definitions of the words "republic," and "republican," are strongly
inharmonious with their true meaning, as correctly understood by the
great bulk of Americans. Thus, Brande asserts that "A republic may be
either a democracy or an aristocracy!"--and proceeds to say: "In the
former, the supreme power is vested in the whole body of the people, or
in representatives elected by the people; in the latter, it is vested in
a nobility, or a privileged class of comparatively a small number of
persons." John Adams also wrote: "The customary meanings of the words
republic and commonwealth have been infinite. They have been applied to
every Government under heaven; that of Turkey and that of Spain, as well
as that of Athens and of Rome, of Geneva and San Marino." But the true
meaning of the word "republican" as applied to a "form of government,"
and as commonly and almost invariably understood by those who, above all
others in the wide World, should best understand and appreciate its
blessings--to wit: the American People has none of the looseness and
indefiniteness which these authorities throw about it.

The prevailing and correct American idea is that "Republican" means: of,
or pertaining to, a Republic; that "Republic" means a thing, affair, or
matter, closely related to, and touching the "public;" and that the
"public" are the "people"--not a small proportion of them, but "the
people at large," the whole community, the Nation, the commonalty, the
generality. Hence, "a Republican form of government" is, in their
opinion, plainly that form which is most closely identified with, and
representative of, the generality or majority of the people; or, in the
language of Dr. J. E. Worcester, it is "That form of government or of a
State, in which the supreme power is vested in the people, or in
representatives elected by the people."

It is obvious that there can be no such thing as "a republic," which is,