The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-12-20


tween us and the nation that differs with
us and the point at issue can be settled
by the sword alone. We may rightfully
therefore. maintain our position in such
a case. although that position may be
really and In point of fact wrong.
But that is a case when we are act
ing under the code. We are there claim
ing by virtue of the code and not against
1t. In the case under consideration.
however. we set out by admitting that
our claim is not included in the code of
international laws; yet we insist that
| other nations shall conform their conduct
| TO that clam,. because we think II would
| be for our advantage for them to do So
although they have never agreed TO IT,
| and are under no sort of obligation TO
| do so. If we adopt this as a principle
| upon which we propose to found our
national action, we must expect all the
rest of mankind TO look upon us and 10
| treat us as an Ishmael. whose hand is
| against all men. We must abandon the
! Presidents position or make our minds
up to that view of US by all foreign
powers.
But the untenableness of our position
| is not completed with even this bald eX
| posture of IT. The case we are dealing
with plainly does not come within the
scope of the doctrine that President
Monroe announced.
| ~ stated of late. but it is just as well
| TO state IT again. AS announced by
President Monroe in his message OF
December 2, 1893. 1t in effect declares
that America is not to be looked on
thereafter as a continent liable to Euro
pean colonization. and. secondly. that
the United States will not permit the
powers of Europe to extend their political
systems in any part of America. or to
control the destinies of any of the new
South American republics, which had
lately established themselves as indie
pendent powers. That is the whole OF
the Monroe doctrine, view it as you
may.
Now. is there anything in the pending
controversy between Great Britain and
Venezuela that infrnges upon either
branch of this doctrine?
The undsputed facts of the case are
that Spain discovered the continent of
South America, and certainly acquired
thereby a prior right TO the settlement
of the country. But il is equally GER
tain that more than three hundred years
ago the Dutch settled large part Of
the continent, to the south of the river
Orinoco, while the Spanish settled ter
ritory TO the north Of that river. and
called it Venezuela. 1t is equally GER
tain that the Dutch continued to extend
their settlements into the interior, over
territory which the Spaniards claimed by
reason of being the discoveries. but not
by reason of occupation, and that In the
course of time there were repeated armed
collisions between the Spaniards and the
Dutch, but that the Dutch maintained
their settlements throughout. AS be-
tween Spain and the Dutch, then, Spain
had that sort Oh 1lBHt " 'hc 'Suh'is
which priorb discovery gives, but the
Dutch had that sort of right which prior
settlement and occupancy for many years
give. A hundred years ago Great Britain
acquired all the rights of the Dutch.
Now. 1t is undeniable that since Great
Britain acquired the rights of the Dutch
her citizens have pushed their settle
ments further into the interior than the
furthest Dutch lines but these further
settlements were always made in I'M
occupied territory, to which the Nene-
zuelans had no sort of title by occupa-
ton. and only that title which prior dis
covery can give. Great Britain claims
that her boundaries have been right
fully extended by these further settle
ments, and she bases her claims upon
grants, evidenced by documents, as well
as upon settlement and occupation. Her
claims, therefore, TO all the territory
that she asserts title to are bona fide,
and however a chancellor might decide
nice issues, made upon strict pleadings,
there can be no doubt whatever that
the English have color of title for all
that they claim, and that the claim is
made in good faith, as their true and
lawful boundary. And, although they
may have had no sort of title to the
territory in dispute fifty years ago, yet
adverse occupation may have given them
as perfect title to it now, as the best
that can be made.
Now, how can such claim upon the
part Of Great Britain. as that made by
her. be held to be either an attempt TO
make further colonization in South
America, or an attempt 10 set up Euro
pean systems OF government in America
further than those systems already ex-
listed there in 1923? In announcing his
doctrine, Mr.. Monroe expressly declared
that this country proposed TO tolerate
all European settlements existing on
this continent and TO do nothing that
would disturb them. Great Britain had,
when the doctrine was announced, long
been in possession of Dutch Guiana, and
the doctrine was, therefore, not intended
10 interfere with her possession of that
territory. The whole question. there
fore, Is. was the doctrine intended 10