Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1895-12-21
Executive Mansion, Dec. II, 1895.
THE CORRESPONDENTS.

N@-t@Sa~-@f
THE CORRESPONDENCE.
The matter submitted to congress in connec-
| tion with the foregoing message consists OF
| three diplomatic notes. Mr.. Olneys note to
| Mr.. Bayard concerning the threatening aspect
| OF affairs between Great Britain and Venezuela
| is first in the correspondence. 1t is dated July
| co. 1895, and deals with the boundary question
at great length. Beginning at the very incep-
| ton OF the dispute, Mr.. Olney carries his argu-
ment of the American claim for arbitration
| based on the Monroe doctrine down to the pres
ent time, and gives emphasis to his statements
| by quoting the sentiments OF President Monroe
| in full, and notes that Its pronouncement by
| the Monroe administration at that particular
| time was unQuestionably due to the inspira-
tion of Great Baitain, who at once gave 1t an
| unqualified adhesion which has never been
| withdrawn"
Mr.. Olney gives in his note firm indorse-
ment to the principle enunciated by Monroe
| and defined Great Britains position in this
| frank manner: She (Great Brittany says to
Venezuela: You can get none OF the debatable
land by force because you are not strong
enough you can get none by treaty because
| will not agree, and you can take your chance OF
getting portion by arbitration, only II you first
| agree to abandon to me such portions as may
| designate"
Continuing Mr.. olney says 1t is not perceived
how such an attitude can be defended nor how
IL is reconcilable with love of justice charac-
| teriStic OF the English race, and holds that IL
| such position be adhered to it should be re-
| garded Us amounting in substance to On inva-
sion and conquest OF Venezuelan territory. Mr..
Oney says that in these circumstances the
| duty OF the president appears to him unmistak-
able and imperative. To ignore Great Britains
assertion of title and her refusal to have that
title investigated and not to protest and give
warning against the substantial appropriation
by Great Britain of the territory for her own
| would he ignore established DOllCy
with which the honor and welfare of this coun-
try are closely Identified. He therefore in
structed Mr.. Bayard to lay the views given be-
fore Lord Salisbury and said: They (the
| views) call for definite decision upon the
point whether Great Britain will consent or
will decline to submit the Venezuelan bound
ary question in Its entirety to impartial arbi-
tration."
Expressing the presidents hope that the con-
clusion will be on the side OF arbitration, Mr..
Olney concluded with the pointed statement
that II the president lis to be disappointed in
that hope 1t is mis- wish to be made acquainted
with the fact at such early date will enable
him to lay the whole subject before congress in
his next annual message"
Lord Saisbury's reply Is addressed to Sir
Julian Pauncefote British ambassador ut
Washington, under date OF November %. This
deals only with the application OF the Monroe
doctrine in the case at issue and was followed
on the same day by another note discussing the
boundary dispute.
At the outset Lord Salisbury states that so
far as he is aware the Monroe doctrine has
never been before advanced on behalf OF the
United States in any written communication
addressed TO the government OF another nation.
He gives what he believes Is the British inter-
probation of the doctrine and maintains them.
Dangers which were apprehended by President
Monroe have no relation to the state OF things
in which we live at the present day.
The dispute between Great Britain and Ven-
ezuela AYERS Lord Salisbury, is a controversy
with which the United states have no apparent
practical concern
Continuing, he says 1t is difhcult to see how
the question in controversy can affect any state
or community outside those primarily inter,
ested: that the disputed frontier OF VeneZuels
has nothing to do with any OF the question.
dealt with by President Monroe; that it is no
o question OF, the colonization by any European
power OF any portion of America nor Of the i'm
position upon the communities of South Amer
lea of any system OF government devised il
, Europe 1t is" he says simply the determi
alton OF the frontier of q British possession
which belonged to England long before the
, republic OF Venezuela came into existence"
Mr.. Olney lays down, says Lord Salisbury
that to, unnatural character of the union be
tween o European and an American state is 81
obvious that it will hardly be denied. He
! majesty's government are prepared emphat
ically to deny it on behalf OF both the British
and American people who are subject to he
crown. They maintain that the union bOtwee
Great Britain and her territories in the western
hemisphere is both natural and expedieni
: They are not prepared to admit that the inter
!, ests OF the United States are necessarily con
l cerned in every frontier dispute which ma
, arise between any two of the states who posses
: dominion in the western hemisphere, and sti
less can they accept the doctrine that the Unite
Z, States are entitled to claim that the process
= arbitration shall be applied to any demand 70
; the surrender of territory which one OF thos
states may make against another.
The second note OF November 90 is wholly de
= voted to q discussion of the boundary dispute
exclusive OF it's relation to the Monroe doctrin,
This dispatch. however. sounds the key note c
Great Britan's position. Lord Salisbury state
that Great Britain has repeatedly expressed 1t
readiness to submit to arbitration the conflict
ing claims OF Great Britain to territory OF grea
. mineral value, and follows this statement wit
: these important words, but the BIRTHS
government cannot consent to enter
tain or to submit to the arbitratio
: of another power or foreign jurist howeve
eminent claims based on extrnvagant prefer
sions OF Spanish officials In the last centur
and involving the transfer OF large numbers
: British subjects, who have for many years en-
ioyed the settled rule OF the British colony,
: a nation OF different races and language. who's
y political system is subject to frequent disturb
u ance and whose institutions as yet often affor
. very inadequate protection to life and propert
No issue OF this description has ever been IL
yolved in the questions which Great Brita
" and the United States have consented to sui
:. NIT to arbitration, and her majesty's govern
u ment Is convinced that In similar circumstance
= the government OF the United States would |
:, equally firm In declining to entertain propose
u Of SUCH nature"
|