mentarily modify, or altogether change its influence. And yet the weightiest charge against democracy, that it is a revolutionary spirit, is thus derived. If by a revolutionary spirit, is meant a spirit which, without aim, seeks to involve all things in promiscuous confusion; if, that spirit which would unhinge the whole moral and political universe, and resolve society into its original chaos, the charge is a foul slander. But if we are to understand a spirit of reform, a spirit which is destined to cause the overthrow of tyranny and the exaltation of the people, then the spirit of democracy is a revolutionary spirit. The former, however, is the sense in which the term is generally used by the minions of aristocracy, with how much reason we will now attempt to show. A reference is ever made by these enemies of the people, to the history of France during the last fifty years, as furnishing a fair exemplication of what the spirit of democracy is calculated to effect. The horrid massacres, the excesses of every kind which characterized the reign of terror,' are charged upon this spirit, and with all the presumption which the wealth and honors of royalty can create, an attempt is made to substantiate their position by an appeal to human nature itself. That the spirit of democracy influenced the first actors in the French revolution, no one will deny. The people had been despised, their rights had been trampled upon, their dearest interests disregarded, until they had presented to them the alternative of ignominious slavery, or a struggle for liberty. The ardent disposition of that chivalrous people soon dictated their choice, and a simultaneous effort was made to secure their liberties. Roused at once from the sleep of ages, invested immediately with all the rights and immunities of freemen, they became intoxicated with their success. Ambitious but wicked men saw the state floating at large without a pilot, and by a bold movement seized upon the helm, and reckless of the consequences, steered whither their private feelings or interests directed. The people suffered not less from the cruelty and oppression of their new, than of their old mas Was all this caused by the spirit of democracy? Does a desire to secure their rights and advance their interests lead the people, after those rights have been secured, and those interests advanced, to wreak their vengeance on the innocent and unoffending? While the French were struggling against oppression, while they were overthrowing the power of the despot, and establishing their independence, they were acting under the influence of the democratie spirit, but the scenes which followed are chargeable to some other and a very dissimilar influence. Even if a principle can be misapplied, can be perverted, we are not at once to discard it as intrinsically bad. Yet the aristocratic publications of England have rung continual changes upon the influence of the democratic spirit of the French revolutionists, from the first commencement of that revolution to the present time. It is well that these writings are generally read by those whose interests render them blind to this flimsy attempt at deception. The majority of the English community are too intelligent and too honest to be thus deceived, and while they shun the errors of the French fanatics, are fast working out for themselves a revolution, or if the title is more acceptable, a reform, none the less dreaded by the miserable sycophants who cluster around aristocracy, because its course is characterized by moderation and wisdom. The influence of this revolutionary spirit has been witnessed in this country; it was this which nerved the arms of our ancestors, it was this which secured our independence. The blessings which we enjoy are the result of a revolution, marked on the one side by cruelty and bloodshed at which humanity revolts, and yet, does any American blame the spirit which caused the struggle that was attended by these scenes of horror. No, every one feels that although human life is valuable, and human happiness desirable, yet that present peace and enjoyment, and even life itself, are not to be estimated when liberty requires their sacrifice. And who are those, who now so loudly cry out against bloodshed and misery. Those very individuals, or their representatives, by whose counsels every nation on the globe has at some time been deluged in blood; the very persons who are now ready to destroy the lives of thousands to preserve some useless prerogative, some time-honored but now injurious custom. Their disguise is too slight, their days are numbered. The revolutionary spirit will soon hurl them from stations which they have long dishonored, and consign them to that private life, from which their talents can never raise them. Again we are told that the spirit of democracy is a levelling spirit, that inequalities in rank and in wealth are broken down by it, and that under its influence the whole face of society is to present one uniform level. A slight acquaintance with mankind would teach any one that a perfect equality of mental or bodily power does not exist in nature, and therefore that different degrees of influence and authority must ever be found. That it is for the general good that inequalities thus existing, and the respect and honor consequent upon them, should not be sustained and perpetuated by artificial means, but that every individual whether of noble or ignoble parentage should stand or fall upon his own merits, is a leading doctrine of the democratic party throughout the world. The justice of this principle is evident to every candid mind, for why should an individual of inferior talents and of a depraved mind, because descended from noble ancestry, sway the scepter which was graced by his predecessors? The question does not regard what will please the few, or what will most gratify their vanity, but the peace and happiness of mankind, the essential interests of the hu man family, which are involved in its decison. To them the blessings of liberty are of inestimable value, and they have a right to demand and enjoy them. It is often said that in carrying out the favorite article in their creed, democrats strive to debase the higher and more intelligent classes to a level with the most ignorant and degraded. The history of their efforts from the first is one unvarying refutation of this base calumny. Common sense would at once place the stamp of falsehood upon the charge, if other evidence were wanting, since the people must first be fitted by education to discharge the duties of freemen before the powers of self-government can safely be placed in their hands. Reason and experience both show that the elevation of the people in knowledge and in virtue is the inevitable result of the spread of democratic principles. The levelling spirit of democracy shows itself, then, in stripping from the weak and foolish courtier the titles and insignia of honor, and in elevating the great mass of the community from the condition of menials to that of men, free men. Shall we be told that the rights of the few are thus trampled upon by a joint participation of them by the many? Their ease may be disturbed, their power may be diminished, but it is an ease which they basely gained, and ignobly enjoyed; it is a power prejudicial to themselves, but much more so to the community. Let us not be told that in this country we have no need of a vindication of democracy, that every one understands it, every one approves of it. Our form of government is indeed a representative democracy, but it is not true now, however it may have been at the time when the sentiment was expressed by a distinguished civilian, that " we are all democrats." All are not willing to trust the people with the powers of self-government. Let no one be startled, when he is told that many, very many intelligent and otherwise prudent men, openly assert the superior advantages of aristocratic governments. It is only necessary however to examine slightly into the reasons of their opinion, to discover the revolting truth that they consider themselves born to rule, while their fellow-citizens are born to obey. Such persons, one and all, should receive the execrations of a free community, and their selfishness and illiberality should secure for them a character deservedly most infamous. It is a lamentable fact that their number is principally made up of those who have received a liberal education. Why it is that they whose minds have been disciplined and expanded in regard to all other subjects, should be so contracted in their political views, it is impossible to determine. They have had abundant opportunities for examining into the history of the world, for ascertaining the comparative effects of free and aristocratic governments upon the happiness and general advancement of the people, and yet they appear to be under the influence of some strange infatuation, which presents the loveliness of the one picture, in all the hideous deformity which in reality belongs only to the other. What madness must have seized upon those who think to stay the progress of democratic principles? Where can they look for support, where even for sympathy? Their own ranks must be thin, and from the nature of the case must every day become thinner, and from whence will they draw recruits? Is an enfranchised and intelligent community to furnish those from its own number who are to debase and enslave it? A few traitors may be found, but verily, they must have strong confidence in the political as well as moral depravity of mankind, who will venture to act, relying upon such calculations. The experience of former free governments furnishes no warrant for such expectations, for in all the essential elements of a nation's prosperity, no analogy exists between their and our condition. Our government is in fact as well as in name a representative democracy: the republics of antiquity scarcely deserved the appellation. When we read of their liberty, we are prone to forget that this was the portion only of the higher orders, while the lower classes were groaning in the veriest servitude. Let us turn to the page of history, and we shall find that in the proudest days of Grecian and Roman liberty, by far the larger portion of the state was excluded from all participation in the administration or honors of government. " This was that liberty renowned, Those equal rights of Greece and Rome, where men, How different is it here, where the lowest are entitled to all the rights and immunities of citizens. By this means a fruitful source of jealousies and enmities, of rebellions and insurrections, are for ever excluded from our system. The other causes which united to effect the ruin of former free governments do not exist here. When driven from this his favorite ground, the aristocrat exultingly points us to our own condition, as presaging the final downfall of democratic principles. A few riots in some of our cities, a substitution of Lynch law in the place of statute law in some obscure section of our country, is eagerly seized upon, and published to the world as an index of our semi-barbarous condition. It would be useless to palliate the enormities which have thus caused our enemies to exult; but we can boldly cast the reproach back upon its author. We can call upon him to point us to that nation, the most refined, the best governed, aristocratic or monarchical, where excesses more disgusting have not been witnessed within the last ten years. Our national vanity will be not a little increased, if we reflect upon the treatment which our country and its institutions receive from the aristocratic foreigner. He will survey the kingdoms of the old world, and, with an air of apparent unconcern, look upon the gross est acts of injustice, upon tumults and even anarchy itself; but let his eye be turned to republican America, and if every thing does not come up to his ideal standard of perfection, his thoughts are troubled, his sympathies are at once enlisted in our behalf. To the aristocrat of Europe we are however indebted for many valuable suggestions, offered it is true in any other than a spirit of kindness, yet well worthy of our attention. While perfection is not expected in our system of government, yet it should be aimed at, and every exertion made to approximate as closely to it as possible. The heart of the philanthropist, of the democrat in foreign countries, should not be pained by recitals of the indiscreet acts of those who have taken upon themselves to exemplify the great principles of democracy in this, its chosen seat. The feeling is not sufficiently deep and universal among us, that every man is personally interested in the success of our political experiment, and that he has weighty responsibilities resting upon him. It becomes us to show by our example, that the spirit of democracy is a spirit of virtue and intelligence as well as a spirit of power, to refute the base calumnies of our enemies abroad and at home, that it is calculated to debase human nature and reduce mankind to a level with the brute creation. Here, in America, it should be shown that under the enlivening influence of free principles, the dormant energies of the human mind are aroused to noble efforts, to persevering and honorable exertions in the cause of literature and science. It is not true that the greater the number of minds partially excited, the lower will be the standard of individual attainment; and here it should be proved, that while the many are enjoying all the advantages which flow from an education, the few can explore the greatest depths of science with as much zeal and success as if under the patronage of royalty. Why then shall we longer delay to unite in one generous effort to prove the heavenly origin, the divine influence of the spirit of democracy? The power is with us; an occasion is offered for its exercise; the honor of the country, the success of our principles, require that it should be displayed. HOPE. HOPE is the balm of life,-the cure for woe;- T. H. |