sneers, and innuendoes, by crediting them with the meanest of motives, and insisting that they are either traitorous, inconsequential knaves, or silly, inconsequential fools. As for those upon whom such treatment is lost (and I confess that I suspect it fails with the majority of scratchers and bolters) try what is known to practical politicians as the postponement treatment. By the skilful use of this treatment I kept Vandyke Podgers from scratching or bolting for thirty-six consecutive years, and then just before the state election he died, and there was an end of that embarrassment. When I began to reason with him there was a presidential canvass on. "Podgers," said I, "as you love your country, do not scratch this year. Consider the far-reaching and vital importance of the issues involved." Podgers concluded to postpone. The following year I accomplished my purpose by reminding him that "this is the first and therefore the most critical year of an administration which upon the whole you indorse, Podgers, and which it is incumbent upon you to make some sacrifices heartily to sustain." He concluded to postpone. The next year my argument took the shape of, "My dear Podgers, let me beg of you to vote a straight ticket this year. Do you realize what year it is, Podgers? Of course you do. I need not remind a gentleman of your exceptional intelligence that this election is but the prelude to the presidential election of next year, with its issues of far-reaching and vital importance." Podgers concluded to postpone. The next year was the presidential year, when I repeated the argument first mentioned. The others in turn again did service, and so on for thirty-six years. And that's the way I kept persuading Podgers to postpone. He never was, but always to be, a scratcher or a bolter. At the elections at which no national or state ticket was run, and only minor local offices were to be filled, I pointed out to Podgers the necessity of keeping the party organization intact; and when all other arguments failed I insisted that of two evils he should always choose the least and that, admitting that our ticket was evil, it was the least of the two. Even this brief and inadequate account of its application will make sufficiently clear to you, I think, the true inwardness of the postponement

treatment. Just one word more about it. Those who employ it with the most gratifying results allow the impression to be produced in the patient's mind at the outset that, although they have never happened to find an election at which scratching or bolting could be indulged in without perfectly harrowing injury to public interests of colossal moment, yet, nevertheless, they heartily and unreservedly approve of scratching and bolting in the abstract. Such an attitude on my part toward poor Podgers won his confidence at our first political conference on this subject, and produced in him a mood hospitable to all my subsequent arguments and admonitions.

This communication has already exceeded reasonable limits, and yet I have only touched upon a few points. But perhaps I have written enough to start you right, to make you understand the nature of our great American game, and to put you in possession of the clew to the secret of playing it successfully. Be it yours to consult the expedient, leaving it to the purists of the party to consult the highly proper. Beware of those who take sentimental views of unsentimental matters. A man who would "rather be right than be president" by all means ought to decline a presidential nomination, and run for a position in a theological seminary, a Sunday-school, or Vassar College; while he who holds that "one with God is a majority" antagonizes the system of reckoning which has come down to us from the fathers, and which has the approval of every practical inspector of American elections. Be practical in your politics, be practical, evermore be practical.

With fervent hopes and high anticipations of your future, I subscribe myself your affectionate uncle,

HISTORY OF POLITICAL PARTIES

Events Leading up to the First Party Formation

THE

HE political existence of the United States dates from the battle of Lexington, the first battle of the Revolutionary War, April 19, 1775. When the conflict with England began, there were two parties in the colonies. They corresponded in name with the leading political parties in England at that time. Their aims and objects were, of course, dissimilar.

The colonial Whigs, including a majority of representative citizens and many young men of adventurous spirit, were will ing to remain loyal to the British Crown if certain rights and privileges demanded by them were accorded.

The colonial Tories were content with conditions as they existed. They recognized the authority of the British to govern the colonies in accordance with the dictates of the King and his advisers. With the Declaration of Independence, the Whigs became enthusiastic advocates of separation. They declared in favor of an absolute breaking away from British rule. The Tories remained pro-British. Eventually, many sympathizers with the English colonial administration left the country.

In some states, during the war, the Whigs predominated. In others, Tories were in the majority. States there were, too, in which opinions were fairly well divided. When war was declared, the administrative affairs fell naturally into the hands of the Whigs, and were maintained by them throughout.

When the Revolution ended, the Whigs split into two parts; one faction, known as "Particularists," advocated the sover

eignty of the states as units and favored confederation. The other, announced as the "Strong Government" party, favored a Constitution and a centralized Federal authority, to be recognized by all states as practically supreme.

Federals and Anti-Federals

Six years later, in 1787, the "Strong Government" men were identified and referred to as "Federalists." The "Particularists," taking the opposite view of the public affairs, were spoken of as "anti-Federalists."

The Federalists, favoring the ratification of a Constitution, and the anti-Federalists, who opposed its adoption, were, when the time came to put its provisions in force, avowed political antagonists. The history of political parties in the United States dates from this period.

The Federalists, or Federals, supported by Washington, John Adams, Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, began, in 1787, their career as a recognized party. From 1789 until 1800 they controlled the national government. From 1800 to 1816, when the party went out of existence, they remained in opposition. Their general policy was one of broad constitutional construction, which gave the national government great power. They advocated a tariff, internal revenue, the funding of the public debt, the establishing of a United States Bank, the organizing of a militia, and the assumption of state debts by the government. They favored England as against France.

The Federals elected Washington as the first President of the United States in 1789, and chose him a second time in 1792. Four years later, they elected John Adams as Washington's successor to the presidential office. The end of the Adams administration, in 1800, marked the exit of the Federal party from power.

The most vital legislative and other measures passed or approved during Federal rule included the Constitution (1789); a tariff act with duties averaging about eight and one half per

cent (1789); a "Bill of Rights," subsequently incorporated in ten Constitutional Amendments (1789); the establishing of a regular army (1789); the assumption and subsequent funding by the national government of the debts of the several states, incurred during the Revolutionary War and amounting to $18,271,786 (1790); the determining of a permanent seat for the national government in the District of Columbia (1790); the establishing of a national bank for twenty years with a capital of $10,000,000, one fifth being subscribed by the government (1791); the organizing of a militia, ordering the enrolment of all male white citizens between eighteen and forty-five years of age (1793); the ratification of the eleven amendments to the Constitution, limiting the judicial power of the United States as against the states, asserting the non-inability of the states (1794); the ordering of six frigates, three of the very heavy class, as the basis for an American navy (1794); the negotiations with England, by Chief Justice Jay, of a treaty of amity, commerce and navigation (1794); the passing of the Alien and Sedition Laws, the former for the expulsion of odious foreigners by the President, the latter to punish persons who unlawfully opposed or stirred up sedition against the Federal government or its officials (1798); and the removal of the national capital to Washington, D. C. (1800).

The provisions of the Alien and Sedition Laws proved to be so distasteful to the people that the prestige of the Federal party, under whose auspices these measures were promulgated, fell rapidly and was never regained.

The supremacy of the party, from the time of its organization until its removal from power, was upheld largely by the superior organization and shrewd management of able leaders. It was never really popular, acting frequently in direct opposition to views and ideas most in favor with the masses. The party rule of non-interference with the affairs of other nations, particularly France, caused much dissatisfaction. The passage of bills to increase expenditure for purposes of national development was blocked by the anti-Federals on every possible occasion.

When in opposition, after the election of Jefferson to the