Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-12-18
Morning Papers Attack President
Cleveland's Message.
GREAT BRITAIN READY TO RESIST
American Journals Nearly Unani-
nous for the Monroe Doctrine.
WHAT LEADING MEN SAY

to the merits OF that question ltSelL
The Times says in its editorial on the
situation:
TT is impossible to disguise the gravity
of the difficulties that have arisen between
Great Britain and the United States. Pros
ident Cleveland's message gives additional
Importance to the dispatches between
Washington and London. The details Of
the boundary dispute are insignificant in
comparison with the far-reaching claims
advanced in Mr.. Olney's dispatch and en-
phasized in President Clevelands message
Convinced as We are that rupture be-
tween the two great English-speaking COM
munities would be calamity not only to
themselves but to the civilized world, they
are nevertheless driven to the conclusion
that the concessions this country Is Sc
riously summoned to make are such as no
Self-respecting nation, least of all one ruling
an empire that has its roots In every quar-
ter of the globe, could possibly submit to-
The United States themselves would never
for moment dream of yielding to this
kind of dictation. We are Of the same
blood, and shall not be less careful of our
national honor
I'VE can hardly believe that the course
threatened by President Cleveland will be
seriously adopted by the American govern
ment; but, if so, it will be incumbent upon
us. without entering upon any aggressive
measures, to protect our imperial interests
and to stand up for our rights under inter-
national law
The Times proceeds to argue that the
Monroe doctrine has never been recognized
as international law. and it quotes Lord
SaliSbury'S admission that any disturb
arce of the territorial districts on the
western hemisphere would be improba ble
and then continues:
But the recognition of this expedency
does not cover the preposterous deductions
which Mr.. Olney's dispatches advance, and
which President Cleveland makes the basis
of the most astounding proposal that has
perhaps ever been advanced by any gov
eminent in times of peace since the days
of Napoleon.
I'VE desire to speak with all proper re-
serve but We can confidently predict that
Great Britain will not admit the preten-
sions put forward by President Cleveland
No commission appointed by power which
is not a party to dispute will be recognized
by US as having, a title of any sort to pro-
nounce upon boundary question. 1t will
receive no assistance from British authors
ties Its decision will be null and void
from the outset, even if it's origin did not
faint 1t with Partially. We shall be very
much astonished If there is any disagree
ment among the organs of public opinion
in this country as to the manner in which
such claim should be confronted"
The Times contends further that Eng
land is bound to resist the extended claim
of Monroesm and says:
"a power which has command Of the sea
does not regard 5000 miles of Intervening
Politics Hinted At.
The Times says also:
These unnecessary and aggressive ex-
cursions seem to point to the possibility
that this sudden offensive movement on the
part of the United States government has
more to do with party politics than with
diplomacy. Much may be pardoned In view
of the approaching election. which. to a
l., lain fha Of no
publicars with the democrats in raising
the lingo cry. 1t is to be remembered,
moreover, that a deal Of time must elapse
before the commission can be appointed.
and still longer time before it can report.
1t may not come into existence indeed.
until the executive has passed into other
hands. Meanwhile, the sober, common
sense of the American people, We should
hope, will condemn the attempt to pick a
quarrel with friendly power.
I'm any case our own course is clear. We
must stand firmly and calmly upon our
rights independent state. and If
necessary, take practical measures to
sert them. 1t may even be expedient to
settle the frontier question by drawing
line of our own-of course. there can be no
thought of anything less than the Schonl-
burgk line-and allowing the United States
and Venezuela to settle the matter as they
may.
The Times only has two editorials, both
of which are devoted to Venezuela. 1t also
publishes all the correspondence issued on
the subject.
The second editorial contains a long dis
cussion of the history of the boundary dis
pute, and says that the American govern
ment now argues, with surprising disin-
genuouSness. that England never had any
consistent theory of its rights, but has
heen gradually enlarging its claims. but
it cannot be too clearly understood" says
the Times, that we have never receded
from the contention that our full claim is
what we inherited from the Dutch"
EngIishmen Must Take 1t Seriously.
The Standard, the conservative organ, in
editt rial en- the message, says:
This extraordinary document will re-
ceive from English people more dispassion-
ate treatment than the decidedly provo
Cative nature of its contents renders alto
gether easy. 1t was prepared by the re-
sponSible head of state, and will prob
ably receive the formal assent of Congress
EnglShmen must therefore take it serious
ly, and refrain from speculations that
would otherwise be attractive as to the
utility, in view of the presidential election
of twisting the lions tail.
THE position President Cleveland as
sumes is preposterous. No American citi-
zen would for a moment dream of admit
ting its SoundneSS In any analogous case
in which the honor and interests of
but one answer. We decline to humiliate
ourselves and we refuse to accept the de-
c1sion of W Washington in matters altogether
outside it's jurisdiction.
The remainder of the Standards article
is an echo of Lord Salisbury's argument,
and it concludes by saying:
Great Britain will reject the demands as
Indignantly as Congress would II America
were asked to submit her title to Alaska to
the judgment of impartial umpires."
The Daily Telegraph QiberaD says that
America has no concern in the Venezuelan
dispute. The editorial goes on to say:
In truth. this invocation of the Monroe
doctrine seems on this side of the water to
be irrelevant. because there is no question
of territorial greed or the imposition of a
European system. 1t Is absurd, because a
statement of an American policy can hard
ly claim to attain the rank of principle
of International law. By what right does
the Washington government demand the
arbitration of this matter when the very
theory which guides their interference has
absolutely nothing to do with the points
in dispute? What nation has ever agreed
to the Monroe doctrine? How often has
the Washington government itself ventured
to advance it?
I'VE say nothing of the process Of twist
ing the lions tail generally resorted to at
times Of electoral excitement. Yet, If it be
true that all this jealous support of
Venezuela originated In partisan intrigues
there is still less reason why we should