Little Falls weekly transcript. (Little Falls, Morrison Co., Minn.) 1894-19??, 1895-12-20
Calls 4 Stop to Extens'on&of
European Power on This
Continent.
The United states,,He-s Says. ls
the Protector Of Weak =.
$. Republics.

England Must Arbitrate With
Venezuela or Deal With
Uncle SAM.
WASHINGTON, Dec. 18.-The presi-
dents message to congress on the
Monroe doctrine will doubtless be-
come one Of the historic state papers
centering around the famous pronun-
ciamento Of President Monroe. Accom-
panying the message was Lord Sails
bury's reply to Secretary Olney's note
on the Venezuelan boundary dispute
The message Of the president is as fol-
lows:
To the Congress:
In my annual message addressed to
the congress on the third instant, I
called attention to the pending bound
Dry controversy between Great Britain
and the Republic Of Venezuela, and re-
cited the substance Of a representation
made by this government to her Britain
mic majesty's government, suggesting
reasons why such disputes should be
submitted 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
the dispatch to which it is reply, is
hereto appended. Such reply is en-
bodied in two communications adj
dressed by the British prime minister to
Sir Julian Pauncefote, the British am
bassador at this capital. twill be seen
that one of these communications is de-
voted exclusively to observations upon
the Monroe doctrine, and claims that
in the present instance new and
strange extension and development of
this doctrine is insisted on by the
United States; that the reasons justify
ing an appeal to the doctrine enunciated
by President Monroe are generally in
applicable ito the state Of things in
which we live at the present day." and
especially inapplicable to controversy
involving the boundary line between
Great Britain and Venezuela.
Thinks the Doctrine Is Sound.
Without attempting extended argu-
ments in reply to these positions, it may
not be amiss to suggest that the doc
trine upon which we stand is strong
and sound because it's enforcement is
important to our peace and safety as
nation, and is essential to the integrity
Of our free institutions and the tranquil
maintenance of our distinctive form of
government. It was intended to apply
to every stage of our national life, and
cannot become obsolete while our re-
public endures. If the balance Of
power is justly cause for jealous anx-
iety among the governments Of the old
world, and a subject for our absolute
non-interference, none the less is an OBJ
servance of the Monroe doctrine Of vital
concern to our people and their govern
ment.
Doesn't See Where 1t Doesn't Apply.
Assuming, therefore, that we may
properly insist upon this doctrine, with
out regard to ''the state of things in
which we live," or any changed condi-
tions here or elsewhere, it is not appar-.
ent why it's application may not be in
voked in the present controversy. If a
European power, by an extension Of its
boundaries, takes possession of the ter.
ritory of one of our neighboring repub-
lies against its will. and in derogation
of it's rights, it is difficult to see why, to
that extent, such European power does
not thereby attempt to extend its sys-
TEN of government to that portion Of
this continent, which is thus taken.
This il the precise action which Presi-
dent Monroe declared to be dangerous
to our peace and safety" and it can
make no difference whether the
European system is extended by an adj
vance Of frontier or otherwise.
1t is also suggested in the British
reply that we should not seek to apply
the Monroe doctrine to the pending dis
pute because it does not embody. any
principle of international law which
sis founded on the general consent of
nations, " and that mo statesman, how
ever eminent, and no nation, however
powerful, are competent to insert into
the code of international law, novel
principle, which was never recognized
before and which has not since been &C.
cepted by the government of any other
country"
1t Is Peculiar to This Country.
Practically the principle for which
we contend has peculiar If not exclus-
i've relation to the United States.
1t may have not been admitted in so
many words to the code of international
law, but since in international councils
every nation is entitled to the rights be-
longing to it, if the enforcement of the
Monroe doctrine is something we may
Justly claim, it has its place in the code
Of international law as certainly and az
securely a. if it were specifically mem
toned, and when the United States is q
sutton before the high tribunal that I'D.
| -:.:.Aos,. ;~<oru aksoua1 1oxxy tho nuoa.