RE "MONARCH is essential" of June 19 from Mary Ratcliffe. How can one have a serious discussion about the monarchy with Mary Ratcliffe?

She accuses me of writing a "hate-filled and disrespectful" letter.

Is the monarchy above criticism? Is that disrespect? Does one shut up and let them get on with it? That’s the way of tyranny.

She writes: “The history of our nation does not depend on a series of ruthless evil dictators.”

Wrong Mary, it has! In all but name.

What do you think the English monarchy has been up to over the centuries? Practicing sainthood? Ease up with the Downton Abbey series!

Think King John (Magna Carta), Henry VIII, Bloody Mary, tyrant Charles I, waster Charles II and Edward VIII, Nazi sympathiser George V? This is the monarch who upon hearing a desperate plea for asylum from his relative, Nicholas II, last Russian Tsar, declined. Shortly afterwards the whole Russian family were exterminated. Family feelings counts for less than one might think among the royals: think Diana, Princess of Wales and the Queen’s dreadful attitude towards her after her tragic death.

In the main, American presidents are respected, if not, they are ousted.

Why did America break away from the English monarchy? Dare you peep into a history book, Mary? Demolish my discussion of monarchy – you can’t.

That’s why you have supplied such an emotive response: a loud bang from a gun firing blanks.

What about France and its presidents? France is a stable country, so is America.

Mandela was a respected president worldwide. Then there’s the Republic of Southern Ireland. Are these examples of "ruthless evil dictators" in banana republics as Mary maintains?

Don’t accuse me of empty rhetoric: back your reply up with facts too, not emotions.

JEFF ADAMS Bloomsbury, Swindon