The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1895-12-18

]
Continuing, Mr.. Olney says il is not
/ perceived how such an attitude can be
| defended nor how It is reconcilable with
that love of justice and fair play so EN-
\ lnently Characteristic of the English race
/ and holds that If such position be adj
L hered to, il should be regarded as amount
/ ing in substance to an invasion and con-
/ quest Of Venezuelan territory In con-
Il clusion Mr.. Olney says that in these
| circumstances the duty OF the President
/ appears to him unmistakable and imper-
| awe To ignore Great Britain's asser-
| ton of title and her refusal to have that
/ title investigated, and not 10 protest and
/ give warning against the substantial APP
| preparation by Great Britain Of the ter
/ ritOry for her own use, would be to ig-
/ more an established policy with which
4 the honor and welfare of this country
\ are closely identified. He therefore in
I structed Mr.. Bayard to lay the views
/ given before Lord Salisbury and said:
/ They (the views) call for definite de-
| cis.On upon the point whether Great Brit
| the Venezuelan boundary question in its
| entirety to impartial arbitration"
| Expressing the Presidents hope that
/ the conclusion will be on the side of ar
/ bitration, Mr.. Olney concludes with the
/ pointed statement that if the President
| rs 10 be disappointed in that hone how
/ eVer-a result not to be anticipated and
/ in his judgment calculated to greatly en-
| barraSS the future relations between this
| country and Great BTitain-it is his wish
/ TO be made acquainted with the fact at
/ such early date as will enable him to lay
/ the whole subject before congress in his
/ next annual MESSAGE"
Lord Salisburys reply is addressed to
SIR Julian Pauncefote, the British ambas-
SadOr at Washington, under date of Nov
70 last. This dealt only with the appli-
cation of the Monroe doctrine in the case
/ at issue, and was followed on the same
day by another note discussing the bOun-
dairy disput per Sc. 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
| that the dangers which were apprehended
| by President Monroe have no relation to
| the state of things in which we live at
| the present day, and adds, with thinly
/ covered irony, that lit is Ineligible that
! Mr.. Olney should invoke in defense of the
views on which he is now insisting, an au-
| thOrity (Monroe) which enjoys so high a
| popularity with his own fellow country
| men,"
THE dispute between Great Britain and
| Venezuela AYERS Lord Salisbury, ''is
| controversy with which the United States
| nave no apparent political concern"
| Continuing in short, pithy sentences he
| says lit is difficult. indeed, TO see how
| the question in controversy can mate
/ rally affect any state or community out
/ side those primarily interested; that the
| disputed frontier of Venezuela has moth
/ ing TO do with any of the questions dealt
| with by President Monroe; that ii is not
/ a question of the colonization by any Eu-
! ropean power of any portion of America
! nor of the imposition upon the communi-
| ties of South America of any system of
| government devised in Europe
1T is he says, simply the determine
sion which belonged to the throne of Eng
! land long before the republic of Nene-
zuela came into existence
AS he proceeds in the discussion. the
language of Lord Salisbury becomes tart.
He argues in theory that the Monroe
! doctrine in itself is sound, but disc!aims
any intention of being understood as ex-
pressing any acceptance of it on the part
of her majesty's government. He quotes
Mr.. Olney as saying: That distance and
5000 miles of intervening ocean make any
political union between European and
American state unnatural and ineXpedi-
ent will hardly be denied and adds that
the meaning of these words is that the
union between Great Britain and Can
ada, Jamaica and Trinidad: between
Great Britain and British Honduras or
British Guiana are 'inexpedient and I'M
president Monroe" says his lordship.
"disciaimS any such inference from his
spects Mr. Olney develops it, HE laws
down" says Lord Salisbury, that the
lncXpedient and unnatural character of
the Union between an European and an
American state is so obvious that it will
hardly be denied. Her majestys govern
ment are prepared emphatically TO deny
1t on behalf of both the British and Amer
lean people, who are subject to her crown.
They maintain that the union between
Great Britain and her territories in the
western hemisphere is both natural and
eNpedient. But they are not prepared to
admit that the recognition of that eXpe-
dicncy is clothed with the sanction which
belongs to the adoption of international
admit that the O' interests RtsPsts" of of
the United States are necessari
concerned in every frontier dispute which
may arse between any two of the states
who possess dominion in the Western
hemisphere; and still less can they ac-
cept the doctrine that the United States
are emitted TO claim that the process of
arbitration shall be applied to any de-
mand for the surrender of territory which
one of those states may make against an
Lord Salisbury concludes with the state
ment that her majesty's government have
not surrendered the hope that the con-
troVersy between themselves and Vene-
suela will be adjusted by reasonable ar
rangementS at an early date.
The second note of Nov. 26 is wholly
devoted to a discussion of the boundary
dispute, exclusive of its relation to the
Monroe doctrine. This dispatch, however
sounds the key note of Great Britain's
position with reference to Mr.. Olney's
representations. Lord Salisbury states
that Great Britain has repea teddy express
ed its readiness to submit to arbitration
the conflicting claims of Great Britain
to territory of great mineral values, and
follows this statement with these inpor-
tant words: But they Ghe British COW
ernmenO cannot consent to entertain ar
to submit to the arbitration of another
power or a foreign jurist, however en-
inent, claims based on extravagant pre-
tensions of Spanish officials in the last
century and involving the transfer of
large numbers of British subjects, who
have for many years enjoyed the settled
rule of the British colony, to a nation
of different race and language, whose
political system is subject to frequent
disturbance, and whose institutions as
yet too often afford very inadequate pro-
lection to life and property. No issue of
this description has ever been involved
in the questions which Great Britain and
the United States have consented to sub
NIT to arbitration and her maiesty's
government are convinced that in Similar
circumstances the government of the
United States would be equally firm in
declining to entertain proposals of such
a nature.
RALLY OF THE REPUBLICANS.