Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1896-01-29
SENATE ARMENIAN RESOLUTIONS.

The Senate concurrent resolutions on
the Armenian atrocities. when "eio
pass.d by that body last week, ana
were conourrsd In Monday by the
lower branch OF Congress. are niue
more dangerous than the House resoiu-
lions reported from the House Commit
tee on Foreign Relations. but are ihnu'
and almost innocuous. as compared WIN
many Of .he uttcrsnccs in The House
debate on the TWO propositions. surely
IL would seem from that debate, report
cd in the Congressional Record tna'
some Of the members OF the House were
merely talking to hear themselves taik-
That the Armenian outrages are
blot upon civilization. and that 1t IL the
dmiy OF the European Powers to carry
ont their pledge 10 see enforced re-
forms In Armenia there can be
mo question. Nor can there be a
question that the people Of this coun-
try ~vmpathize TO the fullest with the
Armenans. and would rejoice to see
the unspeskabls Turk swept, as he de-
serves 10 be- OF the face o. the earth.
Furthermore Il can hardly be gain
said that Great Britain has proved the
greatest obstacle 10 this contamination,
and that upon her shoulders rests the
larger part OF the responsibility for
the continuance OF the butchery Of the
Sultan's Christian subjects. She would
not act summarily herself IN the matter
OF crushing the Turk. and up to this
time has barred the way 10 Kussia's so
acting.
Nevertheless however intense may be
our sympa'h'es with the Armenans. and
however much We may reprobate Great
Britains shortcomings. We cannot. at
this particular jGncture. be too careful
in any step We may take as a govern
ment that might Involve Us in the Ar
menian complication. 10 is not. how
ever the fear Of offending England, but
the danger Of weakening our position
on the Monroe doctrine that we would
have kept in view. Just 10 the extent
that the European Powers may be able
10 produce the impression that the Sen
ate resolutions constitute an interference
In European AFFAIRS. and the meddling
BY the United States in treaty supula-
tons 10 which we are not d party. VIII
,hey be able 10 argue win plausibihty
that We have departed from one OF the
{ two cardinal principles Of the Monroe
/ doctrine. and therefore are not In stu
/ alton 10 sustain logically the other.
As we made the issue on the Nene-
/ zuelsn quest on. our position touching The
Monroe doctrine was unmistskable and
I impregnabie We have only 10 stand
there and the chances are that the set
/ tlemcnt Of that question well be the set
Element Of the Monroe doctrine Issue for
many years 10 come. We mink
/ The changed tone Of the British press
/ and certain outevings Of the British
/ Government justify this latter conclu-
sion. Yet we doubt not that Lord Sails
! bury would be more than pleased TO see
us compromise ourselves by some act
that could be made the basis OF a charge
OF interfering in European affairs. In
deed. II is now stated that he has asked
! the cooperation OF the United States VA
tn. settlement Of the Armenian question.
Ii will not do to say that such co-opera-
ton could not be safely entered upon,
but in any negotiations We may have
10 that end il would be we'll to remem-
Der the danger Of "entangling alliances
and the Injunction. Beware OF gift-oear-
ing Greeks" or course. this govern
ment must protect. at all hazards, ITS
| citizens residing within the Sultan's do
mains. but fl should be very guarded a.
to the possible bearing upon our time
| honored policy Of any agreement ~ may
| conclude with "A European Power.