*

years ago commenced by Martin Van Buren, and carried on to its consummation. Time has yet to show whether or not the days of its decline have come, although the wand of that original magician who laid its foundations may be broken.

A careful examination of the history of our country will present to the mind three distinct periods. The first may be said to embrace our heroic age. From this, more than from any other source, do we derive our peculiar nationality. His tory would seem to teach, that some such period is essential to every national existence. It must have a beginning, in some of its features, akin to the ideal and the romantic, presenting a treasure of glorious reminiscences to feed the national life in subsequent ages, when there is a necessary decay of that high excitement in which it had its origin-to infuse some degree of purity when selfishness and corruption come flooding in, and to keep alive the flame of patriotism by that reverence for history and ances tral glory, of which, (such has been the good provision of God,) even the most selfish and self-lauding ages cannot wholly divest themselves. So important is such a commencement to the national life, that there might almost be justified a resort to mythical fictions, if reality had failed to furnish it.

Such an age seldom if ever comes more than once to any people. There may be real progress after it, although to those whose minds are filled with the glorious original it may seem to be a degeneracy. There may be less of the heroic, of the self-sacrificing, of trust in Divinity. There may be fewer of those who overtop their fellow-men, and who, we cannot help feeling, were raised up for special times and special purposes, and yet there may be a true advance in those great interests for which the State is designed and organized.

There may be also a real degeneracy, and one of its surest signs will be, when this heroic period is laid away in history and not brought forward as a constant and ever present example-when a subsequent age, and subsequent men, who have more of the demagogue, are suffered to intervene and become the watchwords

of party, whilst their self-sacrificing predecessors are consigned to comparative oblivion. In other words, the nation may most surely be regarded as degenerating, when Jefferson and Jackson, whatever may have been their virtues or their vices, are the theme of resolutions in almost every political party meeting, and are toasted on almost every political festival, whilst Washington is seldom mentioned, his example seldom referred to, and his name seldom invoked as the popular symbol, either of the radical party, or of those who assume to be their more conservative opponents.

But not to anticipate the course of our subsequent remarks-we may say, that we also have had our heroic age. We are all, as yet, familiar with it. Neither the men nor the time need be more particularly specified. It may be regarded as ending with the administration of Washington. The second marked period in our history may be reckoned from the commencement of Jefferson's administration to the close of Monroe's in 1824. During this time the nation had doubtless advanced, not only in numbers but in character. There had, on the whole, been progress, although in the midst of many most appalling difficulties, and attended by occasiona! partial retrogra dations. Parties had arisen and contended fiercely. One assumed to be more democratic than the other, and its leaders were more inclined to play the demagogue for the popular favor; the other was charged, and it may have been with some justice, of being too distrustful of popular institutions. The main subjects of dispute, however, arose out of oppos ing views respecting our foreign policy, during the most critical period of the European wars. The acrimony of the contest was finally increased by the second war, in which we became involved with the parent nation. It is not our intention to justify or condemn the foreign or domestic policy of either of these parties. It is sufficient for our present purpose to affirm that, although one assumed the more popular name of Republicans, and the other was sometimes charged with aristocratic tendencies, the violent strife, which lasted for many years, did not, in the main, or in any considerable degree,

would not wholly subvert all the foundations of political morality. It involves a breach of trust of the very highest and most heinous degree. It is a most unrighteous prostitution of national funds, and national offices, and national interests, to the lowest and most selfish purposes. The President, or Governor, who acts upon it, is guilty of a flagrant violation of a most solemn oath. In the presence of the Ever-living God he lifts his hand and swears-faithfully and conscientiously to execute the laws. He is guilty of a most blasphemous mockery, or he must be supposed to make this promise according to the fair intent of the laws and executive powers to which it has reference. Now, no man will for a moment maintain, that the original framers of the Constitution, or the nation that ratified it, ever thought of sanctioning the doctrine, that the public offices were intended to reward political friends and punish political enemies.

It is indeed most wonderful, that the public mind could have ever, to any considerable degree, been blinded to the enormity of this practice. We see, clearly enough, the wickedness of proceedings which certainly are involved in far less criminality. An employer turns away his workmen because they do not vote as he wishes. It is at once condemned and justly condemned. It is a negative breach of trust. No such thing was expressed or implied in the contract. A bank, or some other corporation, is said to have hired editors to lend their columns for the advancement of its private interests. Whether the charge be true or false, the public indignation is aroused. It is a breach of trust. The conductors of the press are rightly supposed to be under an implied contract with the community, to act from no other motives than a true regard to the public good. They are not like the lawyer, whose known profession it is to advocate private interests. There is, however, in these latter cases, a palliating feature which cannot, in any way, be brought in defence of the spoil doctrine." The employer may be said to exercise free control over his own property. The bank subsidizes editors with its own money. In the other case, however, it is not their own, but the nations' money, and the nations' offices, and the nations' interests, which these casuistical embezzlers most basely use to advance their own personal schemes, or, in other words, to reward those who vote

66

for them, and to punish those who refuse. In this view of the matter, there is a meanness in the transaction, which, if possible, exceeds its guilt. It is a most wicked fraud, an enormous breach of trust, and that, too, by those to whom the most sacred deposit has been committed, and in whom the very highest confidence may be regarded as having been reposed. We prefer thus considering it as a wicked breach of trust, rather than as proscriptive injustice-the view that is often taken. The principle, fully carried out, must exclude from responsible offices, not only the best men of the community, but also of the very party in which it is exercised-thus, by gathering to its support all the vile, ever deepening and perpetuating its own moral turpitude.

No doubt it may, in this manner, be rightly regarded as a gross act of injustice, not only towards a portion, but also the most virtuous portion of the State. This view, however, is apt to bring in the false idea of abstract right to the possession of office on the part of any, and, when wrongly started, seems to favor the demagogue cry of " rotation." The other ground is the one on which the doctrine and practice must meet the condemnation of all pure minds. It is, we repeat it, nothing more nor less than a feloneous breach of trust in regard to one of the most sacred of all deposits.

If we are not mistaken, credit is claimed for Mr. Van Buren for having, when Governor of this State, recommended a law to preserve the purity of elections, to punish bribery, treating for votes, &c. But what a petty business is this, to affect so much severity against the bribe of a glass of rum, which one poor wretch offers to another, neither of whom have any true idea of the value of the elective franchise! The convict under this law might say, too, that the rum was bought with his own money; and how does its moral turpitude dwindle in comparisca with that immense scheme of bribery, that wholesale buying up of editors and others, which has so long been carried on, not with the briber's own means, but with the highest property of the nation, committed, as a most sacred deposit, to the care of those who thus basely squander it for the vilest of purposes. To punish their enemies and reward their friends! as though it were not a profanation of the holy name of friendship, to use it in connection with such men and such measures.

In reference, too, to such a system of corruption as has been introduced and practiced by this school for so many years, what a farce does the elective franchise become. The physical tyranny. endured by the Russian serf is not so degrading, as that most abject mental vassalage into which men are brought by that doctrine of "regular nominations and the usages of the party," which, next to the spoils principle, has been the chief glory of Mr. Van Buren's scheme. The people are most assiduously told, that they are the only fountain of all power. With an abjectness only equaled by its hollow hypocrisy, the chief repeats the declaration, that he covets no higher honor than

to be their most humble and obedient servant. The poor party dupes are made to believe that they really are freemen, because they have the glorious privilege of depositing a piece of paper in a ballotbox. They are wheedled with the cry of Democracy, and told of the great power they have in dictating measures, whilst everything has been prepared for them in that manufactory of public sentiment which some of their leaders have been so skillful in conducting. They are flattered with the idea, that from their primary assemblies really comes the influence by which candidates are nominated. How innocently do they assemble in their town caucuses, to send their delegates to county and State conventions, utterly unconscious that in all this they are the merest automata moved by the wire-pullers behind the scenes, and that, whilst they are performing their puppet movements, those who are initiated into the greater mysteries are gravely inquiring of each other, "Whom shall we send to the convention? What man ought we to offer to the caucus, and through them to the electors ?"

But we must bring these remarks to a close. Such has been the system first introduced into this country by Martin Van Buren and his school. The national morality has suffered from it a deterioration from which it may not recover for many years. It has introduced a lax political conscience into all departments of our government. War, pestilence, and famine, combined, could not have produced so deadly an injury. We refer now to the national character and the national morals. The enormous evils it has produced in regard to the currency and business of the country, and which came from the blundering afterthoughts of this reckless clique, would form a proper subject of examination by itself.

As we have said,-to all who have carefully watched the movements of this school for many years past, these disclosures were entirely unnecessary. Its utter want of all principle, was as well known before as since. It needed no such villainy as Mackenzie has practiced, to convince the intelligent, that those who had so long avowed and acted upon the spoils doctrine, must be as supremely selfish, heartless, and unprincipled, as any private correspondence of theirs, even in its worst aspects, could possibly be expected to disclose. If it is of any service, it will chiefly be in showing the democracy, especially some sections of the party, what shameful dupes they have been for so many years, and in teaching them what confidence to repose in any who hereafter may attempt to play the demagogue in the same or a similar style.

It may, perhaps, be a long time before the deep wound which this most corrupt system has inflicted on the country can be cured. We do not believe that the remedy can be found in any particular course of measures. These may relieve evils affecting what may be styled the external prosperity of a nation, but the moral injury we have received lies beyond their reach. "Measures not Men," has ever been the cry of the most heartless demagogues. The most unprincipled ever profess to be in favor of the best of measures. Every scoundrel is ever in favor of what is good and useful in the abstract. The maxim may be right enough in itself, but we have conceived a dislike, and perhaps a prejudice against it, from the fact, that it has been so often used by the worst of men, in support of those after-thoughts and popular hobbies, which were invented only to give countenance to their own course of selfishness and corruption. We are not afraid, at present, to reverse this maxim, and to advance the seeming paradox, that we now need the right kind of men, more than any kind of measures that can be devised. Give us such, and we will trust them for their measures. We want the healing, moral influence, which would come over the country, from there once being firmly placed at the head of affairs statesmen in all respects the opposite of Van Buren, and Polk, and Marcy, and that whole school which has for so long a time demoralized and degraded our nation. Let the great object be to elevate such to power. A cabinet, together with legislative bodies of kindred character, would naturally re