The Atlanta constitution. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1885-19??, 1903-10-26
THE DOCTRINE OF MONROE
AND GOSPEL OF SCRUGGS
By Thoma1 E. Watson,

Editor Constitution: In his first article
Mr.. Scruggs was pleased to pose as "a
blend and admirer.' who regretted that
did not cite authorities when l fatty
pontradicted some generally accepted
fact of history"
Ho ins.nuated that there were many
euch Instances in my book where proof
was needed but named only two. stat
fns positively that my assertions were
both incorrect and unsupported by au-
thorfty Referring to me, Mr.. Scruggs
declared that ''one could wish he had
been a little more careful and painstak-
ing In his statements.
Now, 1t was only because Mr.. Scruggs
posed as friend and admirer'' whose
Eearning was for proof. a little mora
care. and greater degree Of painstak-
ing. that I said in my first article that
he might have applied to me for the
authority and got tin quiet, courteous
way. without any lengthy newspaper
controversy. whose tendency might be
GO lessen friendship and admiration on
both sides But It IS now plainly ap-
parent that he has a rooted prejudice
to Thomas jefferson. and a craving to
cfsplay his own knowledge of history;
therefore II is evident that any private
citation Of authorities however conclu-
eive to the average mind, would never
have quoted Brother Scruggs.
Let US briefly examine the grounds OF
this controversy. In my book on JEFF
ferson It was necessary to explain how
the Monroe doctrine came to he officially
proclaimed. I did this In precisely the
same manner as other american writer's
have done It. and as the facts author
ut Ia rN1a, y
to put the holy alliance upon notice that
In the effort to seize the South Amer
team colonies the European kings would
have the United states 10 fight For
the purpose Of explaining the Monroe
doctrine that was al that was necessary
Go be said I was not writing a treatise
on the holy alliance. It was not my
business IA the Jefferson book 10 go into
u fuu statement or all the objects and
aims Of the holy alliance That had
already been done In my other books
and reference WAS made In the "Jeffer-
Eon" to those other books. Having IN
view no other purpose than 10 tell the
reader how Monroe came to assert the
Monroe doctrine. 7 simply said that the
holy alliance had determined to drive
back the South American republics into
the clutches Of Spain"
completely true and vet Mr.. Scruegs de-
nouuced 1t rs fatty contradictory to the
generally accepted version and positively
declared that I could produce no author
ftv u sllDnort it. 4 wilder more reck-
less criticism was never hurled at any
historsan-ccrtainly not by a friend and
adnirer
II N1r scruges thoueht 1T was incum-
bent upon me. In a life OF Jefferson 20
state all the objects and aims Of the
holy alliance. Why did he not put 1t that
way7 II he believed that the average
reader did not have sense enough to
understand the Monroe doctrine unless
: iugged in al about the Laybach con-
ference and the Verona conference why
did he not put il that way? II he OBJ
sected to my statement because K was
not full enough he had perfect right
20 object to It upon chat ground. But
he was not satisfied to do any OF these
things. What he did say was that my
statement was untrue. In s., many words
ne declared that THE holy alliance did
not seek to restore the Spanish American
colonies - their former allegiance
To prove 10 vour readers the abso-
lutte accuracy Of my own statement and
the reckless error Of his own. | quoted
n array Of authority which pat Brother
Ecru <gs out Of the combat.
WhereHpon. he complacently dives IN
der and comes zap at new place.
"Adroitlv shifting his ground. he now
Confesscs That the holy alliance did IN
tend tn drive the Spauish-Americau col
ouies back TO their allegiance. hut says
the intended tn 10 other Things besides.
In his first article ne found fault with
me because ] had stated what was not
l,s.. "a N