solemn warning was certainly not out of place; but if it was necessary to utter it within a week after the declaration of war, he ought to have pondered well ere he did his best to push the country into a conflict which, whatever it might become in the course of time, was originally not a national but a party war, or rather a war of the party leaders.

This all-important point had not been soon enough taken into due consideration, either by him or his associates. This is the one great blame resting upon the war party, which even those cannot gainsay who otherwise fully approve of their course. The whole war was one uninterrupted struggle against the evil consequences of this fact. There was much truth in what Calhoun had asserted in his speech on May 6. It was, indeed, to a great extent, the second war for the liberty and independence of the United States, but it was irretrievably vitiated by its party origin. How the ambitious plans of the young leaders were dashed to pieces! Instead of Canada being conquered, the time came when Calhoun, with tears in his eyes, had to ask the assistance of Webster to pull the government out of its financial difficulties, which had come to such a climax that the worst might be apprehended. It was a deep humiliation. Yet where is the American patriot

who would wish to erase these pages from the tablets of the history of the Union? Much less could any one wish to miss them in the career of Calhoun, for in one respect, and that the most important one, they are the most attractive and satisfactory in the record of his life. There is at this time nothing of sectional prejudice and narrowness in him. He stands on the broadest national ground, and his political sins are mainly due to the impatient ardor and buoyancy of his patriotism. Undoubtedly he pursues the aims of his personal ambition with full consciousness; he does not, however, seek its satisfaction at the expense of the Union, but by promoting what he is fully convinced that the interests and the honor of his country demand. The word "nation," which Calhoun in later years struck from the political and constitutional dictionary of the United States as having no basis whatever to rest upon, either in fact or in law, is at this time frequently in his mouth. How could it be otherwise, as the idea of it was deeply imbedded in his heart and constantly occupying his mind? His solicitude for the national interests did not cease with the war, nor was it confined to objects immediately connected with the war or referring exclusively to the relations of the Union to foreign powers.

In a speech delivered January 31, 1816, on a motion to repeal the direct tax, he drew a sketch of his views concerning the lessons to be derived from the experiences of the war as to the policy which the United States ought to pursue in future. The starting-point of his argument was the assertion that "future wars with England are not only possible, but . . . highly probable,— nay, that they will certainly take place," because the United States would "have to encounter British jealousy and hostility in every shape; not immediately manifested by open force or violence, perhaps, but by indirect attempts to check your growth and prosperity." He therefore deemed it necessary gradually to prepare for this emergency, not only by increasing the military forces of the Union, but also by systematically developing those germs of giant strength which Providence had bestowed upon and intrusted to the American people. "As to the species of preparation, . . . the navy most certainly, in any point of view, occupies the first place. It is the most safe, most effectual, and cheapest mode of defence." The internal strife during the war ⚫ would have lost much of its bitterness, if the majority had from the first understood this obvious truth, and acted accordingly. The violation of the rights and interests of the citizens

of the States, as a seafaring people, had given rise to the war, and yet the demand of the New England States to wage it principally by sea had remained unheeded, until experience forced the majority to acknowledge, if not in words, at least by deeds, that for once the opposition was not prompted exclusively by local interests and a factional spirit. If the party had listened to the advice of Calhoun with regard to the wishes and complaints of the opposition, the animosity of the Northeastern Federalists would never have reached the pitch to which it finally came. In the light of later events, it is one of the most interesting facts in the life of Calhoun that, in the course of the war, the question was for a while seriously discussed in New England whether the people of that section should not try to form an alliance with South Carolina against the narrow anti-commercial policy of Virginia and her followers.

The above-mentioned speech also contains the first declaration in favor of internal improvements. "Let us make great permanent roads; not, like the Romans, with views of subjecting and ruling provinces, but for the more honorable purposes of defence, and of connecting more closely the interests of various sections of this great country." It is true that Calhoun's immediate object in this is also the

safety of the country in future wars; but he is not only gratified that the building of roads will incidentally tend towards nationalizing the Union; he urges upon Congress the measure because it will have this effect. Always starting from the same point, he furthermore comes to the conclusion that the national government should bestow its protecting care upon the industrial interests of the country; and here, too, he expressly states that other reasons also should induce Congress to adopt this policy.

"In regard to the question how far manufactures ought to be fostered, it is the duty of this country, as a means of defence, to encourage its domestic industry, more especially that part of it which provides the necessary materials for clothing and defence.... The question relating to manufactures must not depend on the abstract principle that industry, left to pursue its own course, will find in its own interests all the encouragement that is necessary. Laying the claims of manufacturers entirely out of view, on general principles, without regard to their interests, a certain encouragement should be extended at least to our woolen and cotton manufactures."

It is remarkable that in the whole speech there is no mention whatever made of the Constitution. The thought does not enter his head that constitutional objections could possibly be raised. The reason of this is simply