The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1895-12-24

Its honor and its interests are involve
> and the continuance OF which IL ear
: not regard with Indifference.
3 AT this point Secretary Olney say
, 1.-The accuracy of the foregoing an
7 alysis OF the existing status cannot,
ls believed, be challenged. 1t show
> that status to be such that thos
: charged with the interests of tn
United States are now forced to deter
mine exactly what those interests al
ana what course of action they r, quire
1t compels them to decide TO what ex
tent, III any, the United States may am
, should intervene In the controvors,
between and primarily concerning onl,
Great Britain and Venezuela, and Il
decide how far it is bound to see tha
the integrity of Venezuelan territor,
Is not impaired by the pretensions .
its powerful antagonist"
The secretary then enters into a,
elaborate review of the application o
the Monroe doctrine in the past anc
says that our present concern is the
practical application OF the doctrine, 6
disregard OF which by any European
power is to be deemed an act Of uu
friendliness toward the United States
On this point the secretary says:
Tho precise scope and Limitations
4 1S eaS Sdhhoo p0 OOo ClodTlY dp-
pretended. 1t does not establish any
general protectorate by the United
States over other American States. II
docs not relieve any American State OF
lts obllgations, nor prevent any Euro
pean power directly Interested from
enforcing such obligations, or from in
hicting merited punishment for the
breach OF them. 1t does not contem-
| plate any interference in the internal
affairs of any American State or in the
relations between it and other Ameri-
can States. It does not justify any
attempt on our part to change the
esta olished form of government of any
American State, or to prevent the peo-
pie of such State from altering that
form according to their own will and
pleasure. The rule in question has
put q single purpose and object. 1t is
that no European power or combina-
LION OF European powers shall forcibly
deprive an American State of the right
and power of self-government aud of
shaping for itself its own political for
tunes and destinies.
Amy European control of our inter-
ests 1s necessarily both incongruous and
lnJut lous, and If the forcible intrusion
OIL European powers In American poll
tics is to be deprecated, tho resis-
tance must come from the United
States, the only power with strength
adequate to the exigency. There Can
be but one answer to the question
whether the safety and welfare of the
United States are so concerned with
the maintenance of the Independence
OF every American State as against
any european power as to justify and
require our interposition whenever
that independence is endangered.
These States are our friends and
allies commercially and politically and
to allow the subjugation of any one of
them by an European power reverscs
the situation and signifies loss OF al
the advantages incident to their netu
raj relation to us. But this i
not all. Tho people of the
United States have a vital interest in
the cause of popular self-governmen Mt
which they have secured at the cost Of
Infinite blood and treasure. The age
of the crusades has passed and they are
content with such assertion and de-
fense of the rights OF self-governmen
as their own security and welfare de-
'nand. 1t is that view, more than any
other, that they will not tolerate the
political control OF American States by
The forcible assumption of an European
ppwer.
There is then doctrine of Ameri-
can public law we'll founded in princl-
pie and abundantly sanctioned by pre-
cedent, which entities and REQUIRES
the United States to treat as an injury
to herself the forcible assumption by
an European power OF political con-
troll over an American State. The
application of the doctrine to the boun-
dary dispute between Great Britain
and Venezuela remains to be made and
presents no real difficulty"
The secretary shows that though
relating to the boundary line, the ques-
tion is one Of political control over
domain Of great extent, the British
claim apparently expanding in two
years some thirty-three thousand
square miles and directly involving the
'of immense 0rfS1eauence in connection
with the whole river navigation Of the
interior of South America.
There is but one desirable mode of
determining theSmerts of tho question
and that is peaceable arbitration
Great Britain admits that thore Is a
cOntr Oversy which should be adjusted
by arbitration, but nullifies this ad-
mission by her insistence that the sub
mission shall cover but part of the
controversy. If it were to point to
boundary which both parties either
expressly or tacitly had ever agreed
to, tho demand that the territory with
in that line should be excluded from
the dispute might rest upon a reason
able basis, but there is no such limo.
Great Britain has shown in various
instances that she was willing to arbi-
trate her political and sovereign
rights, when the interests or territory
involved were not Of controlling mag
nitude. Thus she arbtrated the OK tent
of her colonial possessions with the
United States, twice with Portugal,
once with Germany and perhaps in
other instances. The secretary quotes
from some of these arbitrations In the
past to sustain his assertion that the
British demand for recognition of her
right to a portion of the disputed tor
ritory before arbitration seems to stand
upon nothing but her own ipse dixit.
She says to Venezuela in substance:
You can get none of the debateable
land by force, because you are not
strong enough; you can get mono by
treaty, because [ will not agree; and
you can take your chance at getting q
portion by arbitration only il you first
agree to abandon to me such other por-
tion as may designate"
Summing up, Secretary Olney says:
''ln these circumstances tho duty OF
the president seems to him unmistake O.
able and imperative. Great Britain's