The best defense to make of Jefferson, as the author of the Kentucky resolutions, is not to contend that they do not mean what they say. The truth is, that when Jefferson wrote them, he believed that liberty was being driven to its last stronghold. He believed that the Federalists were bent on carrying out a programme, which unless arrested at the beginning, would drive the states into revolution and blood, and furnish the enemies of humanity with a new pretext for calumnies against Republican government. barrier that can be erected against such schemes must be found in devotion to liberty, he himself forged in the very resolutions that were written to defend it, the most effective weapon that has been used in the last hundred years against Republican government. The civil war, which was the logical outcome of the doctrine of the Kentucky resolutions, was a tremendous struggle to determine whether "government of the people and by the people" can endure.

Failing to realize that the only

But it is unjust to Jefferson to say that the doctrine of these resolutions was his abiding sober thought as to the proper remedy for violations of the constitution. He stated his abiding thought on the matter in a letter written a few years before his death to Justice Johnson: "The ultimate arbiter," he said, “is the people of the union, assembled by their deputies in convention, at the call of Congress, or of two-thirds of the

states. Let them decide to which they mean to give an authority claimed by two of their organs."

QUESTIONS.

1. What did McMaster say about Jefferson as a statesman and how would you reply to it?

2. Why, in your opinion, was Fisher Ames disposed to regard approval of the Alien and Sedition Law as a test of the soundness of one's Federalism?

his?

3. Who was Fisher Ames? Do you recall any speech of

4. Why did Jefferson wish to conceal his authorship of the Kentucky resolutions? Do you recall any other instance in his history when he seemed unwilling that the public should know his relation to important measures?

5. Give the substance of the most important paragraph in the Virginia resolutions?

6. How did Madison explain the meaning of "interpose?" 7. Can you reject his explanation without impeaching his veracity?

8. Reconcile his explanation with the paragraph quoted in the letter to Jefferson.

9. What follows from the opinion that the constitution is a compact?

10. What is the difference between nullification and secession?

11. Could a state be supposed to have the right of secession without the right of nullification?

12. State the substance of the first of the Kentucky resolutions as drawn by Jefferson?

13. Point out carefully the nature of the reasoning by which its conclusions were reached.

14. Jefferson objected that to make the general government the final judge of its powers, was to make its discretion the measure of its powers; did not his theory make the discretion of the states the measure of its powers?

15. If the doctrine of this resolution were true and were acted on as such, what would be the difference between the constitution and the Articles of Confederation?

16. What is Alexander Johnston's interpretation of this paragraph?

17. What do you think of his interpretation?

18. What seems to have been the abiding thought of Jefferson on this subject?

19. What do you think of the reasoning of the second, third fourth, fifth and sixth resolutions?

CHAPTER XXI.

DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALIST PARTY.

France of the

ures of the

UR STORY has already told of the tornado of indignation that swept over the country on the publication of the X., Y. and Z. dispatches, and of the energetic measures passed by Congress in June and July, 1798. The news seems to have taken Talleyrand and the French government completely by surprise. That a "backwoods nation" of 5,000,000 people would dare to throw down the gauntlet at the feet of the conquerors Effect upon of continental Europe was a possibility energetic measupon which they had not reckoned. The United States, Directory at once changed their attitude. They assured Gerry that they were eager to preserve peace between the two republics. They no longer demanded satisfaction for the language of Adams' message. They declared that they did not wish the United States to break Jay's treaty; they issued circulars forbidding the further capture of American vessels; they released American seamen, and, in August, declared in a semi-official way, their readiness to receive a new American minister, provided his political opinions were acceptable.

In his message to Congress in December, Adams asserted that the "pretension" on the part of the French to prescribe the qualifications which a minister of the

United States should possess was inadmissible, and declared that to send another minister "without more deter.

Vans Murray nominated to France.

minate assurances that he would be received was an act of humiliation to which the United States ought not to submit." But he gave it as "his deliberate and solemn opinion, that whether we negotiate with her or not, vigorous prepararations for war will be alike indispensable." Long before this, however, Talleyrand had given the most "determinate assurances" that an American minister would be received. In his message in June, we remember, Adams had said that he "would never send another minister to France without assurance that he would be received as the representative of a great, powerful, and independent republic." Accordingly, on September 28, 1798, Talleyrand caused the resident American minister at the Hague, William Vans Murray, to be assured that "whatever plenipotentiary the government of the United States might send to France, in order to terminate the existing difficulties between the two countries, he would undoubtedly be received with the respect due to the representative of a free, independent and powerful nation." Adams took him at his word. Without even hinting his intention to his cabinet, to say nothing of asking their advice, on February 18, 1799, he nominated Murray as minister to France.

This precipitate action, which was undoubtedly the occasion of the downfall of the Federal party, grew out