n .Ho.^
^°-*.
:t»' A
'V ''r?
5^-0
■& y^^r^^r-^^ <^ .'"^^i.
u\
C
V'^*\V^^
. '^
%.^" '
-•> ....
>'
, -^
' ^'?-'
c^:55:tw.'. o
^ ^oJ^3C5^V^\ -
.0'""
m
r,V o " •
O^ *' ..T« /^
'oK
;/^-
3^"^
/\
V'^^
C
''i*.
'^^
y ^.^ --^^is*/ . V' -^^
• ^<^'^^ °o^
t^^.v'V
--*v
bv'
.^■^ .:^^% ^-. . ^^ /^^^ ^- . ..^^ yj
v^-n^. -
-n^.o^
V *o-o
vv
^^0^
.0^...
•^0
«\. *
.•e--'"-
^ o;^'•^ ^^
.- .<^'\
m\^^^ %--:0--^,o^^ %-^^f^V %/-'f.^*%o^^
.^^...
,-h^ t
^0^ 0^:;^^
* V
e.o' ^V
^ %/ .^kwA. -.
/>*^
o^ "'T.T* .*%
{5^ '^"
•/-o^
/°- '
'bt.*'
^^-b-
>-^.
• cs555\»a'^ O
,v
:. ""^
.X '7
*bK
^^-V-.
'**^ '
^ • AT -.J> ' o » o
%,^* yM»:^ \.^""-/'^^?^^/ v--
a^
.• **
»^yr?*._ *
AN APPEAL
TO THE WHOLE COUNTKY,
FOE AN UNION OF PARTIES,
ON THE BASIS OF THE PRINCIPLES
WASHINGTON, JEFFERSON, MADISON AND MONROE,
IN FAVOR OF GEN. TAYLOR'S ADMINISTRATION,
I V BY A REPUBLICAN OF THE SCHOOL OF 1800.
" To the example of those illustrious patriots, I shall always refer with rcrerencc, and especially to hia
example, who was by so many titles, the Father of his Country." — Gen. Taylor's Inaugural Address.
" Quam multas nobis imagines, non solum ad intuondum, Tcrum etiam ad imitandum, fortissimorum riro-
rum cxpressas, scriptorcg et Gra?ci et Latini reliquorunt, quas ego mihi semper in administranda republic*
proponens, auimum ct mentem meam ipsa cogitatione hominum cxcellentium conformabam." * * * ♦
"Ego multos homines exccllenti animo ac rirtute fuisse, et sine doctrina, natura} ipaius habitu prope dl-
Tino, per seipsos et moderatos, et graves exstitisse fateor; etiam illud adjungo, saepius ad laudem atque rir-
tutem naturam sine doctrina, quam sine natura raluisse doctrinam."— CicTHE UNITED STATES:
MDCCCL.
t/^ *
Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the Clerk's office of the District Court
of the Eastern District of Virginia, in the year 1850.
PREFACE AND DEDICATION.
The following ^^ appeal" was conceived, and mostly writ-
ten, before General Taylor's message was published. It was
in no wise varied to suit that message, and yet the whole of it
might have been hereto appended, as the greater part has been,
as in full accordance with the writer's views.
The author is neither an office-holder nor a politician. Be-
lieving himself to be a sincere lover of his country, an ardent
admirer of her institutions, and an exhilarated enjoyer of her
liberties, he has ventured to put forth this humble effort to pro-
mote the general good. * * * * c; -^^^ y^^^ fateor, me
his studiis esse deditum : caeteros pudeat, si qui ita se literis
abdiderunt, ut nihil possent ex his neque ad communem affere
fructum, neque in adspectum lucemque profere."
It must be productive of good, for the whole country to be
now and then harmonized into one brotherhood. It marks a
new stand-point in their destiny — a new sublimity attained in
their social and political progress. This effort to aid in effect-
ing such a consummation, is respectfully dedicated to all who
will read it; and especially to those who may be disposed to
practice what it endeavors to inculcate.
The repetition on some points apparent in the following
pages, is not unintentional. It may, in some cases, tend to im-
press more deeply ; and generally, to aid the hasty and partial
reader, without, it is hoped, wearying or hindering the patient
and thorough.
THE AUTHOR.
AN APPEAL FOR AN UNIOJS" OF PARTIES.
The existence and activity of political parties are deemed, by a great
many, essential to the proper action of free governmenis; whilst, by
others, they are deemed injurious to the best interests of a community;
and, hence, ougii', to be deprecated by every true fiiend of his country.
Oihers again, regarditig the loo frequent abuses of parties, and their great
liability to excess, as pregnant witli evil, and yet seeing no way of pre-
venting or escaping from them, are content to submit to them as neces-
sary evils, whilst they deplore ihcir fatal consequences.
There is much force in all these views, and good reason to sustain
them; but it is not now necessary to determine which is nearest the
truth. It may be talcen for granted, that in our couniry political parties
are inevitable, and can only be destroyed, now and then, at long inter-
vals, by a "consolidation of sentiment" as to public men and measures;
or by the commanding virtue and wisdom of some Washington, whom
a beneficent Providence o<-.casionally lends to humanity.
Most, then, that remains for practical philosophy is to endeavor to base
the divisions of parties upon principles, and not upon passions or pre-
judices; to direct their vast, enersies by patriotism; to assuasre their ran-
cor in opposition ; and to soften their asperities and sweeten their bitter-
ness by all the refined amenities of social intercourse, without regard to
party distinctions.*
For these most desirable ends, what might we not expect from the
lofty examples of eminent public men, and from a dignified and courte-
ous lone on the pait of ihixl Jirsi (not third) order in the Slate — the
public press! Of approaching, if not attaining, these desirable ends, no
patriot heart should ever despair.
It was the sentiment of President Jefferson, uttered at a lime when
party spirit ran as high as it ever has, and I trust ever will, in this coun-
try, "the moment which should convince me that a healing of the na-
tion into one is impracticable, would be ihe last moment of my wishing
to remain where I am." It was the influence of the same sentiment
that caused him, in his eloquent inaugural address, to denounce "politi-
cal intolerance as despotic as wicked;" and in his hopeful, sanguine
temper to declare, "We are all Federalists: we are all Republicans."
* In conclusion, I congratulate you, my fellow-citizens, upon the high state of pros-
perity to which the goodness of Divine Providence has conducted our common couniiy.
Let us invoke a continuance of the same protecting rare which has led us from small
beginnings to the eminence we this day occupy, and let us seek to deserve tiiat coniinu-
ance by prudence and moderation in our councils, by well directed attempts to assungo
the bitterness which too r.ften marks unavoidable dilferences of opinion, by the promul-
gation and practice of just and liberal principles, and by an enlarged patiiotism, which
shall acknowledge no limits but those of our own wide-spiead Republic.
Gen. Taylor's Inaugural Address.
6
And why, fellow-citizens, may not another Chief Magistrate, with even
more nppropiiateness, take up these wonls, and make iheni ling through-
out tills glorious Union — " We are all Whigs: we are all Democrats: we
are all Republicans?"
If Mr. Jefferson could, in liis day, with any propriety and sincerity,
hope to "heal this whole nation iiuo one," how much more may we
iiope for such a consummation! One fact will be sufficient to shew the
viiulence of parly tlien ; and to teach, loo, a lesson of tolerance and
charily to those of opposite political creeds.
Whilst the struggle fjr the Presidency was going on before the House
of Representatives between the friends of Curr and Jefferson, it is be-
lieved tfiat the governors of both Pennsylvania and Virginia, who were
firm and zealous adherents (o the Republican i)arty, were deierniined, in
case Mr. Jefferson had not been elected, to march a sufficient force to
Washington "to depose the usurpers," until the people could exercise
their sovereign power by sending delegates to a convention for the pur-
pose of making amendments to the Constitution suited to the crisis.*
Leading men were not wanting to second and sanction this course; and
should not a fact like this furnish some offset to similar desperate meas-
ures, in some other parts of the country, which are constantly held up as
among the "raw heads and bloody bones" of party?
It is tiue, that no voter had intended Burr to be the President; but he
was of the same party, high in its confidence, and deemed then worthy
to be associated with Mr. Jeflerson. Though his elevation to the first
office would have been contrary to the intention and expectation of the
people, yet surely it would have borne as lightly upon the governors and
people of Virginia and Pennsylvania, as the protracted embargo did upon
the people of i\ew England", or the tariff upon those of South Carolina.
Political parties should bear and forbear; for by their own virulence
and intemperance in opposition, they sometimes drive one another to the
very verge of anarchy.
THE RISE OF PARTIES.
At two periods of our history, political parties have been united, or the
lines of demarcation between them almost entirely obliterated: — during
the administration of Washington, and that of Mi". Monroe.
Under the great, the good, the peerless Washington, the nation was
one: Parties had not then been formed. When Washington ascended
the Presidential chair, the great defects of the old Articles of Confedera-
tion had been so deeply impressed upon the mind of the nation, that the
tendency to their opposite was inevitable, save in minds equipoised like
his own. These detocis hatl been thus deeply impressed by the manner
in which their effects had been sorely experienced , and by the eloqirence
and ability which had been exerted in every part of the country, especi-
ally by the immortal authors of "The Federalist," to procure the adop-
tion and ratification of the Federal Constitirtion. Two great wants of
our country then were: {}) an imposing national front to foreign nations,
and (2) a more compact and binding union between the Stales at home.
We wanted strength and consolidation. In those days, to be ^ fedcral-
* Tucker's Jefferson, II, p. 80.
ist was to be the friend of tlie country, just started upon a new and
higlier career of glory, under the new Constituiion. Then, the terms
^'federahst" and "consohdaiionist," since used to express and perpetuate
the oppiobium of party, were epithets of orthodoxy and patriotism, and
embraced all who were in favor of ilie new Constitution; and as they
were tlien apphed to llie true repubUcans, so no doubt have they been
applied, in more recent days, as a term of reproach, to many who at
heart were as true republicans as those of eighty-seven or ninety-eight.
Such as have been stated having been the great wants of the country,
it was natural and inevitable that the first administration of the govern-
ment should seek to supply those wants. The international relations of
the country demanded immediate attention, and to give our nation her
due weight and respectability abroad, it was necessary to dignify and ele-
vate the federal government. The great name of Washington- lent it
as much weight as it was possible for it to receive fiom a man ; but he
was only a part of the government, most cautious of stepping beyond the
bounds assigned the Executive; and it was necessary for the whole gov-
ernment to exercise a firm and lofty tone in all its diplomatic relations.
This led to a spirit of centralization, more or less, but of such a charac-
ter as then to excite no alarm. On the other hand, the government un-
der the old Articles of Confederation had been confessedly too weak,
and the States confessedly remiss in fulfilling their obligations to it. In
construing and executing a Constituiion made and adopted by the Slates
for the express purpose of coirecting these evils, it was no easy matter to
determine how nuich strength, and no more, was intended to be added:
The golden mean between its powcis and the still ungranted preroga-
tives of the Slates, was not ascertainable by any invariable and certain
standard. But as the very object of the new Constitution was to impart
additional strength to the general govetnment, new strength was con-
ceded to it by all, and exerted utdiesitatingly ; and perhaps Us tendency
was to overslrengthen itself. Soon parlies began to be formed upon the
question of how much slrengih it could thus legitimately exert.* Thi.-j
new strength was invited in a variety of directiotis by the expanding
prospects and unfolding resources of the magnificent country which we
possessed. How should the war debt be managed and provided for, with
the best regard to the rights and duties of govertiing and governed, and
to the interests of freedom? How should the finances of the govern-
ment be managed with the highest regard to the same principles and
interests? How should the various and innumerable articles of domestic
consumption be supplied? How far by importation, and how far by the
encouragement of their production at home?
On several of these questions, however, there was for years scarcely
any serious division of sentiment. These matters of domestic policy
• In his message Gen. Taylor saya: — " Our government is one of limited powers."
• * * " Our government can only be preserved in its purity by the suppression and
entire elimination of every claim or tendency of one co-ordinate branch to encroach-
ment upon another. With tlie strict observance of this rule and the other injunctions
of the Constitution — with a sedulous inculcation of that respect and love ^or the Union
of the States, wliich our fathers cherished and enjoined upon their cliildren, and with
the aid of that overruling Providence wliich has so long and so kindly rruardcd our lib-
erties and institutions, we may reasonably expect to uansmit them with their innumera-
ble blessings to the lemoteet posterity."
8
became mingled with our international concerns. Europe was the scene
of an appalling political ferment. In the name of liberty, great revolu-
tions were attempted and consummated, but attended by the most fright-
ful Climes and enormities. Before these had uncovered their hideous
heads, the earthquake throes of revolutionary France seemed to he de-
signed and destined to cast off the immense load of tyranny which
oppressed her; and many of the genuine friends of human freedom
gave her their sympathy and approval. From her aid to us in our un-
equal but successful struggle; from the great princij^les of right and
justice for which she was supposed to be contending, as we had done, no
nation aflbrded her more sympathy and counteuitnce than ours, — a syra-
jiaihy and countenance unchanged in great degree by all her enormities
superadded to her gross injustice to us as a nation.
Those among us, who thought that the Federal authorities were dis-
posed to assume and exercise more power than was gianled by the Cou-
siiiution and than was altogether safe for the hest and permanent interest
of tlie governed, claiming to be the friends of human freedom and the
foes of oppression in any part of the world, sympathized so deeply with
France as to give rise to "the French party;" and would have commit-
ted our nation to a course of policy alike incompatible with the rights of
other nations with whom we were at peace and with our duties and
highest interests. Whilst opposing the administration for the develop-
ments and foreshadowings of usurpation which they supposed they had
discovered, they, upon the same principles, opposed its enforcement of
the important duties of friendship and neutrality.
Mr. Jefferson had always been of a hopeful and sanguine tempera-
ment in regard to popular government, and no doubt his views had been
strengthened by his intercourse whilst minister to France with her politi-
cal philosophers; in which, no doubt, he both imparted to and imbibed
from them ideas of the largest popular liberty. He very early became
the leader of the French patty in the United States. Unfortunately,
loo, he concurred with the French philosophers almost as nearly in re-
gard to religion as he did in regard to politics, and received as true, on
both of these vital subjects, many of the speculations oT Volney and
Tiiomas Paine.
VVashixgtoiv differed from Jefferson both in his religious and politi-
cal opinions; though surely no mortal ever lived who was more emphat-
ically the friend of liberty, or less disposed to wield usurped powers, thaa
this incomparable patriot. Firm as the hills of Augusta, to which he
once looked as the last safe retreat in defending the liberties of his coun-
try, he resisted the influences of both French and British parlies; and,
true to impartial justice, steered the ship of State to the end of his ap-
pointed course.
I have already anticipated somewhat; though what I iiave alluded to
began plainly to exhibit itself even under Washington. Still, at the
end of his second presidential term, he could very probably have been
re-elected with neatly the pame unanimity that he had been before.
Roth of the parties which were forming towards the close of his admin-
istration, claimed his sanction to their principles; but it is most correct to
sny, that he belonged to neither. IMr. Jefferson denies him to the fede-
ralists, and declares that the only point on which he and Washington
diffued was, that he "had more confidence in the natural integrity and
9
cliscrelion of ilie people, and in the safety and extent to which they might
tmsl ihemselves with a contiol over iheir goveirunent." *
In his inaugural address, loo, after lie had passed ihiough tlie fiery
poUiical contests from Mr. Adams' accession to his own triumph, in
1800, he renounces all "pretensions to that high confidence reposed in
our first and greatest revolutionary character, whose preeuiineni services
had entitled him to tlie first place in his country's lovc^ and destined for
him tlie fiiirest page in the volume of faithful history."
Under VVAsrnxGTON, then, parties had scarcely been formed; antt so
vast and commanding was his influence, that it very probably relariled,
if it did not prevent, their formation.
At the same time, that very personal influence, which few, if any
others, can ever be expected to exert, might appear to deprive us of any
good reason to hope for such an unanimity of public setiiiment as again
to lead to a consolidation of political parlies. Moreover, it may be more
difficult to heal than to prevent; to re-unite than to keep from dissolii-
lion.
Hence, to deduce from the past any encouragement to hope for the re-
union of parties, v/e must seek it in some other period of our history.
We shall find it during the administration of Mr. Monroe. Then, there
was but one party: Federalists and Republicans were one; and North
and South were one: "Liberty and union" were then truly "one and
indivisible." This union or consolidalion of parties look place after
there had been the iniensest political heals and oppositions; after tfie
wants and interests of the country had had fair and full lime lo become
known; after twenty-eight years' experience of the operation of the new
constitution, under nearly every shade of political opinion ; after laige
accessions of territory had been niade; after every important question
(even including free-soilism,t) relating lo the proper measures of govern-
ment had arisen, been discussed and most of them put lo the test of ex-
periment; and after we had passed with honor and success through a
war with England: Afler all these things, parlies became consolidated
under a man who had proved his pairioiism and ability in the field. —
What has been, may be again. Parties, fierce and ardent, had sprung
up under the elder Adams: afler four presidential terms they were uniiecl.
The present political parties, no more fiery nor more opposed, sprang up
in the first term of General Jackson ; four presidential terms have since
elapsed, and why may ihey not be united under a chief pledged to fol-
low in the footsteps of Washington, JefTerson, Madison and Monroe?
Surely, in the days of Monroe the country was not without patriotism,
wisdom and ability; and then, her public men marked out a line of pol-
icy which received the sanction of the whole people. Experience and
the progress of the age may have pointed ottt some changes and modifi-
calions, so plainly judicious as to be approved unanimously. Wii/t such
modifications and c I tansies, let the policy which once united us under a
Monroe, be now recommended, enforced and carried out by Gen. Taylor
♦Letter to Mr. Mellish, classifying parties, «&c.— Tucker II, 329.
f During the great excitement of the Missouri question, I believe there is not one
word on the subject in any of Mr. Monroe's State papers, indicating his wishes or opin-
ions. Now, there are not wanting those who are endeavoring to force General Taylor
to a premature committal on a similar question, — some, too, who were then living and
approved, yea applauded, the course of Mr. Monroe.
2
10
and his cabinet; and what but a factions disregard of the wise and pru-
dent lessons of histoiy, a predeienninntion to keep festering the wounds
intJicled by party iniemperances, could prevent the people from again
embracing wliat their fathers and themselves have so lecently approved?
Unless, then, we can suppose that, in the brief space of a cjuarier of a
ceniury, such advances have been made in the science of government, —
the noble science of promoting national happiness and greatness, — as to
render useless the experience of the past, the measures and principles of
Mr. Monroe's administration may be applied as tests to determine what
might and should again produce a re-union between the great parlies into
which the country is and has for some years been divided. Nor should
the legitimate influence of such advances as have actually been made be
excluded; and hence allowance should be made for such changes and
modifications as would be admitted with even a considerable degree of
unanimity. Something must always be yielded for the sake of compro-
mise, conciliation and harmony.
This enquiry into the measures and principles of Mr. Monroe's admin-
istration, will necessarily involve a variety of collateral topics; and the
application of the last proposed will be confirmed and enforced by such
views and considerations as properly gather themselves around the subject.
THE CONSISTENCY OF PARTIES.
There are many persons who claim for the party to which they belong
the honor and credit of having always been consistent, and of being the
regular and legitimate successors of those who have kept the true politi-
cal faith that has been approved by the nation. This idea they strive to
impress upon the popular mind, by every means in their power, and too
frequently by an insincere and disingenuous use of epithets known to be
unpopular, and by an appeal to prejudice and passion. They forget, or
entirely disregard the incontestable fact, thai parties change no less than
individuals; and, indeed, must change with the changes of those indi-
viduals whom they recognise as theii leaders and the expounders of their
principles. And, again, both leaders and followers, governors and gov-
erned, may often change position without any dereliction from the prin-
ciples which they profess. The variation may be only in the application
of the general principle, or principles, which they do really and cordially
espouse in common with others. Tlierc are delusions and illusions in
the political world, as well as in the physical. When borne swiftly upon
land or water, surrounding objects seem to us to be moving, whilst we
appear to be stationary. Thus, if either party change, it charges incon-
sisteticy upon the other parly. So also theie may be great political
changes and revolutions, (as well as natural,) of which the actors and
participants in them are totally unconscious. Our earth is moving with
immense rapidity in two directions, — whirling on its axis and flying in
its orbit round the sun: Yet, who of its inhabitants is conscious of the
fact, — a fact wliich it has been one of the trimnphs of science (o demon-
strate. Still, to this day, one parly or the other, in its pertinacious efforts
to prove itself consistent, — the one, true people's party, — shows itself to
be as unreasonable as those opponents of Gallileo and Copernicus, who,
guided only by what was apparent to them, denied that the earth revolved
on its axis, in such cases, too, cither party has diffeied from the perse-
11
cutors of true science only in the mode and degree in which they have
enforced their respective opinions. Their spirit has, too frequetiily, been
the same.
Again, a parly in power will difler materially from one seeking power.
When out of power, it knows little or nothing of the numerous en»er-
gencies which may arise, for which there may be no approved precedent;
ihey cannot then, or rather will not then, fairly appreciate the dilliculties
of administering public allairs. Opposition is easy, — and hence so often
reckless; but good government is no light, or trilling concern. On the
other hand, the opposition are more apt to have just views of the limita-
tions to power; since they are free from the teinptations which the exer-
cise of power produces, and from that desire which men in power too
generally feel to "magnify their office" and authority. Shakspeare was
not mistaken as to the "fantastic tricks" to which even a "little brief
authority " leads those who aie "dressed " in it: nor can the best forms
of government and the wisest of written constitutions effectually leslrain
them. For this natural tendency of the exercise of power, every party
in opposition should, by its own hope and expectation of one day wield-
ing the power itself, make every allowance coinpaiible with that unceas-
ing vigilance which is the "price of liberty;" and should confine itself
to candid and ingenuous opposition.
Many instances, both in our own history and that of England, illus-
trate the foregoing remaiks. Whilst the Prince of Wales was the nu-
cleus of that formidable opposition to the ministry of his father, George
III, which included Burke, Fox and Sheridan, they held moderate and
conservative views, and just ideas of the loyal prerogative. But when
the king was visited with insanity, and, in view of the Piince being in-
vested with the authority of Regent, it was proposed to impose restric-
tions upon him, his adherents suddenly became the rankest tories in the
realm.
The term federalist was once one of honor and influence. The fede-
ralists consummated the union of these Slates; that union proved happy
and piosperous, and its authors were loved and reverenced. That union
was imperatively demanded for our respect and dignity in the estima^ti'on
of foreign nations, and for our security and advancement at home. The
federalists magnified the federal government, as was believed, beyond its
legitimate bounds, till, in violation of the compact which created it, it
encroached so dangeiously upon the reserved rights of the Slates, that the
federalists were overthrow'n and branded with popular odium from that
day to the present; and the name, notwithstanding its origin and primi-
tive associations, is now used as one of opprobrium.
Those who overthrew the Federalists, took the name of Republi-
cans — a term really indicative of the true character of our government.
Yet, as it is a confederated republic, the term Federal Republican, would
perhaps, best import the nature of our Constitution, and contain a per-
petual memento of the sovereignties which united in forming it. How-
ever, it is very much to be doubted whether the assumption of such an
appellation by any party, woidd not be made the occasion of appealing
(oall those old prejudices which have become attached to the term fede-
ral ; and that, too,"though strange to say, chiefly by those who claim to
be the peculiar friends and vindicators of the sovereignty of the Slates!
For they, regarding the term ^'federaV^ only in reference to enlarging
12
ihe powers of the general government, treat it with constant scorn and
reproach.
But now, the once valued name of Republican has been laid aside by
those who claim to be the successors of those who rendered it famous
and victorious, for lliat of Democrat, which has no kind of reference to
the confederulcd character of our government; but rather implies the
sovereignty of the consolidated people. It may be said that these are
meie changes of name, and not of parlies and their principles. But
names are indicative of things, and words are signs of ideas. Even
though the idea may remain the same when the term is first altered; yet
the idea soon changes too.
Tiieie is another parly name, adopted by those who also claim to be
true Republicans — conservators of the just position and importance of
the Stales; liniiters of executive powders, according to a /afr construction
of the instrument which confers them; firm, yet candid friends of the
people; advocates of a liberal and enlightened policy for the promotion
of great interests at home — of justice, as well as a proper display of dig-
nity and power lo foreign nations, towards all whom they would pursue
peace and good w-ill by all honorable means, but form " entangling al-
liances" with none; foes lo disunion — lovers of liberty regulated bylaw;
and cordial well-wishers of the friends of freedom in every quarter of the
world, yet unwilling to intermeddle in the afl^airs of other nations, whom
they would never sufifer to interfere in our own. Who can doubt that to
such a parly as this, by whatever name it may be designated — Whig,
Republican, or Democratic — nine-tenths of the people of the United
Slates are sincerely attached? No doubt, they may differ in making an
application of some of the general principles just above laid down; but
they difl^er no more widely than patties did in the days of Mr. Monroe;
no more widely than different branches of each parly among themselves,
and who yet hold together. Why can not all parties, and fragments of
parties, come together as each party now does ititei' se, discuss public
measures in a patriotic and conciliatory spirit of compromise; and unitedly
co-operate with each other in carrying out great measures of government,
as the diflferent and difl^ering sections of each party now do?
A majority of both patties, now divided by the appellation Whig and
Democrat, are like friends passing one another in the dark, or in disguise.
This may prevent a recognition, but does not prove them to be any the
less friends. The contests of parties thus not unfrequently resemble
those unfortunate mistakes in the melee of battle, when from want of
distinguishing badges, from panic, or the glooiTi of night, soldiers pour
upon iheir own friends tfie deadly fite intended for the foe.
Parties have sometimes com])letely changed places; the one espousing
and claiming the credit of cariying out measures, which it had rejected,
denounced and defeated, when proposed by their opponents. And even
in such a case, they contend strenuously for their consistency and iden-
tity. They remind one of Sir John Cutler's black worsted stockings,
which were darned so often with silk, that at last they consisted entirely
of silk, and yet were held by metaphysicians to be the same pair of
worsted stockings. Or of the argirment upon the same abstruse sirbject
of idenliiy, between a professor and his pupil. The professor asserted,
that so long as any considerable substantial portion of a thing remained,
its identity was preserved. The pupil, who sat whittling a stick, (before
13
in apparent inatleniion,) turned up such a look of doubt and incredulily,
that the professor asked him if he was not satisfied. " I cannot say iliat
I am," rephed the pupil. "Suppose 1 were to lose the bhide of this
knife, and have a new blade put to (his handle, you say that would siill
be the same knife?" '' Yes." " Then suppose I were to lose the han-
dle, and have a new handle put to the blade, by your argument, the
knife thus formed, would retain ils identity?" '-Yes." "Then sup-
pose some one wer:i to find the handle and the blade which I had lost,
and put iheni together again, pray what knife would that be?" Tims
the blades and handles of parlies are continually joining new blades and
handles, and still pretend to be the same originals.
Political parlies sometimes part with large numbers, who once co-
operated with them; or absorb numbers once opposed to them; or adopt
measures which they once opposed; or renounce measures which their
predecessors of the same principles as themselves, as ihey say, embraced ;
and yet claim to be the same parly, and appeal, in order to secure popu-
lar approval, to those whose precept and example they have actually re-
pudiated.
It may tend, therefore, to promote a friendly recognition of each oiher,
by those who now stand opposed, to show that neither party has always
been the keeper of the true political faith for which they are now con-
tending. For surely, if either party can be convinced that those whom
they claim for their predecessors and standards, and of whose wisdom,
pairioiism and orlhodoxy they make a constant boast, have advocated
measures which they now condemn, what should hinder them from re^
turning to [.he practice o( ihose, whose principles they profess to maintain
and perpetuate? And if there can be a consiitulional " platform" erected
broad enough to contain all parties, and yet constructed of materials se-
lected by, and whose soundness has been approved by, the great and
good, the wise and patriotic, to whoiri all look as their political fathers
and founders, what but wilful obstinacy, or fanaticism, (which we will
not here suppose to be so invincible,) can prevent them from adopting
tfiat platform, and planting themselves in union upon it? Let us then,
turn to the history of parlies and their measures, and appeal to the pre-
cepts and examples of those who are revered by each as ils founders and
fathers.
The two great parlies into which the people of this Union are divided
at present, are the Whigs and the Democrats. I do not mean to employ
the term Locofoco, because in the opprobrious sense in which it is em-
ployed, it is equally applicable to fragments of both parties.
The Democrats claim to be the friends of a strict construction of the
Consiituiion ; the guardians of the reserved rights of the States; and in
the application of these, their general and leading principles, they oppose
the tariff, the banking system, especially a bank of the United Slates, the
distribution of the proceeds of sales of ihe public lands, and internal im-
provements by the General Government. They also claim to be more
properly the friends of human right and liberty in general ; and at the
same lime, in the Southern States, to be the safest custodians of the in-
terests and rights of the slave-holding States.
The facts presented by successive presidential elections, furnish a singu-
lar and paradoxical commentary upon what is called the slavery ques-
tion, which both in its real and its perverted aspects, is one of momen-
14
ious concern. We have seen ihe South upholding noilhern presidents,
easily satisfied with iheir piomulgaiion of what ihey deen) " soiiihern
principles," and whicfi, "for the nonce/' may have been sincerely en^-
braced; and the North, even in tiie midsl of free-soilism recommended
by llieir own most distinguished and honored sons, adiiering to southern
slave-holders. I know that these things are readily explamed by parti-
sans, so as to sustain the predetermined course of their respective parties;
but they seem to demonstrate beyond a doubt, that in its relations to the
presidency at least, this slave question has been unduly exaggerated and
improperly handled.
If the slavery question be fraught with the deep and overwhelming in-
terest attached to it in a presidential campaign, and lire North still be
willing to support a southern slave-holder, then the South might well re-
linquish some of the minor political issues in which the southern candi-
date may diti'er from those who claim to be the peculiar friends of the
South; for surely in the eye of reason, probability and experience, the
interests, habits, education, feelings and affinities, social and political, of
the slave-holder, may be regarded as sure a guaranty for Southern Insti-
tutions, as the pledges of a northern candidate, which may be (I do not
say have been) adopted with a view to wheedle the South, in order to se-
cure a nomination, or promote an election of a northern man. And the
more, in the opinion of any friend of the South, the slavery question ab-
sorbs and overrides all other questions, the more incumbent upon him is
it to examine well, how far he can yield those admitted minor issues, and
give his hearty support to the present incumbent of the presidential chair.
No future candidate can be presented from the South more true to it than
he, with any hope of his being elected president of this Union. But as
this subject will have to be handled again, I will pass it now without fur-
ther consideration.
The success of the Republican party, in ISOO, was so complete, and
their ascendancy so firmly established during several successive adminis-
trations, that it has long been the practice with the parties which have
since arisen, to seek popular favor and confidence, by claiming to be the
defenders and preservers of the old JefTersonian Republican principles.
Of the present political parlies, that which styles itself the Democratic,
have succeeded best in persuading the people that they are the true suc-
cessors, or continuaiors, of the old Republicans; and have constantly
aimed to cast upon their opponents as much as possible of the odium and
unpopularity which befel the Federalists. Thus, no doubt, the imputa-
tion of upholding the federal principles of that day, has had great influ-
ence with many minds, even when it was unjustly and sometimes insin-
cerely made. Philosophically considered, the practical tendency of
those charged with being federalists may be less dangerous than that of
those who denounce them for their supposed latitudinarian views of the
Constitution. Admit that they are in favor of a strong federal govern-
ment, and seek unduly to enlarge the grant of powers conferred by the
Constitution; yet they confide the exercise of ihose powers to the truly
Republican, — the representative bodies; where there are many checks
and balances, and where there is a direct responsibility to the people of
the Stales, as States. On the other hand, those who refuse the exercise
of those powers to Congress are exposed to the greater evil of strength-
ening the monarchial branch of the government, — the one-man power, —
15
the Executive: and tliey do lliis, not only by seeking and encouraging
the piolection of his veto againsl the supposed usurpations of the ofi-
selecled representatives of the people ; but by the great deference and
respect which they claim for the President as the head of the great peo-
ple, not of tlie States, as States, but of the Union, and as the avowed
champion of the Constitution.
Now, the representative system is the glory and the bulwark of Re-
PUBLiCAX government ; and from the manner in which representatives
are chosen ; from the tenure of their office, especially in the moie popu-
lar House; from the diversity of interests; from their number and local
position, there is less danger from them than from the Executive.
Which is best to exalt even beyond due bounds, an emphatically Re-
publican feature in a Constitution, or one emphatically monarchial? The
one-man feature of any government is monarchial, whether in a Demo-
cracy or an Absolute Despotism. Let all parties go for the genuine con-
servative liberties of the country; restraining all departments within their
true constitutional bounds; neither submitting to the dictation of a popu-
lar President, nor yielding to Congress powers which the States have
fairly denied. To do this, they must disregard present party names and
pretensions; see what measures and principles have been appioved by
the best and highest Republicax standards, and embrace them without
regaid to existing parly distinctions, and be ready and willing to coope-
rate with all who will carry out those measures, whether they may now
be in progress of execution, or have to be started anew.
I shall endeavor to show that the principles and measures which have
thus been sanctioned have not been constantly held and consistently
practised by the parties which have professed them; and if 1 succeed in
this, of coinse I shall have laid the foundation for a new party, the Tay-
lor party, — the Democratic Republican party.
It may tend to conciliate the attention of some whom he desires to
persuade, for the writer to declare that he is not an oiiginal Taylor man,
though he is now one most cordially; that he is not in favor of abolislv
ing the veto, and that he has no objection to seeing a good President
elected a second term.
Let us now proceed to show, that the approved Republican princi-
ples have not been always maintained and applied by the paities that
have professed them.
STRICT CONSTRUCTION.
The general principles of ^'strict construction," as introduced and es-
tablished imder Mr. Jefferson, are those which have since prevailed; arid
they are those which should prevail. But yet, in many cases, they have
not been applied at all; and, in others, have been grossly misapplied by
those who professed them. Indeed, so large a majority of the nation
have espoused those principles, that the diversity of opinion on public
measures has arisen almost entirely from a different application of them.
I knew that the effort is generally made to brand those who make par-
ticular applications of them with the opprobrium of denying them; but
one had as well say that their author did not embrace them, because he
differed from Mr. Jefferson in his application of them ; or had just as
16
well charge the different denominalions of christians with being infidels,
because they differ so widely in their interpretation of the same common
Bible, which they all receive and revere as their rule of faith and prac-
tice.
I know, (00, that the Virginia Resolutions of -98 are now very often
ridiculed by those who have never read them, or who have no reasons to
mge against them. But they are the embodied views of some of the
purest patriots, 9oimdesi statesmen and best expositors of the principles of
Republican government that our country, — more prolific of high polit-
ical philosophy than all others put together. — has ever produced.
The doctiines of the Virginia Resolutions and Report of '9S-0 are, in
the main, perfectly irrefragable. They are the deliberate convictions of
the v;ise and even-minded Madison; and, taken with his practical inter-
pretation of them, and that of his immediate successor, who also made
them his guide, they allow to the Federal Government every power
which it is expedient for it to exercise. It is true, that many statesmen
have since arisen wiser and more patriotic than Madison oi Monroe; who
have corideiiined the strict construction of those fathers as loo latiludin-
oijs; but now is the time to return to the precepts and example of the
"Eaily Presidents," under the lead of one who lias the matdy candor to
prefer their wise counsels to any new schemes of his own devising.
There is certainly a latitudinous and dangerous interpretation of the
powers of the federal government; there is also a loo restricted one, which
leavitig no room for great unforeseen public necessities, yet when such
emergency arises, is forced to shuffle, equivocate and "stretch," in order
to prove it constitutional to provide for it. But for a desire to abstain
from any allusion which may arouse party feelings, memorable instances
of recent occurrence might here be adduced. A fair, just construction of
the Constitution would allow in advance for the admission of many such
new emergencies, without forcing politicians to disingenuous subterfuges
to justify their palpable inconsistencies; whilst, at the same lim.e, it
would insist upon the Congress and all other branches of the govern-
ment being kept from trespassing on the rights and powers reserved to
the States.
I.— ORIGIN AND CHARACTER OF VIRGINIA RESOLUTIONS OF '98-99.
The doctrines of "strict construction" proper, sprang ostensibly from
the discussions and movements to which the Alien and Sedition laws
gave rise.
However wrong and impolitic the passage of the sedition law may
have been, it must be admitted that there was strong provocation to it.
Its friends may say, that if ever there was a parly in this country who
gave "aid and comfort to the enemy," it was what was called the
'•'French parly" in the time of the Elder Adams, which embraced not
only so large a number of our own citizens, but some ihiity thousand
French emigrants and refugees, who with pen and tongue were con-
stantly reviling and assailing the federal government. And alas! here,
as in France, the professed advocates of the rights of man, — those who
claimed to be more emphatically the friends of human liberty, — were
inimical or indifferent to man's highest blessing — the Christian religion.
17
Siill tlie sedition I;uv wns most unfortiinate for ils authors, and indeed
was unnecessary ; for just about the lime of ils passage tlie conduct of
iFie French government had been sufficieruly unmasked fully to justify
the course of the administration, and to arouse nearly the whole Union
to the highest pitch of patriotic indignation. JXoihing but a just cause,
the cause of the country, could have prevailed upon \VASinxGTON again
to leave the sweets of Mount Yernoti and buckle on the harness of war.
That he did consent to lead our armies, if need be, against our late friend
and ally, is worth volumes of other authority with those who appreciate
ariglil the character and judgment of this best of men — our earlit^st and
best President. May there, however, be many more like him. But the
changes in the councils of France retnoved the causes of war; peace
was made; the indignation of the people subsided; and the opponents
of the administration had now full opportunity of erecting all liieir bat-
teries against it. They availed themselves chiefly of the alien and
sedition laws, which, though widely difTerent, were indissolubly yoked
together. Mr. JefTerson directed the political warfare, and had, especially
in Virginia, where his influence was almost omnipotent, the ablest coad-
jutors; amongst whom Mr. Madison stood most conspicuous.
In 179S; resolutions strongly condemnatory of the policy and princi-
ples of the administration, and especially of the "odious alien and sedi-
tion laws," as they were termed, were passed by the Legislatures of
Virginia and Kentucky, and transmitted lo the governments of (he other
Stales. But they reproved Virginia and Kentucky in the strongest terms:
some, I venture to say, taking even the most anti-republican ground, in
their counter preambles and resolutions.
In 1799, the Legislature of Virginia referred its own resolutions, together
with those of Kentucky and the responses received from the other Slates,
to a select committee, by whom they were calmly exan)ined ; and the Vir-
ginia resohitions were reconsidered and re-aflirmed. Mr. Madison drew
up the report: — note that fact ; for frequently, when the report of '99 is
referred to as authority, it is in condemnation of some measure which ils
very author, and consequently best interpreter, approved: — Mr. Madison
drew up the leport, which is worthy of its paternity, and, with some ex-
ceptions, is an orthodox exposition of the principles on which our federal
Constitution should be interpreted ; so as to allow to Congress all powers
fairly conferred upon it, and to preserve to the Slates all the rights re-
seived to them.
There certainly are rights reserved to the Slates : There certainly are
also implied powers, admi'ted by all parties; but when those powers
shall be implied constitutes the difTerence between them. Some may he
too lax; oiliers loo stringent. Madison, — one of the best infoimed, most
unprejudiced and even-minded fathers of the Constitution, — and INIonroe,
who was in all respects his political co-adjutor, had an early opportunity
of exemplifying the principles of the Resolutions and Report of '99;
and who can deny that their practical exemplification by such men,
when, too, their influence was so fresh and active, is the best guide lo
their true meaning and application? Yei, strange to say, the Resolutions
" employing legal acumen to explain (he difficul-
ties which tlie Constitution presents to ilie execution of its wishes! The
law was repealed, and the judges fell with the law which had created
them. This was going beyond l\\efrst intentions, at least, of Mr. Jef-
ferson ; for in a letter to his friend John Dickinson, he says, "On their
(the federalist?,) part they have letired with the judiciary as a stronghold.
# # * 41 By J, fraudulent use of the Constitution, ivhich has made
judges irremovcable, they have multiplied useless judges merely to
strengthen their phahmx." And there were a nimiber of Republicans
who thought the repeal of the jiuliciary law a violation of the spirit and
meaning of the Constitution ; even as clear an infraction of it as the
sedition law had been; for where was the independence of the judiciary
and what the value of the provision by which they were to hold their
offices "during good behavior," if they could thus be deprived of them
by the abolition of their courts? Yet the repeal was cairied by the strict
constructionists of the lower house, after sixteen days debate, by a vole
of 59 to 32 ! *
3. Another illustration of the jiractical working of strict construction
is the acquisition of New Territory. It is positively certain that Mr. Jef-
ferson thought that the Constitution did not authorize the purchase of
Louisiana; yet there was an imperious necessity that we should possess
it, which has always justified the act. He expressly declares to Mr.
Breckenridge, of Kentucky, " The Constitution has matle no provision
for our holding foreign territory, still less for incorporating foreign nations
into our Union. The Executive in seizing the fugitive occurrence which
so much advances the good of their country, have done an act beyond
the Constitution. The Legislature, in casting behind them metaphysical
subtleties and risking themselves like faithful servants, must ratify and
pay for it, and throw themselves on their country for doing for them un-
authorized what we know they would have done for themselves had they
been in a siiu?.tion to do it."
What iMi. Jefferson here means by " metaphysictd subtleties," is not
very clear, unless it be the doctrines of strict construction — the act done
was confessedly "beyond the Constitution;" and yet if any were dis-
posed to condemn it as unconstitutional, they w-ere invoked to " cast
behind them" such " metaphysical subtleties;" from which, s^nW gram-
matical construction would require us to infer, that an adherence to the
•Tucker'B Life of Jefferson, II, 110, 114.
. 21
Constitiiiion, under circiimstnnces of strong temptation to permit its vio-
laiion, was deemed by Mr. Joflerson, a "metaphysical snbilety." This
iiiieulionnl iiypercriticism, is not unlike many of the siriciures of pro-
fessed *' strict constructionists," towards those who differ with them.
Mr. JefTerson's learneii biograplier, not having the just fear of our fu-
ture " desdni/^' before liis eyes, thus comments: "^Ir. Jefferson's doubts
appear to lest on strong ground ; for assuredly, if the execmivc with the
sanction of the senate, could constitutionally buy l^ouisiana of France,
r\nd stipulate to incorporate it into the Union, it might also have bought
Mexico of Spain, and thus the whole character of the people of the
United Slates, their government, religion, laws and institutions, nught
have been merged in that of a nation more populous than itself; which
supposition is utterly inconsistent with the jealous limitations of power
imposed by the Constitution."
But notwithstanding Mr. Jefferson's decided opinion as to the uncon-
stitutionality of the purchase of Louisiana, sonie of his adherents stood
ready to prove it all consistent with strict coiislmctioii. To Col. Wilson
C. Nicholas, who thought that the power to admit new States extended to
the acquisition of new territory, Mr. Jeflerson replied, that though the Con-
stitution might bear that interpretation, yet " when an instrument admits
two constructions — the cite safe, the other dangerous; the one precise,
the other indefinite, I prefer that which is safe and precise;" and he had
"rather ask an enlargement of power from the nation, where it is found
necessary, than assume it by a construction which would make our pow-
ers boundless." Still he was very willing to acquiesce in tliat interpreta-
tion which he had fi.sl pronounced both dangerous and indefinite, " con-
fiding," as he continues, "that the good sense of our country will cor-
rect the evil of construction whenever it shall produce ill effects."
No amendment sanctioning the purchase of Louisiana was deemed
necessary by the inajority of the Republicans of that day; and not only
did the construction of Col. Nicholas then prevail, but that and a wider
one, has been recently sanctioned in the acquisition of Texas.
The writer admits that he was in favor of the aimexaiion of Texas.
The wider construction of the Constitution to which he referred, con-
sisted in:
4. The admission of Texas into our Union, by joint resolution of the
two house? of congress, instead of by treaty, ratified by two-thirds of the
senate. This will serve as a farther illustration of the manner in which
the principles of strict construction have been applied. Texas was
avowedly introduced into our confederacy by the professed strict con-
structionists : and could she have been admitted by the senate, that sanc-
tion would have been preferred, and none other resorted to. It happens
very singularly, that we know, from a mistake of Mr. Jefferson, what
were his views upon this subject. " We see," says he to Mr. Madison,
"a new instance of the inefiiciency of constitutional guards; we had re-
lied with great security on that provision which requires two-thirds of the
legislature to declare war; but this is completely eluded by a majority's
taking such measures as will be sure to produce war.'''' He was entirely
mistaken in supposing that it required two-thirds to declare war; but the
principle he asserts is sound; and "how coinpleiely," it may be said, in
his own language, "was the constitutional guaid requiring two-thirds of
the senate to ratify a treaty eluded, by resorting to a majority of congress
22
upon joint resolution" — done too, as generally alleged, for the express
))iirpose of overcoming the more than one-third minoiity of the senate,
who wore opposed to ihe ireaiy of annexaiion.
And so far from wailing for a majority of the Legislature to declare
war, ihere are not wanting those who maintain and liclieve, that a late
Piesident did, wiihout consulting Congress, though they were then in
session, "-take such measures as tcere sure to produce tvar." Whereas,
Mr. JeflTerson in a letter to Mr. Madison, exulted " tliat we had already,
in example, given one efTeclual check to the dog of war, by transferring
the power of declaring war from the executive lo the legislative body ;
from ihose who are to spend to those who are to ) ay."^
The foregoing acts and instances, all taken from the history of the Re-
publican party, founded upon the principles of the resolutions of '9S
and '99, and of that party which have claimed to be the only legitimate
successois of the old Republicans of '99, should suffice to shew that
iliere may be wide diflferences in the application of general principles,
though warmly and sincerely espoused, and thai no party can lay claim
lo an entire consistency with their professed principles.
These things aie not adduced for the put pose of stigmatising those to
whom ihey refer; but with the hope of proving that no party can be re-
garded as exclusively the keeper and pieseiver of the true Republican
faith, and fience of promoting a spiiit of conciliation, harmony and union,
between the opposing parties of the day.
A MODERN FEDERALISM.
It is the habit of most of (he professed advocates of "strict conslruc-
tion," to deny that those who espouse measures different from those
which they deem ''necessary and proper" for the general government to
adopt, are friends of strict republican principles at all. They brand
them as federalists, and none of the formulae in vogue with nurses for
frightening refractory children, have been more absurdly and foolishly
used, than this charge o( federalism. There is now in this country no
such parly. There are some avowed federalists scattered amongst both
parlies, and most thickly percliance, amongst those who lepel any affinity
with them. But ihere may be a federal party worse than the old one,
Avho under the dearest epitlieis and the sweetest professions, may sow the
seeds of political evils to such an extent, as lo cause the Irue patriot lo
exclaim with Madame Roland, " Oh liberty ! what criiTies are perpetrated
in thy name!"
Many a politician in this country does not scruple to allow (o the exe-
cutive, powers, acts and prerogatives, more dangerous to, and subversive
of, ihe spirit of our instiiuiions, than those which in the iiame of siiict
construction, they der»y to the legislative department. Thus, lliey sanc-
tion the wiong principle, that one man is a better representa'.ive of the
people, because elected by the whole people, than the Senate and House
of Representatives, who represent the Stales and the people.
Old-fashioned republicanism, in vindicating the sovereignly of the
States, denied the political existence of any such thing to be represented,
as the people in an aggregate and consolidateJ form. The spirit of con-
* Memoir, Correspondence, &c., Ill, 31.
23
solidation was then abhorred. Now-a-days, it is maintained by those who
pretend to adhere to old Republicanism, that as the Senate represenis
the Sovereign Slates, and the House of Representatives iheir respective
local constituencies, so the President represents the people, and is their
special agent and protector. Hence, abuses of the veto power, and other
impioper exertions of executive pierogalive, have been submissively sanc-
tioned, as if upon true Republican principle. This is going beyond the
stficl constructionists even of the British Constitution, and yet for an
Adams or a Hamilton, simply to have lauded some of the features of the
British Constitution, proved them Monocrats and Federalists!
The old-fashioned Federalists were too liberal in their allowance of
constitutional powers to the Congress, They were successfidly resisled
and overthrown by the Republicans, and yet the successors of these
very Republicans go for a more laiiiudinous allowance of powers to the
executive, because he is supposed to represent tiie people. Now, in the
proper estimate of our constitutional polity, one of the ablest expounders
of tlie State Rights doctrine, denies that there is any such body to be
represented or regarded, as the aggregate people. The late and lamented
Judge Upshur, who was so suddenly torn from the theatre of public af-
fairs, by the awful explosion on boaid the Princeton, most ably combatted
the views of Judge Story on this very subject. With less learning, per-
haps, than his eniineni opj^onenf, he possessed no less ability and logical
acumen, and his "Brief Enquiry,"* modest and unpretending as it is,
may rear its "undiminished front" even by the side of "Story's Com-
mentaries."
No witness to the truth of the views here expressed, could be more able
or impartial.
" We have," says he, "every reason to love and admire our Constitu-
tion, and to place it far above every other system in all the essentials of
good government. * * But if our author's (Judge Story's) principles
be correct; if ours be indeed a consolidated, and not a fedeiaiive system,
I at least, have no praises to bestow upon it. * * * The principle
that ours is a consolidated government of all the people of the United
States, and not a confederation of Sovereign Stales, must necessarily ren-
der it little less than omnipotent. The powers of such a governmenl are
supposed to reside in a mojority of the people ; and as its responsibility
is only to the people, that majority may make it whatever they please."
The modern doctrine is, that the President stands for, and repiesents
that irresponsible majority, as the other branches of government repie-
sent iheir respective constituencies; and hence he may do nearly as he
pleases, for by his election, he is supposed to have a majority in his
favor.
Our State Rights author continues: "The separation and coitiplete in-
dependence of the several departments of the government, is usually
supposed to afTord a sufficient security against an undue enlargernen: of
the powers of any one of them. This is said to be the only real dis-
covery in politics which can be claimed by modern times. * * ♦ But
we should not rely on it with loo implicit a confidence. • * * In spile
* Brief Enquiry into the true nature and character of our Federal Government ; be-
ing a Review of Judge Story's Commentaiies on the Constitution of the United States.
By a Virginian. Petersburg, 1840. Passim, and at pp. 124, 5, 6.
24
of every precaution against it, some one depnitincnt will acquire an un-
due preponderance over the rest. The first excesses are apt to be com-
iniited by the liegislature; and in a consolidated governnienlj such as
Judge Story supposes ours to be, there is a peculiar proneness to this.
In all free governments the democratic principle is constantly extending
itself. The people being possessed of all power, and feeling that they
are subject to no authority but their own, learn in the end to consider
the very restraints which they have voluntarily imposed upon them-
selves, in their constitution of government, as the mere creatures of their
own will, which their own will may at any time destroy. * * *
But whatever power the Leo-islatur'C may wi7i, they 7/:in it not for them-
selves: hut for the Executive. * * The powers which are expressly
loclffed in the Executive, and the still greater poavers which
ARE ASSUMED becausc the Constitution does not expressly deny them, a
patronage v:hich has no lijnit and acknowledges no responsibility ; all
these are quite enough to bring the IjCgislature to the feet of the Ex-
ecutive.''^ * * "One by one the powers of the other departments are
swept away, or are wielded only at the will of the President. That
officer is not by the Constitution, and never was designed to be, any
thing more than a simple executive of the laws. * * The boasted
balance which is supposed to be found in the separation and independ-
ence of the departments, is proved, cveyi by our own experience, apart
from all reasoning, to afford no sufficient security against this accumula-
tion of powers," in the hands of the President.
Here is a picture of Federalism indeed; and the old Legislature Fed-
eralists have now given place to the Executive Federalists. Why shall
not the real Republicans, who coinpose so large a majority of the peo-
ple, come forth from whatever paity ihey niay now be attached to, and
put down these Federalists also? Let them rally upon the platform of
the Republicans of '99— ISOO— 1S08— 1S16— the platform of JeHerson,
Madison, Monroe: — the platform of Zachary Taylor, who reveres the
puie examples of these illustrious predecessors!*
WHY THESE GENERAL VIEWS ARE INSISTED ON.
These general views of the principles of "strict construction" are thus
insisted upon, not for the purpose of disparaging, far less of alienating,
those who iTiay have been guilty of inconsistency with or departure from
those principles; but for (he purpose of endeavoring to show the more
conclusively that the measures which the ojiposing j)arties of the Union
now advocate respectively, are but diflferent applications of the same gen-
eral principles of construction, embraced by the mass of both parties.
So much is this believed to be the case, that if either party were brought
to regard any of those measures as highly expedient, no opposition
would be made to them on the ground of their unconstitutionality.
*In the discharge of these duties, my guide will be the Constitution, which I this
day swear to preserve, protect and defend. For the interpretation of that instrument,
I shall look to the decisions of the judicial tribunals established by its authority, and to
the practice of the government under the earlier Presidents, who had so large a sha e
in its formation. To the example of those illustrious patriots, 1 shall always refer with
reverence, and especially to his example, who was, by so many titles, the Father of
his Country. — Gen. Taylor'' s Inaugural Address.
25
If those who claim lo be the "siiict constructionists" pioper, could be
convinced that they dilTer from iheir opponents chiefly in the apjjlicaiion
of the same general Republican principles, the barrier now existing
between them would not appear so great; the now exaggerated, and even
pretended violations of the Constitution, would be urged no longer; the
hard nicknames now used to indicate one another's supposed want of
political principle, and to excite or peipcluate popular prejudices, would
be discardeil; and a great part of the '• middle wall cf partition" would
be thrown down; and then these paities, beholding one another in the
light of conciliation and harmony, would speedily overleap the remain-
ing portion and cordially embiacc, with united hearts, their countiy's
highest good, instead of their own success and predominance.
A candid illustration of what is here more particularly intended can,
it is believed, only proinole the object of this appeal.
The Dernocralic party claim to be the more especial friends and main-
tainers of strict construction. Yet how have they applied these nuble
doctrines?
1. It must be adiYiitted that some of the old Federalists do not regard
their position in and cooperation with the democratic parly as incompati-
ble with their principles. Even if such distinguished men as Chief Jus-
lice Tatjey, Mr. Buchanan and C. J. Ingersoll be not examples, as^they
are supposed to be, there is no doubt that some can be found. They,
then, must be regarded as belter satisfied with the practice of the Demo-
crats than that of the Whigs.
2. When Mr. Calhoun was in favor of the United Stales Bank he was
deemed a good Republican. So was Mr. Clay when he opposed that
institution. Here was but a diflTerent application, then, by these two
great men, of the same principles: Neither will admit that he has changed
his leading views of conslituiional law. Why should not the same be
now true, when Mr. Clay is in favor of an United States Batdc and Mr.
Calhoun opposed to it? And so of other measures which Mr. Calhoun
espoused before he was Secretary of War.
3. The time was when Mr. Clay, Mr. Calhoun, Mr. Crawford, and
Gen. Jackson, were all regarded as leading men of the Republican
party, and each put forth by large numbers as worthy of the Presidency.
Mr. Crawford was the choice of the "strict constructionists" proper, and
Gen. Jackson was then almost entirely repudiated by them. Mr. Craw-
ford died, and Gen. Jackson ultimately became President and the head
of tlie party which is now known as the democratic. What application
canie now to be made of the doctrines of "strict construction?" One
instance will suffice lo show.
4. Mr. Calhoun, in his application of them, led ofT a sovereign Siale
lo nullification; which Gen. Jackson, in his application of them, resolved
lo ptit down, if necessary, by force of arms. Yet Gen. Jackson was sus-
tained in his whole administration by numbers of the most clamorous
supporters of "strict construction" and Slate rights; and ev( n by some
of (hem who had once declared that his election would prove a curse lo
the country.
Now, for a Whig to avow his preference for ihe TariflT, United Stales
Bank, Distribution, &c., is said to be sufficient evidence that he denies
4
26
the legilimate rules of construing the Constitution: — in short, is a Fed-
eralisi ; and yet two classes of l^eniocrati: rnay plant themselves, one
upon Nullification, the other upon the Proclamation and Force Bill, and
yet both stand upon the glorious Resolutions of '98! How can such
things as these be fairly justified ? Yet to these add the instances already
given from the early history of "strict constiuction," and it must appear
thai the demociaiic parly are as much in need as any oilier of the princi-
ple, that the dilTerence of measures is more in ihe application of the
same general principles of constitutional interpretation, than in those
great fundamental principles themselves, which both parlies cordially
espouse.
GEN. TAYLOR AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.
In urging a union of parlies in support of Gen, Taylor's administra-
tion, of course the burden of the appeal must be addressed to the candid,
liberal and tolerant of the democratic party. Tlie Whigs are already in
his favor, with some slight exceptions; and yet it would not require ihe
Democrats to relinquish as much to come to his support, as ihey have
often resigned to parly necessity and to the suggestions of some of their
heads. Why will they not yield to iheir country what ihey have thus
often surrendered to their party? Will they not?
They migiil do this for Gen. Taylor, though they should refuse it to
any nther. When he fought his way to that distinction which was the
cause of his being elevated to the Chief Magistracy of the Union, he was
their soldier and servant, carrying their own admiuisiration, not only suc-
cessfully, but gloriously, through a foreign war. In the long and faith-
ful service which he performed, extending ihrougli several administrations
of diflferent political complexions, — in the discharge of duties irrespective
of party and due to the whole country, his mind and feelings have be-
come fully nationalized; and he is prepared to be the President of the
Utjion — the whole Union, "one and indivisible." Though, like every
indepeniient and candid irian, he has political preferences, yet he is no
bigoted politician; and without attempting to occupy ihe absurd and
slippery ground of neutrality, or no-paityism, he is not obnoxious to
those chaiges, prejudices and objections which attach to most of ihe lead-
ing members of lliat party with which he coincides as so "moderate" a
member. Every firm and inde[)endent mind must take sides with one
party or the other, and it is not here pretended that Gen. Ta} lor has not
made and does not intend to abide by his choice; but he is what he
styled himself, "moderate'^ and conciliatory in his views and feelings.
In estimating the character and position of Gen. Taylor as Piesident,
one important ciicumstance should not be overlooked. He was elevated
to the high seat which he occupies without having cherished any political
aspirations whatever. Thus he was exempted from the cabals and in-
trigues of veteran politicians, and there had been no drawback to the
thorough and entire nationalization of his principles, whilst discharging
his uiiliiary duties. Thus he was prevented from becoming a one-sided
partisan, courling political promotion whilst performing services due to
the whole couniiy. When a miliiaiy chieftain comes to avert his eye
from the rank and file of his troops hilanihropy imd fanaticism, become willing inslrunienis of sectional
jealousy and strife. The people of the South are no less worthy of ]jo-
liiical fellowship now than in the days of the formaiion of ihe Union ;
and the sons and giand-sons of ilie Noith can hardly hiy claim to being
any more humane^ pairioiic, or liberiy-loviug, ihan their revoiuiionary
sires.
Fellow-citizens of ihe North, lovers of peace and liberty, beware tliat
you do not lo^e boih these inestimable blessings, or desiroy ihose of oihers,
in ihe ciusade you are miking. The reniend)rance of nullificaiion may
not tieier you; for nmliiiiides in the South agree with Mr. Monroe, ihiil
a laiifT is consiiluiional and expedient. But on the slavery que.'^iion,
the wlujle South is united, and mnliitudes in ihc North agree with them
as to ihe rights guarantied to the South by tiie Consiiiiition. The issue
of a coiUcst on this subject will be far more fearfid, and the contest itself
attended with the direst calamities. What a warning note, what heart-
moving Jippeals, would not these " eaily Fresiilenls " row utter, could
(hey behold the aspect of our {)oliiical aliaiis! But such as these cannot
novv l:e permitted to arouse us lo duty and sooihe us to peace. Yet we
have '' Moses and the prophets," if men will but hear (hern: Why should
they insist iliat these sliould "rise from the dead?"
In his message to Congiess the very next year, Mr. Monroe declares
thai his views, as to the encourgement of our manufactures, remain im-
chimged, and he proposes a review of the tariff, in order lo '• iifford adcli-
iionul prolcclion lo those articles tec are prepared to fuanvfacture ; or
which are inoie immediately connected %oilli the defence and independ-
ence of our country."
Such, then, were the views of ihis Republican President on this gient
question; — views now loo commonly denounced i.\s I'^edcral, ihouL'h ilins
avowed by one who had the good fortune of destroying the Federal
39
pnrly and bringing ihe whole people (o the snpport of Republican prin-
ciples.
Nex(, let US onquiie in wliiU innnner Congress, filled with Republicans
of ihe Jefreisuriiiii) school, respontlctl lo the foregoing lecominenclaiions
so ofien urged upon llieni.
In the Congress of 1S17-18, liiere was a large majoriiy i[i favor of
proieciiori to domesiic mannfacmres. In the Senaie^ all hut three, and
in the House, ail but sixteen members, voted lo coniinue, for seven years
the duly laid in iSlGon imports of collon and woollen manufaciures.
That duly in ISIG was fixed at tweniy-five per cent, on cottons and
woollens for three years, and the minimum value of i\ square yard of
coiion was then fixed at tweniy-five cents. Siill, the proieciion afforded
by ihe larilf of 1816 was iuj-ufRcicnl ; vast quanlilies of foreign ariielcs
were imporled, and frightful desolaiion and rtn'n spr.-ad ihroughoul ihc
country, adeciing not the meicanlile communily alone, btu all classes.
We have already seen what remedy Mr. Monroe proposed for this slate
of things.
In the sixteenih Congress of 1819-20, the subject of addiiional pro-
tection was much agitated; and a bill for affording ii was passed by a
majoriiy of twenty in the lower House, but rejected by the Senate.
In the secoiui session of the sixteenth Congress, there was a proiracied
struggle in the election of a Speaker. — a vacancy in that office having
been occasioned bv ihe resignation of Mr. Clay. Il resulted in ibe elec-
tion of John VV. Taylor, of New York, one of the republican supporters
of De Witt Clinton, and in favor of a tariff of protection, and opposed
to the extension of slavery in Missouri, There was still a tariff majoriiy
in Ihe House lliis session.
In the seventeenth Congress, the tide rather turned against a laiiff,
which was opposed especially by Southern metnbers, from an impression
llial high duties operaieil unequally on ilifiTeient classes and sections.
Hut during the eighteenth Congiess, Mr. Monroe's view.s wete carried
out by the joint action of the repieseniatives of the States and people.
In conclusion of this subject, it may be added that Gen. Jackson him-
self was in favor of a ''judicious nuilT ;'^ though it is not given us lo
know exactly what kind of tariff he thought would be "judicious."
But as such an one would, according to his opinion, be proper and con-
stitutional, I cannot well conceive how any one else can be pieduded by
his example fronr judging of the judiciousness of a proposed lariflT; and
if he deem \i judicious, pronouncing it consiiiuiional.
Bui Geneial Jackson has given us quite a decided declaration of his
opinion in favor of a t:riff, in a place where il might not have been ex-
pected, viz: his Maysville Road \\i\o Message. " When,*' says he, "the
national debt is p;iid, the duties upon those articles u-hich ue do not raise
may be repealed wiih safely, and still leave, I trust, wiiiiout oppression
lo any section of the country, an accumulating siuplus fund, which may
be beneficially applied lo some well digested system of improvement."
Of couise, then, il was his opinion that these articles which we do raise
should l>e fostered by a conlintiance of duties, even after payment of ilie
national debt. Bui we have in the same able document a more explicit
40
declaration than this: "As long," says he, "as the encouragement of do-
mestic manufactures is directed to national ends, it shall receive from me
a temperate but steady support. There is no necessary connection be-
tween it and the system of appropriations (for internal improvements).
On the contrary, it appears to me that the supposition of their depend-
ence upon each other is calculated to excite the prejudices of the public
against both. The former, (i. e. enccurngemeni of domestic manufac-
tures,) io sustained on the ground of its consistency with liie letter and
spirit of the Constitution, of its origin being traced to the assent of all
the parties to the original compact, and of its having the support and ap-
probation of a majority of the people ; on which account it is at least
entitled to a fair experiment." Here, then, is a marked distinction drawn
by one whose opinion many of ihe soi-disant "strict constructionists"
ought to respect, between the constitutionality of a tariff and of iniernal
impiovement; and an admission, by the same high authority, that public
prejudices may be excited against both; and when these prejudices have
been engendered they stand, both in the stead and in the way of a thou-
sand sound aiguments, and are loo often impregnable to reason and ex-
perience.
A "judicious tariff," for the "temperate but steady" encouragement
of those articles which our country does, or can easily produce, is the only
national policy entitled to the adoption of wise lawgivers. It was the
policy of such statesmen as Jefferson, Madison and Monroe; and will be
that of Gen. Taylor,* who will, with a bold originality, dare return to
their illustrious examples.
rtl.— INTERNAL DIPROVEMENTS BY THE GENERAL GOTERNMENT.
The same course will be pursued in reference to this subject, that has
been with regard to the Bank and Tariff; viz: presenting a summary of
Mr. Monroe's views, derived from his own public documents.
In his first inaugural address, he says: "Other interests of high im-
portance will claim attention, among which, the improvement of our
country by roads and canals, proceeding always with a constiiirtional
sanction, holds a distinguished place. By thus facilitating the intercourse
between the States, we shall add much to the convenience and conrfort
of our fellow-citizens; much to the ornament of the country, and what
is of greater importance, we shall shorten distances, and by making each
part more accessible to, and dependent on, the other, we shall bind the
Union more closely together. Nature has done so much for us by inter-
secting the country with so many great rivers, bays and lakes, approach-
ing from distant points so near to each other, that the inducement to com-
plete the work seems peculiarly strong." It must be admitted that here
are very strong views in favor of internal improvement — the inducement
to it, and the benefits from it — one of the chief of which is the slrengih-
ening the bonds of the Union. But all this was to be, of course, with a
"constitutional sanction." Without this qualification, neither the au-
thority of Mr. Monroe, nor any one else, would be entitled to any weight.
How far, then, in his opinion, did Internal Improvements by the Federal
Government, have a constitutional sanction? It is often asserted in mere
♦See note, p. 36.
41
general lern^s, that Mr. Monroe was opposed to Iiilcrnnl linproveinciils on
constiiuiioiial g^roiinils; anil in one sense, this i_ v" in BOOKBINDl^
j^O v; '«" i^" ^'"^ '-"
X.<
>*^