State of Parties and the Country [pp. 1-53]

State of Parties and the Country.
which they had been administering, and when they should
have put forward such an argument, in their nominee, as
should, at least, have properly represented the principles and
policy which they were prepared to offer for the examinatio
and adoption of the country. Not that they could have succeeded with any choice of names, however judicious. Whig.
gism, itself, was their worst adversary. The party had lost
its prestige. Its charms were at an end. It controlled no
sympathies. It was identified with no progress. It professed no popular measures; no measures which could, in any
way, satisfy the sense of progress, which alone excites a
people's enthusiasm, and promises to ensure the vitality of
States. It was a dormant party. Its atmosphere was
stagnant. It had undergone moral collapse; and no agencies of political chemistry could be found of sufficient power
to galvanize its decaying limbs and energies. To repeat, it
was not Whiggism that triumphed in the election of Taylor;
no party triumphs which lacks the capacity to use wisely and
with profitable return the capital in its hands. The progresses of the country have taken place only under Democratic administrations, and can take place under no other.
These things all considered, and the more than WaterloQ
defeat of the Whigs in the last election, was not problematical to any man with half an understanding, and not deluded
by his own desires. They are beaten, and beaten out of
sight, and finally; —at least under their present name and organization. That they will submit to this condition-that they
will yield the struggle, and recognize the popular decision as
ultimate and settled-we have no sort of notion. But, that
they shall be able to reverse the decree, under any grganization
which shall at once identify them with the past, we hold to
be impossible. We take for granted that they will find for
themselves a new name, and will put forth a fresh declaration of principles, which they will make as specious as they
can, consistently with the necessity of being as vague and
general as possible. But, unless they grapple boldly with
leading measures of national progress they can hardly hope
to hold ground in the conflict. The mO4t that they will be
likely to do, will be to appeal, throu sh appropriatiom
LJuly,
32