The Black Hills union. [volume] (Rapid City, Pennington County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1889-1904, 1895-12-27
Ml!lEssS||ISsAllG(j,ElsTOCONGRE
ENGLAND IS WARMED no
EEP HANDS OFF.

- -
EEP HANDS OFF.
The Principles Involved In the Venezuela
Dispute Declared or the Grayest National
1mpOrtance--An independent Commission
70 Insestigate In Urged.
WARRINGTON, Dec. 1S.-Soon after
both houses of Congress met TODAY.
the President sent, by Executive Clerk
Pruden. the expected message i'll re-
gard to the British-Venezuelan com
pfication. It was at once read in both
houses, as follows:
10 h Congress: In my annual
message, addressed to the Congress- on
the 3D. inst, 1 called attentionsto the,
pending boundary controversy be-
tween Great Britain and the Republic
OF Venezuela, and recited the sub
stance of a representation made by
this government to Her Britannia
Majesty's government suggesting rea-
sons why such dispute should be sub
mitted to arbitration for settlement
and inquiring whether it would be so
submitted.
The answer of the British govern
ment, which was then awaited. has
since been received and, together with
h dispatch to which it is o reply. is
hereto appended.
Such reply is embodied in two COM
m~unications addressed BY the British
prime minister to Sir Julian Paunce-
tote, the British ambassador at this
capital 1t will be seen that one OF
these communications is devoted cx-
clusively to observations on the Mon
o doctrine and claims that in the
present instance a new and strange
extension and development of this doe
trinc is insisted on by the United
States, h a the reasons justifying an
appeal to the doctrine ~enunciated by
President Mnnroe are generally inap-
plicaple .sto the state of things in
which we live at the present day and
especially inapplicable to a controversy
involving the boundary line between
Great Britain and Venezuela.
n MONROE DOCTRINE UPHELD.
Without attempting extended argu-
ments in reply to these positions, it
may not be amiss to suggest that the
doctrine upon which we stands strong
and sound, because its enforcement is
important to our peace and safety as a
nation and is essential to the integrity
of our free institutions and the tran
gull maintenance Of our distinctive
form, of government. 1t was intended
TO apply to every stage of our national
life and cannot become obsolete while
our republic endures. If the balance
of power is justly a cause for Jealous
anxiety among the governments Of the
old world and a subject for our abso-
lutte non-interference, none the less is
nm observance of the Monroe doctrine
of vital concern to our people and their
government.
Assuming, therefore, that we may
properly insist upon this doctrine
without reg lard to tsthe state of things
In which we live" or any changed
conditions here or elsewhere, it is not
apparent why it's application may not
be invoked in the present controversy.
il q European power, by au extension
OF its boundaries, takes possession Of
the territory of one ofaour neighbor-
Ing republics against it's will and in
derogation of it's rights, it is difficult
to see why, to that extent, such Euro
pean power does not thereby attempt
to extend its system of government
to that porticn of this continent which
is thus taken. This is the precise
action which President Monroe de-
clared to g dangerous to our peace
and safety and it can make no diff
ference whether the European system
is extended by an advance of frontier
or otherwise.
CLEARLY INTERNATIONAL LAW.
1t . been suggested in the British
reply that we should not seek to an
ply the Monroe doctrine to the pres
emit dispute, because it does not en-
body any principle of international
Law which lis founded on the general
consent OF nations and that issno
statesman, however eminent, and no
nation, however powerful, are COM
petent to insert into the. code.of inter
national law q novel principle which
was W. recognized before, and
which has not since pharmaceutical by
the government or any other country. 4
Practically the principle for which we
contend has peculiar, If not exclusive,
relation to the United States. It NAV
met have been admitted in SO MANY
Mgds to the code Of International
y but since, in international z o,r,n.-
sells every nation IS entitled to the
rights belonging to it, if the enforce
ment OF b Monroe doctrine is some-
thing we may justly claim it has it's
place IN the code OF international law
- certainly mi as securely assit has
It It were specifically mentioned. md
~ rho &hn TyrsknlE Ixnx-- .-$.YN# .,Se.