Show TIIC MONROE DOCTKIXB AGAIN To the Editor of The Herald Thanking you for printing my letter the other day concerning the Monroe doctrine I wish at the same time to explain how I obtained the brief text which I quoted of that celebrated doctrine doc-trine Not being at the time in possession posses-sion of a better authority than Chambers Cham-bers Encyclopoedia I resorted to it for desired information and found on page 427 of volume V of that work a brief reference to James Monroe in which among other things the following follow-ing appears His Monroe most popular acts perhaps were the recognition of the independence of Mexico and the South American republics and the promulgation promulga-tion of what has since been called the Monroe Doctrine in which he declared the American policy of neither entangling entang-ling ourselves in the broils of Europe nor suffering the powers of the Old World to interfere with the affairs of the New and that any attempt to extend ex-tend their system to any portion of this hemsiphere would be dapgerous to our peace and safety I In the absence of other and per I hans more accurate historical data con cerning that particular portion of our I political politics I did not know of a better way to ascertain the meaning of the term Monroe doctrine than a reference to a standard work such as the one from which this quotation is made and in thus relying upon such authority felt that I would not be far out of the way should it be true that this quotation does not convey the true text or the exact meaning of the term the fault is not mine and if Chambers Cham-bers and The Heralds version of the doctrine in question are not in accord I cannot help it and am not disposed to decide which is correct or if either I be accurate Still entertaining the views formerly I expressed but not wishing to prolong the discussion I wish to suggest to my valued friend of more than a score of years the Editor of The Heraldthat when he says it is always easy to fjnd fault I hope he does not mean to refer to me as a chronic kicker If I did by inference criticise Mr Secretary Gresham for his failure to caution England not to infringe upon the Monroe Doctrine it was because I believe it to be always in order for an American citizen to criticise such acts of his government as he may deem inconsistent with what he believes be-lieves to be right whether the then existing ex-isting administration be Democratic or Republican Should the time ever arrive when partisanship par-tisanship shall have become so despotic des-potic that one cannot criticise the action ac-tion or policy of his own party as well as those of the opposing party at that precise period will cease to exist the freedom of belief and of speech so dear to every true American It is in vain that I am asked to take the example ot Lincolns administration administra-tion through Seward to fortify the position of Gresham or the ipse dixit of Senator Hill or the opinion of the New York World backed by even as good authority as my friend the Salt Lake Herald as sufficient reasons why I should abandon my own opinion formed on due reflection and backed by evidence sufficient to convince me that I am correct in my conclusions Very truly I H D JOHNSON In reply to the foregoing we have to repeat that The Herald in its comments com-ments on the Monroe doctrine did not rely upon any outside version of what that doctrine signifies but upon the actual language of the author which we printed as sent to Congress December De-cember 2 1S23 If that is not as good authority as the interpretation given I to it by a Scotch editor no matter how celebrated or able we have nothing further to say as to the exact meaning of the enunciator of the doctrine It was because so much more than the message of President Monroe contains has been made out of his utterances that we reproduced them verbatim in The Herald As to the expression It is always easy to find fault for which we claim no originality it referred particularly to the Republican papers which have endeavored to make it appear that there was something about the Nlcar auguan affair that did violence to the Monroe doctrine and that the Democratic Demo-cratic administration was censurable for its attitude in relation to it If our friend chooses to apply it to his own remarks we have no objection although that was not intended The Herald concedes the right of any citizen to criticize every public officer who says or does anything deserving of reprobation We have not intimated inti-mated anything to the contrary But we also claim an equal right to criticize criti-cize the criticism of the citizen who thus finds fault Our friend is of course at perfect liberty to still entertain enter-tain the views formerly expressed But is not The Herald entitled to the i same privilege i The example of Lincolnq administration administra-tion and the views of Secretary i Seward of Senator Hill and of the New York World Were not cited as I the end of controversy or in order I to make our esteemed friend abandon his own opinions but to show that The Herald was not standing alone irj I holding a contrary view to that which jour j-our friend expressed We could quote I from many prominent journals anc politicians showing that there is noth I ing in the NIcaraguan affair hat violated vio-lated the Monroe doctrine or justified any interference of the United States I with Great Britains demand or its enforcement they would doubtless fail of convincing one who is of the same opinion still Referring again to Lincolns administration adminis-tration and Secretary Sewards official of-ficial interpretation of the Monroe doctrine doc-trine we draw attention to the language I guage used by the latter in 1866 during dur-ing the war between Chili and Spain J Chili called upon the United States for I aid on the ground that the Monroe II doctrine required such interference I Mr Seward replied that this country was not bound by that doctrine to take part in the wars in which a South i American republic may enter with 0 i I European sovereign when the object of I the latter is not the establishment df1 a monarchy under a European prince in place of a subverted republic There is the line In the Nicaraguan case it was not overstepped in act or spirit If England had attempted to introduce the European political system i sys-tem on this continent and the administration j ad-ministration had permitted such action I without opposing it there would have II i been room for criticism No such a I state of affairs existed in the case I under discussion When there is al wrong to rebuke partisanship should not stand in the way But when wrong does not actually exist and political opponents manufacture it in order to find fault we confess > to enough partisanship par-tisanship not to join in the outcry but to state the facts and defend the right and we do not care a groat if that is I considered partisan |