The despatch, after directing the presentation to Lord Salisbury of the
views it contained, concluded as follows:
They call for a definite decision upon the point whether Great
Britain will consent or decline to submit the Venezuelan
boundary question in its entirety to impartial arbitration. It
is the earnest hope of the President that the conclusion will
be on the side of arbitration, and that Great Britain will
add one more to the conspicuous precedents she has already
furnished in favor of that wise and just mode of settling
international disputes. If he is to be disappointed in that
hope, however,--a result not to be anticipated, and in his
judgment calculated to greatly embarrass the future relations
between this country and Great Britain,--it is his wish to be
made acquainted with the fact at such early date as will enable
him to lay the whole subject before Congress in his next annual
message.
VI
The reply of Great Britain to this communication consisted of two
despatches addressed by Lord Salisbury to the British ambassador
at Washington for submission to our Government. Though dated the
twenty-sixth day of November, 1895, these despatches were not presented
to our State Department until a number of days after the assemblage of
the Congress in the following month. In one of these communications
Lord Salisbury, in dealing with the Monroe Doctrine and the right or
propriety of our appeal to it in the pending controversy, declared:
“The dangers which were apprehended by President Monroe have no
relation to the state of things in which we live at the present day.”
He further declared:
But the circumstances with which President Monroe was
dealing and those to which the present American Government
is addressing itself have very few features in common. Great
Britain is imposing no “system” upon Venezuela and is not
concerning herself in any way with the nature of the political
institutions under which the Venezuelans may prefer to live.
But the British Empire and the Republic of Venezuela are
neighbors, and they have differed for some time past, and
continue to differ, as to the line by which their dominions are
separated. It is a controversy with which the United States
have no apparent practical concern.... The disputed frontier
of Venezuela has nothing to do with any of the questions dealt
with by President Monroe.
His Lordship, in commenting upon our position as developed in Mr.
Olney’s despatch, defined it in these terms: “If any independent
American state advances a demand for territory of which its neighbor
claims to be the owner, and that neighbor is a colony of an European
state, the United States have a right to insist that the European state
shall submit the demand and its own impugned rights to arbitration.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account