vasions upon our rights, Congress should impose restrictions upon their commerce or prohibit it altogether, until they ceased to insult us, and made suitable provisions for indemnity. In a word, instead of a barbarous and brutal appeal to arms, Jefferson proposed to substitute commercial restrictions as a means of bringing offending nations to their senses.

It

The readers of this history are familiar with the reasons that led Jefferson to these opinions. Jefferson hated armies, navies, banking systems, internal taxes, wars, because he loved liberty, and he loved liberty because he thought he saw in over-government the root of most of the ills that afflict mankind. had been one of his cardinal objections to Hamilton that his funding and banking system had furnished the means of corrupting Congress, and he believed that the armies and navies that the Federalists were so eager to have had a double object in view: (1) To fasten a permanent debt upon the government, and thus perpetuate the means of corrupting Congress; and (2) to have ready at hand a force which the Federalists might employ in putting down all opposition to their measures. The same reason led him to believe that the general government ought not to impose internal taxes, and that it ought to confine itself to foreign "concerns." He was a States Rights Republican-and he was a States Rights Republican not only because he was inclined like most of the Americans of his time to look upon the state as

the country of its citizens, but also because he thought the liberties of the people would be less endangered, their interests better promoted by the states, than by the general government. He was opposed to war not only because of its waste of life and money, but because of its hostility to liberty. War would lead to armies and navies and a national debt and banking systems; war would make it necessary for the general government to exercise doubtful constitutional powers. War would tend to centralize and monarchize the government, and so assimilate this country to the rest of the countries of the world.

Two questions which Jefferson had to answer.

Jefferson was a States Rights Republican because he was a philanthropist and a Democrat, and his theory of commercial restrictions had the same origin. In other words, his philanthropy and Democracy were deeper and more fundamental than his States Rights Republicanism. There were therefore, two questions which Jefferson had to answer before he could prove that his Republicanism and his Democracy could dwell together in peace: (1.) Could the general government, in confining its domestic functions to the promotion of commerce and agriculture and the diffusion of knowledge, do all the things that the interests of the people demanded? Might it not find itself in a position in which it would have to choose between a a sacrifice of the theories of Republicanism, and a sacrifice of the imperative interests of the people? (2.) Could for

eign nations be forced to respect our rights by commercial restrictions? Would commercial restrictions serve as an effective substitute for war? If his theory failed to answer both of these questions, it would prove itself a mere dream like Plato's Republic or More's Utopia. The history of his two administrations will show what success it had in answering them.

QUESTIONS.

1. What is the difference between States Rights Republicanism and Democracy?

2. The text says that Jefferson's Democracy was deeper than his Republicanism; explain.

3. What was Jefferson's theory of the proper work of the government?

4. Compare the quotation made in the text from the letter written in 1821, with the Kentucky resolutions.

5. Do you think that Jefferson hoped to change the constitution, and, if so, how?

6. Compare him with Hamilton in this respect.

7. What was his theory of foreign "concerns?"

8. In what memorable instance in Washington's administration did the Republicans seek to put this theory into practice? 9. Show that Jefferson's opinions were rooted in his love of liberty.

10. State clearly the two questions which Jefferson had to answer before he could prove that his theories of government were practicable.

11. In 1802 Hamilton wrote to Rufus King as follows: "The prospects of our country are not brilliant. The mass is far from sound. At headquarters a most visionary theory presides. No army, no navy, no active commerce; national defense not by arms but by embargoes, prohibitions of trade, etc.; as little government as possible within; these are the pernicious dreams which as far and as fast as possible will be attempted to be realized." How far was Hamilton right in his estimate of Jefferson's theories?

A

CHAPTER XXIV.

GALLATIN'S FINANCIAL POLICY.

FEW days before his inauguration, Jefferson wrote a letter, in which he said that he hoped that the body of the nation, even that part which French excesses forced over to the Federal side, would join the Republicans, leaving only those who were pure monarchists, and who would be too few to form a sect. This hope exerted an important influence upon his policy during the eight years of his two administrations.

Jefferson's inaugural address.

Extreme partisans on both sides were dissatisfied with his inaugural. No wonder; for one of its objects seemed to be to prove that there was no difference between them. "Let us unite with one heart and one mind," he had said; "let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection, without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things. And let us reflect, that having banished from our land that religious intolerance under which mankind so long bled and suffered, we have yet gained little, if we countenance a political intolerance as despotic, as wicked, and capable of as bitter and bloody persecutions. During the throes and convulsions of the ancient world, during the agonizing spasms of infuriated man, seeking through blood and slaughter his long lost

liberty, it was not wonderful that the agitation of the billows should reach even this distant and peaceful shore; that this should be more felt and feared by some and less by others; that this should divide opinions as to measures of safety. But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle. We are all Republicans, we are all Federalists." Jefferson knew very well that this kind of talk was not what the extreme partisans of his own party expected. About the end of March he wrote, "I am sensible how far I should fall short of effecting all the reformation which reason would suggest and experience approve, were I free to do whatever I thought best; but when we reflect how difficult it is to move or inflect the great machine of society, how impossible to advance the notions of a whole people suddenly to ideal right, we see the wisdom of Solon's remark, that no more good must be attempted than the nation can bear, and all will be chiefly to reform the waste of public money, and thus drive away the vultures who prey upon it, and improve some little on old routines."

Whatever the motive of Jefferson's conduct, whether his conduct was due to the mere desire to gain popularity, or to the patriotic wish to bring over the great mass of the Federalists to what he conceived to be the right side, or whether, as is most probable, to a

mixture of both, it prevented him from at

tempting to give immediate effect to the

How far Jeffer

son attempted

to put in

practice the revolution of

1800.

"revolution of 1800," save in improving "some little on old