5. Calhoun held that the primary fealty of the citizen was due the State; Webster held it was due the nation.

6. Calhoun declared that nullification was a constitutional remedy; Webster declared it revolution.

7. Calhoun held the States sovereign and therefore possessed of the right of State veto; Webster held the Constitution, the laws made in pursuance of it, and the treaties to be the

law of the land.

supreme

At the close of the careers of these representatives of two antagonistic political theories so long in conflict, ominous signs suggested the probability that the contest would soon be transferred from the forum to the field.

CHAPTER XII

THIRD PARTIES

The radical against the conservative. The rational differentiation of political parties lies in the constitution of the mind. Whether man is naturally controversial or not, he ever insists upon the recognition of his rights. In political affairs he differs most frequently from his fellow upon method, rather than matter. The conservative, who dislikes agitation for its own sake, is ever present. He chooses to suffer evils rather than risk the institutions in the attempt to correct them. Not far from him usually stands the radical, who enjoys agitation and who has a propensity for righting wrongs at any price. He is uncompromising in his judgments, specific in his methods, and insistent upon the accomplishment of his purposes at whatever cost. He dislikes uniformity, as the conservative fears innovation. The radical enjoys change while the conservative would let well-enough alone. One would infer from history that the conservative has had his influence. The Declaration of Independence asserts that, "All experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." In a system of government where opinion is untrammeled, these two characteristics are the rational bases upon which political parties divide. Where there are two controlling parties, one of them will be radical and the other conservative. This division is not consistent, since it most frequently occurs that the radical

to-day may become the conservative to-morrow, and vice versa. It may be affirmed with a degree of accuracy that the party out of power is the radical, but becomes conservative when placed in power.

Third parties. Third parties are the expression of the radical opinions of men who are dissatisfied with the existing régime. They grow out of impatience over the indifference of party leaders to redress evils. They arise from the conviction that the needed reform will not be achieved by the old parties.

The "Quids." The first third party movement was that of the "Quids" in 1805. It was a revulsion from the old Republican party, led by John Randolph of Virginia in opposition to the administration of Jefferson and his attempt to dictate his successor. The Quids nominated for President James Monroe upon the ground that the Republicans under the leadership of Jefferson and Madison had abandoned the fundamental principles of the party and had become centralized by a policy of national encroachment upon the rights of the States. Because of the indifference of Monroe toward the nomination and the election of Madison, the quid tertium agitation scarcely reached the dignity of a third party move

ment.

First third party. The first real third party movement was that of anti-Masonry in 1827. The real grounds for this party's action were opposition to secret orders. From mere local agitation it spread to the nation. Its real political effect was State rather than national.

In New York the movement had taken hold of many prominent men of the churches and newspapers. Of two hundred and eleven publications, thirty-two were openly supporting the Anti-Masons.

In Pennsylvania it found fertile soil. The religious elements here, Scotch-Irish, Quakers, German Baptists, Moravians and other sects, were quite generally in opposition to the Masons,

and joined in the movement against them. In the election in 1832 the Anti-Masons of Pennsylvania polled 88,000 votes to 91,000 by the Democrats and elected eight members to Congress, and eleven members two years later.

In Vermont. In this State it boasted a newspaper. Its influence in the legislature was strong enough to repeal the charter of the Grand Lodge. By 1831 the Anti-Masons controlled the National Republican nominations and elected the governor. The electoral vote of this State in 1832 was cast

for the Anti-Masonic candidate.

Other States. In Massachusetts the Anti-Masons cast 2,000 more votes in 1831 than were cast by the Democrats. In 1833 they nominated John Quincy Adams for governor; who received 3,000 more votes than the Democratic candidate. By 1835 the party was overthrown by the Whigs. In Ohio a like fate awaited it. The Anti-Masonic party is rightfully regarded as an episode in our political history. It conducted one national campaign and caused considerable stir in some of the States. It continued less than a decade, yet it gave to our history one institution, the delegate convention for the nomination of officers. Its first and only convention was held in 1831, and every party since that day has employed that system for placing before the people its candidates.

Labor party. Between the years 1820 and 1840 much agitation existed in labor circles throughout the country, especially in the cities of New York, Philadelphia and Boston. In 1828 the agitation took a political coloring and a workingman's party was formed which nominated candidates for city and county offices in New York and other parts of the country. The party demanded shorter hours, and defined a day's work from sun to sun, or ten hours. It also declared against convict labor, imprisonment for debt, and the banking institutions. It pronounced in favor of the mechanics' lien, and a tax upon church property. The Workingman's ticket the first year received 6,000 votes. In 1830 it held a State convention in

New York in which thirteen counties were represented. The convention recommended the nomination of State officers but later it endorsed the Anti-Masonic candidates.

"Locofocos." In 1834-1835 the Workingman's party was absorbed by what was then known as the Equal Rights party. This organization was a split from the Democratic party. It named candidates for State offices which were ratified by Tammany Hall. It gained much power in the State and attempted to control the general assembly, which resulted in a double organization and a serious disruption. It was in this conflict that the old line leaders extinguished the lights in the hall when the Equal Rights party lit them again with locofoco matches. The name Locofocos was applied to them thereafter as a party. In 1836 a State convention was held which proclaimed their principles. They were extremely democratic, and antagonistic to the centralizing tendencies of the Jackson administration. To the end that their influence might check those tendencies, they made a coalition with the Whigs, which soon ended. Owing to Van Buren's position upon the Bank issue the Workingman's party supported Van Buren in 1836. This coalition was a natural one and the party lost its identity in the absorption by the party from which it sprang. Its only effect upon national politics was to call back the New York Democracy to its fundamental principle, the equal rights of all.

American party. It is but natural that about 1830, the great flood of immigration, which was setting in from Catholic countries, should arouse some alarm among the Protestant elements of the cities where the major portion of the immigrants settled. The poverty of the immigrant, the low state of living, his standard of morals, and his great numbers, created a spirit of bitterness toward him. It took on a social, rather than a political phase. The tendency of this portion of the population to segregate in colonies in certain quarters of the city — which in one sense was looked upon with favor by the residents of the city, but in another was regarded