The Coconino weekly sun., 1896-01-30
DEPEW TALKS.
Tho New York After Dinner Orator Gives
 Ills Views on Current Events.

The New York After Dinner Orator Gives
 His Views on Current Events.
 ALBANY, N. Y., Jan. 22.-The annual session of the State Bar association opened last night at Odd Fellows hall. Dr. Chauncey M. Depew, who delivered the address of the evening on Patriot. ism and Jingoism, the Lawyers study" MT. Depew said in part:
 ours Is lawyers government It was the agitation by the patriotic members of the pro- fession which brought on the revolutionary war It was the conservative wisdom of the lawyers waich framed the constitution of the United States. Twenty of our 24 presidents nave been lawyers, as were 2I of the 54 signers or the Declaration of Independence. and 70 of the 5a members of the convention which framed the constitution Of the United States. A large majority of the members of both houses of congress and of both houses of the legislatures Of the several states have always been and stlll are members of the profession.
 The alarms of war agitate tho world The columns of our daily papers are filled with cables and telegrams announcing the rage of nations and .he imminence of their flying at each others throats The battle blood which IS the Inheritance of the ages is afiame for light. Only one power keeps the nations of Europe from instantly declaring war The
 
 arbiters between nations. The only two na- tions which may be said to be free from this thraldom because of their wealth, their com- merce and credit. are the United States and England.
 The events of the past few weeks have dem. Onstrated how easy 1t is to arouse tue fighting blood among our own people. There are occa- sions when war is both right and necessary and a nation must embark upon it without counting ha hu Of battle is never certain, nor does the arbitra- ment of war always end in right or justice. Now is the time for the profession to perform great work upon the lines of the lawyers of the country in promoting international arbitration. The principal dispute between English speak, ing races, which Is agitating the world calls for both practical wisdom and legal acumen for it's solution. There is no dissent in this country from the Monros doctrine as promul- gated by President Monroe and interpreted by Jefferson, Madison. Webster and Calhoun.
 Yet any one who studies the Monroe doctrine will see how in each indiyjiual case except where there is a fragrant violation. like the French invasion of Mexico, the applicable in- depreciation of it should be the subject of judi cial determination. The presidents message to congress presents novel view of the prln- ciple. If there is dispute as to the boundary line between q South American republic and an European power, no matter how inSignih- cant the territory involved or how distantly 1t affects the independence o the country, or how remotely it may interest us, we must de- mand that the two governments arbitrate the line, and if they refuse, We must find out as best we can which line is correct and enforce 1t by war.
 slight extension of the principle compels us to assume a protectorate over all these re- publics. Their enterprises and industries are almost entirely owned or controlled and car ried on by Americans, English, Germans, French and Italians Their governments are in almost perpetual revolution and the mili- tary dictator of the hour confiscates property right and left, except that of foreigners If he could rely upon the United States to protect him he would treat the lives and property of the Germans, English, Italians and French with the same imrartial appropriation he does those of his couutrymen. These nations would demand reparation and r. dress. This would involve the collection of substantial damages and we would be, in measure, bound to as- sume tho quarrel We might, at the whim or necessities of the successful military dictator of Venezuela or the Argentines, of Brazil or Bolivia, of Paraguay or Peru, of Yucatan or Honduras, of Chilli or Bolivia, be involved in frequent wars with the powers Of Europe. This would require an immense navy and large standing army.
 Had there been an international court Of ar bitration in the Venezuelan matter Lord Sails bury could not have pleaded that there was a boundary line embracing territory so long and unquestionably held by the British that they could not in honor submit the question of their title to the court The idea of securing at an early date an international court represent ing and embracing all the nations of Europe and of North and South America is probably at present utopian. It is possible for Great .k;. ent difficulty to evolve a tribunal of interna- tional law and justice, which shall be in per petual session. whose members snail be sc- lccted with such care, whose dignity shall re- ceive such recognition and whose reputation shall DC so great that each nation can submit to it any question in dispute and bow to its de- cree with safety and honor.