Is no. apparent
Why rs apD-.s i..JH may GJS D. lgvJ;ei i ia
present c,ut-pv.~,".
II . European power. uT an extension Of H.
boundaries. ;aEH> possession " the territory
OF one o. CIR le.ca5I-InE republics agaiu,. -
Will. ana in GerCGa,toE % its rights. il l. GI.H-
cult to see WHY. to that extent, such European
power does not thereby ATTEMPT to extend It's
system Of government to that portion q. this
Continent which = thus taken. This : the
precise action President Monroe declared to be
dangerous to our peace ard safety" and
cnake no difference whether the European syS-
TEN is extended By an advance Of frontier or
otherwise.
~ ~ dlND SES-GSLEl II tie bFI[.Sl reply thlt
we should not seek to apply the Monroe doc
trinC 20 the pending dispute. because it does
not cmhody any principle Of international law
which is founded on the general consent OF ma
lions, and that 40 statesman, however emf
nent, and no nation, however powerful. are
competent 70 insert into the code OF interna-
tloEal law 4 novel principle which was never
recognized before. and which has not since
been accepted !, the government of any other
country"
Practically tbs principle for which We con-
TEND has prior il not exclusive relation to the
United States. It may not have been admitted
In SO manv words in the code OF international
Law, but since in international counSelS 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
e She code Of international law rs certainly /
and as securely IS Il It were specifically men
toned, and when :he United States is 4 sutton
before the high tribunal that administers in
ternatiOnal law the question to be determined
is whether or not we preSen claims which the
Justice Of thai code Of law can iEd to Ge right
aHd valid.
The doctrine finds it's recognition in those
principles of international law which are
BASED upon the theory that every nation shall
Foe protected and its Just claims enforced. OF
course this government is entirely confident
that under the sanction OF this doctrine we
have clear rights and unGoubted 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:
In declaring that the United States would
resist any Such enterprise II II was contcm-
plated, President Monroe adopted a policy
which received the entire sympathy OF the En- /
Rlish gov rnmcnt Of that date"
He further declares: The language OF PreSi-
dent Monroe is directed to the attainment OF
objects which Eng,i>hreu would agree 70 as
S~alutary, while 1t is impossible to admit that
they have b. en- inscribed by any authority in
the code Of interrational law"
Again he SAYS: They (her maiesty's gov
ernmenD fully concur with the view which
President Monroe apparently entertained. that
any disturbance Of the existing territorial dis
tribution in that hemisphere by any fresh ac-
QUESTION on the part Of any European state
would be 4 neutrality-suspicious. Change"
In the belief that the doctrine for which We
contend was clear and definite. that it was
founded upon substantial considerations AID
Involved our safety and welfare: that IL
was fully applicable to our present conditions
and 10 the state OF the worlds progress. and
that it was directly related TO the aaa! merits
Of the dispute, bu: anxious to learn in a salts
factory and CONCLUSIVE manner whether Great
Britain sought. under a aim OF boundary. to II
extend her possessions on this continent: with
out right. or whether she merely sought pos
oISNiOh VI LAX itAAAs'aA hA.AA Ii ~ .AAAAA II
her lines of ownership. this government
proposed TO the government Of Great Britain ]
a resort to arbitr ton as the proper means
of settling the question, to the end that a vex-
aIiOus boundary dispute between the two con-
teStantS might be determined and our exact
standing and relation in respect to ne cOntro-
perSy might be made clear.
II VIII be seen from the correspondence here
with submitted that this proposition has been
declined By the British government upon |
grounds which, under the circumstances, I
seem to me to be far from satisfactory. T.
IL is deeply disappointing tina: such an
appeal, actuated by the most friendly feelings +
toward both nations directly concerned, adj +
dressed TO the sense OF justice and to the f.
magnanimIty =. one c: the great powers Of the
world, and touching its relations to one COM
paratively weak and small, should have prof.
duced no better results.
The course to be pursued by this govern
meut, in view Of the present condition, does
not appear to admit Of serious doubt
Having labored faithfully for many
years to induce Great Br:taia toE
submit this dispute to impartial arbitra7
ton, and having been now finally appraised of
her refusal TO do so, nothing remains but tot
accept the situation, TO recognize its plain re-
auirements and deal Will it accordingly.
ireat Britain's present proposition has never
AhuS far been regarded as admissible by Nene-