throughout -the States would be far from unanimous in the support of such bumpviously jingoistic affirmations of the doctrine as those of Senators Lodge and Davis now before Congress. But any temperate and reasonable definition of the principle, Drought forward at a less delicate juncture than the present, would command the hearty assent of the entire country. Such unanimity of opinion does not extend, however, to the second question involved in the Message—whether the Monroe doctrine is legitimately invoked in a boundary discussion like the present. National feeling, irrespective of party, is still overwhelmingly in sympathy with the President even here, but a large conservative element in the Eastern States, together with what may fairly be called the best and most intelligent sentiment of other wide sections of the country, holds to the belief that the principles of *¥ Monroeism" are not here at stake. The territory in dispute is one Affoct the future safety of the United States, whose possession by England can in no wise
or the stability of prevailing conditions on this side the Atlantic. This being true, there may indeed be occasion for serious remonstrance with the British government, but not for any heavy-tragedy invocations of the Monroe Docttine, as though the existing balance of power in America were being seriously disturbed.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.