Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1809-07-07

possibility of union But there is anothe
point upon which the federalists have in
sisted, that affords complete proof VI their
insincerity, because they knew it could not
be acCeded to: They demanded that the
Republicans should give up Mr.. Jefferson.
AS the republican party brought Mr.. JEFF.
ferson forward for the presidency and SUD-
ported him IN that Office from hrircihle, it
would be radical departure from their
real sentiments, should they abandon him.
1t would shew that the Republicans are the
mere creatures of erfediency, and that all
their former professions of attachment to
the late president were hypocritical. Could
the friends of the administration have con-
sented to- a proposition so degrading to them
the federaiists would be justified in casting
them of for public contempt, in the same
manner that female is cast off who suf.
fers seduction by the arts Of profigate
llbertine, aud meets with but little compass
sion from society, on account OF the base
ness of her prostitution. OF all things il
was, doubtless, desirable to the fsderaiists
that the republicans should concur in the
prescription OF a malitude of their friends,
and more particularly in the dcnunciation
Of MIR. Jefferson for that would be an adj
mission in the face OF the world, that feder-
al doctrines have been correct, from be.
ginning to end but such an admission would
nor only he satire upon our national his.
tory for period ofeight years. bui it would
be positively false (; for Dothing is more
Certain, than that the Republicans view the
whole series of conduct OF the federal party
as pro1iga,e, licentious, and tending to in.
surrection and disunion. And what would
the federalsts think of men who could con.
sent to unite upon basis which rendered
them completely infamous
Thus, then, by the very terms of the pro-
position for an Union of Parties, it was i'm
possible for the Republicans tou unite. Their
acquiescence in such proposal would have
been to them perpetual disgrace and SER
vile submission of the majority to the min.
GRITTY.
But is such All union practicable This
question embraces curious speculation, at
once interesting and useful. An union of
rarties implies an iden,.ty Of opinions and
am not afraid Of respectable cor tradicton
when say, that the history of The human
race and the uniform experience CT man.
kind prove that an identity of opinions is
impossible. Ii is not in the nature of things,
and it could never have been intended by
the Creator of the Universe Les US sup
pose for moment, no matter how absurd.
that all men conceded in opinion where,
IN that case, would be our improvements N
science and in the arts The conflict of O.
pinious, IKE the collision of steel and fl MT,
strike out those bright conceptions which
alone can ii'umiae the path of knowledge
and enable us to pursue its advancement.
Uniformity OF opinion is the death of re hsc..
tion, even of-common thoughts, and would
produce intellectual corruption, reducing
human nature to a bestial condition. But
il IS imfossi6 e. Men will ne DER think a.
like. We are all influenced by the impress
sions' made upon our senses, and those SEN
ses being iferently organized in different
individuals, their ideas and consequently
their Thoughts will be different. The same
sound strikes not every mans ear alike
the same object does not present itself in
the same form to every eye; even the sans
words pronounced IN the same tone create
varied sensations upon differ ent hearers, and
wnen The enuaciation is altered, produces
diieTeat effects upon the same hearer. X
IS this variety occas.onsd IN the ineliyidu-
ais OF the human race, and the d scordancy
of ideas caused bSfthe finer or coarser or
ganization of the med um OF re fiection which
c,nsi ute the iif.ef Ia mental world viii h
Keep t In motion Which preserve il aud
winch, properly regulated, is the only true
source Of mortar .elicity Indeed, world
wuPout difference or opinion would be az
insipid rs world wiihoai the distinctions
out single mountain 10 relieve the eye a
country without trees, rivu,ets, or rivers
or III short, creation Of men without wo.
men to alleviate the soitariness Of their
lives.
Were one inclined 10 ridicule the idea Of
an uniformity of opinion, it might be asked
what, IN such state of the human mind,
would become of our D.vines, of our Law.
yers, of our Dem goues? Their craft
would surely be destroy ed for. if there
were no differences OF opinion, ;here would
be no Controversies A result which the
federalsts could have hardly contemplated,
or they would certainly never have made
the proposition
The proposal for an Union of Parties,
therefore, has been not only itlsincere. bus
1t IS impossible. After these considerable
ohs and these deductions, il would be use.
less to discuss the point further. The rule
OF conduct, which may be derived from the
brlef investigation OF the case, is this:
The republicans ought to adhere 10 their
doctrines, and 10 SUPPORT tbe adlninisfra.
ion 7DhiLst IL maintains those doctrines
suDcriTg he federal forsy TO fursue what
course IL qciH.
Animated by the genuine spirit of '7s,
arSe portion o. the citizens OF Goochland
I'm cd AZ che Court Iouoc - g.