Columbus Democrat. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 18??-18??, 1838-01-20
ANDREW JACKSON.
MosEs DAWSON, Esq.
FEDERALISM.

Oar opponents object to the application Of this
term to their party, They seem to regard It as
an insult Now, rot to speak Of the absurdlty Of
such reproa n from those who are in the habit
orheaping every term of obloquy upon the Dem
ecratic party, we think their complaints in this
case are silly in the extreme. We do not en-
ploy the title as one of mere obloquy. There is
nothing offensive in the name alone. II has been
claimed with pride by men who, IN talent and
character were at least on a par with those who
hold the same opinions at the present day. We
prefer the term, because it is clearly expressive
Of the doctrines which characterize the Oppos-
ton. They are in favor of extending the tunc-
tons, and expanding the powois of Federal au-
horty. They take their stand upon the same
question which first excited the opposition oil the
Republican party.
Ii is curious that the controversy which aglta-
ted the community SO strongly forty years ago,
il now revived with more energy than ever
The bank was the first great question which alien
ated the Republicans from their opponents and
it still draws the strongest line between the TWO
parties. That violation of the Constitution, by
which the first bank was sanctioned, was the en-
terng wedge for the dangerous doctrine oil loose
construction, whence has proceeded every subse-
quent encroachment upon the rights Of the States.
Protective tariffs, internal Improvements by the
General Government, all the spurious progeny Of
Authoritarian doctrines, derive their origin and
justification from this source. All those who ale
in favor of this loose construction, and the policy
which flows from it, are essentially Federal'ss or
ConsolIdaonlsis. They profess principles which
are incompatible with the letter and spirit oil the
Constitution, and which entrench and encroach
upon the reserved rights Of the States. lney DO
not understand the nature Of our Government ;
or, rather, they wish to alter and dstort political
system, of which they do not approve. Foled
in the convention which gave character SO re-
publican to the federal compact, they would DC
that insidiousIy and gradually which they couIc
not accomplish at once and openly. In The opn'
ions which they entertain, and the doctrines whIcf
they profess, they may be sincere. We hope
they are So But they must not, then, object tf
be called by name which Is so expressive o
their political creed, and which the people under
stand so well. We say again, they are Federal
lists, and we shall persist in calling them by then
proper title. Although they have changed lheI
names so often, and are provided with as man.
Eases as some OF the gentlemen we meet with a
the bar of our courts, they arc essentially and en-
durlngly the came,
We are willing to admit that there are mel
who have sincerely repudIated the obnoxious am
anti-rcpublicun principles which they once held
What man can say that he has always entertain
ed the same notions on, every SUBJECT In
pride of consistency which makes US cling 10 re
cognlsed errors, is contemplate. we oepen
so much for our belief upon education ana exam
pie, and association, that years are often require
Q 10 enable Us to form independent opinions lroE
the conviction of our own minds. we doubt NJ
: the sincerity Of those whose change oil opinion
dlsinterested, and proved by the consistency
= their actions. But Federalism also ranks anon
!. lis leaders men who were once, at least IN pr
q fession, Democrats. They have deserted u
) doctrines which first gave them popularity al
5, have turned against the people the influence al
n authority which their former Republican chara
d ter gives them. Those men are the worst en-
I. mics to popular rights and doctrines In,
combat them with The exaggerated zeal OF
it renegade. They know that they never can
$, forgiven by the people, and this conviction re
n. ders them desperate and interruptions hd