the party name becomes a mere shibboleth, and blind partyism usurps intelligent adherence to principles. A party in such a strait is more of an obstruction and menace than a purifying, progressive and exalting agency, and it may well be questioned whether it is any longer entitled to the use of an ancient and honorable name.

EARLY PARTIES.

The Colonial period could develop no national parties as we now know them, for the colonies were disjointed. But as they began to adhere over the question of taxation without representation, two orders of thought arose, one of which favored the right of the British parliament to tax America, and the other opposed it. These same orders of thought existed in England, the former being designated by Tory and the latter by Whig, and these names were readily transferred to America. The Tory remained the fast friend of English sovereignty on our soil. The Whig, at first only an opponent of parliamentary claims, drifted into a Colonial unionist without separation from the mother country, and finally into a unionist with separation.

The Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary war brought the Tory party under odium and left it without a mission on American soil. Its members became enemies of the country, and even traitors. As a party it met a speedy and deserved death. The principles of the Whig party became overwhelming, but its name grew to be traditional, through the almost universal use, according to locality or fancy, of such equivalents as Popular Party," "Party of Independence," "American Party," Liberty Party," "Patriots," etc.

66

The Whig idea both brought about the Confederation

and freed its abandonment. It equally substituted the Constitution for the Articles, and Union for Confederacy. The Tory title being a thing of the past, there was little use for its antithesis, Whig. The dominant idea under the new constitution was how to unite the states more firmly, and how to provide for peace and war. This was federalism, or whigism under changed auspices, and in a new political rôle. Whigs lost their name entirely in the title Federalists. The Federal party became the national party, and in a certain sense the nation, for as yet AntiFederalism had not become coherent, had accepted even what it opposed, so as not to jeopardize the experiment of Union. Thus Federalism, which was responsible for the new government, naturally sought its strength and perpetuity, by throwing all doubtful constructions of the Constitutions in favor of the central authority; that is, it interpreted the Constitution openly and liberally, saw in it a spirit as well as a letter, looked upon government under it as a creation with powers and functions to be questioned only by the people at large.

Now that the experiment of popular government had been fully launched, and the fact of a Union was no longer in danger, the Anti-Federal spirit of the day began to take shape. It assumed the negative of the proposition of government as laid down by Federalism, and inclined to such a construction of the Constitution as would throw all doubt in favor of the States; that is, it interpreted the instrument closely, regarding it as an inelastic code, and government under it as simply an aggregate of powers with which the States had parted, and which they alone in their sovereign capacity were at liberty to question, or, if need be, recall.

These may be regarded rather as schools of thought

than as active and antagonistic political parties, yet they laid the foundation of subsequent parties, coherent in organization and with contra-distinguishing titles. While both schools were united as to the policy of a protective tariff, the propriety of honoring Washington with a second term of office, and in general a scheme of funding the national debt, there was an unconscious drift apart upon the question of open or close construction of the Constitution, the trend of the liberal interpreters, or Federals, being more and more toward a fuller exercise of powers on the part of the national government, and of tle close interpreters toward the doctrine of State rights.

The adoption of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, which were regarded as in the nature of a declarative bill of rights, so disarmed all AntiFederal opposition to the instrument, as to render the title "Anti-Federal" a party misnomer. Jefferson felt that it was a perpetual reminder of opposition to the fact of government, and that if ever the varying, and often discordant, sentiments it represented were to be crystalized, some new and more appropriate name must be adopted. His opportunity soon came. Aglow with the spirit of the French Revolution and the fires of the French Republic, his admiration, on his return to this country, became infectious, even assuming the fantastic form of dress and manner. The Federals, fearing the introduction of the ungovernable, leveling and communistic spirit of France, opposed such threatened innovations, and became more coherent than ever as a party. In proportion, Jefferson and his admirers grew warmer, more united, more aggressive. Only a name and banner were needed to complete a formidable organization. These the genius of Jefferson supplied. His party should, first