The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-12-31
He RtYisYs at Considerable LenSln Inc
Venezuelan Question.
EECLAND'S GRADUAL ENCROACHNLNr
Upon the Territory Of the Lit'ie So"'h
American Nation-Populists Deny
Being AFFILIATED with Either the
Democratic or Republican
Parties.


PETER phrased it, III we should have any
trouble with our ncighbors on the other
side Of the Atlantic" They were referred
20 the Committee on Foroign Relations.
Mr.. Voorhees, presented a communica-
ton from the Charge d'Affairs OF the
Argentine Republic. now in charge Of the
legation. the subject of commercial rela-
tions between that country and The
United States. and asked that it be re-
ferred to the Committee on Finance.
IRREGULARLY RECEIVED.
Mr. HOar, of Massachusetts,. called al
tention 10 the rule OF the Senate, whlcn
provides that no petition. memorial or
other paper, signed 10y citizens OF sub
1ects Of foreign power shall he re-
ceiVed by the Senate. except through
transmission from the state Department.
After some colloQuy on this point and
O ruling by the Nice-President that the
paper could not be received. the matter
was allowed 10 lio over for the present.
The House bin. as to bonds. was laid
before the Senate, read twice. and re-
ferred to the Finance Committee
Mr.. Mitchell Ropj. Oregon, gave notice
that he would. at the conclusion Of the
remarks TO be made to-day by Mr. Lodge,
ask the Senate 10 proceed 10 the selcc-
tion Of the committees. also that he would
Afterwards ask the Senate to take from
the table his proposition 10 Impose
duty on wool for the purpose of enabling
him 70 make some remarks thereon.
The resolution. heretofore offered by
Mr.. Quay, calling on the Secretary of
the Navy for information as 10 whether
Il would be advantageous 10 the naval
service 10 contract now for six battle
ships, instead of two was taken up and
agreed 10.
LODGE on MONROE DOCTRINE.
Mr. Lodge addressed the Senate on the
subject of the Monroe doctrine. He said
he had intended not TO do so until the
Joint resolution introduced by him. giving
to the declaration made by Mr. Monroe
in his message OF December 1923. the
formal sanction Of Congress- had recev-
cd the consideration of the Committee
on Foreign Relations, but since that
the President has sent in his message
on the Venezuelan difficulty, and Con-
gress. without dissenting vote, had
authorized the commission as requested.
This action had led 10 much wild talk
and cries more vocal than numerous
from those who believe we should never
do anything TO clash with England's IN
terests This outcry coupled with Lon
don's attempt 10 frighten Congress by
producing stock panic had tended 10
confuse the issue. He. therefore, thought |
a little cool explanation would not De |
ont of place
Two cardinal principles. he said, had
always governed the United States in
their relations with foreign nations. The
first was Washingtons neutrality coc-
trlne, as laid down in the farewell ad-
dress The second was the Monroe doc
trine. the history of which he traced In
srt-. - tfstf faln
By outside powers TO break through that
doctrine was the Joint Intervention of
England, France, and Spain In Mexico,
in 1861.
THE SECOND CASE.
A second case has now arisen and the
maintenance of the Monroe doctrine is
again threatened. as II was by inc
French in 1862 This second attack upon
the principle OF the Monroe doctrine
comes from Great Britain. ana Is mace
under cover Of a boundary dispute win
Venezuela. In order 20 show the impor-
tance OF this controversy, which hau
now reached crisis affecting most grave
ly the honor the interests. the rights, ana
the well-settled policy of the United states
he sketched briefly" as he said, but
with elaborate details, the history OF the
dispute between Great Britain and Nene-
zuela, and the negotiations between the
two countries.
He continued. 1T viii be observed
from this brief outline of the dispute that
no new rights have come to England or
Venezuela since lSll-i e., since the
declaration of President Monroe.
They have the rights OF Spain and
Holland. respectively, nothing more. and
nothing less, and are entitled TO what
those inherited rights give them.
'In 1886 British Minister acknowledge
ed that Point Barima belonged TO Nene-
zuela, by allowing the Venezuelan Gov
ernment to erect a lighthouse there In
1870 a British court IN Demarar declared
that the territory of the Morocco far TO
The east of the Orinoco. to be Venezuelan
territory. In lSl an English engineer
laid out a perfectly arbitrary line, run
ming from the mouth OF the Orinoco in
n southerly direction. until il reached
the southern boundary OF British Guiana.
ENGLANDs ENCROACHMENTS.
Lord Aberdeen disavowed this line and
proposed another. starting at Morocco,
and going further into the interior,
Lord Granville proposed another, reach
ing futher TO the West; Lord Rosebery,
another. inside the Schomburgk line: but
coupled with the free navigation Of the
Orinoco.'
In 1898 he proposed a second line. and
mean time Lord Salisbury had extended
the British claim, while he was Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs.
Every British Minister has offered a
different line within which Great Britain
would not consent TO abitrate, and every
British Minister has gone beyond his
predecessor In making fresh claims be-
vond the former lines. AT first sight.
this seems TO denote Inconsistency on
the part OF the Brish Government. but
In reality their course has been Just the
reverse.
There is apparently just as much sup
mort for one line as another, when they
pass beyond the valley OF the Essequibo.
From Schomburgk down, every line was
entirely arbitrary, and the constantly
growing claims beyond the various lines
offered was In entire keeping with tho
policy OF the British Government. Their
objectw as 10 get as much new territory
as they could 81 the matter ever came
10 a settlement, which they have used
every artifce TO delay.
THE SAME AS CONQUEST.
Asserting his belief that Great Britain
had no good claim TO a foot OF land
beyond the EsseQuibO. MIR. Lodge laid
down the principle that II England, with
no authority but "a disputed claim, seizes
territory and declines arbitration upon
II her action does not differ from seiz-
ing and holding new territory In the
Americas by tho right OF conquest. The |
seizure OF this South American territory /
by England. he asserted. was an abso-
lutte violation Of the Monroe doctrine.
"At the last session OF the Congress !
called the attention OF the Senate ana
the country" said Mr.. Lodge, ITO the !
manner IN which England absorbed the
Islands of the Pacific and 10 the neces-
cx1y for oux controlling the Hawaiian Is !