Arizona republican., 1896-01-15
STAND UP FOR ARIZONA.
PHGNIx. JANUARY 15. 1896.
WAR WITH THE BRITISH.

At the meeting of the RepuDlcan League Club in Phoenix January Il, Hon. Thomas Fitch was one of the main speakers of the evening. To him was assigned the question What would be the effect upon our commerce of a war with England. Following is his answer:
 There can be no war unless England shall bring it about. Thus far she alone has been the aggressor, although to read the London journals one would suppose that the United States was seeking a conflict In truth in our foreign policies we have been always conciliatory, seldom inSistent, and sometimes less than just to our own citizens. England has acquired terri tory in Asia, in Africa and in Oceanlca without our remonstrance or criticism. It is not long since she refused to arbi- trate an alleged grievance in 'Nicara- qua, constituted herself sole judge in her own case, decided it in her own favor, and with the shotted guns of her cruisers trained upon an unfortifed and helpless town eXtorted 9l5,0OO from the slender treasury of her vic tim And yet we did not interfere, ex- cept ito unofhciallly advise Her Majesty's government that although its piracy of money might be disre- garded it would not be suffered upon any pretext to seize Nicaraguan soil. (Applause).
 Where did England gain the right to characterize our attitude with respect to the Venezuela dispute as unwar- ranted or unjust? The position we have consistently asserted is that if the territory which England claims really belongs to her she may take it from Venezuela by force, if she is able to do so, and we will not interfere. But If 1t does not belong to England we cannot suffer her to seize and hold it by force of arms, because seventy years ago we pledged our national honor to the doc urine that no American republic should-if we could prevent it-be stripped of its territory by any Euro pean power (Applause). We never asked Europe to accept the Monro doc Urine as a part of international law, but we always asserted it as a principle that must be recognized in this hemis- phere. (Applause). We do not claim to know whether the occupation by Great Britain of the territory west of the Esiquibo river is an invasion of Venezuela or not That is a question which should be determined as land suit between individuals is determined not by the obsolete wager of battle, but by an impartial tribunal whose c.1oa a11 I'm amine documents, and make surveys, We do not concede that in determining her rights in Venezuela Great Britain may act as judge, jury, prosecutor, clerk and sheriff, and provide all the witnesses, interpret aI the documents, and furnish the surveyors, instru- ments, dhain-bearers and tape lines for the measuring. Naugihter). England is not dealing now with a weak Central American power or a bare-legged African chief (Applause.) She must go into the court of nations with her case. That court is called arbitration (AppGause) To such court she has more than once submitted her bound ary disputes with powerful nations to such court she can consistently honorably and safely make submission of her controversy with Venezuela.
 To our friendly suggestion that arbi- tration be invoked, England replied ''the Monroe doctrine is not applicable in the opinion of Her Majesty's gov ernment The Monroe doctrine is ob- solete-in the opinion of Her Majesty's government. The territory in dispute belongs to Her Majesty's government in the opinion of Her Majesty's govern ment, and Her Majesty's government declines to arbitrate it's opinions-it proposes to enforce them.
 Is such an answer a noble one? Is it fair to Venezuela? Is it just o1 courteous to the United States? The Marquis of Salisbury may ordinarily be the very Turverdrop of diplomats ir department, but the very brutality oi