The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-11-13
RIVER AT 8 A. NJ.
Danger Height Of
THEY MISS THE MARK.

II ia amusing to study the run OF
nress opinions in Great Britain on the
adjustment Of the Venezuelan ques-
ton. The same newspapers Whlch
were vociferating year ago ABOUT the
impertinence and interference Of the
United States in a matter that did not
concern them, and declaring that Great
Britain could never recognize us as in
any sense a party to that dispute, are
now shaking hands vigorously over
what they call the great gain to their
government by substituting a strong,
independent and reliable party in fu-
ture matters Of this sort for q weak,
vacillating and untrustworthy South
American state. They all take prac-
tically the same tone, and are equally
wide of the mark. They say that Eng
land is delighted to know that, when
complications arise in the future with
the petty governments Of the Ameri-
can continent, they can call us to
account and settle with us, instead Of
with the state which is offender or
offended, as the case may be.
In this they show the usual failure
to comprehend the American idea and
the American position. 1t does seem to
us that a dogma which has been SO
literally stated and so abundantly
discussed on both sides Of the Atlantic
as the Monroe doctrine ought to have
made it's way by this time even
through the British mental integument.
Neither the Monroe doctrine in itself
nor the application Of it which we have
made in the case of Venezuela commits
the government Of the United States in
any particular to the support of or re-
sponsibility for any future act Of any
American republic. We did not inter
fere in the Venezuela controversy be-
caIse Venezuela had done or failed to
do something. We did not interfere
because Great Britain had insisted
upon something that was right. On
the contrary, as was shown when the
British forces occupied Corinto and we
held hands off, we showed that it is
none of our business when differences
arise under we'll settled rules of inter-
national law between one of the South
or Central American republics and a
foreign power. We were brought into
the dispute in the only way that we
ever can be brought into one. That
is when foreign power proposed to
absorb territory on American soil, or to
extend it's own authority over territory
the sovereignty Of which vests rightly
in an American government.
This Is the essence and the sole i'm
denies the right Of any European pow
er to extend it's authority on the Amer
ican continent. The two Americas are
not subject to future colonization by
any European power. No government
In either of the two Americas is sub
ject to coercion or to the limitation of
its territory or to its governmental
rights within that territory by external
forces. That is the sum and substance
of it. That is the claim which we
have made and which others have ad-
mitted That is the Monroe doctrine,
which will stand without question for
all time to come as an accepted part of
the law of nations. With no matters
less vital than this have we any con-
nection whatever. If British capital
lists own rights in deposits of guano
in Peru it Is none of our affair If
Bolivia or Uruguay puts under arrest
a diplomatic representative of England
or France or any other nation, 1t must
make due reparation for the indignity
offered, just as we should do. If any
such state becomes liable in damag es
it must pay them or take the conse-
quences. We should not fire a musket
to prevent the collection Of an indem-
nifty, only provided that it did not
amount to q conquest OF territory or to