life, would after all find a few intelligent and liberal readers, who would appreciate their sincerity.

The author saw no disqualification for his task in his foreign birth, indeed his opinion leaned the other way; for he believed, that a person may be the critic of an adopted country without being an ingrate, and that he might be its admirer without being a sycophant. He apprehended, however, that having to write in an idiom, which he learned, since he left school, may make his style and composition look awkward to fastidious eyes; and he would humbly request his readers to judge him rather by the standard of how far a German may capacitate himself for writing in English, than by that of the proficiency of those, whose mother-tongue it is. He confesses to the weakness, if weakness it be, of a constant fond attachment to the literature of his native land, and that there he gained most of his knowledge of the political subjects he discusses. He is firm in his belief, that this has qualified him for the chief duty of his work -that of comparative research; and that his capacity to judge American politics has thereby been improved. He hopes he may with propriety state the fact in this connection, that the best publications on American affairs have been written by foreigners; and the reason can be no other, than their occupying a position and having a culture, that enabled them to see without bias, and to comprehend men and things without national prejudice.

While composing the several chapters, the author could not fail to become aware, that he was laying down conclusions, that differed from some of the views formerly expressed by him in reports and remarks to legislative bodies, or in addresses to the public, as well as in contributions to the press; and he can now only ask that the opinions and principles herein expressed be taken as his maturer conceptions, since they flowed from a much more comprehensive inquiry and treatment of the respective public questions, than had been the case in former publications. The negative reasoning, usual in the school (the democratic) to which the author was attached, had to be abandoned, and the positive mode of scientific ascertainment substituted. The oft-repeated question: Who shall be denied public authority? was changed to the true issue: Who shall be desig

nated to perform the respective public duties? Instead of a disjointed federal combination of antagonizing bodies-politic, he had now to use for his standard an entirety of states in union, that co-operated in a federal organism, in which every political function could and should have its appropriate organ at all times and for all public exigencies. Federalism, that had before been to him a lamentably lame and barren conjunction of quarrelling governments, became thus in his mind a possibility of a harmonious union of all political forces, each attending to that, for which it was superior. And fidelity to this, to him so fertile train of reasoning, and not consistency with now obsolete opinions, had therefore to be the standard in his work. It has served him well, and he can sincerely recommend it to the reader.

Thus asserting the right of logical free-thinking, brought the author to the perception, that whilst the United States had on paper an organic and constitutional, they had in practice an inorganic party government. And that led to the perception, that this perversion caused the inefficiency in the public service, which is the great American public disease; because it places public administration, from the President down to the township officers, with few exceptions, into the hands of mere politicians; whom to call statesmen, would be a falsehood. The author had to animadvert on these facts as they deserved, and has done so; which, of course, subjects him to the accusation, that the animus of his observations is disappointment in not having himself as successful a public career as he desired. Against this he can simply state the truth, that he has openly and unreservedly denounced these abuses for thirty years, and that he did it as soon as he became cognizant of this political wrong. And all this time a surrender of his convictions, or even a truce with the evil influences, would have secured him power and emoluments; but he adhered, and now adheres, to a remark frequently made

1 The two parties of the United States resemble the married couple, who spoiled each other's planting. The husband planted, unknown to his wife, salad; she, just as secretly, beans. Each weeded out in secret the other's planting, unconscious of the other's sowing. She treated the salad as weeds, he the beans, and between them no crop was raised. A similar spitework keeps America from having a good government.

b

by him that American party government, with its spoils-system, "is an illegitimate parasite, that is more destructive of legitimate public interests, and eats up more of the substance of the people, than any tyranny recorded in history."

He claims for his work the indulgence always accorded to a first effort towards a philosophic treatment of a given subject of thought. The Introduction will explain in what sense he asks these pages to be so regarded; and their contents will show, that he has attempted no more and no less than a comprehensive review of American politics from the standpoint of comparing them as they actually are, with what they ought to be. The reader was presumed to be acquainted with this ethical standard and to know, that the study of a nation's politics, by that criterion, involves an inquiry into the character of the formation of its rightful public will, and that objective comprehensiveness in aid thereof is all that should be attempted in a book composed for this purpose.1

Much has been written, spoken, and published on the several points touched upon by us; but as it has never been brought under the focus of a comprehensive course of political reasoning, it was and is a mass of public thinking that, for its barren sameness, baffled reflection, instead of aiding it. Hence we felt, and thought that others must feel, the want of a collective, yet contrastive elimination, so that we may find ourselves to rights in our political labyrinth. This, so far as we know, has never been attempted before. We undertook it first for our own instruction, and, finding it satisfactory, rewrote it for publication, believing it would be useful to the public mind. And we bespeak for it, that lenity which the pioneer people (for whom it is composed) has ever claimed as well as vouchsafed to the labors of those who work for them.

It was originally intended to publish in an appendix to this book, and as a sort of manual, the papers and documents named below; but the idea was abandoned on the advice of friends, who thought it would make the volume unnecessarily and in

1 It may be well to add here (perhaps a still better criterion) the remark of J. von Müller, the historian of Switzerland, that "the truest distinction between governments consists in the different ways, that have to be pursued to obtain power in them."

conveniently large; and that they could easily be procured by the respective reader. The several chapters being, however, written with the aforesaid presupposition, it may be well to advise the reader to procure the same and have them by him, during the perusal of these pages; for he will find them useful towards a thorough understanding of American politics.

Charles Dickens remarked once: "that had he lived in America, his works would never have been written, and if written, not appreciated." The accusation, that lurks in these words, has some truth in it, so far as it exposes the indifference of American readers to books written with a view to the correction of social and political malformations. But as our work was done with no expectation of profit or popularity, Dickens's remark has not discouraged us, and it is issued as a free contribution to what the writer felt to be a public want. If it corrects a single false public humor, it has not been written in vain. THE AUTHOR.

List of Papers and Documents above referred to.

An Outline Map of America.

Franklin's Union and Land Plan, 1754.

The Declaration of Independence.

The Articles of Confederation, 1783.

The Ordinance of 1787.

The Constitution of the United States, with Amendments.

Washington's Farewell Address, 1794.

The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, 1798.

Jefferson's Inaugural Address, 1801.

Jackson's Farewell Address, 1837.

Lincoln's Inaugural Address, 1861.

The Democratic and the Republican Platforms, 1876.

Samuel J. Tilden's and Rutherford B. Hayes's Letters of Acceptance of the respective nominations, also 1876.