The Atlanta constitution. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1885-19??, 1903-10-26

y
that what jefferson wrote was a mere
ccho?" He said so-said it positively. Is
If trueo In his second letter he hlmsen
proves that what he said in his nrSt let-
ter about the Monroe Doctrine Is not
true.
He now admits that nothing but neu'
traity Is found in the farewell address,
he now admits that the Monroe Doctiiio
consists of two other distinct plhioip'''
ono European colonization here anu Nv
extension of the European System ne1
which have no place whatever IN tue 10
well address; consequently he proves uls''
he committed a gross error Wnch "0
stated what jefferson wrote was ihoi0
echo. for Jefferson made fuil anu "a
plicit declaration of those other w"
principles which have no place III 'ii'
farewell address.
How can Brother Scruggs explain tti"
bIunder? 1t is plain. 1t is vital. 1t was u'
lberately committed. He declared Wv
farewell address SO embodied the MON w
Doctrine that the subsequent de'la. d '''i'-
of II were more echoes OF 'hat i"''i"'
paper, yet he is driven 10 confess ''''-'
only one of his three grand pIInclp'e9 -
Monroe
farewell address, Win not Mr.. SerusGs
make the honest confession when IS s'ou
for the soul and admit that he woeluAs
bundered? -
TO this painful predicament IS MI
Scruggs led, even when we conceded tha'
he has correctly stated the Monroe Doc
trne. But I deny that he stated ~
properly. The weight of authority
dead against him.
What was the Monroe Doctrine; hVl-
IDENTIFY II must have been something
which no president Of the United 9'"'''
had proclaimed prior to that line-e'So
it would not nave excited so Sfea' "
sensation 1t must have been some ooC
trino peculiar To Monroes administration.
else ii would not have so suddenly ana
universally became known by his name
Judged by these standards, was @Shihs
TONS neutrality doctrine the elnoo''-
ment' Of Monroe's doctrine so that Mon
roe was a "mera echo OF washington
Surely not for all Europe was ialnli'aI
with the neutrality doctrine ana ia"
been since Washington's proc.am3Hoi' W
793. In other words the neutrality ""c-
trina was old. Ii was universally known
But Monrocs message set lofth d ~
Urine which was now to Europe ana ne"
10 most Americans!
What was it?
The historian schouler (vol HI PAGE
o8s, saws that the Monroe doctrine con-
sists of two distinct propositions: N)
That we cannot permit European nations
IA extend their systems to the new
world. and
%, That this continent is no longer
open 60 colonization.
IN these two propositions consists the
celebrated Monroe doctrine 50 says the
historian Schou,or.
/, the unconstitutional History Of the
limited states" the learned author. Or
hudson $. I.andon, takes precisely the
Same view as Schoulor G'age l4S.)
In the political History OF the United
states by Goodwin Smith. DC L.. pre-
cizely the same definition Is given. tfage
I75)
Also, DIT. Woodson wilson, Vol. ~,
page 263 History Of the American
People"
In professor Elson's Side Lights on
American History the Monroe doctrine
is declared to be found in that portion
of The message which distinctly sets forth
the two principles before stated
IN Harris "Formation Of the Union
the Monroe doctrine IS said to consist OF
these two principles.
IN Morris "fIistory Of the United
states" the two principles referred to
are specified as being the Monroe doc
trlne.
could cite other authorities. one after
snother to the Same effect
1T is safe to say that in ninety-nine
cases out Of a hundred whore the dis
tinctive Monroe doctrine is defined 1t
.,,l tr, f5,,,,,d "a consist In these two Driu-