The Portland daily press., 1895-12-18

the Boundary Line Is--A Crisis Which
Demands the Maintenance of Our Ma
tional Self Respect and Dignity-The
Message and the Correspondence.
Washington. December 1.-THE Pres-
dend sent to Congress today the Venezue-
Ian correspondence accompanied by the
following message:
TO the Congress: In my annual mes
sage addressed to the Congress on the
third instant, I called attention to the
pending boundary controversy between
Great Britain and the republic of Vene.
zuela and reoited the substance of a rep
resentation made by this government to
her Brittanic Majesty's government sug-
costing reasons why such dispute should
be submitted to arbitration for settle
ment and inquiring whether it would be
submitted. The answer of the British
government, which was then awaited,
has since been received and together with
the despatch to which it is reply, is
hereto appended.
"Suoh reply is embodied in two COM
municattions addressed by the British
prime minister to Sir Julian Pauncefote,
the British ambassador at this capital.
1t will be seen that one of these commu-
nications is devoted exclusively to obser-
vations upon the Monroe doctrine and
claims that in the present instance, a
new and strange extension and develop
ment of this doctrine is insisted on by
the United States, that the reasons justi-
flying an appeal t o the doctrine enunciat-
ed by President Monroe are generally in
applicable to the state of things in which
we live at the present day. and especial
ly inapplioable to controversy involv-
ing 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 a nation, and is
essential to the integrity of our free in
stitutions and the tranquil maintenance
Of our distinctive form of government. 1t
was intended to apply to every stage Of
our national life and cannot become
obsolete when our republic endures. II
the balance of power Is justly cause for
jealous anxiety among the governments
Of the old world, and subject for our
absolute non-interference, none the less
is an observance Of the Monroe doctrine
of vital concern to our people and their
government.
Assuming, therefore, that we may
properly insist upon this doctrine without
regard to the state of things in which
we live or any changed conditions here
or elsewhere, it is not apparent why its
application may not be invoked in the
present controversy. If a European
power by any extension of it's boundaries,
takes possession of the territory of one
of our neighhoring republics against
Its will and in derogation of It's rights. it
is difficult to:.see why to that extent such
European power does not thereby attempt
to extend itsssystem of governmnt to that
portion of this continent which is thus
taken.
'This is the precise action which Presi-
dent 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.
"It is also suggested in the British re-
ply that we should not seek to apply the
Monroe doctrine to the pending dispute,
because 1t does not embody any principle
OF in ternational law which Is founded on
the genera consent of nations, and that
| no statement however eminent, and no
| nation, however powerful. are competent
| to insert into the code of international
| law novel priuoiple which was never
| recognized before, and whloh has not
| since been accepued by the government
OF any other country.
Practically the principle for which
| We contend has peculiar, II not exclusive,
relation to the United States It may
not have been admitted in SO many words
to the code Of international law, but since
in International councils every nation
is entitled to the rights belonging to 1t, if
the enforcement of the Monroe doctrine
Is something we may justly claim, 1t
has Its place in the 0ode OF International
law as certainly and as securely as it 1t
We're specifically mentioned. and when
the United States is a suitor before the
high tribunal that administers Internal
| ional law, it Ia valid The question to be
determined is whether we present claims
! which the justice of that code OF law can
'tnd to be right and Valid