306 VENEZUELA AND AFTER 



hardly be questioned. It reviewed the course 

 of the boundary dispute, in the sense, for the 

 most part, of the Venezuelan representations; 

 it asserted the interest of the United States in 

 the controversy on the ground, first, of the 

 general principles of international law, and 

 second, of the long-established and often-pro 

 claimed policy known as the Monroe Doctrine; 

 it maintained that the British refusal to submit 

 the question to arbitration might cover a process 

 of aggression upon Venezuela that the United 

 States could not tolerate; and it concluded 

 with a demand for a definite decision as to 

 whether the British Government would or 

 would not submit the boundary question in its 

 entirety to impartial arbitration. 



The tone and temper of this communication 

 were unusual and should have warned Lord 

 Salisbury of an impending crisis. In connec 

 tion with the Monroe Doctrine, in particular, 

 Secretary Olney s pronouncements were start 

 ling. Among its implications were: that there 

 must be no intrusion by any European power 

 in the politics of any state of either North or 

 South America; that any permanent political 

 union between an American and a European 

 state is unnatural and inexpedient; that the 



