CHAPTER XI

POLITICAL PARTIES AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS

It will be convenient to discuss, in connection with foreign affairs, the organization and early development of the political parties in the United States; since the attitude of these parties toward European nations constituted one of their fundamental differences. After independence had been achieved, it was unavoidable that the United States should come into contact, more or less close, with other nations. In fact, international dealings of importance had already been opened with some countries. An important treaty had been made with France in 1778, and its interpretation was now a matter of contention; the treaty of peace with Great Britain of 1783 was not being enforced in every respect; money was due to France and Holland; and there was a dispute with Spain in regard to the boundaries of Florida and the navigation of Mississippi River. The Barbary pirates, too, were not yet in a state of subjection. These various and important diplomatic matters demanded the attention of the government, and hastened the formation of party lines.

Before the Revolution the two political parties in America were the Whigs and the Tories-the same parties, naturally, which existed at that time in Britain. Of these the Whigs were largely in the majority. The colonists were, for the most part, dissenters in religion, and opponents of the old order of things in politics as well. Whig doctrines flourished in the new atmosphere. In 1775 Lord Chatham

Jefferson would retain their strength even at the expense of the national government. These differences, then, were fundamental in the dispositions of the two men and their followers. The origin of political parties in America must be sought herein rather than in an attitude toward any particular question. John Adams was correct when, in speaking of political differences in 1812, he exclaimed: "Alas! they began with human nature; they have existed in America from its first plantation." Adams also expressed a view quite characteristic of himself and Hamilton when he wrote in his Defence of the American Constitutions, in 1787: "The rich, the well-born, and the able must be sepa

rated from the mass and placed by themselves in a Senate." Almost simultaneously Jefferson was writing: "I am persuaded that the good sense of the people will always be found the best army. They may be led astray for a moment, but will soon correct themselves." Jefferson's writings abound in such sentiments, while in those of Hamilton views of an opposite character are frequently expressed. In short, Hamilton was an aristocrat; Jefferson, a democrat.

Here, then, was the fundamental difference between the two great men and the two great parties which they were to organize. A strict construction of the Constitution followed logically from Jefferson's view, and a liberal construction from that of Hamilton. The matter of interpretation was incidental rather than fundamental. The political creeds of Hamilton and Jefferson made it imperative that each should assume the attitude which he did in regard to the construction of the Constitution.

Having observed the fundamental differences between the two schools of political thought, it will be interesting to note the development of these differences. Party lines were being slowly formed during the first administration of Washington, and the two new parties, the Federalists and the Republicans, were in active opposition during his second administration. Hamilton and John Adams were the leaders of the Federalists, while the Republicans looked to Jefferson as their chief.