"Let one branch of the legislature hold their places for life, or at least during good behavior. Let the executive, also, be for life."-Madison Papers 203. Beware of a third term!

Madison speaks of the attempt of Hamilton to abolish the state legislatures; "One gentleman (Col. Hamilton) in his animadversions on the plan of New Jersey, boldly and decisively contended for an abolition of the state governments."-Madison Papers, 220.

Unfortunately for liberty, there was a large party in the convention, that viewed everything pertaining to government through the medium of the British Constitution and British laws. The monarchists imagined that British statesmen were the wisest of men and the British government the very height of human perfection. They despised the power of the states and the people. They wanted a strong consolidated government which in time would abolish the state governments and end in monarchy. They were in favor of a limited monarchy. They hated democracy and the power of the people! The Jersey-men, at the beginning of the convention, were called Federalists, as they were in favor of a Federal confederation of the states. Those who opposed the Jersey plan were, then, called antiFederalists. During the progress of the convention, as the Jersey plan was defeated the Virginia plan was called a Federal government, which received some support from the monarchy-men. The monarchy-men, the better to hide their ultimate views and plans, assumed the name of Federalists, and those in favor of state rights were called anti-Federalists. The state-rights men now assumed an opposition to consolidation and monarchy. The Federalists were in favor of putting supreme power in the national government and reducing the states to counties!

Mr. Picking offered the following resolution enlarging the powers of Congress: "to negative all laws passed by the several states interfering, in the opinion of the legislature," for they spoke of the Congress by this name in the convention, "with the general interests and harmony of the Union, provided that two-thirds of the members of each house assent to the same." Mr. Rutledge said on this occasion:

"If nothing else, this alone would damn, and ought to damn, the constitution. Will any state ever agree to be bound hand and foot in this manner? It is worse than making mere corporations of them, whose by-laws would not be subject to this shackle." Madison papers 468. If the fathers of the constitution had lived until now, what would they think of the usurpation of the Congress and the Radical party? What would they think of the military despotism wielded over the south? What would they think of reducing states to mere military departments, to be governed by the whim of some military dictator, acting under the dictatorship of Congress! Did they dream that the whites of eleven states would be reduced to such an abject servitude, as to be under the dominion of the "Anglo African!! " Oh! shades of the mighty dead!! Hamilton speaks in favor of the abolishment of the states, thus: "By an abolition of the states, he meant that no boundary can be drawn between the national and state legislature; that the former must therefore have indefinite authority. If it were limited at all, the rivalship of the states would gradually subvert it. Even a corporation the extent of some of them, as Virginia, Massachusetts, &c., would be formidable. As states, he thought they ought to be abolished."-Madison Papers, 212.

Again, he says: "He acknowleged himself not to think favorably of Republican government; but addressed his remarks to those who did think favorably of it, in order to prevail on them to tone the government as high as possible."-Madison Papers, 244.

Gouverneur Morris said in a speech in the convention on uniting and consolidating the states, thus:

"This country must be united. If persuasion does not unite it, the sword will."-Madison Papers, 276. Was this prophecy? How faithfully the Radicals have followed in the footprints of the "blue-light Federalists." Indeed the present Radicals derive all their arguments from the Tories and Federalists. Yea, even from the Parliamentarians of England and the Red Republicans of France and from the theories of despotic governments ancient and modern! Again, this same Gouverneur Morris speaks further of the abolition of the states:

"State attachments, and state importance, have been the bane of this country. We cannot annihilate, but we may perhaps take out the teeth of the serpent."-Madison Papers, 277. Oh, shade of Federalism! how perseveringly the Radicals have, since their advent into power, worked to annihilate the state governments. Oh, admirable Stevens, Sumner, Butler and Wade, you have been apt disciples of the "blue-light Federalist"-you have faithfully and religiously followed the political teachings of John Adams and Alexander Hamilton. But though you did not completely succeed in establishing monarchy, you made a bold and vigorous attempt. Though you attempted the annihilation of the southern states, by your infamous re-construction bills, yet you did not establish monarchy; but you made vast and rapid strides ! Though you trampled the constitution under foot, yet you did not attain your darling object, the establishment of the British Constitution with Kings, Lords, and Commons on the ruins of the Constitution of Washington! It is true that though you failed to establish a monarchy, you succeeded in establishing a dictator!! Your power is gone!! The Federalists in the convention and through the states wanted to make wealth and education a test of qualification for citizenship and for holding office.

Mr. Mason moved: "That the committee of detail be instructed to receive a clause, requiring certain qualifications of landed property, and citizens of the United States, in members of the national legislature; and disqualifying persons having unsettled accounts with, or being indebted to, the United States from being members of the national legislature.'

"Col. Mason mentioned the parliamentary qualification adopted in the reign of Queen Anne, which, he said, had met with universal approbation."-Madison Papers, p. 370.

The following is from a speech of Gouverneur Morris on the qualification of voters.

"Give the votes to people who have no property, and they will sell them to the rich, who will be able to buy them. We should not confine our attention to the present moment. The time is not distant when this country will abound with mechanics and manufacturers, who will receive their bread from their employers? Will such men be the secure and faithful guardians of liberty? Will they be the impregnable barrier against aristocracy? He was as little duped by the association of the words 'taxation and representation.' The man who does not give his vote freely, is not represented.. It is the man who dictates the vote."-Madison Papers 386. Madison moved to strike out the word "landed" before the word "qualification." "Landed possessions were no certain evidence of real wealth, many enjoyed them to a great extent who were more in debt than they were worth. The unjust laws of the states had proceeded more from this class of men than any others."-Madison Papers, 371.

"The right of suffrage is certainly one of the fundamental articles of republican government, and ought not to be left to be regulated by the

legislature. The gradual abridgment of this right has been the mode in which aristrocacies have been built on the ruins of popular forms."Madison Papers, 387.

Mr. Pinckney said:

"It was prudent, when such great powers were to be trusted, to connect the tie of property with that of representation in securing a faithful administration. The legislature would have the fate of the nation put into their hands. The president would also have a very great influence on it. The judges would not only have important causes between citizens, but also where foreigners are concerned. They will even be the umpires between the United States and individual states, as well as between one state and another. Were he to fix the quantum of property which should be required, he should not think of less than one hundred thousand dollars for the president, half that sum for each of the judges, and in like proportion for the members of the National Legislature."-Madison Papers, 403.

Dr. Franklin said in reply, that he "expressed his dislike to everything that tended to debase the spirit of the common people. If honesty was often the companion of wealth, and if poverty was exposed to peculiar temptations, it was not less true that the possession of property increased the desire of more property. Some of the greatest rogues he was ever acquainted with were the rich rogues."-Madison Papers, 403.

The Radicals of Massachusetts and Connecticut have followed faithfully the example of their Federal ancestors, by excluding all from the ballot-box, who cannot read and write the English language. The radicals of Rhode Island have gone still further by making property a qualification for citizenship. We have many Radicals in other states who are wishing for an opportunity to make education and property a qualification for citizenship in all the states. The Federalists wanted to exclude foreigners from participation in the government. They wanted Americans to rule America-to reduce the foreigners to vile servitude-mere hewers of wood and drawers of water. Gouverneur Morris moved to insert fourteen instead of four years' citizenship, as a qualification for senators; urging the danger of admitting strangers into our public councils."-Madison Papers, 398.

Butler said that he "was decidedly opposed to the admission of foreigners without a long residence in the country. They bring with them, not only attachments to other countries, but ideas of government so distinct from ours, that in every point of view they are dangerous." "He mentioned the great strictness observed in Great Britain on this subject.”—Madison Papers, 399.

Gouverneur Morris again said: "Run over the privileges which emigrants would enjoy among us, though they should be deprived of being eligible to the great offices of government; observing that they exceeded the privileges allowed to foreigners in any part of the world; and that as every society, from a great nation down to a club, had the right of declaring the conditions on which new members should be admitted, there could be no room for complaint. As to those philosophical gentlemen, those citizens of the world, as they call themselves, he owned, he did not wish to see any of them in our public councils. "He would not trust them. The men who can shake off their attachment to their own country can never love any other." "Admit a Frenchman into your Senate, and he will study to increase the commerce of France."-Madison Papers, 400.

Mr. Williamson said:

"He wished this country to acquire, as fast as possible, national habits. Wealthy emigrants do more harm, by their luxurious example, than good by the money they bring with them."-Madison Papers, 411.

Mr. Madison said:

"He wished to invite foreigners of merit and republican principles among us. America was indebted to emigrants for her settlement and prosperity. That part of America which has encouraged them most had advanced most rapidly in population, agriculture, and the arts. "Instances were rare of a foreigner being elected by the people within any short space after his coming among us. If bribery was to be practised by foreign powers, it would not be attempted among the electors, but among the elected, and among natives having full confidence of the people, not among strangers, who would be regarded with a jealous eye."-Madison Papers, 412. Franklin said:

"We found in the course of the revolution that many strangers served us faithfully, and that many natives took part against their country. When foreigners, often looking about for some other country in which they can obtain more happiness, give a preference to ours, it is a proof of attachment which ought to excite our confidence and affection."-Madison papers 399. Thus, we see that the Federalists showed their hostility to foreigners. Native Americans and Know-Nothings have religiously followed in the footpaths of the Tories and Federalists. Oh, what ingratitude to foreigners, who had shed their blood in the cause of American independence! It appears that all parties who have opposed the democratic party, were the enemies of foreigners. Know-Nothing principles can be traced back to the very convention, that framed the constitution. Yea, before the bodies of those patriotic foreigners who died in the cause of American freedom, had moldered into clay! What ingratitude--"No Irish need apply." This vile attempt of the monarchy-men to establish a monarchy, an aristocracy, or a consolidation of the states, on the ruins of the states and American liberty, alarmed the friends of state-rights and popular government both in the convention and throughout the country. Some delegates left the convention and went home and never returned, for they claimed that the states had sent them to amend the Federal constitution, and not to form a national government. That the states would never send delegates to the convention, if they thought that the deliberations of the convention would turn on the consolidation of the states or a national government. The Federalists and the friends of a strong government were in favor of giving congress the power to "emit bills of credit," to abolish slavery; to incorporate banks; to pass laws for the encouragement of commerce, manufactures and agriculture, they wanted to clothe the government with discretionary powers! It is from this source that Federalists, Know-Nothings, Republicans and Radicals have derived their principles, prejudices and bigotry.' The state rightsmen did not want to trust the government with the purse and the sword, or with discretionary power of taxation, and with the power of raising men without any limitation. They argued that if the Federal government were invested with discretionary power over the resources of the states, the people would be ground between the upper and nether millstone; that there would be nothing left to support the state governments. That the Federal govern

ment would centralize the power of the country, which, in time, would annihilate the state governments; and end in the establishment of a military government or a monarchy! It appears from Madison Papers, and Elliott's debates, that the southern people were jealous of their rights, particularly, on the tariff and slavery questions; that they would never have entered into a union, if they thought that either of these rights would be invaded! Indeed, the constitution would never have been formed or adopted, only for the conciliatory and compromising spirit of the Fathers and Founders of the con

stitution and the Union.-Greeley's Amer. Conflict, vol. 1, p. 46. They yielded their own private and public views for the public good! From the history of the country, the debates and journals of the convention, and the opinions of the "Fathers," we find that the Federal Union is the creature of the states, deriving its power and existence therefrom. That all powers not granted to the Federal government is rescrved to the states. Immediately after the adoption of the constitution, the advocates of a strong government, the Federalists, sought by implication and inference to give the Federal government the very same powers they failed to ingraft on the constitution, in the convention. They claimed to give to the constitution a latitudinous construction, adding inference upon inference from "earth to heaven, like Jacob's ladder."

We quote the following from Thomas Jefferson on the objects and plans of the Federalists, in construing the government into a monarchy:

"I have stated the above, that the original objects of the Federalists were, 1st, to warp our government more to the form and principles of monarchy, and, 2d, to weaken the barriers of the state government as co-ordinate powers. In the first they have been so completely foiled by the universal spirit of the nation, that they have abandoned the enterprise, shrunk from the odium of their appellation, taken to themselves a participation of ours, and under the Pseudo-Republican mask, are now aiming at the second object, and strengthened by unsuspecting or apostate recruits from our ranks, are advancing fast towards an ascendency."-Jefferson's Works, vol. 7, p. 293. Well, if the Federalists did not gain an ascendency, in the time of Jefferson, their followers, under false colors of a Republican name, used under false pretence to get into power, like a pirate, hoisted the black flag of Federalism at their mast head, and by the aid of military necessity, they have committed the most glaring usurpations and wielded a military despotism which Jefferson never dreamt of. If they did not establish a monarchy in name they wielded a military despotism and trampled the constitution of the United States, and the constitutions and laws of several States under foot.

Jefferson further speaks of the opinions and principles of the Federalists:

Federalism, stripped as it now nearly is, of its landed and laboring support, is monarchism, Anglicism; and whenever our own dissensions shall let them in upon us, the last ray of free government closes on the horizon of the world."

Oh, how prophetic of the despotism of the so-called Republican party, since the election of Lincoln! for the Republican party is the faithful successor of the Federalist. It has made a vast and rapid stride towards monarchy.

Again, Jefferson says:

"Among that section of our citizens called Federalists, there are shades of opinion. Distinguished between the leaders and the people who compose it, the leaders consider the English Constitution as a model of perfection, some with a correction of its views, others, with all its corruptions and abuses. This last was Alexander Hamilton's opinion."-Jefferson's Works, vol. 6, p. 95.

This

"This government they wished to have established here, and only complied and held part, at first, to the present constitution, as a stepping-stone to the final establishment of the final model. party has therefore always clung to England as their prototype, and great auxiliary in promoting and effecting this change."-Jefferson's Works, vol. 6, p. 95.