The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1896-05-22

ton, the act having been committed on foreign
territory. We find no record of the home gov
, ernments disavowal of this act
Another British authority, the Statesman:
Year Book says, that England's possession:
were enlarged 10y the addition Of thirty three
thousand square miles o; this same disputed
territory in the year 1884, Lord Salisbnrys at
tention was called TO this fact by Secretary
OlRey. He deigns no notice of it in his reply
but argues that Her Najestys subjects occupy
this territory snd therefore he cannot consent
to entertain any claim which would transfer
them to another rule.
Having shown that England has appropriated
territory which she never acquired by snv ees-
sion, we fail to perceive why this is not an ex-
tension of her form of government. Having
established that English subjects have settled
this same territory we cannot discern why it is
Tot colonization. Therefore. we affirm that
President Cleveland rightly and correctly main
tains that this doctrine applies TO the venezue-
Ian controversy. If the United States cannot
prevent England from controlling and coloniz-
ing land belonging to Venezuela neither can
she hinder her in seiziug any territory on the
western hemisphere to which she may care to
|
land grabbing tendency. we ought not to OBJ
struct other European nations in the exercise
OF like privilege. We would see South Amer
lea parcelled among the more powerful nations
OF Europe as we have witnessed the partition
ing of Africa and Southern Asia. 1t may be
commended in opposition to this view. that it is
absurd, TO presume that thsse nations would
seize American territory. even if not protected
by the United States. We make answer by cit
ing the records of History. 1t has always been
England's policy to intervene in the affairs of
the world at large. not only when her peace and
safety were involved, but whenever II might
accrue to her financial benefit. She has de-
stroyed Alaskan seals: she took military posses
sion of Nicaragua on a claim so finsy as not
to be considered by individuals in private bust
ness she seized Gibralter and the island of
Malta in order that she might rule the Me6iter-
ranean she took the Suez canal. the Persian Gulf
the great dependency OF India and boasts of
dominion upon which the sun never sets. Her
latest ambition was to seize part Of our own
Alaska
| 1t may be asserted that the South American
Republics, on account of their revolutionary
tendency, are weak and irresponsible and
therefore are Republics only in name. To this
we reply that because O that weakness it be-
comes us the more, as a mighty Christian ma.
ton, not TO allow any government of the East
ern world to Cypress or destroy those of the
Western 1t is our own imperative duty to aid
these peoples in msintaininga Republican form
OF government. for history has shown that the
freest people are the most enlightened
We do not believe in the doctrine that might
! is right but in that nobler sentiment right
should prevail We are persuaded that it was
no spirit of jingoism" which melted Jefferson,
Madison, Monroe, Polk, Lincoln Grant. Hayes,
Garfield, Arthur. Harrison and President Cleve
land to give like interpretations TO the Monroe
doctrine. We cannot grant lack of patriotism
upon the part of Adams. Webster, Everett,
Blaine, 0lney and other distinguished secretsT-
les who have endorsed it and advocated its en-
forcement. 1t is dear to the hearts of the
American people as q glorious tradition of our
national life. If we would maintain our ma
tional honor we must have policy that shall
receive the universal sanction of the people
That other declaration, the immortal document
of 1776 is no more sacred in its authority than
the one penned by James Monroe. jefferson
said: THAT made US q nation, this sets our
compass and points the course which we are to
steer through the ocean of time opening upon
us"
What had Great Britain to lose by accepting
the Presidents proposal and Venezuela's desire
TO srbitrate? To a candid m lind her failure 10
accept this would indicate an unjust claim
Arbitration is the humane and christian meth
cd of settling national differences. 1t is the
substitute for war and great and intricate must
be the condition that will not admit of this
means of adjustment. In the language of the
great English premier, George Canning we
would ask. Are the great political and COM
mercial interests of the New World to be cam
vassed and adjusted in Europe without the CO.
operation or even the knowledge of the United
Statest" During the three score and ten years
since the asking Of this question the United
States has had but ons answer and that answer
is the Monroe doctrine.
If the people of Europe have the discernment
of that British Minister they must know that
answer is fnal they must know that this Re-
public will not permit the western hemisphere
to become the prey of European adventures;
they must know that were all the old world ma
tons to form a conspiracy to make spoil of any
portion of teh new and werethey to lay hands
on even the weakest of our neigh bors the
United States as one man would rise in defense
of this doctrine and for the ideas represented
by that glorious ensign of liberty would face
embattled Europe.
FIRST SPEECH FOR THE NEGATIVE.