Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Textbook Ebook Practice Makes Perfect French Verb Tenses 3Rd Edition Trudie Booth All Chapter PDF
Textbook Ebook Practice Makes Perfect French Verb Tenses 3Rd Edition Trudie Booth All Chapter PDF
French
Verb Tenses
French
Verb Tenses
Premium Third Edition
ISBN: 978-1-26-012172-8
MHID: 1-26-012172-0
The material in this eBook also appears in the print version of this title: ISBN: 978-1-26-012171-1,
MHID: 1-26-012171-2.
All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners. Rather than put a trademark symbol after every occurrence of a trademarked name,
we use names in an editorial fashion only, and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark. Where
such designations appear in this book, they have been printed with initial caps.
McGraw-Hill Education eBooks are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums and sales promotions or for use in corporate
training programs. To contact a representative, please visit the Contact Us page at www.mhprofessional.com.
Trademarks: McGraw-Hill Education, the McGraw-Hill Education logo, Practice Makes Perfect, and related trade dress are trademarks or
registered trademarks of McGraw-Hill Education and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without writ-
ten permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. McGraw-Hill Education is not associated with any product or
vendor mentioned in this book.
Extensive audio recordings, vocabulary flash cards, review quizzes, and progress tests are available to support your study of this book. Go to the
Apple app store or the Google Play store (for Android devices) to download the free Language Lab mobile app. A web version is also available
online at: mhe-language-lab.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html. Note: Internet access required for streaming audio.
TERMS OF USE
This is a copyrighted work and McGraw-Hill Education and its licensors reserve all rights in and to the work. Use of this work is subject to
these terms. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act of 1976 and the right to store and retrieve one copy of the work, you may not decom-
pile, disassemble, reverse engineer, reproduce, modify, create derivative works based upon, transmit, distribute, disseminate, sell, publish or
sublicense the work or any part of it without McGraw-Hill Education’s prior consent. You may use the work for your own noncommercial and
personal use; any other use of the work is strictly prohibited. Your right to use the work may be terminated if you fail to comply with these terms.
THE WORK IS PROVIDED “AS IS.” McGRAW-HILL EDUCATION AND ITS LICENSORS MAKE NO GUARANTEES OR WARRAN-
TIES AS TO THE ACCURACY, ADEQUACY OR COMPLETENESS OF OR RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM USING THE WORK,
INCLUDING ANY INFORMATION THAT CAN BE ACCESSED THROUGH THE WORK VIA HYPERLINK OR OTHERWISE, AND
EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES
OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. McGraw-Hill Education and its licensors do not warrant or
guarantee that the functions contained in the work will meet your requirements or that its operation will be uninterrupted or error free. Neither
McGraw-Hill Education nor its licensors shall be liable to you or anyone else for any inaccuracy, error or omission, regardless of cause, in the
work or for any damages resulting therefrom. McGraw-Hill Education has no responsibility for the content of any information accessed through
the work. Under no circumstances shall McGraw-Hill Education and/or its licensors be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, punitive,
consequential or similar damages that result from the use of or inability to use the work, even if any of them has been advised of the possibility
of such damages. This limitation of liability shall apply to any claim or cause whatsoever whether such claim or cause arises in contract, tort
or otherwise.
Contents
Introduction ix
Useful grammatical terminology for verbs xi
A few remarks about French pronunciation xv
vi Contents
10 The conditional 169
The formation of the present conditional 169
The uses of the present conditional 172
The formation of the past conditional 179
The uses of the past conditional 181
Tense sequences in conditional sentences 184
11 The subjunctive 189
The present subjunctive of regular verbs 190
The present subjunctive of irregular verbs 193
The past subjunctive 201
The uses of the subjunctive 203
Exercices de révision 231
The use of the subjunctive in the main clause 234
13 The imperative 263
Regular forms of the imperative 263
The negative imperative 264
Irregular forms of the imperative 265
The position of object pronouns with the imperative 267
The imperative of reflexive verbs 270
Contents vii
Review exercises 295
Appendix A: Numbers, dates, time 333
Appendix B: Verb tables 337
French-English glossary 363
English-French glossary 375
Answer key 387
viii Contents
The verb is the most important part of the sentence. It expresses an action or state
of the subject and indicates the time and mood of an occurrence. In order to be
able to communicate in a language, you must know how its verb tenses and moods
are formed and how they are used.
Practice Makes Perfect: French Verb Tenses is a manual and workbook that
offers the learner a clear and comprehensive explanation of the French verb sys-
tem, as well as the opportunity to practice the newly acquired skills in numerous
exercises that follow each section. Differences between French and English usage
are pointed out throughout the book, and idiomatic expressions are presented
where literal translations would be incorrect. The vocabulary in the examples and
exercises is taken from current usage and is useful for daily communication.
Vocabulary presentations make translations easier, and a glossary is provided so
that the student can look up new words or words that he/she may have forgotten.
And in this new edition, there is a comprehensive review section of exercises.
Finally, an answer key allows the user to correct the completed work.
Many years of teaching experience at American universities have taught me
where the difficulties of the French language lie for native English speakers when
choosing a tense or mood and when inserting a verb in the sentence. The choice of
the correct past tense (imperfect or passé composé, for example) and the addition
of direct and indirect objects can be quite a challenge for the student. French Verb
Tenses is designed to help the learner overcome these difficulties and to master an
important aspect of French grammar. The book can be used for additional prac-
tice in beginning, intermediate, and advanced language classes; it is ideal for self-
study and review and can also serve as a reliable reference tool for students and
teachers of French.
All French grammar books have sections on verbs but cannot devote as much
space as necessary to this subject. Most French verb books on today’s market focus
on conjugations and give little, if any, information about the usage of verbs and idi-
oms. What sets French Verb Tenses apart from other books on the same subject is
its goal to offer not only a thorough description of all contemporary verb forms
and moods but also to show how they are used in a given context. Clear definitions
of grammatical terms in the introduction and throughout the manual facilitate
comprehension. In addition, cultural information about France has been included
in the exercises so that the learner, while refining his/her written and oral com-
munication skills, also gets an insight into aspects of French culture.
New to this third edition are complementary resources available via the
McGraw-Hill Education Language Lab mobile app. All vocabulary lists are pro-
vided as flashcards for study and review; quick quizzes for each chapter will test
ix
x Introduction
Infinitive
The infinitive is the basic, unconjugated form of the verb. In English, all infinitives
are preceded by to. In French, infinitives end in -er, -ir, or -re (donner [to give],
choisir [to choose], vendre [to sell]).
Subject
The subject of a sentence is the person or thing that performs the action. The sub-
ject determines the form of the verb: I go. You sing. David asks. We dance. The
students work. The subject can be a noun (David, the students) or a pronoun (I,
you, he, etc.).
Conjugation
When one lists the six existing verb forms in a particular tense by adapting the
verb to each of the subject pronouns, one conjugates the verb. Contrary to English,
most French verb forms change from one person to another during the
conjugation.
Compare the following two present tense conjugations:
French: je parle, tu parles, il/elle/on parle, nous parlons, vous parlez,
ils/elles parlent. (Only two forms are alike.)
English: I speak, you speak, he/she/one speaks, we speak, you speak, they
speak. (All forms are the same except one.)
Stem
The stem is what is left of the verb after dropping the infinitive ending -er, -ir, or
-re. Thus, the stem of parler is parl-, the stem of réussir is réuss-, and the stem of
attendre is attend-.
Verb ending
A verb ending is what is added to the stem during the conjugation. Regular -er
verbs, for example, have the endings -e, -es, -e, -ons, -ez, -ent in the present indic-
ative. The verb ending indicates the subject, tense, and mood, i.e., it shows who or
what performs the action, when this action occurs, and how it is perceived.
xi
Mood
Grammatical mood means “manner.” It shows how the speaker perceives what he or she is saying.
There are four personal and two impersonal moods in French.
The indicative, subjunctive, imperative, and conditional are personal moods. The infinitive
and the participle (present and past) are impersonal moods. Impersonal moods do not show who
performs the action.
Elision
A vowel is elided when it is dropped and replaced by an apostrophe (je danse, but j’adore).
Subject pronouns
The following set of subject pronouns are used when conjugating a verb in French:
SINGULAR PLURAL
The French subject pronouns differ from their English counterparts in the following way:
◆ There are two ways to say you, depending on whom one addresses (see Note).
◆ There are two ways to say they, due to gender (see Note).
◆ There is no specific word for it. French refers instead to a masculine thing with il (he) and
to a feminine thing with elle (she).
Note: The e in je is elided (i.e., dropped), and je becomes j’ before a verb that starts with a
vowel or mute h: j’aime, j’habite.
The pronouns il and elle can be used for persons, animals, and things.
The pronoun il expresses
◆ he (replacing a masculine person)
◆ it (replacing a masculine thing—or an animal—and used as a subject in impersonal
expressions)
The pronoun elle expresses
◆ she (replacing a feminine person)
◆ it (replacing a feminine thing or animal)
The indefinite pronoun on expresses one, they, people.
Comment dit-on « chair » en français? How does one say “chair” in French?
On parle français en Belgique. People (5 They) speak French in Belgium.
Verb categories
◆ Regular verbs. The conjugation of these verbs follows a fixed pattern. Once you learn this
pattern, you can conjugate each verb within one group (-er, -ir, or -re verbs). With regu-
lar verbs, the stem of the infinitive remains intact during the conjugation, and all verbs
within one group have the same endings.
◆ Irregular verbs. The conjugation of each of these verbs does not follow a fixed pattern
and therefore must be memorized.
◆ Auxiliaries. These verbs (avoir and être in French) are also called helping verbs because
they help to build a compound tense.
◆ Transitive verbs. These are verbs that can take an (direct or indirect) object. An object is
a person who (or a thing that) receives the action of the subject. In the sentence je visite
le musée (I visit the museum), le musée is the object. The verb visiter is transitive.
In dictionaries, transitive verbs are often indicated by the abbreviation v.tr. (verbe
transitif). You will find a more detailed explanation of the different kinds of objects in the
section Verbs and their objects, pages 25–32.
◆ Intransitive verbs. Intransitive verbs, such as aller (to go), venir (to come), and rester (to
stay), cannot take an object. You cannot go, come, or stay “someone” or “something.” In
dictionaries, intransitive verbs are usually indicated by the abbreviation v.i. (verbe
intransitif).
◆ Reflexive verbs. The infinitive of these verbs is preceded by the reflexive pronoun se (or
s’ before a vowel or mute h). The verbs se coucher (to go to bed) and s’amuser (to have a
good time) are reflexive verbs.
◆ Impersonal verbs. These are verbs that are only used in the third-person singular (5 il)
form. Many impersonal verbs describe the weather: Il pleut. (It is raining.)
Beginning students of French usually have no difficulty writing the words they
have learned but find it hard to pronounce them. In French, numerous letters are
silent, and some represent sounds that do not exist in English. Depending on its
environment within the word, one letter may have several different pronuncia-
tions, and one sound may have several different spellings. Although French uses
the same alphabet as English, the rules of English pronunciation do not apply. The
sounds that the letters of the alphabet produce in French are frequently quite dif-
ferent from those they produce in English.
To indicate how a letter or combination of letters is pronounced, the symbols
of the International Phonetic Alphabet are often used, i.e., the letters are tran-
scribed phonetically. Phonetic transcriptions are always placed in square brackets.
The word temps, for example, is transcribed [t3], the word homme [Om]. Note
that silent letters (m, p, s in the first example, h and e in the second example) do
not appear in phonetic transcriptions.
There are thirty-six phonetic symbols that represent the thirty-six sounds of
the French language. If you learn these extremely useful symbols, and if you know
which sounds they describe, you will be able to understand the transcriptions
given in this book and look up the pronunciation of French words in many
dictionaries.
Consonants
Most of the symbols representing the consonants and half-consonants (or semi-
vowels) are derived from the Latin alphabet that we use to write French and
English.
FRENCH WORDS THAT ENGLISH WORDS THAT
SYMBOL CONTAIN THIS SOUND CONTAIN A SIMILAR SOUND
xv
The following phonetic symbols are not taken from the Latin alphabet:
FRENCH WORDS THAT ENGLISH WORDS THAT
SYMBOL CONTAIN THIS SOUND CONTAIN A SIMILAR SOUND
Vowels
Note that French vowel sounds are much tenser than the English ones.
FRENCH WORDS THAT ENGLISH WORDS THAT
SYMBOL CONTAIN THIS SOUND CONTAIN A SIMILAR SOUND
Nasal vowels
Note that these vowels are transcribed with a tilde [~] above them and that the sounds they rep-
resent resonate in the nose.
FRENCH WORDS THAT ENGLISH WORDS THAT
SYMBOL CONTAIN THIS SOUND CONTAIN A SIMILAR SOUND
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this book:
adj. adjective
e.g. for example
fam. familiar (you [fam.] 5 tu)
f. or fem. feminine
f.pl. feminine plural
i.e. that is, that is to say
inf. infinitive
lit. literally (indicating a literal translation of a French expression or sentence)
m. or masc. masculine
m.pl. masculine plural
p. page
pl. or plur. plural
pol. polite (you [pol.] 5 vous)
qch quelque chose (something)
qn quelqu’un (someone)
sing. singular
sb somebody
sth something
French
Verb Tenses
The second session of the 17th Congress opened on the 4th day of
March, 1820, with James Monroe at the head of the Executive
Department of the Government, and the Democratic party in the
majority in both branches of the Federal Legislature. The Cabinet at
that time was composed of the most brilliant minds of the country,
indeed as most justly remarked by Senator Thomas H. Benton in his
published review of the events of that period, it would be difficult to
find in any government, in any country, at any time, more talent and
experience, more dignity and decorum, more purity of private life, a
larger mass of information, and more addiction to business, than was
comprised in the list of celebrated names then constituting the
executive department of the government. The legislative department
was equally impressive. The exciting and agitating question then
pending before Congress was on the admission of the State of
Missouri into the Federal Union, the subject of the issue being the
attempted tacking on of conditions restricting slavery within her
limits. She was admitted without conditions under the so-called
compromise, which abolished it in certain portions of the then
province of Louisiana. In this controversy, the compromise was
sustained and carried entirely by the Democratic Senators and
members from the Southern and slaveholding States aided and
sanctioned by the Executive, and it was opposed by fifteen Senators
from non-slaveholding States, who represented the opposite side on
the political questions of the day. It passed the House by a close vote
of 86 to 82. It has been seriously questioned since whether this act
was constitutional. The real struggle was political, and for the
balance of power. For a while it threatened the total overthrow of all
political parties upon principle, and the substitution of geographical
parties discriminated by the slave line, and thus destroying the
proper action of the Federal government, and leading to a separation
of the States. It was a federal movement, accruing to the benefit of
that party, and at first carried all the Northern democracy in its
current, giving the supremacy to their adversaries. When this effect
was perceived, democrats from the northern non-slaveholding States
took early opportunity to prevent their own overthrow, by voting for
the admission of the States on any terms, and thus prevent the
eventual separation of the States in the establishment of
geographical parties divided by a slavery and anti-slavery line.
The year 1820 marked a period of financial distress in the country,
which soon became that of the government. The army was reduced,
and the general expenses of the departments cut down, despite
which measures of economy the Congress deemed it necessary to
authorize the President to contract for a loan of five million dollars.
Distress was the cry of the day; relief the general demand, the chief
demand coming from debtors to the Government for public lands
purchased under the then credit system, this debt at that time
aggregating twenty-three millions of dollars. The banks failed,
money vanished, instalments were coming due which could not be
met; and the opening of Congress in November, 1820, was saluted by
the arrival of memorials from all the new States praying for the relief
to the purchaser of the public lands. The President referred to it in
his annual message of that year, and Congress passed a measure of
relief by changing the system to cash sales instead of credit, reducing
the price of the lands, and allowing present debtors to apply
payments already made to portions of the land purchased,
relinquishing the remainder. Applications were made at that time for
the establishment of the preemptive system, but without effect; the
new States continued to press the question and finally prevailed, so
that now the preemptive principle has become a fixed part of our
land system, permanently incorporated with it, and to the equal
advantage of the settler and the government.
The session of 1820–21, is remarkable as being the first at which
any proposition was made in Congress for the occupation and
settlement of our territory on the Columbia river—the only part then
owned by the United States on the Pacific coast. It was made by Dr.
Floyd, a representative from Virginia, who argued that the
establishment of a civilized power on the American coast of the
Pacific could not fail to produce great and wonderful benefits not
only to our own country, but to the people of Eastern Asia, China and
Japan on the opposite side of the Pacific Ocean, and that the valley of
the Columbia might become the granary of China and Japan. This
movement suggested to Senator Benton, to move, for the first time
publicly in the United States, a resolution to send ministers to the
Oriental States.
At this time treaties with Mexico and Spain were ratified, by which
the United States acquired Florida and ceded Texas; these treaties,
together with the Missouri compromise—a measure
contemporaneous with them—extinguished slave soil in all the
United States territory west of the Mississippi, except in that portion
which was to constitute the State of Arkansas; and, including the
extinction in Texas consequent upon its cession to a non-
slaveholding power, constituted the largest territorial abolition of
slavery that was ever up to that period effected by any political power
of any nation.
The outside view of the slave question in the United States, at this
time, is that the extension of slavery was then arrested,
circumscribed, and confined within narrow territorial limits, while
free States were permitted an almost unlimited expansion.
In 1822 a law passed Congress abolishing the Indian factory
system, which had been established during Washington’s
administration, in 1796, under which the Government acted as a
factor or agent for the sale of supplies to the Indians and the
purchase of furs from them; this branch of the service then belonged
to the department of the Secretary of War. The abuses discovered in
it led to the discontinuance of that system.
The Presidential election of 1824 was approaching, the candidates
were in the field, their respective friends active and busy, and
popular topics for the canvass in earnest requisition. Congress was
full of projects for different objects of internal improvement, mainly
in roads and canals, and the friends of each candidate exerted
themselves in rivalry of each other, under the supposition that their
opinions would stand for those of their principals. An act for the
preservation of the Cumberland Road, which passed both houses of
Congress, met with a veto from President Monroe, accompanied by a
state paper in exposition of his opinions upon the whole subject of
Federal interference in matters of inter state commerce and roads
and canals. He discussed the measure in all its bearings, and plainly
showed it to be unconstitutional. After stating the question, he
examined it under every head of constitutional derivation under
which its advocates claimed the power, and found it to be granted by
no one of them and virtually prohibited by some of them. This was
then and has since been considered to be the most elaborate and
thoroughly considered opinion upon the general question which has
ever been delivered by any American statesman. This great state
paper, delivered at a time when internal improvement by the federal
government had become an issue in the canvass for the Presidency
and was ardently advocated by three of the candidates and qualified
by two others, had an immense current in its power, carrying with it
many of the old strict constructionists.
The revision of the tariff, with a view to the protection of home
industry, and to the establishment of what was then called “The
American System,” was one of the large subjects before Congress at
the session of 1823–24, and was the regular commencement of the
heated debates on that question which afterwards ripened into a
serious difficulty between the federal government and some of the
Southern States. The presidential election being then depending, the
subject became tinctured with party politics, in which so far as that
ingredient was concerned, and was not controlled by other
considerations, members divided pretty much on the line which
always divided them on a question of constructive powers. The
protection of domestic industry not being among the powers granted,
was looked for in the incidental; and denied by the strict
constructionists to be a substantive term, to be exercised for the
direct purpose of protection; but admitted by all at that time and
ever since the first tariff act of 1789, to be an incident to the revenue
raising power, and an incident to be regarded in the exercise of that
power. Revenue the object, protection the incident, had been the rule
in the earlier tariffs; now that rule was sought to be reversed, and to
make protection the object of the law, and revenue the incident. Mr.
Henry Clay was the leader in the proposed revision and the
champion of the American system; he was ably supported in the
House by many able and effective speakers; who based their
argument on the general distress then alleged to be prevalent in the
country. Mr. Daniel Webster was the leading speaker on the other
side, and disputed the universality of the distress which had been
described; and contested the propriety of high or prohibitory duties,
in the present active and intelligent state of the world, to stimulate
industry and manufacturing enterprise.
The bill was carried by a close vote in both Houses. Though
brought forward avowedly for the protection of domestic
manufactures, it was not entirely supported on that ground; an
increase of revenue being the motive with some, the public debt then
being nearly ninety millions. An increased protection to the products
of several States, as lead in Missouri and Illinois, hemp in Kentucky,
iron in Pennsylvania, wool in Ohio and New York, commanded many
votes for the bill; and the impending presidential election had its
influence in its favor.
Two of the candidates, Messrs. Adams and Clay, voted for and
avowedly supported General Jackson, who voted for the bill, was for
it, as tending to give a home supply of the articles necessary in time
of war, and as raising revenue to pay the public debt; Mr. Crawford
was opposed to it, and Mr. Calhoun had withdrawn as a Presidential
candidate. The Southern planting States were dissatisfied, believing
that the new burdens upon imports which it imposed, fell upon the
producers of the exports, and tended to enrich one section of the
Union at the expense of another. The attack and support of the bill
took much of a sectional aspect; Virginia, the two Carolinas, Georgia,
and some others, being unanimous against it. Pennsylvania, New
York, Ohio, and Kentucky being unanimous for it. Massachusetts,
which up to this time had no small influence in commerce, voted,
with all, except one member, against it. With this sectional aspect, a
tariff for protection, also began to assume a political aspect, being
taken under the care of the party, afterwards denominated as Whig.
The bill was approved by President Monroe; a proof that that careful
and strict constructionist of the constitution did not consider it as
deprived of its revenue character by the degree of protection which it
extended.
A subject which at the present time is exciting much criticism, viz:
proposed amendments to the constitution relative to the election of
President and Vice-President, had its origin in movements in that
direction taken by leading Democrats during the campaign of 1824.
The electoral college has never been since the early elections, an
independent body free to select a President and Vice-President;
though in theory they have been vested with such powers, in practice
they have no such practical power over the elections, and have had
none since their institution. In every case the elector has been an
instrument, bound to obey a particular impulsion, and disobedience
to which would be attended with infamy, and with every penalty
which public indignation could inflict. From the beginning they have
stood pledged to vote for the candidate indicated by the public will;
and have proved not only to be useless, but an inconvenient
intervention between the people and the object of their choice. Mr.
McDuffie in the House of Representatives and Mr. Benton in the
Senate, proposed amendments; the mode of taking the direct vote to
be in districts, and the persons receiving the greatest number of
votes for President or Vice-President in any district, to count one
vote for such office respectively which is nothing but substituting the
candidates themselves for their electoral representatives.
In the election of 1824 four candidates were before the people for
the office of President, General Jackson, John Quincy Adams,
William H. Crawford and Henry Clay. None of them received a
majority of the 261 electoral votes, and the election devolved upon
the House of Representatives. John C. Calhoun had a majority of the
electoral votes for the office of Vice-President, and was elected. Mr.
Adams was elected President by the House of Representatives,
although General Jackson was the choice of the people, having
received the greatest number of votes at the general election. The
election of Mr. Adams was perfectly constitutional, and as such fully
submitted to by the people; but it was a violation of the demos krateo
principle; and that violation was equally rebuked. All the
representatives who voted against the will of their constituents, lost
their favor, and disappeared from public life. The representation in
the House of Representatives was largely changed at the first general
election, and presented a full opposition to the new President. Mr.
Adams himself was injured by it, and at the ensuing presidential
election was beaten by General Jackson more than two to one.
Mr. Clay, who took the lead in the House for Mr. Adams, and
afterwards took upon himself the mission of reconciling the people to
his election in a series of public speeches, was himself crippled in the
effort, lost his place in the democratic party, and joined the Whigs
(then called the national republicans). The democratic principle was
victor over the theory of the Constitution, and beneficial results
ensued. It vindicated the people in their right and their power. It re-
established parties upon the basis of principle, and drew anew party
lines, then almost obliterated under the fusion of parties during the
“era of good feeling,” and the efforts of leading men to make personal
parties for themselves. It showed the conservative power of our
government to lie in the people, more than in its constituted
authorities. It showed that they were capable of exercising the
function of self-government, and lastly, it assumed the supremacy of
the democracy for a long time, and until lost by causes to be referred
to hereafter. The Presidential election of 1824 is remarkable under
another aspect—its results cautioned all public men against future
attempts to govern presidential elections in the House of
Representatives; and it put an end to the practice of caucus
nominations for the Presidency by members of Congress. This mode
of concentrating public opinion began to be practiced as the eminent
men of the Revolution, to whom public opinion awarded a
preference, were passing away, and when new men, of more equal
pretensions, were coming upon the stage. It was tried several times
with success and general approbation, because public sentiment was
followed—not led—by the caucus. It was attempted in 1824 and
failed; all the opponents of Mr. Crawford, by their joint efforts,
succeeded, and justly in the fact though not in the motive, in
rendering these Congress caucus nominations odious to the people,
and broke them down. They were dropped, and a different mode
adopted—that of party nominations by conventions of delegates from
the States.
The administration of Mr. Adams commenced with his inaugural
address, in which the chief topic was that of internal national
improvement by the federal government. This declared policy of the
administration furnished a ground of opposition against Mr. Adams,
and went to the reconstruction of parties on the old line of strict, or
latitudinous, construction of the Constitution. It was clear from the
beginning that the new administration was to have a settled and
strong opposition, and that founded in principles of government—
the same principles, under different forms, which had discriminated
parties at the commencement of the federal government. Men of the
old school—survivors of the contest of the Adams and Jefferson
times, with some exceptions, divided accordingly—the federalists
going for Mr. Adams, the republicans against him, with the mass of
the younger generation. The Senate by a decided majority, and the
House by a strong minority, were opposed to the policy of the new
President.
In 1826 occurred the famous debates in the Senate and the House,
on the proposed Congress of American States, to contract alliances to
guard against and prevent the establishment of any future European
colony within its borders. The mission though sanctioned was never
acted upon or carried out. It was authorized by very nearly a party
vote, the democracy as a party being against it. The President, Mr.
Adams, stated the objects of the Congress to be as follows: “An
agreement between all the parties represented at the meeting, that
each will guard, by its own means, against the establishment of any
future European colony within its own borders, may be advisable.
This was, more than two years since, announced by my predecessor
to the world, as a principle resulting from the emancipation of both
the American continents. It may be so developed to the new southern
nations, that they may feel it as an essential appendage to their
independence.”
Mr. Adams had been a member of Mr. Monroe’s cabinet, filling the
department from which the doctrine would emanate. The
enunciation by him as above of this “Monroe Doctrine,” as it is
called, is very different from what it has of late been supposed to be,
as binding the United States to guard all the territory of the New
World from European colonization. The message above quoted was
written at a time when the doctrine as enunciated by the former
President through the then Secretary was fresh in the mind of the
latter, and when he himself in a communication to the American
Senate was laying it down for the adoption of all the American
nations in a general congress of their deputies. According to
President Adams, this “Monroe Doctrine” (according to which it has
been of late believed that the United States were to stand guard over
the two Americas, and repulse all intrusive colonists from their
shores), was entirely confined to our own borders; that it was only
proposed to get the other States of the New World to agree that, each
for itself, and by its own means, should guard its own territories;
and, consequently, that the United States, so far from extending
gratuitous protection to the territories of other States, would neither
give, nor receive, aid in any such enterprise, but that each should use