Search America's historic newspaper pages from 1756-1963 or use the U.S. Newspaper Directory to find information about American newspapers published between 1690-present. Chronicling America is sponsored jointly by the National Endowment for the Humanities external link and the Library of Congress. Learn more
Image provided by: University of New Mexico
Newspaper Page Text
VOL. 2, NO. 18. SILVER CITY, N. M., WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 26, 1895. l'KU'K 5 CENTS AMERICAN SPIRIT. Message of President Cleveland Congress on the Venezuelan Question. to The Monroe Doctrino muxt l, Mliiliiln(l mill no TruvklliiK to O rent Brit ain, even at Die coHt of of War. Washington, Dec. 17. The president sent the following message to congress today : "To Congress In my annual message addressed to congress on the .'id instant, I ?lled attention to the pending bound ary controversy between Great Britain and the liepublic. of Venezuela, and re- cited the substance oí the representation made this government to lierBrutanie majesty's government, suggesting rea t-ons why such disputes should be sub mitted to arbitration for settlement and inquiring whether it would be so sub. milted. . : . : "The answer of the British govern ment, which was then awaited, has since been received and together with a dispatch to which it is a reply, is here to appended. Such' reply, is embodied in two communications addressd bv the British prime minister to Sir Julian Pauncefote. British embajador at this capital. It will be. seen that one of these communications m devoted ex clusively to observations upon the Mon roe doctrine and claims that, in the pre sent instance, new and si ranga exten sion and development of this doctrine is insisted on by the United Suues, that the reasons justifying an appeal to the the doctrine enunciated by President Monroe are generally inapplicable to the state of things in which we live at the present day, and especially inappli cable to the controversy involving ilie boundary line lietweeii Great Britain and Venezuela.' "Without attempting extended argu ments in reply to these positions it - may not be amiss to suggest that the doc trine upon which we stand is strong and Bound because its endorsement is impor tant to our peace and safety as a nation, and essential to the integrity of our free institutions and the tranquil mainten ance of our distinctive form of govern ment. It was intended to apply to every sttige of our muiónat life and can not be come obsolete while our republic pn- dures. If the balance of power is justly cause for jealous anxiety among govern ments of the old world and subject for our absolute non-interference, none the less is the observance of the Monroe doctrine of vital concern to our people and their government. Assuming, therefore, that we may properly insist upon the doctrine without regard to the state of things in which we live,' or any changed conditions here or else where, it is not apparent why its appli cation may not be invoked in the pre sent controversy. If European power, by the extension of its boundaries, takes possession of the territory of one of our neighlioring republics against its will and in derogation of its rights, it is dilti cult to see why, to that extent, such European power does not thereby at tempt, to extend it system of govern ment to that porti mi of this continent which is thus taken. This is the pre cise action which President Monroe de clared to le 'dangerous to o.ir peace and safety,' and it can make nodillier ence whether the European system is extended by the advance of frontier or otherwise. , "It is also suggested in tha British re ply that wa should not seek to apply the Monroe doctrine to the pending dispute, because it does not embody any princi ple of international law which 'is founded on general consent of nations,' and 'that no statesman, however eminent, and no nation, however powerful, are competent to insert into the code oí internaiiomil law a novel prii.ciple whicli was never recognized More and which has not since la-en accepted by government of any other country. "Practically the principle for which we contend has peculiar if not exclusive relation to the United States. It may not have been admitted in so many words to the code of international law, but since in international councils every nation is entitled to rights belonging to it, if the Monroe doctrine is something we must justly claim, it has its place in the code of international law as certain ly and as securely as if it were specifi cally mentioned, and when the United States is suitor More a tribunal that administers international law, the ques tion to be determined is whether or not we present claims which justice of that code of law can find to be right. and valid. "The Monroe doctrine finds its recou- I nition in those principles of inlcrniition al law Ahich are based upon tbe theory that avery nation shall have its rights protected and its just claims enforced. "Of course this government is entirely confident that under the sanction of this doctrine we have clear rights and un doubted claims. Nor is this ignored in the British reply. The prime minister, while not admitting that the Monroe doctrine is not applicable to present con ditions, states: ' 'In declaring that the United Slates would resist any such enterprise if it was contemplated, President Monroe adopted the policy which received ti e entiio sympathy of the English govern ment of that date.' "He further declares: 'Though the language of President Monroe is direct eel to tbe attainment of objects which most Englishman would agree to be salutory, it is impossible to admit that that they have been inscrilied'' by any adequate authority in the code of inter national law.' , "Again he says: 'They (her majes ty's government) fully concur with the view which President Monroe appar ently entertained, that any disturbance in that hemisphere by any fresh ac quisitions on the part of any European state, would be highly inexpedient change.' "In the belief tliat the doctrine for which we contend was clear and defi nite, that it was founded upon substan tial considerations and involved our safty and welfare, that it was fully ap plicable to our present conditions and to the state of the world's progress, and that it was directly related to the pend ing controversy and without any con victions as to the final merits of the dispute, but anxious learn in a satis factory and conclusive manner whether Great Britain sought under the boun dary claim to extend her possessions on this continent wit.i at righr.r or whe ther she merely sought, possession of territory fairly included within berlinés of Ownership, thiB government proposed to the government of Great Britain to resort to arbitration as a proper means of settling the question to the end that the vexations boundary dispute lictween the two contestants might lie determined and our exact standing and .relation in respect to the controversy .might lie made clear. , . . V ' ' t i ' "It will be m'n fmii 'rWiwliMH , 1 ''