s it was universal, and explains the fierce
party-spirit which possessed the statesmen of that period, and likewise
accounts for many of their errors.

Among these errors must be placed the belief which Jefferson had, that
there was a party of monarchists in the country. Sir. Randall makes a
long argument in support of this opinion, and closes with an intimation
that those who refuse to believe now cannot be reached by reason. He may
rank us with these perverse skeptics; for, in our opinion, his argument
not only fails to establish his propositions, but is strong against
them. Let it be understood;--the assertion is not, that there were some
who would have preferred a monarchy to a republic, but that, after the
government was established, Ames, Sedgwick, Hamilton, and other Federal
leaders, were plotting to overturn it and create a monarchy. Upon this
we have no hesitation in taking issue. The real state of the case, and
the circumstances which deceived Mr. Jefferson, may be briefly set
forth.

Jefferson left France shortly after the taking of the Bastile. He saw
the most auspicious period of the Revolution. During the session of the
Estates General, the evils which afflicted France were admitted by all,
but the remedies proposed were, as yet, purely speculative. The roseate
theories of poets and enthusiasts had filled every mind with vague
expectations of some great good in the future. Nothing had occurred to
disturb these pleasing anticipations. There was no sign of the fearful
disasters then impending. The delirium of possession had not seized upon
the nation,--her statesmen had not learned how much easier it is to plan
than to achieve,--nor had the voice of Burke carried terror throughout
Europe. Even now, it is impossible to read the first acts of that drama
without being moved to sympathetic enthusiasm. What emotions must it not
have excited while the awful catastrophe was yet concealed! Tried by any
received test, France, for centuries, had been the chief state in
Europe,--inferior to none in the arts of war, superior to any in the
arts of peace. Fashion and letters had given her an empire more
permanent than that which the enterprise of Columbus and the fortune of
Charles gave to Spain, more extended than that which Trafalgar and
Waterloo have since given to England. Though her armies were resisted,
her wit and grace were irresistible; every European prince was her
subject, every European court a theatre for th