son, while his knowledge of their capacities and dispositions is confessedly too scanty to warrant any such confidence. Still less can he be supposed to act generally from his own convictions; for many of the political questions on which he puts forth such influence as belongs to him, are beyond his reach. Some of the subjects now agitated between the contending parties in this country, are in themselves difficult of investigation, presenting exceed ingly intricate questions, questions indeed which no man is competent to settle who has not given time and attention to them, and made them in some measure a part of his business. Almost every individual will confess himself perplexed by them. The tendencies of banking systems, the fluctuations of currency, the exact ultimate operation of free trade or a protective policy these are really profound subjects, and we would be all ready to say, if questioned individually, that we need information and reflection before we can speak positively on many of the questions they involve; we have more to learn than to teach upon them. Yet what confidence, what vehemence, do we witness among all sorts of men, on the one side and on the other of these same questions? The men who would look about modestly for advice, if there were the same perplexity in their personal affairs, are as noisy declaimers as any others on our national embarrassments. Every newspaper writer presumes to discourse of them as readily as if the whole domain of political economy were mapped out under his feet, and he could correct every blunder of every administration. Surely there is some evil in all this. It is not right that the zeal of a partisan should so far outrun the judgment of the man. Of course we do not mean that we ought not to entertain any opinion on questions of national policy, until we are wise enough to

have a place in the cabinet; but we do mean that it is a serious calamity to any country that its great interests should be swayed chiefly by the impulses of any party, and that they who are least competent to understand those interests should give heat and bulk, where they can give nothing more, to the faction that may happen to control those interests. It is to be lamented that men who individually, to say the least, might do no harm, should band themselves together and plunge beyond their depth into those troubled waters which they can not purify nor calm.

As an effect still worse, it corrupts moral habits. We have all observed that men will do as partisans what they would be ashamed to do as men. The trickery of politicians and the profligacy of party presses, are among the commonest subjects of complaint on every hand. The saying, 'all is fair in politics,' is understood to be a common principle with the ac tors in them. The very name of politics has an ill odor with upright men generally. Every diligent observer of these times learns to put very little confidence, on subjects of this nature, in the candor of men, whose honesty in other things he would not think of distrusting. An editor who does not misrepresent nor discolor facts, for or against any party, is either reck. oned a singular man, or reviled by every party. In political movements, whether on a great or small scale, what deceptions, what perversions of facts, what misconstruction of motives, what lies, what virulent contentions and reproaches, what base intrigues, what miserable counterfeits of patriotism! And these things are witnessed, not in those persons who quietly entertain and modestly express their own opinions on proper occasions, but in such as are pledged to a party, and always keep pace with its

march, never stepping out of its rank and file unless on a new maneuver. Now in all the prejudice, malignity, deceit and heartlessness, thus fostered, we need not say there is incalculable evil. Not to speak of the time thus wasted, and the energy thus diverted from more salutary pursuits, there is a wear and tear of moral feeling, a corruption of popular sentiment, which are more to be lamented than the heaviest external calamities. The worst public embarrassment is the too just suspicion that possesses the public mind; the bankruptcy that is most to be dreaded, is that of moral worth in the conflict of servile factions.

The same spirit, as none can fail to see, does injustice to public men. The moral corruption that has just been spoken of, shows itself in the spirit of censoriousness and defama tion that pervades the political world, as plainly as in any other fact. Par tisans will say that of each other, which they would neither desire nor dare to say in private life. They will believe and circulate reports which have no foundation out of the newspaper in which they happen to appear, without a moment's inquiry or a charitable doubt. For political purposes, the darts of calumny are made to pierce the shelter of domes tic life. The most eminent public services are disparaged; personal worth is discredited; an antagonist is not allowed to cherish the most common sentiments of patriotism; the richest gifts and acquisitions are virtually denied all merit. Too fearful a tax is imposed upon every man who would serve his country in her distinguished offices, for he must consent to be traduced as if he were her worst enemy. For examples sufficiently remote, and not now exposed to misconstruction,-examples in which readers of every party may now feel the recoil of such abuse,

let it be remembered that in the contest by which one of our most popu⚫

lar presidents came into office, and in the early part of his administration, besides the common assaults which he might have expected, the retirement of his family was invaded by the lowest ribaldry, and the reputed piety of his wife was made a mark for public jesting, and this too by cherished organs of the party that boasted of their superior regard to truth and decency. And on the other hand, one of the most promi nent members of the government, under a subsequent administration, has found it necessary to defend himself by oath against the groundless imputation of gross immorality. Still more common is the injustice done to talent and patriotic worth in our public men of all parties. Familiar as we are with the power of prejudice and partiality in blinding the judgments of mankind, it is yet really surprising to see how incapable the great mass of one party are of appreciating the most splendid abil ities and most successful efforts among their opponents. On one side of the field of strife, you are not suffered to believe there is a re ally great or honest man on the oth er. er. In judging of opposite men and measures, no allowance is made for human imperfection, nor for provi dential contingencies. Really it is impossible for us to know the worth of public men, unless we discard the testimony both of their adherents and antagonists, and suffer them to represent themselves to us as if we were foreign observers, uncommit. ted and unbiased. It can not be doubted that the coarse abuse now heaped upon them by the press and by political declaimers, is owing in a great measure to the spirit of par ty, without which there would hardly be a motive for such systematic injustice, and few individuals, as such, would take the responsibility of inflicting it. And plainly it is a great evil, one that is complained of indeed in all quarters. There is always evil in doing injustice, whether

land, without what is called "mixing them with politics," and the danger arising from such a real or supposed connection. Hence there springs a formidable obstacle in the way of enacting and of enforcing local regulations against demoralizing amusements, or the sale of intoxicating liquors. In such an enterprise we may have the individual sentiments of the majority of the community on our side, and go on auspiciously for a while. But soon we are cautioned against any politi cal bearing that may be supposed to lie in our movements, and at certain seasons of the year it is sug. gested that on that account another time would be more favorable; and all this too while politics have_not once come into our thoughts. Presently one and another of those whom we have reckoned friends of such measures, become inactive and reserved. A spell is on them from some quarter. The explanation is, they are afraid that the responsibility of the movement will come upon the party to which they belong, that their opponents will take advantage of it to secure the votes of those few persons whose practices or profits will be affected by our success, and that thus the political balance will be turned against them. More than once in this way, men who would have enforced some of the most salutary laws, have had their energies paralyzed, seeing themselves deserted in a crisis by the very people on whose coöperation they had relied, but whose partisanship prevailed against more generous philanthropic impulses. The thing is understood in every town where such efforts have been made in vain. In cases where the majority of both the opposing parties, if individually consulted, would be favorable to a proposed reform, it is yet found that they are so far arrayed against each other, as to make both afraid to act upon it with candor and independence, lest either should lose some

thing in numbers or position at their next contest. This is not the least evil resulting from party spirit, as it has prevailed sometimes within our observation. There are other hin drances, too many and too great, in the way of every benevolent re formation, without such embarrassments as this. A man's individual responsibility is more than he is generally willing to meet for the sake of doing good, without an additional responsibility for any body of men whatever. If it were not for the sinister influence of partisanship, there would be no such danger as is apprehended of "mixing politics" with every moral reformation that is carried on by the aid of law, and the dreaded interference, if it should exist, instead of being hurtful, would be itself a salutary result. But against this influence the most wholesome laws can not be enacted in behalf of public morals, or if enacted, can not be carried into effect.

Such are some of the mischievous tendencies that show themselves in the working of party spirit in our times and under our peculiar insti tutions. The evil is acknowledged to be such, and perhaps lamented, by many of the very people who cher ish it most warmly. It appears to them as pernicious as to us, yet they virtually set it down as a disease of the body politic under free institu tions, incurable, and therefore to be" borne as it best may be. "Of what use is it," they ask themselves, "to expatiate on what is a necessary fault of society?" Now it is true that while men continue as they are, in such a country as ours, there will be too much partisanship in all polit. ical affairs; but is that a reason why any should go on indulging it in themselves, and countenancing it in others? As much may be said of almost every public vice, and of all sin; yet we would not leave it to do continued and increasing mischief. We properly endeavor to restrain and reduce an evil, if we can not expect

at once to extirpate it. And by reflection and suitable vigilance, we may guard ourselves against the influence of party spirit, if we can not banish it from the whole community. The contrary impression, that the evil is irremediable, and therefore to be let alone, has done much to perpetuate and extend it.

And besides the supposed necessity of party spirit, the notion has come to prevail, that party organization is also necessary, and that every man must necessarily submit himself to it, or else be content either to incur the ill will, by thwart ing the schemes, of all factions, or to throw away his just influence over the affairs of his country. But if we would rid ourselves of the evils of partisanship, such views must be discarded. By such views they are made worse and worse.

Of course there should be, and must be, to some extent, concert and mutual understanding among patriotic men for specific purposes; but there is something different from this, as every body sees, in the spirit and the machinery now at work on every side. As citizens, we can not be insulated; but it is not necessary nor expedient for us to lose our political individuality, and become incorporated wholly with a party. It is possible and desirable for us to be freemen, not partisans, in the proper sense of those terms. That individ ual independence is not a mere figment, nor a virtue impracticable in common life, there are examples enough to show. There was a time when the doctrine that now prevails, of subserviency to organization, had no countenance from the more intelligent class of citizens,-when the word caucus was an abomination, as well as an Americanism,-till they unhappily concluded that they must of course employ the same weapons by which they were assailed. The doctrine may yet be repudiated. And there are examples at this day, of men who intelligently and

honestly refuse to enroll themselves among the servile followers of any man or set of men, who obey their own convictions and keep their own counsel, in exercising their political privileges. Nor are they liable to any just reproach for taking such a position. It is always the fashion among partisans of every sort, to represent those who call themselves "no party men,' as time-servers and pretenders, "fence-men," and the like; but such judgments, pronounced by men who would rule, on those who will not be ruled, may be safely disregarded. There is a paragraph from Dean Swift, which goes the rounds of the press now and then, to this effect, that every man must in fact belong to some party, and if he claims to be independent of all, he has some sinister ends to answer by it; but the saying is a mere assumption. Unprincipled men may renounce all existing parties, sometimes to form a new one, sometimes to reserve themselves for the most successful; but when our position is mistaken for theirs, it is enough to reply that there are men who, without proposing to themselves any selfish advantage, do yet refuse to be regarded as if they had no choice but of belonging to this or that faction,-who lend what influ ence they have to such public men and measures as they individually prefer, at the cost of dissenting from all factions. There is independence and dignity in such a position, wheth er in the state or in the church, in political or ecclesiastical strife, however liable it may be to reproach from those whose dictation is resisted. The phrase, "non-committal policy," is used to signify a crafty concealment of one's opinions or designs; but often it has been applied, by way of undeserved reproach, to conduct the most high-minded and

The absurdity of the phrase, "noparty party," is chargeable on their opponents, not on themselves.