The San Francisco call., 1896-02-12

George j. Goschen, Member for the East
Grlnstead Division of Sussex, moved the
ADDRESS In reply to the speech from the
throne, and the motion was seconded by
Sir Hernert E. Maxwell. member for Wig
townshire.
Sir William Harcourt, Chancellor of the
Exchequer in the late Ministry and leader
OF the opposition in the House, saiG he
had never In all mis- experience met such
critical circumstances as those with which
they were confronted. 1t was in the
highest degree desirable, he said, that the
misunderstanding between Great Britain
and the United States over the Monroe
doctrine should be removed in both coun-
tries at the earliest possible moment The
Government of the United States had ex-
pressed desire to cooperate in a friendly
solution of the dispute between Great
Britain and Venezuela, and he was re-
ioiced to see in the speech from the throne
that the prospect was welcomed. The only
practical question remaining was whether,
in the Venezuelan difficulty, there had
been any invasion of the rights of the
United States, as upon that point no pro-
nouncement had been made by the United
States Government.
1t was, in his judgment, a doubtful
question whether the United States could
justly cooperate in the settlement of the
Venezuelan difference in default of that
Government having in its possession all
of the information bearing thereon which
was at England's disposal. He therefore
regretted the delay IN the publication of
the case of Great Britain and demanded
that a prompt and honorable conclusion of
the affair be arrived at.
The Right Hon. Arthur J. BaIfour, First
Lord of the Treasury and Government
leader in the House, followed Sir William
Harcour..
"Sir William, he said, s'has attacked
some opinions that were never held by the
ministerial side. We never suggested for
a moment that the United States intended
to insult Great Britain in inquiring into
the Venezuelan boundary matter. The
Government does not see any reasons for
offering any criticism of the Monroe doc
trine. So far from looking at the appoint
ment of the American commission as
an Insult. the United States Gov
ernment having appealed to US in
ordinary diplomatic intercourse to aid
them with all the information at our dis
it, but when Sir William Harcourt says
that the Venezuelan boundary is in OBJ
scurity and no clear view can be taken, let
me remind him that since 1844 England
has made serious and honest attempts to
get it settled, for reasons not connected
with English politics, ambition or greed.
Each attempt failed. We will not be pre-
vented by diplomatic punctillios or false
pride from trying to finally settle it
[Cheers.]
at is impossible to foresee what gene
raj conclusions the American commission
or those who are inquiring into the British
case here may arrive at, but | am certain
that every one, Americans or British. who
is impartially' considering the subject, will
be convinced that there never has been
ana is not now the slightest intention on
the part of England to violently attack
the substance of the Monroe doctrine. No
illegitimate ambition nor unworthy greed
for territory or desire to step beyond the
due limits or frontiers of the empire has
ever animated the British policy through
out this long controversy.
II can only add that l shall rejoice that
the country and the public opinion of the
world will rejoice, if out of this toll shall
spring the good fruit of general system
of arbitration. If that shall be the result
of these controversies, shall feel that all
the evil done will have been more than
com pensated for, and that a permanent
guarantee Of the good will of the English
speaking peoples en- both sides of the
Atlantic will have been obtained for all
time" [Cheers.l
In the House of Lords the address in
reply to the Queens speech was moved by
Lord Stanmore and seconded by the Earl
of Rosslyn.
Lord Rosebery said he was glad to see
that the negotiations for the settlement of
the difficulties in the Transvaal were pro-
crossing. He expressed his approval of
the conduct of Mr.. Cham berlain, Secre-
tary of State for the Colonies, who had
exhibited statesmanlike courage and
promptitude of decision.
He greatly deplored the recent utter
ances of Lord Salisbury which, on the part
of the Beers, had tended to a feeling of
distrust of England's good faith, and
would lead to belief that the sympathy of
the Government was with the invaders of
the territory of the South African republic
He demanded to know what form the
Governments inquiry would take in regard
to the relations of the chartered British
South Africa Company to the transactions
which had recently taken place in the
Transvaal, and also desired to know why
the Government had been ignorant of
what had been going on at Mafeking prior
to Dr.. Jameson's raid. It was obvious, he
said, that the charter of the British South
Africa Company must be revised.
Turning his attention to the situation in
Armenia Lord Rosebery said Lord Sails
bury's recent statements in regard to the
obligations OF England under the terms of
the treaty of Berlin were absolutely incor-
rect. The whole point to be taken into
consideration was that the powers sigma
tory TO the treaty should see to it that the
reforms required by that instrument were
carried into effect. The Cyprus conven-
ton laid special Obligations upon England
and such an expression of impotency as
that conveyed by the statement which had
been made by the Premier had never be-
fore been made by British Minister. Was
there, he asked, peace with honor?