The citizen. (Frederick City, Md.) 1895-1923, 1896-11-27
BY CHARLES l.. SHIPLEY.
PART SECOND.


our previous article the origin of the
Monroe Doctrine, from the day that it
emanated from the pen of its author
until the French invasion of Mexico,
we will endeavor in this, the second
portion of our review, in as brief man
ner as possible, to cover in as plain de-
tails its application to the Venezuela
boundary dispute.
1t is plainly evident that doctrine,
which our government has upheld for
the past seventy years, cannot at the
present time be abruptly set aside to
suit the intrigue of any nation, state,
or faction of statesmen. If we upheld
it in the past when we were weak
nation, and later was ready to sustain
it by an application to arms-as in the
case of MeXico-We must be prepared
to sustain it in the same manner in the
present difficulty, or one that will
arise in the future, or else eradicate it
absolutely from our political system,
and let "might make right" by per-
uniting any foreign nation to seize
with IMMUNITY such territory of the
South American Republics as would
suit their purpose in extending their
system to the continent south of us.
The present appeal of Venezuela was
not unexpected or without preliminary
warning. Only during the early part
of the year 1895 was there a rupture
between England and one of the Cen
trail American republics, rupture
which would undoubtedly have as
sumed grave aspect if the demand of
Great Britain had not been complied
A. ~ 81. I'D.
We refer to the Corlnto incident.
The cause of trouble between this
Central American republic and Great
Britain was created by the expulsion
from the former country of Consul
Hatch, and for other alleged damages
to British subjects arising from troubles
in the Mosquito reservation. For this
alleged damages Great Britrin made a
demand on Nicaragua for an indem-
nifty of 5000, and as she showed
very little disposition to pay the same,
a number of war vessels were sent to
seize Corinto, the principal pOrt of en-
try OF the little republic. When this
summary procedure of Great Britain's
became known in this country, it
caused great excitement for while
and diversity of opinion existed as to
the Course to be pursued 10y the United
States government.
Those of our citizens who were affl,ct-
ed with the mania of 'tjiugOism" were
in favor of a forclble interference, an in
reference that would demand of Brit
tania the immediate and unconditional
withdrawal from Nicaragua soil. But
would such an interference have been
justifiable? Here was not a question of
boundary line or territorial acquisition,
but one of personal rights, and the
question of the settlement of such a
dispute rested solely with the two
countries concerned. Great Britain was
a sovereign power and SO was Near
aqua, and the former claimed that the
latter had Inflicted personal affront
upon a number of her subjects. OF that
Great Britain was the sole judge, and
there Is no law, no court, anywhere to
compel her to think otherwise. AS q
sovereign power she had an indispu-
table right to demand redress for the
affront Offered and to determine the
amount of reparation that she would
accept as adequate for the offence.
Nicaragua in her turn as a sovereign
power was entitled to refuse the pay
ment if she was so disposed, though in
so doing she courted war with her an
tagonist. She did refuse, and the re-
suit was the seizure of one of the ports
of entry and its occupation by English
arms until the indemnity should be
paid. Iu this war Great Britain only
initiated the United States govern
ment, which ordered the lombard
meat of GreytOn, in Nicaragua, by a
fleet under Secretary Marcy's order by
the way of enforcing a demand of ours
number of years ago. The rights of
a sovereign power to enforce it's de-
mands is beyond dispute, and in this
particular demand of Great Britain we
do not see wherein the United States
had any just cause to interfere, when
1T was not question of territory at
stake. If Great Britain had demanded
portion of Nicaragua's territory for
reparation, instead of a money indem-
nifty, then our right To interfere would
have been unquestioned if we desired
to have adhered to our traditional pol
icy of MonroeisnI. Happily, however,
the incident was settled in a peaceable
manner, Nicaragua agreeing to meet
the demand of Great Britain, and the
latter promptly withdrew her fleet
from Nicaragua waters, and it was not
necessary for the United States to in
dulge in the extravaganza procedure
that a number of our hOt-headed aud
thoughtless citizens insisted upon.
THE BOUNDARY DISPUTE BETWEEN
GREAT BRITAIN AND VENEZUELA.
Following closely upon the Corinto
incident the Venezuela boundary dis
pute was soon forced to the front in a
most complicated aspect.
A rehearsal of this important ques-
ton in all it's points would only prove
Wearlsome to our readers and consume
unne cessary space and time. The de-
tails OF the controversy are too fresh in
the minds of the American public to
give minute diagnosis of it, and we
shall touch it as lightly as possible
and merely repeat the essential ele-
ments of the same before passing on to
the correspondence between Lord Sal.
lsbury and Secretary Olney.
A careful report of the boundary dis
pute was prepared about three years
ago for the bureau of American repub-
lies, and was given in hand book
which it issued on Venezuela, and from
extracts from that report we have the
following:
The province of Guiana, forming
part of the captaincy general of Cara
cas- and pertaining to Spain, was origi-
nally bounded on the east by the At
lantlc ocean and on the south by the
Amazon river.
During the long war waged nv the