concerning the decree of the 24th of January last for the settlement of claims growing out of the war, it is found, with regret, that all its remarks revolve around an idea to which it is impossible to assent without detriment to the general principle that secures to every State the right to establish its own domestic legislation. On the one hand, the memorandum tends to deny the judicial validity of the law of February 14, 1873, regarding the manner of preferring claims against the nation, and, on the other hand, endeavors to restrict, in a certain sense, the action of the government as affecting the claims submitted to the board of classification, recently created. Such ideas, which amount to making an exception in favor of German interests in the Republic possible, could be entertained if there were two legislations in existence, one intended to govern the interests of the Nationals and another relating to the property of foreigners. No long meditation is necessary to realize the grave injury that would be done by such a dual legislation to the nations, like the greater part of those in America, in whose development foreign immigration and the influx of foreign capital are important factors. In the course of a few lustrums the inequality of conditions between natives and foreigners would create numberless difficulties which would go so far as to make national sovereignty a mere illusion of fancy." (Ven. Ministry of Foreign Relations, March 19, 1901.)

The Venezuelan minister continued to ring the changes on this balderdash, and the government of Germany continued to stand firm.

III

The British, German, and Italian governments were anxious to avoid friction with the United States. They knew well how deeply ingrained is our primordial superstition, the Monroe Doctrine. They knew that a fetish surviving from olden days may lead a good and civilized people to react toward even fanatical extravagances. They remembered Cleveland's Message, and wished to steer clear of similar complications. So those patient countries apprised the United States freely and fully of all the wrongs they had suffered at Venezuela's hands, indeed the facts were notorious, but at the same time they gave the United States ample assurances that they had no intention of treading on the tail of its Sacred Serpent, - the Monroe Doctrine. And yet be it noted that while they used soft words they carried a "big stick," that mighty array which came down upon Castro's bailiwick was not placed on show solely to impress and overawe Venezuela.

Secretary of State Hay was informed, on November 11, 1902, by the British Ambassador at Washington (Sir Michael H. Herbert), that His Majesty's government has "within the last two years had good cause to complain of unjustifiable interference on the part of the Venezuelan government with the liberty and property of British subjects."

On December 7, 1902, the German and British governments presented their ultimata to Venezuela. Two days later Venezuela arrogantly refused to accede to these demands. As stated by the umpire of the British-Venezuelan Commission,

"The right of intervention on the part of Germany in behalf of her subjects is distinctly repudiated by Venezuela as being a 'judicial impossibility'; 'that such intervention is contrary to the law of the country and therefore inadmissible under the international law'; to which the German government replies that it holds 'that national laws which exclude diplomatic intervention are not in harmony with international law, because, according to the view of the powers of the Republic, all intervention of this character could be barred by means of municipal legislation.""

The blockade by Great Britain, Germany, and Italy of the ports of Venezuela soon followed.

Could "Jeffersonian Democrat" or any sane man contend, in view of the facts in this case, that a war commenced by the United States against the allies on this issue would have been anything less than an indication of the insanity of its promoters over the Monroe Doctrine? And yet there were thousands of our citizens who wanted the government of Washington to declare war. When a vagary, like the popular dogma under discussion, gets a firm grip upon the national mind and conscience, it is impossible to predict into what diabolism it may not allure the most virtuous and till then the most hard-headed of people!

IV

In this connection there shall be briefly noted, rather as interesting side-lights than for such historic importance as they may possess, some Venezuelan happenings in which Mr. Herbert W. Bowen conspicuously figured.

When finally the blockade closed in upon the ports of Venezuela, Mr. Bowen, but recently appointed United States minister at Caracas, accepted a position as Castro's representative (with Secretary Hay's consent, strange to say), sprang into the "lime-light," and at once proceeded with extraordinary enthusiasm to perform his task.

He sought to accomplish by bluffing what he could not achieve by argument, always insinuating that the government of the United States was supporting his demands. From his language and attitude, a sufficiently artless person might well have inferred that his was the hand that held in leash, and, upon his decision, might "let slip the dogs of war"; indeed, Bowen plainly suggested Bonaparte in selfconfidence. The following letters are samples of the diplomatic style of this retiring gentleman in communicating with the governments of Great Britain and Germany:

Mr. Bowen to Sir Michael H. Herbert.

WASHINGTON, January 27, 1903. DEAR SIR MICHAEL, - Please do not fail to state in your cablegram that I cannot consent to give preferential treatment to the allied powers, because, if the matter were referred to the Hague, all the creditor nations would be put on the same footing. The allied powers, therefore, should not try to press the point, as it would be unfair to do so.

Believe me, etc.,

HERBERT W. BOWEN.

Mr. Bowen to Baron von Sternburg.

WASHINGTON, D. C., February 10, 1903. DEAR BARON VON STERNBURG, I agreed to pay each of the allied powers £5500 in cash, with the understanding that no other cash demand would be made. I therefore refuse absolutely to pay Germany's new demand for a cash payment of 1,700,000 bolivars and Italy's new demand for a cash payment of 2,800,000 bolivars. Our agreement was that the 1,700,000 and the 2,800,000 bolivars were to be paid out of the 30 per cent of the customs receipts at the same time and in the same manner as were to be paid the claims of all the other creditor nations. The special agreement I concluded with Germany was that I should pay cash or give a sufficient guaranty. I gave the latter, and its sufficiency has never been disputed.

I am, etc.,

HERBERT W. BOWEN.

Notwithstanding Mr. Bowen's allegation that if the matter were referred to the Hague "all the creditor nations would be put on the same footing," quite the opposite occurred; and he did yield to the demands of Germany, although he had said so positively that he would not.

That Bowen did really valuable service for Venezuela there is no doubt, yet, after all he had done on her behalf (and his deeds comprised not only bluster, but hard work), when he returned to Caracas he was received with disdain. Our "sister Republic," accustomed to find some ulterior motive lurking behind such generosity, was suspicious. Soon appeared in El Monitor, of Caracas, an article reflecting seriously on the honor of Mr. Bowen and saying that he had been paid large sums for his services. At the same time it was stated among the Venezuelans generally that Bowen (of course through his friends) was to receive from General Castro "concessions" which would be worth "millions."

Mr. Bowen took official cognizance of these attacks upon his honor by writing General Castro as follows:

CARACAS, March 4, 1904. ESTEEMED FRIEND, - In El Monitor of this morning they published that Venezuela has paid to me B. 169,382.70, and that there had been paid to the arbitral commissioners and in the Hague B. 416,001.95.

I pray Your Excellency that you will please defend my honor, as I have defended the honor of Your Excellency and of Venezuela.

I will never be satisfied unless they punish the Director of said paper at once, and unless there is published in said daily, and in the Gazeta Oficial the truth with reference to Venezuela having paid me $5000, and that they have paid for the expenses of her three representatives at the Hague $4500.

I have raised my most energetic protests to the Minister of Foreign Affairs this afternoon, and I protest now against such calumnies to Your Excellency. Your affectionate friend,

HERBERT W. BOWEN.

To the Most Excellent General CIPRIANO CASTRO, President, etc.

To this the secretary of the "Esteemed Friend" coolly responded that the press was free in Venezuela, just as in the United States, and that therefore the government would take no action in the premises.

Mr. Bowen the next day wrote in reply, submitting that, as during the last two years various periodicals had been suppressed by the Venezuelan government, he had supposed that such a method was the most convenient one for dealing with the calumny, to the end that the editor might be compelled to retract it and be punished for it. But, he continued, as President Castro refused to intervene in the affair and gave him to understand that he must defend himself," tomorrow I will convoke a reunion of the Diplomatic Corps, and after it has been effectuated, I will inform you of the steps which I have decided to take." It is said that Castro stood up bravely under this fearsome threat.

Mr. Bowen accordingly attempted to assemble the Diplomatic Corps, the representatives of the same governments that he and Wayne MacVeagh (chief counsel of the United States in the Venezuelan arbitration before the Hague Tribunal) had been but a short time before so eager to vanquish.

These gentlemen had held their tempers and kept civil tongues in their heads while the subjects of their governments were being assassinated and robbed, their flags insulted, and the ships of their compatriots looted and destroyed. They had schooled themselves to self-reserve in the face of dangers and outrages, and Mr. Bowen's ebullition of wounded feelings must have fallen upon stony ground. At all events, none of them attended the indignation meeting.

After this little fiasco Bowen's position grew even more uncomfortable. The other legations, remembering his professional status during the blockade, treated him with scant sympathy, and concerned themselves very little over the systematic insults to which Castro and his clique subjected him. His experience should be a warning to others.

When a man leaves a position as representative of the greatest and best government on this earth for a position in the service of the rottenest, let him alone bear the consequences of his act.

T

CHAPTER XIX

WIDESPREAD DESTRUCTION OF FOREIGN

INTERESTS IN VENEZUELA

HERE have been several international arbitrations with Venezuela, because of the destruction of foreign property, and the outrages committed on foreign citizens by that government. In each one of these arbitrations those international mixed commissions which were under American influence have resolved every technicality in favor of Venezuela; hence that government has never been compelled to pay for the hundredth part of the property that it has actually confiscated or destroyed.

The decisions of the mixed commissions have merely encouraged each successive Dictator of Venezuela to be more grasping than his predecessors. The seizure of a foreigner's property means net profit and little or no risk. The august Monroe Doctrine raises a mighty barrier against foreign invasion, and unless the outrages become so extensive or so rank as to arrest the attention of the world, nothing is done toward redress. No single European nation wishes to risk war with the United States, and so the cries of its citizens go unheard, save when the volume of many-tongued laments swells to arouse all Europe. But foreign interests have now been so nearly obliterated that no really effective outcry can be anticipated. Nor is there any probability that foreign interests will soon increase, either in Venezuela, or in Colombia, Ecuador, Central America (except Costa Rica), San Domingo, or Haiti, for an attempt to establish a business in any one of the countries on this list is tantamount to an attempt to commit financial suicide.

It is evident that the foreign company would not (unless its case were desperate) present an international claim, and thus bring down upon its head the bitter hostility and reprisals that would be sure to follow. Ordinarily it would prefer to suffer, to yield to extortion, to divide its profits (if it had any) with the Dictator, in short, do everything within the bounds of reason, to avoid a collision.

While examining the cases of partial or total destruction of foreign companies, one should critically consider the extraordinary difference between the sums claimed and the amounts allowed as damages. In order justly to appreciate the enormity of the outrages committed,