from the West, and making war upon the unoffending South, I must believe, I am bound to believe, he has some object in view which he has not ventured to disclose.  Mr. President, why is this?  Has the gentleman discovered in former controversies with the gentleman from Missouri, that he is overmatched by that senator?  And does he hope for an easy victory over a more feeble adversary?  Has the gentleman’s distempered fancy been disturbed by gloomy forebodings of “new alliances to be formed,” at which he hinted?  Has the ghost of the murdered coalition come back, like the ghost of Banquo, to “sear the eyeballs” of the gentleman, and will not down at his bidding?  Are dark visions of broken hopes, and honors lost forever, still floating before his heated imagination?  Sir, if it be his object to thrust me between the gentleman from Missouri and himself, in order to rescue the East from the contest it has provoked with the West, he shall not be gratified.  Sir, I will not be dragged into the defence of my friend from Missouri.  The South shall not be forced into a conflict not its own.  The gentleman from Missouri is able to fight his own battles.  The gallant West needs no aid from the South to repel any attack which may be made upon them from any quarter.  Let the gentleman from Massachusetts controvert the facts and arguments of the gentleman from Missouri, if he can—­and if he win the victory, let him wear the honors; I shall not deprive him of his laurels. * * *

Sir, any one acquainted with the history of parties in this country will recognize in the points now in dispute between the Senator from Massachusetts and myself the very grounds which have, from the beginning, divided the two great parties in this country, and which (call these parties by what names you will, and amalgamate them as you may) will divide them forever.  The true distinction between those parties is laid down in a celebrated manifesto issued by the convention of the Federalists of Massachusetts, assembled in Boston, in February, 1824, on the occasion of organizing a party opposition to the reelection of Governor Eustis.  The gentleman will recognize this as “the canonical book of political scripture”; and it instructs us that, when the American colonies redeemed themselves from British bondage, and became so many independent nations, they proposed to form a national union (not a Federal Union, sir, but a national union).

Those who were in favor of a union of the States in this form became known by the name of Federalists; those who wanted no union of the States, or disliked the proposed form of union, became known by the name of Anti-Federalists.  By means which need not be enumerated, the Anti-Federalists became (after the expiration of twelve years) our national rulers, and for a period of sixteen years, until the close of Mr. Madison’s administration in 1817, continued to exercise the exclusive direction of our public affairs.  Here, sir, is the true history of the