New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-12-23
MONROE AND CLEVELAND
A BRIToN's CRITICISM OF THE AMERICAN PRES


IDENT.
To the Editor OF The Tribune.
Sir When President Monroe announced to Europe
that If any aggressive movement, dangerous 10 our
peace and safety" or subverslve to the rights and
interests OF the United States on this continent,
should be attempted by any Governments by the
acquis ton OF new territory. 1t could not be viewed
"in any other light than manifestation Of an
unfrendly disposition toward the United States,
he did not to say, by any means. that the ad-
justment OF boundary line between two countries
previously existing should be intcrfered with by
this Government
The position taken by President Cleveland in his
recent message TO Congress assumes that the Mon
roe Doctrine shall be strained to cover dispute
between Great Britain and Venezuela existing long
before that doctrine was announced. which only
covers trivial question of boundary limit More
over. in asserting that when commission ap-
pointed by the United shall settle this ques-
ton to the satisfaction OF this Government the de-
csion must be accepted by England. he assumes
more than any Government can admit. IN fact,
should any Government attempt such proceeding
with the United States in regulating her boundaries
with Mexico, any other country, Il would De
slapped the face very unceremoniously without
a doubt.
Lord Salisbury declares that Her Maje.tys Gov
eminent fully with the view which Presi-
dent Monroe apparently entertained. that any dis
turbance OF the existing territorial distribution in
that hemisphere by any fresh acquisitions on the
part Of any European State would be highly mex
ped!ent change" This language is fair enough and
frank enough for any such experienced diplomat ST
TO use. and the United States should respect Lord
Salisbury for this emphatic enunciation of the doc
;rine Of President Monroe; but he very justly IN
ssts that this doctrine does in the least affect
the present slight boundary quarrel with Venezuela
and in this view OF the case think tho common
of the American people Will ultimately acqui-
1t is pity. therefore that the President has
thought il his duty to threaten war In the event
aims boundary. maintained for hundred years
encroaches in the least degree upon Venezuelan ter
such thai moderate counsels rather than vlGes
self-assertior are necessary: No one appreciates
the greatness and unbounded natural resources OF
this new and prosperous country more than do
unless it be England hersef-but when 1t comes to
nations Ie7s.0 no nsoism' should be manifested
ton Of Nh Cleveland. since have been OF his
warmesi and most constant supporters since he en-
tered public life as Governor Of this state, having
generally estima ted his ability. honesty fidelity ana
fore regret exceedingly that feel II incumbent upon
to lend my voice against his policy IN ms IN
stance; but think the gravity OF the occasion re
qures this course on my part. cannot refrain
from adding that it would have been much safer
and | believe wiser. had he left the diplomatic cor
respondence IN the hands OF his Secretary OF state
and refrained from this warlike message on so
While caeerfully admit that arbitration has made
great progress In settling disputed affairs OF nations
during the last quarter OF century, still do not
believe that strong nation should take II upon
Itself 10 dictate another what shall consent 10
in "A trivial boundary dispute between two small
possessions at distance from US; particularly
EST in the Just solution Of the question than We
can possibly have. The influence OF the mted
states OF America has become great by following
Inc wise counses OF Washington--and let me add
Tonroe-that the Executive OF the Nation should be
exceedingly careful how he uses the great power
hope that wiser counsels VII ultimately Prsya
How-york Dec 90 1885,