Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1895-12-17
CLRYELAND'S PLAIN WORDS
Text of His Message to Congress on
England's Refusal to Arbitrate
Venezuela Dispute.
MONROE DOCTRINE MUST BIZ MAINTAINED
The Riot Act Vigorously Read to John
Bull-His Arrogance Sharply Re-
buked-A Strong Declaration
Americans Will Applaud.
Washington, Dec. 1.-THE president
sent the following message to congress

Washington, Dec. 1.-THE president
sent the following message to congress
to-day:
To Congress:-In my annual message,
addressed to congress on the 3D. instant, ]
called attention to the present boundary
controversy between Great Britain and
the republic of Venezuela, and rocited the
substance of the representation made by
this government to Her Britannia majes-
ty's government, suggesting reasons why
such disputes should be submitted to ar
bitfation for ssttlement and inqniring
whether u wound be SO submitted.
The answer of the British government,
which was then awaited, has since been
received, and, together with the dispatch
to which it is a reply, is hereto append
cd.
Such reply is embodied in two COM
munications addressed by the British
prime minister to Sir Julian Pauncefote,
British ambassador at this capital.
Il will be seen that one of these com.
munications is devoted exclusively to
observations upon the Monroe doctrine,
and claims that, in the present instance,
a new and strange extension and develop
ment of this doctrine is insisted on by
the United States; that the reasons justi-
flying an appeal to the doctrine enunciat-
ed by Presi dent Monroe are generally ill.,
applicable sto the state OF things in
which We live in the present day" and are
especially inapplicable to the controver-
ny involving the boundary line between
n,Ank nvxkn;v, ma Vannuno1a
souNDNEss OF MONROE DOCTRINE MAIN
TANNED.
Without attempting extended argu-
ments in reply to these positions, it may
not be amiss to suggest that the doctrine
upen which We stand 10 strong and sound
because its enforcement is important to
our peace and safety as nation, and es-
sential to the integrity Of our free insti-
tutions and the tranquil maintenance of
our distinctive form of government. It
was intended to apply to every stage of
our national life and can not become OBJ
solete while our republic endures.
If the balance of power is justly a
cause for jealous anxiety among the gov
ernments Of the ole world and the sub ject
for our non.interference, none the less is
the observance of the Monroe doctrine of
vital concern to our people and their gov
ernment.
Assuming, therefore, that We may prop
erly insist upon the doctrine with regard
to "the state of things in which We live"
or any changed conditions here or else.
where, it is not apparent why its appli-
cation may not be invoked in the present
controversy.
Ifa European power, BY an extension
of its boundaries, takes possession Of the
territory Of one 81 orr neighboring re-
publics against it's will and in derogation
of it's rights, il is difficult to see why, to
not thereby attempt to extend it's system
OF government to that portion of this
continent which is thus taken. This is
the precise action which President Mon
roe declared to be dangerous to our
peace and safety" and it can make no
difference whether the European system
is extended by an advance of the frontier
or otherwise.
MONROE DOCTRINE PART OF INTERNA-
TIoNAL CODE.
It is also suggested in the British re-
ply that We should not seek to apply the
Monroe doctrine to the pending dispute
because it does not embody any princlple
of international Law which ''is founded
on the general consent of nations" and
'that no Statesman, however eminent,
and no nation, however powerful, are
competent to insert into the code OF In
ternational law a novel principle which