POLITICAL PAPERS 
 
 . 'I 
 
 I. THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 II. THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 BY 
 
 THEODORE MARBURG. 
 
 Reprinted from The Baltimore American. 
 
 V 
 
 BALTIMORE: 
 
 JOHN MURPHY & CO 
 1898. 
 
 PRICE 15 CENTS. 
 
Glass pZ~ 7 « <_l 
 Rook - f A $ 
 
!■«■ ■Kt--t-t-'£e--t- <£■ 
 
 /e- 
 
 <tL-U> 
 
 ^ 
 
POLITICAL PAPERS 
 
 I. THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 II. THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 BY 
 
 THEODORE MARBURG. 
 
 Reprinted from The Baltimore American. 
 
 BALTIMORE : 
 
 JOHN MURPHY & CO, 
 1898. 
 
 e^ 
 
 SL 
 
Em 
 
 .A\3 
 
 Army & Navy Oiab 
 jan.4»28 
 
^ 
 
 I. 
 
 THE ¥AE WITH SPAIN. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Chapter. Page. 
 
 I. Intervention — The Law and the Prac- 
 tice — America Must Act Alone, - 5 
 
 II. Oppression Flagrant and Persistent — 
 Ultimate Destiny of Cuba — Just 
 Retribution for Spain, - - - 14 
 
 III. Right of Higher Civilization, - - 19 
 
 IV. Wisdom of Our Course, 21 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 1 
 
 [May 1, 2, 8, 1898.] 
 
 I. 
 
 Intervention — The Law and the Practice — 
 America Must Act Alone. 
 
 r "THE past few months have witnessed a con- 
 flict of emotions in the breast of the people. 
 A traditional policy and a wholesome horror of 
 war have been drawing them in one direction, 
 whilst indignation at inhuman acts impelled 
 them in another. Those who felt the justice of 
 America's position and at the same time valued 
 the President's noble attempt to enforce that 
 position without resort to war, realized that to 
 
 1 Copyright, 1898, by Theodore Marburg. 
 
 5 
 
6 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 give utterance to their thoughts could only 
 serve to encourage the war spirit and further 
 hamper the President. Now that war has be- 
 gun, it is important to examine candidly the 
 principles involved. 
 
 The assertion most commonly heard is that 
 we have no right to interfere in the internal 
 affairs of another nation. 
 
 A fundamental rule of international law is 
 that the independence of a state must be re- 
 spected. Its laws must be presumed to be fit 
 and their execution just, and the state must be 
 allowed to accomplish the fulfillment of its own 
 destiny free from outside interference. 
 
 Few writers on international law have failed, 
 however, to recognize exceptions to this rule, 
 and some of the greatest among them include 
 among these exceptions interference on grounds 
 of humanity. 
 
 Hefter recognizes it, and Vattel says, 
 " If the prince, by attacking the fundamental 
 laws of the country, gives his people legitimate 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 7 
 
 ground for resistance, if tyranny becomes in- 
 supportable and rouses the nation to rebellion, 
 any power has a right to succor the oppressed 
 people if they solicit its aid." 
 
 Prof. Arntz is of the opinion that interfer- 
 ence is justified "when a government, even 
 though acting quite within the limits of its 
 sovereignty, violates the laws of humanity, 
 either by measures hostile to the interests of 
 other states, or by excessive injustice or cruelty 
 which seriously attack our morals and our 
 civilization." 
 
 "The right of intervention must be recog- 
 nized because no matter how much the rights 
 of sovereignty and of independence are to be 
 respected, there is one thing even more entitled 
 to respect and that is the right of humanity 
 and of human society, which must not be 
 outraged." 
 
 Woolsey asserts that interference is justified 
 when crimes are committed by a government 
 against its subjects. 
 
8 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 Acceptance of such a principle may, of course, 
 lead to abuses, but Calvo very properly re- 
 marks that a principle must be judged by its 
 logical and common results, and not by pos- 
 sible abuses to which it may lead. 
 
 Hall states " that interference for the pur- 
 pose of checking gross tyranny or for helping 
 the efforts of a people to free itself is very 
 commonly regarded without disfavor." 
 
 These opinions are cited not to prove that 
 intervention on grounds of humanity is author- 
 ized by international law; many writers, among 
 them a majority of the Italian school, reject it. 
 The opinions are cited simply to show that the 
 question is, at least, an open one. A just 
 estimate would probably be that international 
 law has not yet been developed to a sufficient 
 extent to cover all cases of international action 
 and that, furthermore, it has its natural and 
 inherent limitations due to the fact that it 
 la<ks a punitive sanction. 
 
 Behind the law within the state are the police 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 9 
 
 and the whole military power of the state. 
 Behind international law there is nothing to 
 enforce its decrees except war. In intervening 
 in behalf of an oppressed people the state is 
 probably no longer moving in the sphere of 
 international law, but must justify its acts by 
 an appeal to the common interests of humanity 
 or high state policy. 
 
 There are but few occasions which justify 
 the individual in violating the wonderful and 
 comprehensive system of law prevailing within 
 the state. There are many occasions when 
 the people acting in their national capacity 
 must step outside the limits of the circum- 
 scribed body of rules called international 
 law. 
 
 If respect for international law had proved 
 the ruling influence with her government, 
 France would not have aided America, and 
 the accomplishment of American liberty would 
 have been postponed, if not actually defeated. 
 
 If in 1827 the powers had obeyed the in- 
 
10 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 junctions of international law, Greece would 
 not have been freed. 
 
 If in 1859 Louis Napoleon had felt that the 
 observance of international law was the highest 
 duty of the state, he would not have marched 
 into Italy to drive out the Austrian and bring 
 to a successful issue the noble aspirations of 
 Cavour and Victor Emmanuel for Italy's unity 
 and independence. 
 
 Actual practice shows numerous instances of 
 interference in the internal affairs of a nation. 
 The idea prevailing in former times that the 
 stranger was an enemy has been rapidly break- 
 ing down under the strides of commerce, travel 
 and frequent communication, and the tendency 
 to find kinship amongst men has as steadily 
 grown. We no longer look with unconcern on 
 acts of oppression, no matter what the blood, 
 nationality or religion of the oppressed people 
 may be. 
 
 Most intervention has been founded on policy, 
 but occasionally it bears the stamp of disinter- 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 11 
 
 ested action. This is largely true, for example, 
 of the episode of Navarino, an event of the 
 Grecian struggle for independence already re- 
 ferred to. The barbarity with which the Turk 
 conducted the war, pillaging, murdering and 
 carrying off the Greeks into slavery, aroused 
 Europe. England, France and Russia sent 
 ships to patrol the Grecian islands and coast to 
 prevent this, and a collision with the Turkish 
 fleet, in October, 1827, resulted in the annihila- 
 tion of the latter. Greece had then belonged 
 to Turkey for nearly four centuries, the occu- 
 pation of the Morea by Venice for a time 
 excepted, so that this act was armed inter- 
 vention in the internal affairs of Turkey. The 
 grounds on which it was justified were : 
 humanity, request of one of the parties, and 
 the propriety of putting a stop to piracy and 
 anarchy. 
 
 It differs from our intervention in Cuba in 
 that it was the joint act of several European 
 powers, but in this connection there is this to 
 
12 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 be considered. A little over two vears ago we 
 flung at the head of the world's great colonizer 
 and civilizer a missive which told her that we 
 were the arbiters on this continent, and that a 
 policy born of the necessities of our early days 
 was still adhered to. That policy forbids a 
 European nation to interfere outside the sphere 
 of her own possessions here (are not our own 
 obligations all the heavier on this account?) 
 and it would likewise make it difficult for us 
 to invite any European nation to co-operate 
 in the present armed intervention. 
 
 The desire to act more in conformance with 
 the practice of nations with respect to inter- 
 vention might next lead us to seek the co- 
 operation of some of the American countries. 
 
 When European governments co-operate, it 
 means the co-operation of equals. An alliance 
 of the United States with any other American 
 government or group of governments would 
 not be such. Without any desire to disparage 
 other American countries, it may be safely 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 13 
 
 asserted that our power is so preponderant 
 here, there are so many ways in which we 
 could secure allies and influence their action, 
 that the moral force of such an alliance would 
 be lacking. Co-operation with other American 
 powers would be more or less empty form, a 
 simple reflection of European methods without 
 their significance. It is, then, fitting that with 
 respect to foreign questions generally we should 
 act alone. 
 
 In the solution of this particular question, 
 what American countries are there whose co- 
 operation we might hope to secure? Canada 
 is not an independent American government, 
 whilst the balance of the powers in the western 
 world, with the exception of the few settle- 
 ments in the Guianas, are of Spanish and Por- 
 tuguese origin, and could hardly be counted 
 upon to co-operate with us in actual war 
 against the mother country and a closely 
 affiliated country. Logically, then, it is the 
 United States alone that can intervene in Cuba. 
 
14 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 II. 
 
 Oppression Flagrant and Pe? % sistent — Ultimate 
 
 Destiny of Cuba — Just Retribution 
 
 for Spain. 
 
 It remains to consider whether intervention 
 at this time is justified. The oppression which 
 warrants intervention in the internal affairs 
 of a state should be flagrant and persistent. 
 Many people in America and elsewhere believe 
 that the violation of the laws of humanity and 
 justice has been flagrant and persistent in Cuba. 
 There has been not one revolution nor short- 
 lived oppression which we might patiently 
 wait for Spain to correct, but continuous op- 
 pression for the greater part of the present 
 century and repeated protests in the form of 
 rebellion put down in a bloody manner. 
 
 The century is drawing to a close, and we 
 see the sense of injustice and oppression in the 
 Cuban as keen as ever and an attempt on the 
 part of Spain to reassert its authority the most 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 15 
 
 bloody and disastrous of all in the history of 
 the island. 
 
 Whilst England has lost only one of her 
 colonies, and great regions of the world are 
 to-day content to remain under her flag, Spain 
 has lost all the colonies that were strong 
 enough to resist her power. A few islands, 
 readily accessible and easily overrun with 
 troops, are all that remain of her former mag- 
 nificent colonial empire. Her unjust govern- 
 ment, plunder of the people by officials, and 
 over-taxation for the benefit of the home 
 country have done this. This fact alone con- 
 stitutes a serious arraignment of Spain's atti- 
 tude in the modern world. 
 
 Cuba is so close to our shores that the long- 
 story of its wrongs has been forced upon our 
 attention. The cry of distress which has gone 
 up from the island so often during the century 
 has more than once aroused the sympathy of 
 our people. We have, indeed, been patient. 
 If the Spanish character were different, if we 
 
16 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 could be led to believe that Spain would be 
 just to Cuba in the future, we might, even at 
 this late day, have refrained from armed inter- 
 vention, but such hope is belied by the history 
 of the island during the century. 
 
 The vital consideration is that the most 
 liberal government which the Spaniard could 
 grant the Cuban would not bring with it a 
 permanent solution of the Cuban question. It 
 is generally admitted that with her present 
 population Cuba is unfit for self-government. 
 This means that she must be governed from 
 outside, and if she remains under the Spanish 
 flag, it means that after an attempt at autonomy 
 the cruel and greedy hand of Spain will again 
 be found at her throat and in her pocket. 
 That which we have just witnessed is, then, 
 to be repeated. The American people have 
 arrived at the just conclusion that no per- 
 manent solution of the Cuban question can be 
 reached without turning out the Spaniard, and 
 they feel that it is time to act. Few deceive 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 17 
 
 themselves as to the ultimate destiny of Cuba. 
 When we turn the present government out, 
 the logic of events will briug us the island. 
 We of course propose to let the inhabitants 
 decide for themselves and try to work out their 
 own destiny, but every thing points to the 
 conclusion that the insecurity of life and prop- 
 erty under self-government will in time lead 
 them to apply for admission to the Union. 
 Once under stable and just rule, immigration 
 there from Anglo-Saxon countries should ulti- 
 mately give a sufficient basis for sound local 
 government. 
 
 If the unhappy island can realize in no other 
 way the very reasonable wish for enlightened 
 and humane government in this advanced age, 
 is not our course proper? The world knows 
 very well that it was not the desire to add 
 Cuba to our territory which led to war, but 
 if the Cuban question can be solved in no 
 other way than by action which will ultimately 
 bring the island to us, we should not hesitate 
 2 
 
18 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 to assume the full responsibility of such action. 
 It is best to face such an issue squarely and 
 frankly. If we are right, it matters not 
 whether certain of the Powers approve of our 
 course or not; the situation at home is too 
 delicate for them to do more than enter a 
 diplomatic protest. It will be difficult to col- 
 lect an indemnity from a country already 
 bankrupt, and the war, which the dictates of 
 humanity have led us to undertake, will cost 
 us a round sum, so that we cannot be charged 
 with acquiring the island gratuitously. 
 
 As for Spain, leave out of consideration all 
 previous rebellions in Cuba, even all her other 
 deeds in the present campaign of three years, 
 and consider the sole fact of her having penned 
 up several hundred thousand non-combatants, 
 preventing them from earning a living, and 
 then failing to supply them with the necessaries 
 of life until one-half of the whole number 
 perished. Is not the loss of Cuba a just retri- 
 bution for such an act ? 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 19 
 
 III. 
 
 Right of Higher Civilization. 
 
 Another important consideration is that of 
 the higher civilization supplanting the lower. 
 
 When the white man came to America there 
 were about 500,000 Indians in what now con- 
 stitutes the United States. To-day there still 
 remain 225,000. We have then brushed aside 
 275,000 Indians, and in place of them have 
 this population of 70,000,000 of what we re- 
 gard as the highest type of modern man. The 
 fact that the Indian, who was tolerably prolific, 
 did not number more than 500,000 after all 
 the centuries he must have lived here, indicates 
 a formidable struggle against nature, a struggle 
 against cold, famine, disease and loss of life 
 through internecine war ; in other words, a 
 great sum of human misery which we have 
 been quite justified in brushing aside and sup- 
 planting with the peace and comparative con- 
 tentment and high pursuits which prevail over 
 the continent. 
 
20 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 The question presented by Cuba differs only 
 in degree. The Spaniard and his American 
 descendant are very much the same people they 
 were several centuries -ago. What are the Span- 
 ish countries of South America, what is Spain 
 itself doing in all the walks of life which make 
 for progress? In previous centuries Spain has 
 done a splendid and useful work in the western 
 world, but she has failed to keep abreast of the 
 world in moral and intellectual progress, and 
 must pay the penalty. The principle that the 
 higher civilization is justified in supplanting 
 the lower is a dangerous one to admit, because 
 of every nation regarding its own type as the 
 highest, but there are certain broad facts which 
 must force the impartial observer to admit the 
 superiority of our own race, the Anglo-Saxon, 
 in the qualities that contribute to human 
 advance. At any rate, we hold to the opinion 
 that we have done more than any other race to 
 conquer the world for civilization in the past 
 few centuries, and we will probably go on hold- 
 ing to this opinion and go on with our conquests. 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 21 
 
 If we believe that there is a distinct pur- 
 pose in all that is about us and in our own 
 presence here, we cannot escape the conclusion 
 that man's express duty is the uplifting of 
 man. The duty to improve and elevate him- 
 self and his fellows thus becomes an end in 
 itself and a justification of life. Every rational 
 human being, no matter how humble his station 
 in life, has the power to help or hinder this 
 process. He is influenced principally by his 
 environment, made up of the national character 
 and tendencies, and a nation in its collective 
 capacity directs the process. Any nation which 
 blocks the way of human progress must expect 
 to be brushed aside by more powerful and 
 vigorous blood. 
 
 IV. 
 
 Wisdom of Our Course. 
 
 Is the step we have taken wise? 
 The first concern of a government is the 
 welfare of its own people, and if these people 
 
22 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 are an enlightened, a moral, and a progressive 
 people, the world's work is best furthered by 
 their healthy growth. If intervention in Cuba 
 will seriously interfere with such growth here, 
 it must be condemned. 
 
 When the Louisiana territory, extending to 
 the headwaters of the Mississippi and west to 
 the Rocky Mountains, was acquired in 1803, 
 few could foresee the portentous consequences 
 of the act. It is now apparent that without it 
 we would not have seized what then became a 
 contiguous territory, California, nor made a 
 successful claim to Oregon, and unless all this 
 had been acquired we would have been con- 
 fronted with the possibility of a rival power 
 on the Continent, involving a standing army, 
 extensive lines of fortification, and an occa- 
 sional war. 
 
 The electric telegraph and steam navigation, 
 the handmaids of foreign trade, are of such 
 recent origin (within the memory of living 
 men), that trade between the nations must be 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 23 
 
 in its infancy. If this is so, the future will 
 witness a great development of wealth along 
 the seacoast, important cities, expensive harbors, 
 and approaches, and with them a growth in 
 naval power. The possession of the West 
 Indies may then acquire an importance re- 
 sembling that of the Louisiana Territory. 
 
 Presuming that our institutions are lasting, 
 the position of power which the future will 
 bring, must, some day draw the West Indies to 
 us. We must expect a renewal of the forward 
 movement which led to our overrunning and 
 acquiring Texas. The planting of its outposts 
 in a constantly widening circle on the part of 
 a vigorous and healthy race, is one of the most 
 familiar processes of history. Such a matter 
 need give the living generation but little con- 
 cern as time is an element in working out such 
 questions. When the movement of races or the 
 history of nations is under consideration, a 
 century or so is a short period ; but to acquire 
 the largest and richest of the Indies now may 
 
24 THE WAR WITH SPAIX. 
 
 make our inevitable task lighter in the future. 
 When we have owned Cuba for half a century 
 it will be a simpler matter to persuade some 
 European government, particularly if it is seek- 
 ing our moral or active support at the moment, 
 to release or sell to us some other of the islands. 
 
 Our first President laid down for us a policy 
 of non-interference and freedom from alliances 
 in Europe. Soon afterward came the enunci- 
 ation of the Monroe Doctrine which meant 
 that we regarded the growth of European 
 influence on this continent as a menace to our 
 liberties. In our weakness we could not afford 
 to meddle in the disputes of Europe and could 
 not afford to have a European government 
 constitute itself a too powerful neighbor on 
 our own continent. This policy was next ex- 
 tended to include non-intervention by us in the 
 affairs of American countries as well. 
 
 We have here a creditable perception of the 
 needs of the young state. But that state ex- 
 pands in territory, in numbers, in knowledge, 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 25 
 
 and in wealth, and that which was fitting in its 
 youth and unripeness, hampers and dwarfs and 
 stifles it in its manhood. Itself subject to the 
 belittling influence of a discussion revolving in 
 a narrow circle around the tariff and finance, 
 it beholds kindred races playing such part 
 in the world's affairs that questions from all 
 quarters of the globe are daily knocking at 
 their doors for solution ; it recognizes the in- 
 spiring influence of such larger part; the spirit 
 and moral motive and power are there, and 
 the nation presently moves to its proper place 
 among its fellows. 
 
 Only overcrowded countries can colonize 
 successfully. Others send their merchants 
 abroad, but these are not true colonizers 
 because only numbers and the men who labor 
 with their hands can colonize. The self-seek- 
 ing of the colonist has spread civilization, and 
 nothing but self-seeking will carry on this 
 work. America, which is not in a position to 
 colonize at a distance, cannot at present take 
 
26 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 part in the work, but it can throw its influence 
 in favor of the best races engaged in it. It 
 can play another role, too, an important and 
 noble one, and play it the more successfully 
 because it is not under any pressure to acquire 
 territory at a distance, and its action will, 
 therefore, be recognized as disinterested. It 
 is the role of the arbiter who proclaims that 
 justice shall be done, and who is powerful 
 enough to see that justice is done. May it not 
 happen that we can throw our weight on the 
 side of justice abroad without interfering with 
 home progress? Might not such a course 
 even serve to distinctly further home progress? 
 A great fillip would be given the national 
 spirit through awakening the higher instincts 
 of the people and fostering a sense of unity 
 of purpose and proper national pride. No 
 one denies that these were tremendous quick- 
 ening factors in Germany after the Franco- 
 Prussian war, starting her on her career of 
 prosperity and power. 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 27 
 
 Such things afford a striking example of 
 how that which is regarded as unreal and 
 intangible may become of the highest practical 
 value. Local questions which are so slow of 
 solution now might find a solution in the new 
 attitude of the public mind. If it succeeded in 
 bringing a different class of men into politics 
 the splendid machinery of our government 
 would be made to show what it can do. There 
 is evidence in many directions that, whilst we 
 have made such marked progress in intelligence 
 and wealth, the moral sense of the people has 
 grown, too. If our politics are debased, it is 
 not because the mass of the people are debased. 
 In the course of the world's history it has 
 generally been the minority that has ruled. 
 When history was great, it was a minority of 
 great men who made it. When an age appears 
 degenerate, it is often because a minority of 
 inferior men rule it, the majority remaining 
 apathetic. A minority of the unscrupulous and 
 active may govern a majority of honest and 
 
28 THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 
 
 indifferent. Under American institutions elec- 
 tive bodies should really represent the best that 
 is in the community. They ought, at least, to 
 represent something above the average. What 
 often actually takes place is that they do not 
 even represent the average, but represent a 
 minority of the worst. The reference above is 
 to the solution of questions such as this. 
 
 In the next place, the gain in diplomatic 
 prestige, which would follow such participation 
 in the world's affairs, would help the country's 
 commerce. Growth of political power is usu- 
 ally followed by a sharp rise in commercial 
 importance. 
 
 In other words, whilst a moral and a pro- 
 gressive nation serves the world best by 
 regarding its own interests first, and thus 
 strengthening and developing itself, the field 
 of an enlightened self-interest is wide enough 
 to include discreet action abroad in the interest 
 of humanity. 
 
 We have abundance of land and a condition 
 
THE WAR WITH SPAIN. 29 
 
 of politics within the country which pronounces 
 against any further extension of territory until 
 certain pressing questions are solved. The 
 mass of the people will recognize this as the 
 proper policy to be pursued under ordinary 
 circumstances, but it will not prevent them 
 from dealing like men with an exceptional 
 condition. 
 
 In brief: Spanish rule in Cuba has caused 
 much human misery to which it is the duty of 
 the United States to put a stop ; this can only 
 be done by her ultimately acquiring the island 
 since no other solution of the question would 
 be permanent ; the loss of the island to Spain 
 is but a just retribution for inhuman acts; its 
 ultimate acquisition by the United States may 
 be an act of high state policy. 
 

II. 
 
 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 [Reprinted from Baltimore American of Dec. 22, 1895.] 
 
 * War and the Military System. 
 
 \ I J HEN the cause of justice calls for war, 
 commercial interests should never be 
 allowed to block the way. Aside from the 
 question of national honor, there are many 
 compensations in war. The armaments of 
 Europe are often spoken of as a deadly weight 
 upon the energies of the respective European 
 countries. It is pointed out that the men are 
 taken from their callings for service in the 
 army in the best years of their life, the infer- 
 ence being that they lose a knowledge of their 
 trade or profession, and lose the taste for work. 
 3 33 
 
34 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 In the face of this we see Germany, which 
 has brought its military system to the highest 
 scientific perfection, rapidly becoming one of the 
 great commercial and manufacturing nations 
 of the world. Italy, also, has undoubtedly 
 benefitted by her military system. One ex- 
 planation of this apparent contradiction is that 
 men are brought together from different sections 
 of the country, acquire new tastes and ideas, 
 and are impressed with the benefits of organi- 
 zation and the necessity for order and obedience. 
 The country lad, who ordinarily would have 
 no ideas above his plow and the routine of 
 farmwork, becomes a broader man, and at the 
 end of his military service is a more useful 
 citizen. 
 
 Adequate strife of one kind and another, in 
 the present order of nature and throughout 
 nature, means progress. A few years ago 
 Bluntschli, who presided at the Congress of 
 International Law in Oxford, sent to Yon 
 Moltke a copy of the regulations which had 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 35 
 
 been drawn up by the congress for the conduct 
 of armies in time of war, their express object 
 being to lessen the hardships of war. In his 
 reply, Von Moltke said that he could express 
 but little sympathy with the movement. 
 
 He believed in war, not only as a necessity at 
 times, but in war for its own sake. He main- 
 tained that without it the nations would de- 
 generate into money-loving and selfish people ; 
 that war brought out the nobler traits in men, 
 and that to be ready to lay down one's life for 
 his country was an ultimate test of manhood. 
 
 Again, we are forced to recognize the benefits 
 of a successful war. Of these the most im- 
 portant relate to the political life of the nation, 
 internal as well as external. But when the 
 spirit of a healthy people is aroused by a 
 stirring national event the results are not 
 solely political. Such an event permeates the 
 whole world of mind and produces definite 
 results in industry as well. What explains the 
 surprising repair of waste often witnessed is 
 
36 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 that the greatest factors in production are the 
 character and trained habits of the people. 
 These remain, even much of the machinery of 
 production remains, after the most devastating 
 war. The people and machinery can produce 
 much more than they are ordinarily called 
 upon to produce. When, therefore, the eco- 
 nomic void which the waste of war has created 
 sets all the people and all the machinery at 
 work there follows a period of unusual pros- 
 perity, the effects of which are cumulative and 
 lead to real development. 
 
 German unity with all its results for Ger- 
 many, and for the world, could probably not 
 have been attained in any other way than by a 
 great war. It is likewise difficult to see how, 
 without the frightful drama of the Civil War, 
 America could have liberated the slave and 
 demonstrated to the world that the Union was 
 a thing of permanence and meant to fulfill the 
 great destinies mapped out for it by the framers 
 of its wonderful constitution. It has never 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 37 
 
 known such a period of prosperity as that 
 which followed the Civil War. 
 
 This is one side of the picture; the other 
 has been too vividly painted by the brush of 
 experience, and is too deeply burned in the 
 hearts and brains of Americans to need de- 
 scription. By common consent, the dictates of 
 humanity, and a sense of the awful suffering 
 that accompanies war, clearly enjoin the avoid- 
 ance of an unjust war. The true strength and 
 manhood of an individual and of a nation are 
 shown by their asserting their power only 
 when a just occasion calls it forth. Is there 
 such an occasion now in the controversy with 
 England? 
 
 The Monroe Doctrine. 
 
 Our own authorities tell us that, from a 
 standpoint of international law, we have nothing 
 to stand upon. What we are about to do is to 
 endeavor to insert into the international code 
 a principle for which we have at times con- 
 
38 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 tended, but which has never yet been recog- 
 nized. Is the principle justly interpreted by 
 Secretary Olney ? And were this so, is the 
 present occasion a fitting one upon which to 
 introduce it? And is the nation, to whom we 
 are allied so strongly by ties of blood and 
 tradition, the proper one upon which to make 
 war in order to establish the principle? 
 
 In the minds of those who enunciated it, 
 the Monroe doctrine clearly meant that no 
 European government should be allowed to 
 overturn the liberal governments of the west- 
 ern world in order to substitute for them a 
 monarchical government, nor to seize upon 
 territory there for purposes of colonization. 
 Secretary Olney has so enlarged the scope of 
 the doctrine that it embraces any territorial 
 dispute between an Americm power and a 
 European power. This is admittedly true, 
 because he specifically disclaims any knowledge 
 of the merits of this particular controversy. 
 His language is : " It is not admitted, how- 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 39 
 
 ever, and, therefore, cannot be assumed, that 
 Great Britain is in fact usurping dominion 
 over Venezuelan territory." 
 
 England's Attitude Toward Arbitration. 
 
 Great Britain admits that the real owner- 
 ship of a portion of the territory is open to 
 question ; with respect to this portion she is 
 ready to submit to arbitration. In addition 
 to this, however, Venezuela claims territory 
 which Great Britain asserts to be hers abso- 
 lutely, and which has been settled by her 
 people. Because of her aggressive policy,which 
 has really resulted in settling large regions of 
 the globe with a religious and a moral people, 
 and a people with traditions of political liberty, 
 she has but few friends amongst the nations, 
 and experience has taught her that she cannot 
 rely upon arbitration for fair decision of dis- 
 putes to which she is a party. She is in the 
 position of a man, who, in a hostile land, has 
 had brought against him a claim for the pos- 
 
40 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 session of property which he feels to be rightly 
 his and his children's, and is asked to submit 
 the claim to the judgment of a biased tribunal. 
 However much the members of an international 
 tribunal may be bent upon absolute fairness, 
 it cannot be denied that national prejudice will 
 unconsciously play an important part in their 
 decision. 
 
 It is admitted that the Monroe doctrine is 
 not a part of international law, and it would 
 appear from the above, moreover, that it is 
 questionable whether the doctrine is applicable 
 to the present dispute. It remains to be con- 
 sidered whether England is the country of all 
 others with whom we should enter upon a war, 
 the justice of which is questionable, for the 
 establishment of a new principle as a part of 
 international law. 
 
 The English-speaking People. 
 
 The spread of the English-speaking people, 
 of whom w r e form an important part, is one of 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 41 
 
 the significant facts of the century. It has 
 been pointed out that in 1700 there were 
 7,000,000 English-speaking people; at the 
 beginning of the present century there were 
 20,000,000, and to-day we constitute a body 
 of 115,000,000. What does this signify? 
 Nothing less than the spread of liberal in- 
 stitutions, political freedom, humanity and 
 enlightenment over a great portion of the 
 world. 
 
 If we arrive at the conclusion that it is not 
 to our interest to colonize, why should we 
 block this movement, so important to civili- 
 zation, by checking English colonization ? Re- 
 flection will show us that we have many more 
 ties with England, France, Germany or Italy 
 than we have with the South American re- 
 publics. They are building up everything 
 that makes the modern world, science, art, 
 philosophy, the principles of a broad humanity 
 and the science of government. 
 
42 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 The South American Republics, 
 
 What are the South American republics 
 doing in all these walks? They are republics 
 in name, but are they democracies in fact? 
 The form of government has much to do with 
 the happiness of a people, but the adoption. of 
 a good form cannot alone give the people a 
 good government. Unless a government is so 
 fortunate as to possess men enlightened and 
 conscientious to a degree above their fellows 
 (which is not often the case), it is apt to be 
 good or' bad, according as public opinion and 
 the attention given to its expression insist or 
 not upon its fulfilling its duties. The sense of 
 civic duty, like everything else in the moral 
 and intellectual world, depends upon environ- 
 ment. It is not uncommon to see a law passed 
 which is quite in advance of public sentiment 
 and which eventually educates public sentiment 
 up to its high level ; but generally it is unwise 
 to count upon this. Laws will depend for their 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 43 
 
 efficacy upon public support. If they do not 
 reach the public conscience, they will do more 
 harm than good. The harm is in their non- 
 enforcement, which throws discredit upon law 
 in general. 
 
 The South American republics are examples 
 of admirable laws and institutions applied to 
 people wholly unequal to the task of grasping 
 their meaning. They may have other ad- 
 mirable qualities, but traditions of political 
 liberty and a capacity for their exercise do not 
 go with the Latin blood. It will require long 
 years of practice to acquire them. We know 
 how unstable their governments are, to what 
 frequent revolutions they are subject, and how 
 sadly they are found wanting when measured 
 by the standard of international morality. To 
 protect them against discipline at the hands of 
 European powers means that we must ourselves 
 be responsible for their actions, our readiness 
 to do which Secretary Olney specifically and 
 rightly disclaims. 
 
44 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 England's Province. 
 
 England is charged with being grasping. In 
 its foreign policy a nation should, above all, 
 be a trustee — a guardian first of its people's 
 honor, and then of their material interests. 
 Considerations of general human sympathy and 
 theoretic justice may play their part, but always 
 subservient to the trusteeship. If a nation 
 represents what is best in the world — and every 
 nation must, of necessity, believe itself to repre- 
 sent the best either in its present state or future 
 possibilities — it serves the interests of the world 
 at large in extending its own possessions and 
 influences by colonization. As commerce, in 
 seeking its own ends, has brought about a re- 
 vival of Roman law in Europe, and has sup- 
 planted savagery with civilization in many 
 regions of the world, just so the self-seeking 
 of a great nation unconsciously accomplishes 
 a great good. England may have been unjust 
 to us in our earlier days — even then it was 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 45 
 
 largely party and not the whole people — 
 but for many years she has had no other in- 
 tention than to treat us as nearest of kin and 
 regard us as her friend. Whilst our school 
 books, in treating of the Revolution, instil ani- 
 mosity toward England in the breast of the 
 majority of American children — and, unfor- 
 tunately, the mass of the people remain chil- 
 dren in this respect — English children are 
 taught to respect the spirit of the American 
 Revolution, to honor the names of their own 
 great statesmen who advocated our cause at the 
 time, and to believe that our cause was just. 
 They regard the events which brought about 
 the American Revolution as a stupid mistake 
 on the part of the king and a clique who hap- 
 pened to be in power. The people, as a whole, 
 have no other than the most friendly regard 
 for us. 
 
 When the Monroe doctrine was framed, we 
 were so weak that the growth of a foreign 
 power on the American continent constituted a 
 
46 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 menace to us. Truly, no sensible man regards 
 it as such to-day. Dispassioned observers must 
 admit that we are rapidly becoming the great 
 government of the world, and will soon be 
 forced to take our place at international coun- 
 cils, in spite of our home-keeping policy. We 
 are destined to be the peer of all in everything 
 that constitutes an enlightened people and an en- 
 lightened government. Jealousy should there- 
 fore be beneath us. Instead of courting war 
 with England, we should accept the invitation 
 extended by the members of the English House 
 of Commons to form a permanent treaty of 
 arbitration, and stand with her before the 
 world for all that we both represent in politics, 
 religion and morals. Such a union would be 
 the most powerful the world has ever seen, and 
 make for enlightened progress everywhere. 
 
 Our True Interests. 
 
 Moreover, if we are farseeing, we will not 
 block the extension of English colonization in 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 47 
 
 America. In this connection what French 
 colonization did for England is significant. 
 In India the French conquered an important 
 region which eventually fell into the lap of 
 England. France paved the way for England 
 in Egypt. She was in the Mississippi Valley 
 before England, and colonized Canada for her. 
 Few doubt that our northern neighbor, by 
 mere force of gravity, will in time become 
 part of us, and the same would be the tendency 
 with respect to English settlements elsewhere 
 in America. 
 
 We might accomplish the same end by the 
 establishment of a protectorate over the weak 
 and more unstable South American countries, 
 so that Anglo-Saxons would settle there. It 
 is, however, to be questioned whether we have 
 as yet sufficiently digested the heterogeneous 
 immigration which has been coming to us, and 
 whether our sinews are sufficiently formed to 
 undertake such a disturbing task. Watch a 
 stone which is thrown from a tall cliff, and 
 
48 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 you will see it drawn into the cliff before it 
 reaches the ground below. The same law of 
 gravitation will inevitably cause the nation to 
 the north of us, allied by blood and tradition, 
 to some day knock at the doors of the great 
 republic for admission. If the natural process 
 is too slow, we might take Canada by force. 
 The objection to embodying Mexico, and Cuba 
 likewise, on the ground that they are peopled 
 by a race with traditions different from our 
 own is not a valid one, because if they become 
 part of us the emigration from the United 
 States and from Anglo-Saxon countries would 
 soon give us a preponderance of Anglo-Saxon 
 blood in them. If, on the other hand, we 
 decide that our policy for the present should 
 not be that of expansion and colonization, why 
 should we obstruct English expansion either 
 in America or elsewhere? This involves dis- 
 carding a portion of the Monroe doctrine, 
 which, as has been pointed out, is really out 
 of date, but leaves to us the nobler and more 
 
THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 49 
 
 disinterested part of the doctrine, that which 
 constitutes us the guardian and propagator 
 of liberty in America. 
 
 To Sum Up: 
 
 First. The Monroe doctrine is not at present 
 a part of the international law. 
 
 Second. The doctrine is not affected by the 
 present controversy. 
 
 Third. To force ourselves into the contro- 
 versy and to endeavor to establish the doctrine 
 as a part of international law by a war with 
 England is more than foolish, and would be a 
 wrong to mankind. 
 
 Fourth. A part of the Monroe doctrine has 
 lost its usefulness and should be discarded. 
 
 England and America stand for political 
 progress in the modern world. All the govern- 
 ments in Continental Europe, except .Russia 
 and Turkey, are modelled either on the lines of 
 the English government or American govern- 
 4 
 
50 THE VENEZUELAN DISPUTE. 
 
 raent. We have together developed political 
 liberty, and to enter into war with one another 
 would most surely be a blow to civilization. 
 
I 
 
 j 
 
1 
 
 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 I If \l\ \\\ \\ \\ W II B II 
 
 I: . 
 
 1 ""ili" inn mii inn lllil ||i | 
 013 902 130 7 •