is"
' yr“ 4 I, .
f FAWCEVTVT’SV“
grammati- llilllmr.
Commencing Saturday the 16th, ‘and
continuing Monday and Tuesday, when
“we shall sell fine French Felt Hats. all
styles and colors, including a full line
of Black, bought specially for this sale.
We shall also make a reduction in all
our Trimmed Hats, and will offer one,
hundred Hats and ' Bonnets from $1.50
up, The Season has been backward,
hat is the reason for the extraordinary
bargainslwe shall offer the'coming week.
. FAWCETT’S
3 WATER srls tars Nominal:
1 WINTER
‘ COAL.
Best Varieties‘of Lehigh Coal
carefully screened, and de-
livered promptly. Call and
secure OUR PRICES before
purchasing.
E M. ITOLLES & 00.
Goal, Wood, Hay. Straw
Grain and Feed.
Waler 8L, tool llavilanrl,
SOUTH NORWALK.
DAILY FREIGHT. LINE
BETWEEN
NORWALK,
so. NORWALK
AND
NEW YORK.
_. Propellers
City of Norwalk,
Vulcan and Eagle.
Leave Norwalk at 5 p. in, .
Leave So. N orwalk at 6 p. m.
Leave New York, Pier 23,
E. R., B‘eekman St.. 5 p In,
mm.
We are nowprepared to supply
the public with a good reliable ready
mixed paint in 1} pt, 1 qt, 2 qt. and
4 qt. pails. Also aw and boiled
oils, turpentine, dryer, varnish,
white lead by the pound or hundred
weight, white and colored kalsomine.
Putty, nails by the pound or keg.
Good, line of paint brushes.
Our prices are all» right—same as
the goods.
H. H. WILLIAMS
1? Main St.
manna con 03.“
eon, moon, BRICK,
LIME, UEMENT, TILE PIPE. [
OFFICE WITH 6.. a s. H. HOLMES,
MAIN STREET, NOBWALK.
Horse. Sh oeing.
The undersigned has taken the shop in
the front of S. '1‘. Ruby’s on Cross sh set
and is prepared to do horse shoeing in
hen-class manner
' ,, John '1'. Lycett‘.
‘ lclrn Sherman’s Autobineraphy. '
Recollections of Forum YEARS in the House.
Senate and Cabinet. A FINANCIAL Hrs'ron! by
America’s greatest living master of finance.
Agents Wanted.
' Quickest selling book of the. year. One agent
- took 76 orders
21 orders his first three days. For prices and
one week. Another took
terms to agents, address
THE liENRY BILL _PUB. (20.. NORWICN, CONN.
C. H. HARVEY:
EITY EMPLOYMENT AGENCY
70 North Main St, South Norwalk.
h.lfadies and‘gentiemen 0%rzsiririfiefirg-plfigs
e in an ca aci y. can run sa .
ME‘BIATEYLI at the abovo a ency; also those
wishing positions, either m e or female. can
secure employment. .
WANTED Imnnmr—Posiriox for thor-
ough y capable coschmsn or gardener (Amer-.
ion). or to-help .aroundrgentleman’s place.
First-class credenhalmv . . ' ‘ _
ALSO urnqur for two Swedish. three
German and six other girls for general house-
work: two waitresses and three amber-
maids. First-class references. »
- . . . Y. Harvey’s Shoe Store.
0 North Main street. . South Norwalk.
‘—
What'would be a nicerpreS-
out than a , "
I I
HAT?
A Handsome
{Umbrella or Game ‘
Can’t be beat. I have both.
Or perhaps you prefer a
Golf Gap in which case I have
an elegant assortmeut of all
kinds of Caps.
est' winner for Christmas is
the Combination Umbrella
and Cane It is just What you
want for “Hubby’s” present
Call in and examine them.
A large line Ladies’ Felt
Hats always in stock.
J. W. O’BRIEN,
Practical Hatter,
125 Washington Street, -.
_ South N orwalk,
EDWARD P. WEED
33 mu sr..“rlonwux.
.__—.._.—~¢. W’—
ALL SEEKERS AFTER
Christmas Gifts
handsome display of
telluloid Toilet Sets,
Perfumes
in Elegant Boxes, of which we
have the largest assortment
in the City
Japanese Nevellies, ,
But tress Bottles,
Pocket Books,
Pocket Knives,
Fancy loilel Alomizers, Etc.
A
Amx or am CIGARS
will. be appreciated by
AA
wv
those who smoke.
PICTURE, FRAMES
This year at 15c, '2 for 25c.
mm P. Wire.
ea mu smut, irIrIemu.
\i
But the newest and great— ‘
their dominions.
1
’1 MW ‘ " " win)"; II I' 4:41., I"! , I . ‘ '-.
gfitfietefiritddn, n'ctw thstandlngw ich ev-
Guiana farther and farther-etc the west-
ward of the line proposed by Lord Aber~
risen in 1844. ' ' ' ' .
The Case Inn Nutshell.
The secretary traces the various efforts ..
‘ made by Venezuela to arrive at settlement "
of the boundary question and of the
United States to secure its submission to
arbitration, bringing the history down to
the beginning of this year, when the im-
portant features of the situation were
summarized by him as follows:
First—The title of‘territory of indefi-
_ nite but confessedly very large extent is'in
,. dispute between Great Britain and Vene-
zuela. ' . -
. : Second—The disparity in strength of
. the parties is such that Venezuela can
hope to establish her claim only through
peaceful methods. ' .7 ,
Third—The contrOVeI-sy has existed for
half a century, despite Venezuela’s efiorts
to establish a boundary.
Fourth—Venezuela has for a quarter
of a century striVen for arbitration.
Fifth.‘—-Great Britain has continuously
refused except upon the renunciation in
her favor of a large part of Venezuela’s
claims.
Sixth—The United States has made it
clear to Great Britain and the world by
frequent interposition of goodofi‘ices that
the contrmersy is one in which its honor
and its interests are involved and the
continuance of which it cannot regard
with indifference. ‘
Secretary Olney further says: “There is
but one feasible mode of determining the
merits of the question, and that is peace-
able arbitration. Great Britain admits
that there is a controversy which should
be adjusted by arbitration. but nullifies
this admission by her insistence that the
submission shall cover but a part or the
contrdversy. If it were to point to a
boundary which both parties either ex-
pressly or tacitly had ever agreed to, the
demand that the territory within that line
should be excluded from the dispute might
rest upon a reasonable basis, but there is
no such line. ”
SALISBURY’S ARGUMENT. ,
The British Prime Minister’s Reply to Sec-
retary Olney’s Original Note—An At-
tempt to Evade the Point of: Issue.
Wismxeros, Dec. 18.—The British
side of the dispute is embodied in two
notes from Lord Salisbury to Sir Julian
“Pauncefote. Both notes are dated the
same day, and the former, which the em-
bassador is directed to communicate to
Secretary Olney, is of the highest impor-
tance, as in it Lord Salisbury goes broadly
into the Monroe doctrine. In full it is as
follows: .,
FOREIGN OFFICE, Nov. 536.
SIR—On the 7th of August I transmit-
ted to Lord Gough a copy of the dispatch
from Mr. Olney which Mr. Bayard had
left with me that day, and of which he
had read portions to me. I informed him
at the time that'it could not be answered
until it had been carefully considered by
the law officers of the crown. I have
therefore deferred replying to it till after _
the recess. .
I will not now deal with those portions
of it which are concerned exclusively with
the controversy that has for some time
past existed between the republic of Vene-
zuela and her maje‘sty’s government in re—
gard to the boundary which separates
Intake a very different
view from Mr. Olney of various matters
upon which he touches in that part of the
dispatch, but I will defer for the present
all observations upon it, as it concerns
matters which are not in themselves of
first rate importance and. do not directly
concern the relations between Great Brit-
ain and the United States.
The latter part, however, of the dis-
patch, turning from the question of the
frontiers of Venezuela, proceeds to deal
with principles of a far wider character
and to advance doctrines of international
law which are of. considerable interest to
all the nations whose dominicns include
any portion of the western hemisphere.
The contentions set forth by Mr. Olney
in this part of his dispatch are represented
by himVas being an application of the po-
litical maxims which are well known in
American discussion under the name of
the Monroe doctrine.
A Misstatementof Fact.
As far as I am aware, this doctrine has
never been before advanced on behalf of
the United States in any written com-
municatlon addressed to the government
of'another nation, but it has been general-
ly adopted and assumed as true‘by many
eminent writers and politicians in the
United'States. It is said to have largely
” influenced the government oft-what coun-
try in the conduct of its foreign affairs,
though Mr. Clayton, who was secretary of
state under President Taylor, expressly
stated that that administration had in no
way adopted it. But during the period
that has elapsed since the message of
President Monroe was delivered in 1823
the doctrine has undergone a very notable
development, and the aspect which it
now presents in the hands of Mr. Olney
differs widely from its character when it-
first issued from the pen of its author.
The two propositions which in effect Pres-
ident Monroe laid down ware, first, that
America was no longer to be looked upon
as a field for European colonization, and,
secondly, that Europe must not attempt
to extend its political system to America
or to control the political condition of any
of the American communities who had
recently declared theirindependence. The
dangers against which President Monroe
thought it right to guard were not as
imaginary as they would seem at the pres-
ent day. The formation of the holy al-
liance, the congresses of Laybach and Ve-
rona, the invasion of Spain by France for
the purpose of forcing upon the Spanish
people a form of government which seem-
ed likely to disappear unless it was sure
tained by external aid, were incidents
fresh in the mind of President Monroe
when he penned his celebrated message.
A Perniclous System.
The system of which he speaks, and of
whichvhe so resolutely deprecates the ap-
plication to the American continent, was
the system then adapted by gertain power.
ful states upon the continent of, Europe
_ of combining to prevent by'force cf arms
the adoption in other countries of politi-
cal institutions which they disliked and
to uphold by external pressure those which
they approved. Various portions of South
America had recently declared their in-
dependence, and that independence had
not been recognized by the governments of »
Spain and Portugal, to which, with small _
exception, the whole of Central and South
America was nominally subject. . It was
not an imaginary danger that be fore-
saw if he feared that the same spirit
which had dictated the French expedition
q .
. Nrytchangfe in the British 'r'djaimsslnce-that,
’ time has moved the frontier ,ongrltish‘.
,_ semis z 1.199156 .pcw. .
_ governments of Europe with the idea
of imposing [by the force ofarms upon the
South American communities the form of
government and the, political connection
which they had, thrown ofl. . Indeclaring
that the United States would resist any
such enterprise if‘ it was contemplated
President Monroe adopted a policy which
received the entire sympathy of the Eng-
lish government of that, date. ’
by President Monroe have no relation to
the state of things in which we live at the
present day. There-is no danger of any
holy alliance imposing its system upon
any portion of the American continent,
and there is no danger of any‘Europ'enn
state treating any part of the American
continent as a fit object for European 'col-
onization. ' ‘
A Popular Authority.
It is intelligible that Mr. Olney should
invoke, in defense'of the views on which
he is now insisting, an authority which
enjoys so high a popularity with his own
fellow countrymen. But the circum-
Itances with which PresidentkMonroe was
dealing, and those to which the present
American government is addressing it-
self-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 are neigh-
bors, 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.
materially affect any stat or community
outside those primarily interested, except
perhaps other parts of her m‘ajesty’s do-
minions, such as Trinidad. The disputed
frontier of Venezuela has nothing to do
with any of the questions dealt with by
President Monroe. It is not a question of
the colonization by as European power of
any portion of America. It is not a ques-
tion of the imposition upon the commu-
nities of South America of any system of
government devised in Europe. It is sim-
ply the determination of the frontier of a
British possession which belonged to the
throne of England long before the repub-
lic of Venezuela came into existence.
A Spacious Argument.
But even if the interests of Venezuela
were so far linked to those of the United
States as to give to the latter a locus
standi in this controversy their govern-
ment apparently have not formed, and
certainly do not express, any opinion upOn
the actual merits of the dispute. The
government of the United States do not
say that Great Britain or that Venezuela
is in the right in the matters that are in
issue. But they lay down the proposition
that the doctrine of President Monroe,
when he opposed the imposition of Euro-
pean systems or the renewal of 'European
colonization, confers upon them the right
of demanding that when an European
power has a frontier difference with a
South‘ American community the Euro-
pean power shall consent to refer that
controversy. to arbitration, and Mr. Olney
states that unless her majesty’s govern-
ment accede to this demand it will
between Great Britain and the United
States. ”
Whatever may be the authority of the
doctrine laid down by President Monroe,
there is nothing in his language to show
that he ever thought of claiming this
novel prerogative for the United States.
It is admitted that he did not seek to as-
sert a protectorate over 'Mexico or the
states of Central and South America.
Such a claim would have imposed upon
the United States the duty of answering
for the conduct of these states, and con-
sequently the responsibility of controlling
it. 'His sagacious foresight would have
led him energetically to deprecate the ads
dition of so serious a burden to those
which the rulers of the United States‘have
to bear. It follows of necessity that if the
government of the United States will not
control the conduct of these communities,
neither can it undertake to protect them
from the consequences attaching to any
misconduct of which they may be guilty
toward other nations. If they violate in
any way the rights of another state, or of
its subjects, it is not alleged that the
Monroe doctrine will assure them the as-
sistance of the United States in escaping
from any reparation which they may be
bound by international law to give. Mr.
Olney expressly disclaims such an infer-
ence fromthe principles he lays down.
The Policy of Arbitration.
But the claim which he founds upon
them is that if any independent American
state advances a demand for territory of
which its neighbor claims to be the own-
er, and that neighbor is the colony of a
European state, the United States have a
right to insist that. the European state
shall submit the demand and its own im-
pugned rights to arbitration. ' ‘
I will not now enter into a discussion
of the merits of this method of terminat-
ing international dlfierences. It has
proved itself valuable in many cases, but
It is not free from defects which often
operate as a serious drawback on its val-
us. It is not always easy to find an arbl-_
trator who is ‘competcnt, and who at the
same time is wholly free from bias. and
the task of insuring cempliance with the
award when it is made is not exempt
from difficulty. It is a mode of settlement
of which the value varies much according
to the nature of the controversy to which it
is applied, and the character of the liti-
gants who appeal to it. Whether in any
particular case it is a suitable method of
procedure is generally a. delicate and diffi-
cult question. The only parties who are
competent to decide that question are the
two parties whose rival contentions are in
Issue. The claim of a third nation, which
pose this particular procedure on either of
the two others cannot be reasonably jus-
tified and has no foundation 'in the law
of nations. .
. A Little Soft Soup. .
In the remarks which I have made I
have argued on the theory that the Mon-
roe doctrine in itself is sound. Imust not,
however, be understood as expressing any
ly’s government. It must always be men-
lioned with respect on account of the dis-
linguishcd statesman‘to whom it is due
and the great nation who have generally
adopted it. But international law is
founded on the general consent of nations,
tent to insert into the code of internation-
al law a novel principle which was never
recognised before, and which has not
since been accepted by the government of
any otier country. The United} States
have a right, like any other-nation, to inr-
terpose in any controversy by which their
own interests are affected, and they are
the judge whether those interests are
he r-‘r'z-‘iuiniul. But their rights are in no
way 'szi erg. based or extended bythefact
. The dangers which were apprehended.
It is difficult, indeed, to see how it can"
“greatly embarrass the future relations
is unaffected by the controversy, to im-'
scceptance of it on-the part of . her majes- .
and no statesman, however eminent, and
no nation, however powerful, are ccmpe- _
tour-find and in what measure they should
-, that the-c trovgéfiltfl
. . - .. , , sari-mention
which “labelled American. “Mr. Olney
quotes the case of the recent Chilean war.
in which the United States declined to" . A.
. join with France andlEngland, in an effort
‘—
l
T 301 bring hostilities to a close, On account
‘cf the Monroe‘ doctrine. The United
States were entirely in their right in de-
clining to join in an attempt at pacifica-
tion if they thought fit, but Mr. Olney’s
principle that ‘ ‘American questions are for
American decision,” even if it received
any countenance from the language of
President Monroe (which it does not),
cannot be sustained by any reasoning
drawn from the law of nations.
Our Authority Questioned.
The government of the United States
is not entitled to affirm as a universal
proposition, with reference to a number of
assumeé no responsibility, that its inter—
ests are necessarily concerned in whatever
may befall those states simply because
they are situated in the 'western hemi-
sphere. It may wall be that the interests
of the United States are afl'ected by some,-
thlng that happens to Chile or to Peru,
and that the circumstances may give
them the right of interference, but such a
contingency may equally happen in, the
ease of China and Japan, and the right of
interference is not more extensive or more
assured in the one case than in the other.-
Though the language of President Mon-
roe is directed to the attainment of objects
which most Englishmen would agree to
be salutary, it is impossible to admit that
they have been inscribed by any adequate
authority in the code of international law,
and the. danger which such admission
would involve is sufficiently exhibited
both by the strange development which
the doctrine has received at Mr. Olney’s
hands and the arguments by which it is
supported in the dispatch under reply.
In defense of it ho says: “That distance
and 3, 000 miles of iiitcrvcnin g ocean make
any permanent political union between a
European and an American state unnat-
ural and inexpedient will hardly be de-
nied. .But physical and geographical con-
siderations are the least of the objections
to such a union. _ Europe has a set of pri-’
mary interests which are peculiar to her-
self. America is not interested in them
and ought not to be vexed or complicated
with them.”
And again: “Thus far in our history
we have been spared the burdens and evils
of immense standing armies and all the
other accessories of huge warlike estab-
lishments, and the exemption has highly
contributed to our national greatness and
. wealth as well as to the happiness of ev-
ery citizen. But with the powers of Eu-
ropepermanently encamped on American
"soil the ideal conditions we have thus far
enjoyed cannot be expected to continue.”
A Deliberate Evasion.
The :necessary‘ meaning of these words
is that the union betwaen Great Britain
and Canada; between Great Britain and
Jamaica and Trinidad; between Great
Britain and British Honduras or British
Guiana are "lnexpedient and unnatural. ”
President Monroe disclaims any such in-
ference from his doctrines, but in this, as
in other respects, Mr. Olney develops it.
He lays down that the inexpedient and
unnatural character of the union between
a European and American state is so ob-
vlous that it "will hardly be denied.”
Her majesty’s government are prepared
emphatically to deny it on behalf of both
the British and American people who are
subject. to her crown. They maintain
that the union between Great Britain and
her territories in the western hemisphere
is both natural and expedient. They fully.
concur with the view which President
Monroe apparently entertained, that any
disturbance of the existing territorial dis-
tribution in that hemisphere by any fresh
acquisitions on the part of any European
state would ,be a 5 highly inexpedlent
change. But they are not prepared to ad-
mit‘that the recognition of that expedien-
cy is clothed with the sanction which be-
‘ longs to a doctrine of international law.
What Salisbury Won’t Accept.
They are not prepared to admit that the
interests of the United States are neces-
sarily concerned in every frontier dispute
which may arise between any two of the
states who possess dominion in the west-
ern hemisphere, and still less can they no-
; LORD SALISBURY.
cept the doctrine that the United States
are entitled to claim that the process of
arbitration shall be applied to any demand
for the surrender of territory which one of
those states may make against another.
1 have commented in' the above remarks
"only upon the general aspect of Mr. Ol-
ney’s doctrines, apart from the special
considerations which attach to the contro-
'versy‘ between the United Kingdom and
Venezuela in its present phase. This con-
“troversy has undoubtedly been made more
difficult by the inconsiderate action of the
Venezuelan government in breaking of!
relatibns with her majesty’s government,
and its settlement has been correspond-
ingly delayed, but her majesty’s govern-
ment have not surrendered the hope that
it will be adjusted by a reasonable ar-
rangement at an early date. .
I request that youwill read the sub-
stance of, the above dispatch to Mr. Olney
and leave him a copy if he desires it.
SENATORS APPLAUD.
Members of Our Upper House Show Ap-
' prove! of‘Cleveleud'e Menage.
. WASEI'NGTON, Dec. 18. —In the senate
avery member showed the keenest inter-
est in the reading of the document. There
was hardlya vacant seat on the Republic-
an side of the floor and but few absentees
on the Democratic side.
of the message closed there was a hearty
handclapping from all quarters of the
chamber, Mr. Chandler (Rep, N. H.)
leading in the demonstration on the Be-
puhlican side. . It was indeed an innovation
to the usual decorum of the senate, where
the I senators seldom, if ever give vent to
their feeling by‘applgusa. .Veteransicf the
89118130. .8331”: Was the ’ .most .' spontaneous
demonstration. inithe'ir recollection: .
The message and, ,accompanying‘docue, I
ments were referred. to line committee on
foreign relations, and ilen at 1:15 p. -m. .
the senate adjourned. '
e
a
As the reading '
l
ATR.H.WH ’
_.-PLAISTED’S-
‘ A Piece of nice CUT ‘
~ independent states for whose conduct it ‘
GIFT.
E have a large stock of use
ful pieces at
VERY LOW‘ PRICES.
See our line of
Perfume ltomizers,
All prices from 25c. to $5
E also have many novelties
SILVER.
R.‘ H.:PLAI-S'l'ED,
43 Washington St..
South Norwark.
HOLIDAY
Gochl
we have a fine assort-
ment of
FANCY
ATOMIZERS
all" prices.
JEWEL
CASES
CUT _ GLASS.
Perfumes in Bottles,
from 25.. to $7.50
TENNY’S '
FINE: ; ‘
CANDIES'
fresh every week;
rommmrs; Immune
No. 8 North Main Street,
',
scorn mamas, '
Norwalk Chronicler