REVIVAL OF PARTIES.

127

of Mr. Jefferson in his inaugural, after passing the ordeal of a most bitter political campaign. "We are all Federalists, all Republicans," said he, and "differences of opinion were not always differences of principle."

Many of those measures maintained by the Federalists and opposed by the Democrats, as a party, were ultimately indorsed by the latter, and became tests of party fidelity. To employ the language of a candid and able political writer of those times wherein the events of which he treats transpired: "Before the war, the Federalists were for a regular and respectable naval establishment, and for the Bank; but after the war, no one of the Democratic party advocated gun-boats (which had once been the test of party!!!) and a majority of this party also favored the re-establishment of such an institution as it had itself destroyed. These were among the Federal 'triumphs,' as well as in setting forth the principle of protecting the national industry, which belongs more to Alexander HAMILTON than to THOMAS JEFFERSON: for, though the latter maintained the application of that principle in his report, as Secretary of State, on the Fisheries-the former, as Secretary of the Treasury, marked out and prescribed its extent TO THE FULNESS OF INDEPENDENCE AND NATIONAL POWER. On the other hand, we had our ‘triumph'in the establishment of more liberal principles, and new responsibilities in public agents. If, on the part of the Federalists, they held erroneous ideas as to the necessity of a strong government,' we were almost as incorrect in our zeal to reduce the general and necessary powers of government; that, if the Federalists wished too much to extend the foreign commerce and relations of the United States, the Democrats desired too much the establishment of a rigid 'terrapin policy. And it may be well to remark, that the business of our foreign relations, neither in

its principles nor its practice, was ever so much extended as at this present season of revival of 'Democracy,' but such extensions were among the charges we preferred against the Federalists in 1798-'9.”

equally to the

The force of the above extract applies policy and practice of a standing army. Ever since the war of 1812, the same writer remarks, we have kept in pay three or four times as many officers as are required for the rank and file in service." "It was Democratic in all the South to protect domestic manufactures, and force regulations of trade on the people of the East; but now it is Democratic with many, and not in the South only, to stand violently opposed to domestic manufactures."

We have instanced in these illustrations, which might be extended much further, the changes wrought in the principles of parties from the period of their formation to the time when President Jackson ignored the "infallibility of the decrees of the Supreme Court," in assuming for the Executive the right to enforce the law as "he understood it.”

At the opening of the new Administration, a generai disposition was evinced among the opponents of the Executive to give his measures a fair trial. It was not definitely known what line of policy he would feel bound to adopt. Certain of his supporters maintained that he would not pursue the course foreshadowed by the votes which he had cast as a member of the Senate. Gen. Jackson had not occupied so prominent a position before the country as many of his compeers, yet, as a senator, he had definitely defined his position on the long disputed question of the constructive power of Congress. He had voted in the

affirmative on eight different bills providing for Internal Improvements by the General Government; and his support of the tariff of 1824—which was founded on the principle of protection,-classed him in sentiment with Mr.

VIEWS OF PRESIDENT JACKSON.

129

Adams, Mr. Clay, and Mr. Calhoun, with whom Mr. Crawford did not agree. And even Mr. Crawford advocated the recharter of the National Bank, in 1810; and subsequently, as a cabinet officer, was supposed to have favored internal improvements by the General Government, and, also, a protective tariff.

The combination of the friends of Messrs. Jackson, Calhoun, and Crawford in the recent election, augmented the desire to learn what would be the bearing of the President towards the different factions. The position respecting party distinctions, taken in General Jackon's letter to Mr. Monroe, happily circumstanced him to conciliate conflicting elements, and to select the ablest men irrespective of party as his advisers.

In entering upon his administrative duties, General Jackson found the Government at peace with all the world; and the Treasury with a surplus of five millions of dollars. His friends were in a decided majority in the twenty-first Congress; which convened on the 7th of December 1829, and continued this, its first session, until the 31st of May, 1830. Andrew Stevenson was re-elected Speaker of the House by 152 votes against 39.

The Message of the President presented an elaborate view of the foreign and domestic condition of the country. Many of the suggestions contained in the message received the attention of Congress; but all of them did not meet with a favorable reception. The standing committees in both the Senate and House to which were referred so much of the message as related to the renewal of the bank charter, reported in direct opposition to the recommendation of the President. This action, when it is remembered that the majorities on these committees were friends of the Administration, "is a striking proof of the want of harmony between the President and Cabi

net, and the party which had brought them into power." The reports on retrenchment and reform received no attention, nor did the recommendation for the amendment of the Constitution. The treatment of the tariff question in the message was not free from ambiguity, yet it was understood to be hostile to the protective policy. This met with a more favorable reception in Congress. The tariff of 1828 became a law during great political excitement, and in the adjustment of its details, more regard was had to its political effect than to its beneficial influence. It was a source of dissatisfaction to its friends as well as to its enemies. The inadequate protection afforded to the woollen manufactures induced the advocates of the policy to bring forward the subject, that they might secure a modification of the law more favorable to their interests, and to protect the revenue from frauds. A bill for this object was reported, discussed, passed both Houses, received the President's signature, and became a law. Several other measures were passed at this session, which had for their object the prosperity, harmony, and general welfare of the country.

During the twenty-first Congress transpired the important discussion on the resolution of Mr. Foote, which is now generally known as the "great constitutional debate." The relative powers of the General Government and States were fully analyzed, and their supremacy respectivelly urged.

The resolution introduced by Mr. Foote related simply to public lands. From this as a centre, the debate branched outward, embracing the great fundamental principles of our government. The debate as a whole is one of commanding interest. The speeches for the most part, were brilliant, comprehensive, eloquent. The scope of history embraced by them is of ample interest to re

WEBSTER AND HAYNE.

131

ward a most patient and careful perusal. But the crowning features of the debate were the speeches of Messrs. Webster and Hayne.

Our limits preclude us from giving even a synopsis of the two master efforts of this great debate.

Nullification was a power, asserted Mr. Hayne and his coadjutors, inherent in a State, which she might exercise irrespective of the pleasure of the General Government. Although this idea was demolished by Mr. Webster in his reply, discountenanced by President Jackson in his proclamation to the people of South Carolina in the difficulties with that State, in 1832, and disapproved by the great mass of the American people, it has continued from that day to the present, to influence the action of a respectable portion of the people of the Southern States. No particular law resulted from this protracted and able discussion.

A bill was passed during the present session, authorizing a subscription to the stock of the Maysville and Lexington Road Company, in Kentucky. In the House the vote stood for it 102, against it 85, and in the Senate, 24 to 18. After retaining the bill eight days, it was returned accompanied by a veto message. The reading of this message was the occasion of great excitement in the House. Two days after its reception, that body, May 29th, took up several bills relating to internal improvements. One authorizing a subscription to the Louisville and Portland Canal Company was passed, and vetoed. Two others receiving the sanction of Congress were submitted to the President, and by him retained until the next session of Congress. This course on the part of the President offended many of his friends, and entirely alienated some from the party. The decided majority possessed by the Administration in both branches of Con