leaving the French in possession of the field. Whilst Napoleon was thus engaged with the Prussians at Ligny, Marshal Ney disputed the position of Quatre Bras with a division of the British and Belgian forces, commanded by the Prince of Orange. In this engagement the Duke of Brunswick was slain; and Ney, after sustaining a heavy loss, fell back on his former position. On the 17th the Prussian army, now augmented by the arrival of Bulow's division, marched northwards in order to support the Duke of Wellington, who had retreated slowly from Quatre Bras and Mont St. Jean, with his head-quarters at the village of Waterloo, and the forest of Soignies in his rear. Napoleon with 80,000 occupied the heights of Planchenois, with his headquarters at a farm house called Caillon. He had previously despatched General Grouchy with 32,000 men to keep the Prussians in check. The battle began on the 18th at mid-day, with a fierce attack of the French on the British left wing, commanded by Sir Thomas Picton. Then followed an attempt on the part of Napoleon to break their centre; but Wellington, forming his men in squares, stood firm, awaiting the coming up of Blucher, who, according to the Prussian accounts, had pledged his word that he would appear on the 18th with his whole force. But hour after hour passed in anxious suspense; and it was not until half-past four in the afternoon that the sound of a distant cannonade announced the advance of the Prussians. The road from Wavre to Waterloo had been rendered almost impracticable by the heavy rains; and many of the Prussian soldiers, worn out by their violent exertions in the battle of the 16th, scantily fed, and drenched to the skin, had several times sunk to the ground from sheer exhaustion. Once, when the cannon stuck fast in a deep part of the road, they seemed inclined to abandon the attempt in despair, and sullenly muttered, "It won't do, father Blucher." But the cheerful voice of their old commander was heard above all, reminding them of their duty and encouraging them to greater exertions. "Children," he shouted, "we must forwards. "Tis all very well to say it won't do, but it must do. I have promised it to my brother Wellington-you would not have me break my word." At first Napoleon supposed, or at least pretended to believe, that Grouchy's division was advancing; but becoming speedily aware of his mistake, he determined to charge the English

centre with his reserve, which consisted of four regiments of the old guard. But Wellington had provided for such a contingency, and opened a heavy fire from several batteries which had been hitherto masked; whilst, at the same time, the English army charged the enemy in front, and Blucher, Bulow, and Ziethen attacked the flank and rear.

Thus surrounded, the French gave way and fled in confusion, with the exception of Napoleon's guard, which continued to resist the attacks of Bulow's cavalry until they were mostly cut to pieces. The Prussians, forgetting their weariness, pursued the flying French so closely that Napoleon himself was obliged to abandon his carriage at Genappe, leaving behind him his hat and sword, which Blucher forwarded to the king of Prussia, retaining the carriage, cloak, and telescope for his own share of the booty, and dividing all the emperor's valuables among his soldiers.

On the 7th of July Blucher and Wellington entered Paris for the second time. So vehement was the Prussian general's indignation against the French, that he actually proposed the dismemberment of their country; and was on the eve of blowing up the bridge of Jena, but was saved by Wellington from the disgrace of committing an act of such wanton barbarism. Talleyrand had previously employed a friend to intercede with him; but Blucher refused to listen to his remonstrances. "I shall blow up the bridge," he said, "and it would give me great pleasure if Prince Talleyrand were seated upon it."

On the 20th November, a second peace was concluded at Paris, on conditions more favorable to the French than perhaps they deserved, although sufficiently humiliating to a brave and high spirited people. Eighteen frontier fortresses were to be garrisoned by the Allies, and a foreign army of 150,000 men to be maintained at the cost of the French nation, until the Bourbon dynasty was firmly established on the throne. The French were also required to deliver up all the works of art which they had taken, and to pay an indemnity to the Allies of 700,000,000 francs. So faithfully were these conditions executed, that in a congress held at Aix-la-Chapelle in the autumn of 1818, it was resolved by the allied monarchs, to withdraw their army, as no longer necessary for the maintenance of order in France.

N 1784, thoughtful men began to see that, if the United States were to exist as a nation, there must be a central government with direct power both in internal and external

affairs; able to carry on foreign negotiations in the name of the nation, to issue commands to the citizens of the state, and to enforce these commands, if necessary, and to punish those who neglected them. The first man clearly to perceive, and boldly to declare this, was Alexander Hamilton, one of the most far-seeing and courageous statesmen that any country ever produced. He had already distinguished himself in the war as aide-de-camp to Washington, and at a still earlier time by a series of essays on the rights of the colonies. But, though he had been among the most ardent supporters of American independence, no one saw more clearly the dangers of the new system. So highly did he value a strong central government, that frequently through his life he was denounced. by his countrymen as the advocate of monarchy, and the enemy of his country's liberties. This charge was without the least foundation. Hamilton did indeed believe that the English government was in itself, and where it was possible, the best system, but he saw as clearly how unfitted it was for America. He wished his countrymen to copy, not the monarchial form of government, but so much of the English system as would make the Constitution stable and lasting. In 1785 an opportunity offered for introducing such a change as he wished for. In the spring of that year commissioners were appointed from Virginia and Maryland to settle certain difficulties about the navigation of the Potomac

river and Chesapeake Bay. They met at Mount Vernon, Washington's house, and there a plan was proposed for maintaining a fleet on the Chesapeake, and for settling commercial duties. This led to the proposal made by the Assembly of Virginia for a general conference of commissioners from all the states to consider the state of trade. Hamilton saw that this conference might be made the instrument of wider changes, and he persuaded New York to send commissioners, himself among them. In 1786 commissioners from five states met at Annapolis in Maryland. Hamilton laid before them a report, giving reasons why it would be well if a convention of delegates from all the states should meet to consider the state of the National Government. The proposal was adopted.

In 1787 the Convention met in Philadelphia. It is scarcely too much to say that no body of men ever met together for a task of such vast importance to the welfare of mankind or needing so much the highest powers of statesmanship. The president of the Convention was Washington. One prominent statesman, Patrick Henry, was away. The man who was, above all others, the author of the Constitution, was James Madison, of Virginia; and it must never be forgotten that the American Constitution did not represent what any one party considered the best possible system, but was formed by each party yielding something. On one point, and one only, were all agreed, namely, that the new government must be republican and democratic; that is to say, that the rulers must be chosen by the mass of the people, and be really answerable to the people for their conduct while in office.

Two rough schemes were laid before the Conven

tion, one by Edmund Randolph, of Virginia, the other by William Patterson, of New Jersey. The former, which, with some changes, was finally accepted, represented the views of those who wanted a strong central government, the Federal party, as they were afterwards called; the other, those of their opponents. Hamilton also brought forward a scheme; but this went so far beyond the wishes and views of the mass of the Federals, that it met with no support. Finally Randolph's scheme was adopted, and the Convention applied itself to casting it into shape. The result, with some changes, has continued to be the Constitution of the United States to the present day. The chief provisions were as follows:-The government was to be in the hands of a President and Congress. Congress was to consist of two Houses, the upper called the Senate, the lower the House of Representatives. In this the Convention was no doubt influenced by the example of the State Governments, and so indirectly by that of England. There was, however, this special advantage in having two Houses. It got over, as no other contrivance could have, the difficulty resulting from the difference of size between the various states. The members of the Upper House were to be elected by the State Legislatures; those of the Lower House by the qualified electors of the various states. in the Upper House each state was to have two senators, in the Lower the number of representatives was to be proportioned to the population of the states.

But

Thus the smaller states were not altogether put on an equality with their larger neighbors, nor altogether subjected to them. As in the Congress of the Revolution, the question how the slaves should be reckoned in apportioning representatives gave rise to much discussion. Finally a compromise was adopted, and three-fifths of the slaves were counted as population. The power of making laws was intrusted to Congress, but the president's assent was necessary. If the president should refuse his assent to a measure, it was then sent back to Congress, and if again passed by a majority of twothirds in each House, it became law. The president himself is to be elected for four years. He was not to be directly elected by the people, but by electors chosen by the citizens in each state. This was introduced with the idea that it would secure a wise and more deliberate choice than if the people

voted directly. The number of electors for each state was to be equal to the number of senators and representatives together from that state. The manner of choosing these electors in each state was to be decided by the Legislature of that state. In most cases they were chosen by the mass of the citizens; in some by the state Legislature. If two candidates for the presidency got an equal number of votes, the House of Representatives was to vote between them, voting, not singly, but by states. If no one received the votes of a majority of the electors, the House was to elect one out of the five highest on the list. There was to be a vice-president, who was to fill the president's place in case of a vacancy. At first the vice-president was to be the second candidate for the presidency, but this was found to give rise to great confusion, and after 1804 the vicepresident was chosen by a separate election, though upon the same system. All persons who were entitled to vote for members of the lower branch of the Legislature in the state in which they lived, were to be entitled to vote for members of Congress and presidential electors. This provision enabled the states to control the suffrage for national purposes, and thus to exclude free blacks.

The president was to appoint all public officers, and to be the commander-in-chief of the army and navy. The seat of government was to be a neutral territory, not exceeding one hundred square miles, under the direct control of Congress. This district was granted by Maryland, and is known as the District of Columbia. The capital city is Washington. There was to be one supreme judicial court, presided over by a chief justice, who was appointed by the president for life. This supreme court was entrusted with the important task of dealing with all cases in which the enactments of Congress might clash with the enactments of the various State Governments. By this means one of the great obstacles to a confederation was got over. All disputes between the two conflicting powers, the central Legislature and the State Governments, were referred to a body independent of each. Moreover, those who felt the danger of a democratic constitution valued this court as the one part of the government which was not directly dependent on the people. On the other hand, thorough-going democrats like Jefferson looked on this as a mistake.

When the Constitution was drawn up, the difficul

ties of its framers had little more than begun. The question at once arose, how was the Constitution to be put in force? Congress had no power to grant away its own authority to a new government, nor had the nation enough confidence in it to accept its decision. Accordingly the Convention resolved to lay it before the various states. The serious question then arose, what was to be done if some of the states accepted, some refused? Finally it was decided, that, if nine states accepted it, the Constitution should take effect, and that, if any of the remaining states refused, they must be left out of the new confederation. In accordance with this, conventions of the various states were summoned. The contest was a severe one. The struggle was hardest in New York and Virginia, but in both the Constitution at length prevailed. In Virginia, Patrick Henry opposed it with the utmost animosity, and with the power and eloquence of his best days. It is related that at one meeting he spoke for seven hours at a stretch. Henry, however, became conspicuous before his death as a supporter of the central government against the rights of separate states. Rhode Island and North Carolina held out the longest, and for a while remained outside the Union; but they, too, at length acceded.

Washington was called by the united voice of the nation to the presidency. In him the nation had a leader, who commanded the love and confidence of his fellow-countrymen as no other man ever has. But for this extraordinary good fortune, it is unlikely that the American people, with its violent dread and hatred of monarchy, would ever have consented to the rule of a president. The new government did not long enjoy peace. In 1787 hostilities had broken out between the inhabitants of the newly-settled western territory and the Indians there. As in such cases generally, there seem to have been acts of unprovoked and unjustifiable violence on each side.

Forces were sent against the Indians in 1790 and 1791, but both were defeated with heavy loss. Both the commanders in those expeditions, General Harmer and General St. Clair, were tried for incapacity, but acquitted. In 1794 Wayne, who had distinguished himself in the War of Independence, was sent against the Indians. He defeated them in a decisive battle, and in 1795 they sued for peace. In this war the government met with no small dif

ficulty in enlisting an army. One party in Congress maintained that the war should be carried on solely by the border militia. Great inconvenience too was felt, as in the war with England, from the system of short enlistments.

In 1794 an insurrection broke out in Pennsylvania. This sprung out of the discontent felt at the imposition of a duty on spirits. His first term closing, Washington was re-elected president. His second term of office was marked by still more serious difficulties. The relations of the States with England, France and Spain were unfriendly. The English government refused to quit some of the western forts, on the ground that the States had not fulfilled the terms of the treaty. John Adams was sent as envoy to England, and was well received by the king. But for a while the points in dispute remained unsettled. The Spanish government refused the Americans the use of the lower waters of the Mississippi, and seized ships sailing there. Moreover there were disputes about the boundaries of the Spanish and American territories.

The manner in which peace had been made had done something to sow the seeds of discord between England and France. The outbreak of the French revolution served further to alter the relations between the two countries. The moderate party in the States stood aloof from the successful revolutionists, and looked upon the influence of that party in America as dangerous, while the Democrats, headed by Jefferson, were drawn more closely towards France. The war between England and France threw the relations of America to both nations into still greater confusion.

Two distinct political parties had now sprung up within the States. As we have seen, there was, at the time of the settlement of the Constitution, a State Rights party on the one side, and a Federal party, as it was called, on the other. The State Rights party always denied the right of their opponents to the name of Federalists, declaring that they were equally in favor of a federal government; that the real question was, which system was most truly federal, and that, for one party to call themselves Federalists, and their opponents Anti-federalists, was begging the question. The passing of the Constitution in a great measure overthrew the Anti-federal party; but as soon as the Constitution was established, the old struggle was renewed in a

slightly different form. The Anti-federalists, calling themselves Republicans, sought to restrict the central government as much as possible, and to interpret the Constitution in the way most favorable to the state governments; the Federals wished in everything to strengthen the central government at the expense of the separate states. In this there can be no doubt that the extreme men on each side, and most perhaps those of the Federal party, strove to stretch the Constitution beyond what they must have known to be the wishes of its framers.

It is important to understand clearly the origin and nature of these two parties, as the division between them runs on through all later American history, changing its form indeed, but still remaining in many important points the same. The Federal party was headed by Hamilton. Its main strength lay in the commercial states of the north and east, and especially among the New York merchants. The other party, with Jefferson for its leader, drew its strength mainly from the southern planters.

Washington could not be said strictly to belong to either party; indeed, his neutrality was one of the points which gave the nation such confidence in him. His leanings however were towards the Federals. He had sought to do justice to both parties by appointing Hamilton and Jefferson to the Departments of Finance and Foreign Affairs, making them thereby his principal advisers. The first great subject on which the two parties joined battle was the question of a national bank. This was Hamilton's project. The Republicans were opposed to it, as throwing too much power into the hands of government. They denied that the Constitution gave the government any power to form such an institution. Finally the bank was established. Another even more serious matter was the foreign policy of the government. As was said before, Jefferson and his followers were the friends of France, Hamilton and the Federals, of England. Reckless charges were brought against each of these statesmen, and have been repeated since, accusing them of readiness to sacrifice the interest of America to that of the European nation whom they respectively favored. But, whatever may have been the case with inferior members of the two parties, there can be no doubt that both Hamilton and Jefferson were above any such designs. Faults they both had as

statesmen; but, widely as they differed in all things else, they agreed in serving their country faithfully, though on different principles and in different ways. A bill for stopping all trade with England was carried in Congress, and was only prevented from becoming law by the president's veto. In 1794, a treaty was made with England, carried by Washington's influence by a bare majority.

In 1797 Washington retired. He steadily refused re-election, thereby setting a precedent, which for a long time was religiously followed. In a favorable address to his countrymen he reminded them forcibly of the need for forgetting all distinctions and remembering only that they were Americans. "The name," he said, "of America must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations." Following up the same line of thought, he pointed out that the difference between the northern, southern, eastern, and western states, so far from being causes of separation, were in reality only reasons for a closer union, since each quarter required to be helped and to have its wants supplied, by the resources of the rest. After his retirement, Washington took no active part in public life, but employed himself with the management of his estates and with farming, in which he took great delight.

In the next year the fear of a French war obliged the government to make military preparations, and Washington was appointed commander-in-chief. The danger, however, passed over, and the rest of his life was spent in peaceful retirement. That, however, did not last long. In the next year, 1799, a cold brought on by exposure carried him off after a short illness. Not only in America, but in France and even in England, the news of his death was received with marks of public sorrow. The unpopu

larity which his foreign policy had brought upon him passed away, and did nothing to weaken the love, gratitude, and esteem, with which his countrymen have ever regarded his memory. Never in all history have such feelings been better deserved. From first to last, no selfish ambition, no desire for aggrandizement, had ever led him astray from the duty which he owed to his country. Successful leaders of revolutions have always been exposed to special temptations, and have seldom altogether resisted them. Few have been more tempted than Washington; yet none has ever passed through the