The enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 188?-1899, 1895-12-25
Executive Mansion, Dec. II, 1895.
THE CORREsP ONDENCE.

THE CORRESP ONDENCE.
Tho matter submitted to congress in conuec-
ton with the foregoing message consists Of
three diplomatic notes. Mr., Olnet's note TO
Mr.. Bayard concerning the threatening aspect
OF affairs between Great Britain and Venezuela
Is first in the correspondence. 1t is dated July
20. 1897, and deals with the boundary question
at great length. Bcginling at the very incep"
ton of the dispute Mr.. Olney carries his argu-
ment of the American claim for arbitration
based on the Monroe doctrine down to the pres
ent time and gives emphasis to his statements
byuuOtng the sentiments of President Monroe
IN full ana notes that Its pronouncement by
the Monroe administration at that particular
time was unquestionably due to the inspira-
tion of Great Baitain, who at once gave 1t an
unqualified adhesion which has never been
withdr avn
Mr. Ulney gives in his noto a firm indorse-
ment to the principle enunciated by Monroe
and defined Great Britains position in this
frank manner: She Great Britain) says to
Venezuela: You can get none of the debatable
land by force because you are not strong
enough; you can get none by treaty, because l
will not agree, and you can take your chance Of
getting portion by arbitration only if you first
agree TO abandon to me such portions as may
designate"
Continuing Mr.. Olney says it is not perceived
how such an attitude can be defended nor how
IL is rcconcilable with love of justice so charac-
teristic of the English race, and holds that II
such position be adhered to II should be re-
garded as amounting in substance to an inva-
sion and conquest of Venezuelan territory. Mr..
Olney says that in these circumstances the
duty Of the president appears to him unmistaH-
able and imperative To ignore Great Britain's
assertion of title and her refusal TO have that
title investigated, and not to protest and give
warning against the substantial appropriation
by Great Britain of the territory for her own
use would be to ignore an established policy
with which the honor and welfare Of this coun-
try are closely identified. He therefore in
structed Mr. Bayard to lay the views gwen be-
fore Lord Salisbury and said They the
views) call for a definite decision upon the
point whether Great Britain will consent or
will decline to submit the Venezuelan bound
ary question In its entirety to impartial arbi-
tratiOn."
Expressing the presidents hope that the con-
! clusion will be on the side of arbitration, Mr..
| Olney concluded with the pointed statement
| that II the president lis to be disappointed in
| that hope it Is his wish to be made acquainted
with the fact at such early date as will enable
him to lay the whole subject before congress in
/ his next annual message"
Lord Salisburys reply is addressed to Sir
Julian Pauncefote, British ambassador at
| Washington under date Of November 20. This
deals only with the application OF the Monroe
doctrine in the case at issue and was followed
on the same day by another note discussing the
boundary dispute,
At the outset Lord Salisbury states that so
far as he is aware the Monroe doctrine has
| never been before advanced on behalf OF the
| United States in any written communication
| addressed 10 the government Of another nation.
| He gives what he believes is the British inter-
probation of the doctrine and maintains them,
Dangers which we're apprehended by President
Monroe have no relation TO the state Of things
in which we live at the present day.
The dispute between Great Britain and Ven
ezuela, AYERS Lord Salisbury. Is controversy
! with which the United States have no apparent
! practical concern
Continuing he says it is difficult to see how
the question in controversy can affect any state
or community outside those primarily inter-
ested that the disputed frontier Of Venezuela
has nothing to do with any Of the questions
dealt with by President Monroe that it Is moi
question of the colonization by any European
power OF any portion Of America nor Of the i'm
position upon the communities of South Amer
lea CT any system Of government devised IN
Europe 1t is" he says, simply the determi.
alton Of the frontier Of q British possession
which belonged to England long before the
republic of Venezuela came into existence"
Mr. Olney lays down, says Lord Salisbury
that the unnatural character of the union be-
tween a European and an American state is 81
obvious that it will hardly be denied. Hel
majeSty'S government are prepared emphat
ically to deny 1t on behalf of both the British
and American people who are subject to hel
crown. They maintain that the union between
Great Britain and her territories in the western
hemisphere is both natural and eXpedient
They are not prepared to admit that the inter
ests Of the United States are necessarily con
cerned In every frontier dispute which ma!
arise between any two Of the states who possess
dominion in the western hemisphere and still
less can they accept the doctrine that the United
States are entitled to clai.n that the process o
arbitration shall be applied to any demand TO
the surrender Of territory which one of thos
states may make against another.
The second note of November 20 is wholly de-
voted to discussion OF the boundary dispute
exclusive OF It's relation to the Monroe doctrine
This dispatch, however, sounds the key note o
Great Britain's position. Lord Salisbury state
that Great Britain Gas repeatedly eXpressedit
readiness to submit to arbitration the conflict
ing claims OF Great Britain to territory OF grea
mineral value, and follows this statement will
these important words, but the British
government cannot consent to enter
tain or to submit to the arbitration
Of another power or q foreign jurist, however
eminent, claims based on extravagant preten
sions OF Spanish oficials In the last centur,
and involving the transfer Of large numbers o
British subjects who have for many years en-
joyed the settled rule Of the British colony, Il
nation Of different races and language, who's
l nOlitipnl GyStpm 10 cuhianf IN franuant dicfnrh
ance and whose institutions as yet often affor,
very inadequate protection TO life and property
No Issue Of this description has ever been In
, volved in the questions which Great Brital
and the United States have consented 10 sub
NIT TO arbitration, and her majestys govern
ment is convinced that in similar circumstance
the government Of the United States would b
, equally firm In declining to entertain proposal
l Of such o nature"
= Arlzona'S Population.
Arizona has $1,000 white people an,