would be only a preliminary to intervention, but
the administration, though instructing Gen. Lee
to guard the rights of American residents, con-
tinued to watch for filibustering expeditions and
to intercept thera when this was possible ; and in
July, 1896, the president issued a second proclama-
tion of neutrality, repeating in more explicit
terms the one that had been put forth in 18!)5.
Relations with Spain continued to require delicate
management during the whole of the administra-
tion, the more notable events being the firing on
the American steamer " AUian^a " by a Spanish gun-
boat, for which apology was ultimately made by
Spain, the condemnation to death of the crew of the
alleged filibustering schooner " (Competitor," which
was finally suspended upon representation that the
prisoners had not received the trial by civil tri-
Dunal to which they were entitled by treaty, and
the settlement by Spain, on 14 Sept., 185)5, of the
long-standing claim of 1,500,000 pesos, as in-
demnity for the condemnation to death, in 1870, of
Antonio Mora, a naturalized American citizen, and
the confiscation of his estates. It was charged by
the enemies of the administration that this pay-
ment was made in pursuance of a secret agreement
by which the Unitew States bound itself to vigilant
action in the suppression of filibustering.
But the most conspicuous event in the relations of the administration with foreign countries was undoubtedly President Cleveland's Venezui'la mes- sage, the act morit highly prai;%d as well a'< the most severely condemned of his whole public career. In his message to congress on 2 Dec., 1895, Mr. Cleveland called attention to the long-stand- ing boundary dispute between Great Britain and Venezuela. an<l to the efforts of the U. S. gov- ernment to induce the disputants to settle it by arbitration. I'reviously, in July, Secretary OIney, in a despatch to the .meri<!an ambassador in Lon- don, hail called attention to the [Mwuliar interest of the United States in the dispute, owing to the rela- tion of that dispute to the Monroe doctrine, and again urging arbitration. On 26 Nov. Lord Salis- bury returned an answer in which he denied that the interests of the United States were necessarily concerned in such ilisputes, and refuse<l to arbitrate except in regard to territory lying to the west of the Sehomburgk line — a line surveyed by Great Britain in 1841-"4.
These despatches were sent to congress on 17 Dec, together with a special message in wiiich Mr. Cleve- land stated that, as Great Britain had refused to arbitrate the dispute, it now became the dutv of the United States to determine the boundary line by diligent inouiry. and asked for a «{)eciiil appro- priation to defray the ex[)en.'ics of a commission to be appointed by the exe<;utive for that purpo-*. This commission was to report without delay. " When such report is made and accei)tc<l," tlio message went on, " it will, in my opinion,' be the duty of the Unite<l States t« resist by every means in its power, as a wilful aggression lipon its rights and interests, the niipniprliition by (in^it HntJiin nf any lands or the e.xerci. of govemmental jurisdic- tion over any territory which, after investigation, we have determined of right to belong to Venezuela." This message causMl great excitement Imth in this country and Great Britain, being reganled as equivalent to a threat of war. The president's course, however, was almost unanimously uphrld by Ixjth parties in congress, which immediately authorized the ap|i<>iiitinent of a boundary com- mission, and this commission was imme<liatcly con- stituted l)y the appointment of Justice David J. Brewer, of the U. b. supremo court ; Chief-Ju^itice Alvey, of the court of appeals of the District of Columbia ; Andrew D. White, of Xew York ; Fred- erick R. Coudert, of New York; and Daniel C. Oilman, president of Johns Hopkins university. The commission began at once to take testimony and accumulate<l a vast amount of data, but before it was prepared to make its formal report, the ex- citement due to the message had subsided on both sides of the Atlantic, and an agreement was reached through diplomatic channels by which Great Brit- ain bound herself to arbitrate her dispute with Venezuela, thus terminating the incident. The conclusion of this controversy was widely regarded as the first formal acquiescence by a European power in the Monroe doctrine, or, at any rate, in the application of that doctrine to warrant the ex- ercise by the United .States of virtual protection over the smaller American states. The Venezue- lan arbitration treaty was signed at Washington by Sir Julian Pauncefote for England and Minis- ter Andrade for Venezuela, on 2 Feb. According to its provisions. President Cleveland designated as arbitrator, on behalf of the Unitcl States, Justice Brewer, of the supreme court, while the Venezue- lan government named Chief-Justice Fuller, and Great Britain appointed Lord Herschell and Jus- tice Collins.
Some minor events in the relations of the ad- ministration with foreign governments were as fol- lows : In 1896 groat sympathy was excited through- out the country by the Armenian massacres, and in congress many efforts were made to bring about the active interference of the United States in Turkish affairs, either on broad humanitarian grounds or because of spe<;ific cases of injuries suffered by American missionaries. It was be- lieved al.so that the United States should have a war ship at Constantinople, and when Turkey re- fused to grant to this country the privilege of sending an armed ship througlt the Dardanelles, there were many rumors of an impending attempt at a forcible passage. The administration, how- ever, continually denied any such intention, and, although the " Ilancroft,""a small war vessel, orig- inally intended for a practice-ship, was sent to the Mediterranean, as was believed, that she might bo in readiness to act as a ^uanLship should she be required to do so, no occasion arose for her use, the American squadron in Turkish waters, larger than for many years previous, being such as to compel proper treatment of American citizens.
Owing to the repeate<l efforts, especially in the Pacific states, to restrict ('hinese immigration, laws hiid l)een passed by congress, which were agreed to by China m a special treatv concluded at Wash- ington, 17 March. 1894. liy this treaty Chinese lalmrers were prohibited entering the country, and those already residing in the United States were required to be registered. On 3 May, 1894, the time fixed by congress for this registration ex- pired. There was great objection to this feature of the law, and large numbers of Chinese had failed ti) ri'ijistiT. The law nrovided that all such should be deported, but finally the luluiinistration decided that as no means had been provided for this pur- pose no steps should be taken to carry out the de- portation clause.
The seal-fishery question, which it had been hoped was scttle<l by the Paris tribunal, continued to come in different forms Ix-fore the a<lininistra- tion. President Cleveland had urged in one of his messages that congress should sanction the pay- ment of |!425,(XK), agreed upon l)etwcen Secretary Gresham and the British minister iis compensation for Canadian vcissels seized unlawfully by the U. S.
