antagonism to the ideas which have been adopted in America, both concerning the origin of valid governments, and as to the mutual relations of states or nations. But few words are necessary to explain the system which exists among the nations of this continent, and to make it manifest that the two systems cannot exist together in the Western Hemisphere without creating a constant and irrepressible conflict of irreconcilable ideas. It is the fundamental idea that underlies our institutions, that the state is for the people, and not the people for the state; that the state is valued for its benefits to the people, rather than the people for the greatness it adds to the state; that the people are, in the order of nature, before the state, which they create by their will; and that, in like manner, the state is before the government, which it creates for itself, and may alter as it sees fit. Hence the stability of the government rests in the intelligence and patriotism of the people, and is promoted by whatever expands the minds and strengthens the principles of every class in society. The American Land system, by which the laborer owns the land he cultivates, and the system of Common Schools, by which every man learns to know his own rights and those of his neighbors, are natural products of the American Political System. The government neither stands on the grant of a superior, nor secures itself by keeping the people in subjection. For the sake of international comity and good neighborhood, it asks recognition, and courtesy, and justice from other nations, as its equals in'rank, but would peril everything rather than concede that it owes its validity to the grant of any potentate, or depends for its continuance upon the strength of any foreign power. It would carry us over too much ground, to show in detail how perfectly such a government must shape itself to the people, and how such a people would grow up to their government, until it would become impossible to mold either the people or the government into compliance with the opposite political system. It were more practicable to exterminate them from the face of the earth than to make them patient and submissive subjects of a government imposed upon them without their consent. It is more to our present purpose to consider the workings of this political system upon the international relations of independent states.

And the

first thought which suggests itself is, that each state, creating its own government for its own purposes, will necessarily have such a government as it prefers, such as it can create, can administer, and can support, and defend-and no other. And hence it does not admit the right of any combination of states to judge for another state what is best for it, or to dictate to another what it may or may not have for itself. The people living under such institutions would feel an interest in the progress of civil liberty everywhere, and would extend a cheering sympathy to any people who were struggling worthily to obtain the boon of self-government; but the nation itself would maintain a pure and impartial neutrality, unless some extreme case should arise in which our own safety was involved, or where the voice of outraged humanity might call for interposition. We would neither attempt to force such institutions upon the unwilling, nor purchase them for the incompetent. Whatever people would have them must win them; and if they would enjoy them, must keep them. In a word, the principle of non-intervention, which some statesmen are vainly endeavoring to graft upon the political system of Europe, is the natural growth of the American system, or rather, it is a necessary part of the life of society on this Western Continent-to be asserted on all occasions, and maintained at all hazards.

The European system in its full-blown development under the domination of the Holy Alliance, brought all Europe under its control. The final struggle for popular rights was made in Spain, where the Cortes adopted a constitution by their own authority, and compelled the king to accept its conditions. Ferdinand the VII appealed to the Holy Alliance to restore him to his legitimate prerogative, of governing by hereditary right, and making his people contented with such privileges as he saw fit to give them. It was a test case, and the absolutists were equal to the occasion. By their advice and consent, France sent an overwhelming army into Spain, in aid of the king, and totally broke the power of the popular party, leaving the throne as absolute as any in Europe. Europe was tranquilized, in the Vienna sense, and the Holy Alliance was at liberty to turn its attention to other continents for conquests to win, or dangers to repress.

But while these struggles had been going on in Europe, and partly in consequence of them, a great change had come over the political aspect of the New World. Our country no longer stood alone as the exponent of the American political system, and the object of absolutist jealousy. But this republic found itself at the head of a glorious sisterhood of free and independent states. The whole congeries of Spanish colonies on the continent of America, although in apparently the least possible preparation for the enjoyment of free institutions, had been first thrown loose from the control of the parent country by the breaking up of the regular government, through the ambition of Bonaparte; and having thus been compelled to assume the functions of self-government, they had severally, each by and for itself, successfully asserted and won their independence. The case is presented in a statesman-like way by Mr. Adams, when Secretary of State under President Monroe, in his letter of instructions to Mr. Anderson, the first American Minister to one of the Spanish Republics, dated May 27th, 1823 :

"The revolution of the Spanish Colonies was not caused by the oppression under which they had been held, however great it had been. Their independence was first forced upon them by the temporary subjugation of Spain herself to a foreign power. They were, by that event, cast upon themselves, and compelled to establish governments of their own. Spain, through all the vicissitudes of her own revolutions, has clung to the desperate hope of retaining, or of reclaiming them to her own control; and has waged, to the extent of her power, a disastrous war, to that extent. In the mind of every rational man, it has been for years apparent that Spain can never succeed to recover her dominion where it has been abjured; nor is it possible that she can long retain the small remnant of her authority yet acknowledged in some spots of the South American continent."

It was a great and glorious change for America, and was not unappreciated by the great men who were then at the head of affairs in this country. Mr. Webster said, in his celebrated oration at the laying of the corner stone of the Bunker Hill monument, June 17th, 1825, that "among the great events of the half century, we must respect certainly the revolution of South America; and we are not likely to overrate the importance of that revolution, either to the growth of the country itself, or to the rest of the world. When the battle of Bunker Hill was fought, the existence of South America was scarcely felt in the

civilized world. The thirteen little colonies of North America habitually called themselves the continent. Borne down by colonial subjugation, monopoly, and bigotry, those vast regions of the South were hardly visible above the horizon. But in our day there has been, as it were, a new creation. The southern hemisphere emerges from the sea. Its lofty mountains begin to lift themselves into the light of heaven; its broad and fertile plains stretch out in beauty to the eye of civilized man; and at the bidding of the voice of political liberty, the waters of darkness retire."

With the exception of the British Provinces north of us, the power of Europe was driven from the continent. From the lakes to Cape Horn, every foot of land had ceased to belong to the European political system, or to be in any way responsible for the "Balance of Power" in the Old World. Mexico, indeed, temporarily, and Brazil permanently, had adopted monarchical forms of government, but they were entirely American in interest. Fortunately, we had men in the. administration of our government, who possessed both the wisdom and the patriotism to comprehend the situation, and act as the occasion required. It was the golden period of our political history. The devotion to public interests which characterized the days of the revolution had not died out, for Jefferson, Madison, Marshall, Rufus King, and many of their compatriots, were still alive. The native sagacity of our early statesmen which had baffled the diplomatic skill of Europe, had been ripened by the practical experience of thirty years in the administration of affairs at home and abroad. Private interest had not become so large as to withdraw most of the ablest men from public service. Party spirit had not eaten out the keen sense of what becomes the honor of the country. And slvery had not yet extinguished patriotism in half the states of the Union. It was in the lull of party strife called "the era of good feelings.". It was the transition period between the patriotic inexperience of our infant government and the dominant selfishness of late years. Some of the men still in public life had participated in the cares of government when the indifference, if not contempt, of Europe for our insignificance was a shield to us against aggression. All of them had participated in the anxious

and critical period of the "second war of independence," by which we had at length gained the respectful consideration of the European governments. It was a crisis in our affairs, and we had men who could see its importance, and who knew how to meet it. And it is not too much to say, that if the policy which they adopted had been properly carried out by their successors, we should have been saved from many humiliations, as well as many political evils, which have been, or will be our portion.

The Holy Alliance had no thought of letting this whole continent slip out of their hands. The instant that they saw "the tranquility of Europe" restored by the suppression of popular freedom in Spain, their attention was turned towards this continent, with a determination first to resubjugate the colonies of Spain, and then to see what might be done towards breaking up the nest of dangerous principles in this country, and, if possible, put the United States into a situation where neither their doctrines nor their examples should again disturb the peace of Europe. The arrangements for this purpose were on the eve of being concluded, indeed were only waiting for the formal adhesion of England, when the sudden death of the British Secretary of Foreign Affairs laid the foundation for a change of policy in that government, which finally altered the whole course of events in Europe.

The Marquis of Londonderry, best known by the title of Lord Castlereagh, which he bore during the life of his father, died by his own hand, in a fit of insanity, caused, it was believed, by excessive care and labor in the session of parliament then just closed. He had managed the foreign affairs of England with consummate ability during all the latter years of the great continental conflict in Europe, which ended with the battle of Waterloo, and had taken a distinguished part in all the negotiations for the readjustment of boundaries and other relations of all the countries of Europe. He was in full sympathy with the reactionary governments, and as earnest as any in favor of such measures as were thought best calculated to protect legitimate and established dynasties against all future revolutions in favor

*In August, 1822.