The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1895-12-17

WARRINGTON, Dec. H. .Presldent Cleve-
land has submitted his second message
OF the session to Congress today.
The document is as follows:
In my annual message addressed to the
Congress on the third instant, called at
teniton to the pending boundary contro-
versy between Great Britain and repuh hlic
OF Vene5uels, and recited the substance
ofa representation made by this gov
ernment TO Her Britannia Mnjesty's gov
ernment, suggesting reasons why such
dispute should be submitted to arbitra-
tion for settlement and inquiring whether
it would be so submitted.
The answer of the British government
which was then awaited has since been
received, and together with the dis
patches to which reply is hereto APP
pended.
Such reply is embodied in two commu-
nications addressed by the British prime
minister to Sir Julian Pauncefote, the
British ambassador at this capital. Ii
will be seen that one of these communi-
cations Is devoted exclusively TO observa-
tion upon the Monroe doctrine, and
claims that In the present instance a new
and strange extension and development
OF this doctrine is insisted on by the
United States, that the reasons justifying
an appeal TO the doctrine enunciated by
President Monroe are generally lnappllc-
able "to 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.
Without attempting extended argu-
ment in reply to these positions it may not
be amiss TO suggest that the doctrine
, upon which we stand is strong and sound
because its enforcement is important to
our peace and safety as nation and is
essential to the integrity of our free in
situations and the tranquil maintenance
of our distinctive form of government.
IL was intended to apply to every stage
of our national life and cannot become
obsolete while our republic endures. III the
balance of power is Justly cause for
jealous anxiety among the governments
OF the old world, and subject for our
absolute non-in reference none the less
is an observance of the Monroe doctrine of
vital concern 10 our people and their
government. Assuming, therefore, that
we may properly insist upon this doc
trine without regard TO "the state of
things in which we live' or any changes
in conditions here or elsew here, il is not
apparent why its application may not be
invoked in the present controversy.
IL a European power, by an extension
of its boundaries, takes possession OF the
territory OF one of,Qur neighboring repub-
lies against Its will, and I'm derogation of
its rights, IL is oit5cult TO see TO what
extent should he European power thereby
attempt to extend its system OF govern
ment TO that portion OF this continent
which is thus taken. This Is the precise
action which President Monroe declared
to be dangerous to our peace and safety"
and 1t can make no difference whether
the European system is EXTENDED by an
advance OF frontier or otherwise.
1t is also suggested in the British reply
that we should not seek to simply apply
the Monroe doctrine TO the pending dis
pute because il does not emb body any
principle OF international law which sis
founded on the general con sent of
nations, and that "no statesman, how
ever eminent, and no nation, how aver
powerful, are competent TO insert into
the code OF international law, a novel
principle, which has never been recog-
nized before, and which has not since
been accepted by the government OF any
other country"
Practically the principle for which we
contend has peculiar il not exclusive re-
lation TO the United States. 1t may not
have been admitted in go many words TO
the code OF international law, but since
Internal ional counsels every nation is
entitled to rights belonging TO IL. III the
enforcement of the Monroe doctrine is
something we may justly claim, it has it's
place in the code OF international law as
certainly and seriously as II IL were spe-
cifically mentioned, and when the United
States Is at suit or before the high tri-
bunal that administers international law,
the question TO be determined is whether
or not we present claims which the justice
OF that code of law can find TO be rem
dered valid.
The Monroe doctrine finds its recogni-
tion in those principles of international
law which are based upon the theory that
every nation shall have it's rights pro-
tected and its lust claims enforced. OF
course this government is entirely con-
fident that under the sanction OF this
doctrine we have clear rights and un-
doubted claims. Nor is this ignored in
the British reply. The prime minister
while not admitting that tho Monroe
doctrine is applicab bic to the present con-
ditions, states, "In declaring that the
United States would -ssist any such en-
terprise IL IL was contemplated. President
Monroe adopted a policy which received
the entire sympathy of the English gov
eminent of that date. ~
lie further declares: "Thorgi the
language OF President Monroe il directed
10 the attainment OF objects which most
Englishmen would agree to be salutary,
II is impossible 20 admit that they have
been inscribed by any equal authorities in
the code of international law Again,
be SAYS: "Tbey (Her Majesty's govern.
~. a.