trade, and that the opposition to the war of 1812 arose from the same fact-a fear of the destruction of the large interests engaged in com

inerce.

Another curiosity was the position of the Democratic party on the tariff. Says Benton in 1824: "Revenue the object, protection the incident, had been the rule of the earlier tariffs. Now that rule was sought to be reversed and to make protection the object of the law and revenue the incident."

And as strange as any of these curiosities, John Q. Adams, then a Democrat and the Secretary of State under James Monroc.*

It was in this year, 1825, that a successor to Mr. Monroe was to be elected. Four candidates, all Democrats, were in the field, viz: Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay, J. Q. Adams and Wm. H. Crawford. Mr. Calhoun had also been a candidate, but had withdrawn. The result, decided by the House of Representatives, was the election of Mr. Adams-Mr. Calhoun, Vice-President. Another result was the withdrawal of the pro

*"For although Mr. Adams had received confidence and office from Mr. Madison and Mr. Monroe, and had classed with the Democratic party during the fusion of parties in the 'era of good feeling,' yet he had previously been Federal; and in the re-establishment of old party lines, which began to take place after his election, his affinities and policy became those of his former party."-Benton's "Thirty Years," vol. i, p. 112.

tective tariff men from the ranks of the Democracy, and uniting with the remnant of Federalists, the formation of a new party, known for a short period as the National Republicans, afterwards as Whigs.

The Democratic party, which had hitherto been commonly known by the designation of "Republican," from this time was also more generally called by the name by which it is now universally designated.

It was about this period (1828) that J. C. Calhoun also began to break with the Democratic party, with which, according to his own statement, he had acted from not very praiseworthy motives. He thus explains his position to Commodore Stewart, in 1812.

"When we cease thus to control this nation, through a disjointed Democracy, or any material obstacle in that party shall tend to throw us out of that rule and control, we shall then resort to a dissolution of the Union."

In other words, as long as there was a chance for him to reach the Presidency (he was a candidate, as we have seen in 1824), he was wil!ing to remain in the party, but when that prospect failed, he had determined to leave the Democratic party and cause the secession of his State, "for the better conservation of our interests." Particular attention should be given to the words italicised, as throwing much light on the subsequent actions of Mr. Calhoun and his followers.

Having seemingly despaired of any further advancement in the Democratic party, he was ready to commence the new programme. Assuming that the tariff was unjust, and an infringement of the rights of the States, the United States law was declared null and void, and the duties forbidden to be paid after the 1st of February, 1832, by South Carolina. And should the United States attempt to enforce the collection of the revenue the State would secede from the Union.

Foiled by the vigorous position of General Jackson (as fully detailed in another chapter on secession in this work), Calhoun hereafter devoted himself (to use his own expression) to "forcing the issue" of slavery upon the country. All his political acts were concocted with especial regard to that end, and his efforts in support of that unholy cause have since ended in the ruin of those who espoused his principles.

The Presidential election of 1829 resulted in the election of General Jackson over J. Q. Adams by a large majority. The principal issues before the country were those which have since come to be known as distinctively democratic, as in favor of a plain and economic administration of the federal government, and a close construction of its powers. The principal questions which occupied the attention of the country during the administrations of Jackson and Van Buren were: 1st. The nullification scheme already alluded to, in the discussion of which occurred

the famous debate between Webster and Hayne. 2d. The Missouri compromise. 31. The controversy with the United States Bank, which terminated in the extinction of that institution. 4th. A modification of the tariff, which had been highly protective.

The Democratic position was that a tariff for revenue as the principle aim, and protection as the incident ought to be the rule.

5th. The admission of Texas. 6th. The establishment of the United States treasury.

Hitherto the surplus moneys had been loaned to banks or distributed to the States. The bills to establish the treasury were clear in principle and simple in detail the government to receive nothing but gold and silver for its revenues, and its own officers to keep it-the treasury being at the seat of government, with branches or subtreasuries at the principal points of collection and disbursement. This measure was vehemently assailed at the time of its adoption, but experience has demonstrated its utility and the wisdom of its originators.

Another measure, the abolition of the electoral college, advocated by General Jackson in every message, deserves mention. He thus alludes to it in his first: "I consider it one of the most urgent of my duties to bring to your attention the propriety of amending that part of the Constitution which relates to the election of PresiIdent and Vice-President." * * "To the

*

people belongs the right of electing their Chief Magistrate; it never was designed that their choice should, in any case, be defeated, either by the intervention of electoral colleges or by the agency confided under certain contingencies to the House of Representatives." * ** “I would, therefore, recommend such an amendment of the Constitution as may remove all intermediate agency in the election of President and Vice-President."

It is proper to state that the electoral college plan of electing our Chief Magistrate was opposed by Dr. Franklin, John Dickinson and many others in the convention that framed the constitution. And so early as 1824 a bill was submitted to Congress providing for the direct vote of the people, but failed to obtain the two-thirds vote necessary to carry the measure. Benton's remarks on this subject are replete with good sense. He says, Thirty Years in the Senate, vol. i, p. 122: "Hitherto all attempts to procure the desired amendment have failed, but the friends of that amendment should not despair. The great British parliamentary reform was only obtained after forty years of annual motions in Parliament. The selection of President has gone from the hands of the people-usurped by irresponsible and nearly self-constituted bodies in which the selection becomes the result of a juggle, conducted by a few adroit managers, who baffle the nomination until they are able