Evening journal., 1896-01-08
THAT SHOMBURGK LINE
Sir Edward Clarke Says Great
Britain Is Wrong.
SAYS ENGLAND MUST ARBITRATB.

~ liam - w OiASs
SAYS ENGLAND MUST ARBITRATE.
Otherwise She Wil Prccipitate War
with the United states. In Which She
WIN BE at Fault--The Times Important
Concession.
LONDON. Jan. s.-sir Edward Clarke,
speaking at Plymouth, in referring to Ven
ezuela, said
1--WE must not be too impatient or angry
with the Monroe doctrine. If we refused
TO arbitrate except outside the shomburgk
line, we should have war with the United
States, and a war in which we should not
be right. Each side must yield to some
extent. We must ignore the American
commission, but to say that a line fixed in
1910 is unnlterable is to adopt as un-
reasonable an attitude as the United States
adopted in President Cleveland's mes
sage"
He hoped, he said, that the government
would resume negotiations with Venezuela
direct, and that some mediator would be
found whose judgment could be accepted
with honor by both countries. In that
case, he continued, we might be called
upon to bear taunts both here and in
America.
1t would not be pleasant to hear that we
had yielded after President Cleveland's
message but he did not believe in bas-
tard honor, which feared to do justice be-
cause justice had been demanded with in
suit or menace. It was our business espe-
-. IL 8
with America, to make up our minds to
what was right and to do the right calmly
and quietly regardless Of taunt content
that we had helped TO preserve peace by
the only conduct worthy Of a great nation.
The close of Sir Edward Clarke's re-
marks was greeted with cheers.
Arbitration or War.
The Chronicles Washington correspond
ent cables as follows; II once more re-
peat my solemn conviction that the over
whelming majority Of the American peO-
pie win support their government in war
on behalf Of the principle of arbitration
where American interests are believed to
be involved. At the same time positively
reassert that the president and the cabinet
earnestly desire an amicable settlement,
and individual members Of the admins
tration confess that they fail TO compre-
hend the reasons for Englands attitude
Of mere blunt refusal. In all the govern
ment departments here the situation is re-
garded as very serious, despite every effort
made on behalf of peace. "
Commenting ON the dispatch, The
Chronicle said today: "The vital and alb
sorbing feature of the controversy is that
America desires arbitration, and we can
not refuse the request. 1t is slowly, we
hope surely, entering the minds of our
statesmen that in order to do justice to the
American case we must look at the Mon
roe doctrine from the American point Of
view. Herein the hair splitting of ingen-
ious lawyers and academic essayists helps
very little We have to take into account
a deep rooted national sentiment which
has way of getting itself recognized in
policy and in action without the sanction
Of theoretical rules.
Some Notable Admissions.
"Lord Salisbury may urge this, that the
American doctrine is not incorporated in
the code Of international law. The Ameri-
can answer is that what we call interna-
tional law is merely the customs observed
by European states in their relations with
each other which have been determined
by the dominant powers. England has
been foremost as a maker of international
law Ii requires no exceptional gift of per-
ception to see that the United States aspire
TO the same leading role in politics ON the
American continent.
England filed Europe with glory and
was herself a benefit TO mankind in the
period OF the Napoloonic wars. The inter
national law which Is TO govern the Amer
lean continent is in progress of formation,
~ r..
that since the United States are the domi-
nant power on that continent they will
not fail to exercise that paramount in
fucnce which Is incidental 20 the position"
The Times has a long article on the
Monroe doctrine and the Venezuela bound
airy line. 1t makes an important conces-
sion when it describes the Shomburgk
line as having no particular sanctity and
ms useful mainly for marking off the prac-
tically settled from the unoccupied dis
tricts. BY suggesting that it ought not TO
be difficult 60 determine and exclude the
districts actually occupied on either side it
opens the way for arbitration of the
boundaries OF the unsettled districts as a
whole, without dealing with the Shom-
burgk line at all. The precise method pro
posed by The Times is not important;
what is significant is its concession that
the Shomhmgl line, which was Lord
Solisbury's nrcducible minimum, lacks
the sanctity of a fixed frontier Of the Brit
ish empire That was the line which Lord
Salisbury said could not be discussed, yet
the leading English journal deals with it
as though &c were a convenient gcograph.
ical expression, and argues that arbitra-
tion could be arranged without reference
to IL.
Kentucky's Legislature.