to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.

APPENDIX III

PRESIDENT CLEVELAND REAFFIRMS THE MONROE DOCTRINE

P

LAIN, CONCISE AND FULL OF MEANING IS THE MONROE DOCTRINE. In the wars of Europe the United States had never taken any part, and never would take any part, in any future wars over there. But the Americas were to be in all future times for Americans. Europe took the warning and this policy of the United States was never seriously called in question until Grover Cleveland was President.

A controversy had been long pending between British Guiana and Venezuela over the boundary line between the two countries. Several times the United States had made efforts to use its good offices to bring the controversy to a pacific conclusion, but the British government pushed forward its claims without listening to any suggestions on the part of this government. At last information was received that Great Britain contemplated taking possession by force of the disputed territory. It was then President Cleveland took a hand.

Through Secretary of State Olney an earnest suggestion was made to Great Britain to submit the matter to arbitration. Secretary Olney put the proposition in the strongest and most forcible language possible, for he was one capable of using strong terms when the occasion required. It was of no avail. The British premier at first shifted, and then finally refused to even consider arbitration in any form. In his regular message to Congress in December, 1895, President Cleveland used this strong language:

It being apparent that the boundary dispute between Great Britain and the Republic of Venezuela concerning the limits of British Guiana was approaching an acute stage, a definite statement of the interest and policy of the United States as regards the controversy seemed to be required both on its own account and in view with its relations with the friendly powers directly concerned. In July last, therefore, a despatch was addressed to our ambassador at London for communication to the British government in which the attitude of the United States was fully and distinctly set forth. The general conclusions therein reached and formulated are in substance that the traditional and established policy of this government is firmly opposed to a forcible increase by any European power of its territorial possessions on this continent; that this policy is as well founded in principle as it is strongly supported by numerous precedents; that as a consequence the United States is bound to protest against the enlargement of British Guiana in derogation of the rights and against the will of Venezuela; that considering the disparity in strength of Great Britain and Venezuela the territorial dispute between them can be reasonably settled only by friendly and impartial arbitration, and that the resort to such arbitration should include the whole controversy, and is not satisfied if one of the powers concerned is permitted to draw an arbitrary line through the territory in debate and to declare that it will submit to arbitration only the portion lying on one side of it. In view of these conclusions, the despatch in question called

upon the British government for a definite answer to the question whether it would or would not submit the territorial controversy between itself and Venezuela in its entirety to impartial arbitration. The answer of the British government has not yet been received, but it is expected shortly, when further communication on the subject will probably be made to Congress.

The reply when received was a definite refusal by Great Britain to submit the whole question to arbitration. On its receipt President Cleveland sent to Congress a special message, concluding with the following pointed paragraphs:

The course to be pursued by this government in view of the present condition does not appear to admit of serious doubt. Having labored faithfully for many years to induce Great Britain to submit this dispute to impartial arbitration, and having been now finally apprised of her refusal to do so, nothing remains but to accept the situation, to recognize its plain requirements, and deal with it accordingly. Great Britain's present proposition has never thus far been regarded as admissible by Venezuela, though any adjustment of the boundary which that country may deem for her advantage and may enter into of her own free will cannot, of course, be objected to by the United States.

Assuming, however, that the attitude of Venezuela will remain unchanged, the dispute has reached such a stage as to make it now incumbent on the United States to take measures to determine with sufficient certainty for its justification what is the true divisional line between the Republic of Venezuela and British Guiana. The inquiry to that end should, of course, be conducted carefully and judicially, and due weight should be given to all available evidence, records and facts in support of the claims of both parties.

In order that such an examination should be prosecuted in a thorough and satisfactory manner, I suggest that the Congress make an adequate appropriation for the expenses of a commission, to be appointed by the Executive, who shall make the necessary investigation and report upon the matter with the least possible delay. When such report is made and accepted it will, in my opinion, be the duty of the United States to resist by every means in its power, as a willful aggression upon its rights and interests, the appropriation by Great Britain of any lands or the exercise of governmental jurisdiction over any territory which after investigation we have determined of right belongs to Venezuela. In making these recommendations I am fully alive to the responsibility incurred and keenly realize all the consequences that may follow.

I am, nevertheless, firm in my conviction that, while it is a grievous thing to contemplate the two great English-speaking peoples of the world as being otherwise than friendly competitors in the onward march of civilization and strenuous and worthy rivals in all the arts of peace, there is no calamity which a great nation can invite which equals that which follows supine submission to wrong and injustice and the consequent loss of national self-respect and honor, beneath which are shielded and defended a people's safety and greatness.

APPENDIX IV

CABINET NOMINATIONS REJECTED BY THE SENATE

No nomination for the cabinet was rejected by the Senate until the stormy administration of President Jackson. His fight against the United States Bank brought on a controversy with the Senate.

Roger B. Taney, of Maryland, nominated by President Jackson for Secretary of the Treasury, rejected June 24, 1834.

James M. Porter, of Pennsylvania, nominated as Secretary of War by President Tyler, rejected by the Senate January 30, 1844. Only three votes were cast for his confirmation.

David Henshaw, of Massachusetts, nominated for Secretary of the Navy, by President Tyler, rejected by the Senate January 15, 1844.

Caleb Cushing, of Massachusetts, nominated to be Secretary of the Treasury by President Tyler, rejected March 3, 1843.

James S. Green, of New Jersey, nominated as Secretary of the Treasury by President Tyler, rejected by the Senate June 15, 1844.

Henry Stanbery, of Ohio, nominated by President Johnson to be Attorney General, rejected by the Senate January 2, 1868.

Charles B. Warren, of Michigan, nominated by President Coolidge as Attorney General, rejected by the Senate March 10, 1925. Name again submitted. Rejected March 16, 1925.

Of the twenty-nine Presidents, seven of them had previously held cabinet positions-Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren and Buchanan-had each served as Secretary of State, and Taft as Secretary of War. Calhoun was Secretary of War when elected Vice President.