ing its enemy at home. To this end were passed an alien, a sedition and a naturalization law.
The alien law empowered the President to send out of the country any person reasonably suspected of engaging in secret machinations against the government. It was opposed because it lodged with the executive too much power, and was liable to great abuse.
The sedition law authorized the punishment, by fine and imprisonment, of persons who should unlawfully oppose or stir up sedition against the Federal government or its officials. The Republicans resented the law, because it restricted the liberty of speech and of the press.
The naturalization law, with other requirements, provided that an alien must reside in the United States fourteen years before he could become a citizen. This law was repugnant to the Republicans, since if retarded immigration, allowed in the country too many persons owing no allegiance to the government, and assailed the idea that the rights of America are the rights of human nature.
The Kentucky and Virginia resolutions were occasioned by the alien and sedition laws. Their importance lies in the fact that with them the doctrine of nullification originated. Jefferson was the author of the former and Madison of the latter. The resolutions were protests against the measures of Congress, which, being unable to resist, the Republicans made through state legislatures. But Virginia did not stop with resolutions; it prepared to use force in resenting the encroachments of the Federal government, and for this purpose an armory was erected at Richmond.
Rupture of the cabinet.—When the Sixth Congress convened, the Federal gain had been such as to give the administration a majority in the House, but the gain was the result of external politics—the war with France—and its value could not be lasting. The supremacy of the Federal party was drawing to a close. A disaffection in its ranks had been growing for some time, when, in May, 1800, it occasioned a rupture of the cabinet. This served to weaken the efforts of the Federalists at
The election of 1800.—The Federal candidates for President and Vice-President were John Adams and C. C. Pinckney. Mr. Adams’ Federal opponents endeavored to secure the first position for Mr. Pinckney. Hamilton wrote a pamphlet setting forth the defects of Mr. Adams, and giving the “superior fitness of Mr. Pinckney for the position of Chief Magistrate.” There was no such division among the opposition. In 1800, a congressional convention, composed of Republicans, was held in Philadelphia. Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr were nominated as candidates for the executive offices. A platform of principles was promulgated. [See D. and Pl.] An earnest and spirited campaign followed. Of the electors chosen, seventy-three were Republicans, and sixty-five Federalists. By the constitution at that time, each elector voted for two persons; he who received the greatest number of votes was to be President, and he who received the next greatest was to be Vice-President. The Republicans voted so that Jefferson and Burr received each seventy-three votes, which threw the election into the House. Thomas Jefferson was chosen on the thirty-sixth ballot. During the excitement preceding the election of Jefferson the country was in peril. The Federalists thought of casting the election on the Senate, if the states could make no choice. To this the Republicans threatened forcible resistance. The efforts of the Federals in the House to defeat the election of Jefferson by forming a coalition with the friends of Burr, caused a great number to desert the Federal ranks and join the Republicans.
Democrats.—“Democratic-Republican,” abbreviated to the second word, continued to be the official name of the party of Jefferson. The unpopularity of Adams’ administration was transferred to the Federal party, and the name “Democrat,” by which this organization stigmatized the minority, was adopted by a good portion of them, and became a synonym for the word Republican.
Downfall of Federalism.—The election of 1800 broke the sceptre of Federal power. The defeated factions charged each other with causing the downfall of the Federal party. But for this political prostration there were other causes. The party maintained its supremacy from the first more through superior organization and skillful leaders than through the aid of a numerical majority; it organized a government, “novel in its character, and well calculated to create diversity of opinion relative to the details of its administration;” it adhered to the policy of non-interference with the affairs of foreign nations, a policy which, as regards England and France, was not approved by large numbers of the people; it increased the expenditures of the government to meet the rapid expansion and growing demand of the country, and this increase met with opposition, the causes not being sought. The Federal party did not fall without honor. “To it belongs the proud distinction of having laid the foundation of the government structure, and of having reared the machinery for its operation. The principles of the party survived its existence; they were denounced by the opposition, but were generally re-established and maintained by the party that succeeded to power.”
Jefferson’s Administration.
Republican principles.—Thomas Jefferson was inaugurated President, at Washington City, March 4th, 1801. His policy was set forth in his inaugural address, which showed that he desired to effect a unity of action between the parties. What he deemed the essential principles of our government was stated in the following words: “Equal and exact justice to all men of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations—entangling alliances with none; the support of the state governments in all their rights, as the most competent administration for our domestic concerns, and the surest bulwark against anti-republican tendencies; the preservation of the general government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet-anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the people; a mild and safe corrective of abuses, which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies
