which the enemies of free government would represent it to be.
Its fundamental principles may be partially traced through the
modern theoretical maxims, and the ancient usages of England. This
consideration, however, does not derogate from the wisdom of the
founders of the Republic, who have so successfully availed themselves
of the experience of other countries and other ages, in organizing
the system; and maturing it by the most unremitting diligence through
peace and war. A review of the progress of American politics, and of
the reasonings which guided the patriotic legislators, would be a
work of much interest. It would lay before us a large portion of the
best abilities, and the most tried virtue of the country, engaged
in inquiries conducive to the general interests of the nation. It
would disclose at every important crisis a venerable assembly, which
neither announced their proceedings as the greatest efforts of human
ingenuity, nor assumed the lofty tone of an “omnipotent” legislature,
but recurred to the will of their constituents for ratification, and,
keeping a view to the future as well as to the present circumstances,
provided the {180} means of revising and amending their decisions.
It was in consequence of this philosophical mode of proceeding, that
the present admirable fabric was gradually erected. It was thus that
the declaration of independence of 1776, a temperate, but energetic
manifesto, intimating the determination of the colonies to throw off
the foreign yoke, was succeeded by the articles of confederation in
1778. This compact, although efficient in time of public danger, was,
during the succeeding peace, found to be defective in not admitting
the dignity and promptitude necessary to the general government, and
not furnishing a sufficient guarantee for the permanence of the Union.
Under the articles of confederation, each State retained the right
of voting its own supplies for the common benefit, and to lay taxes
on such articles as were found most convenient; also, to impose such
imposts and duties on foreign trade as they thought proper. The amount
of supplies furnished by each State was apportioned to the value of
the lands,--a criterion that could never be applied with accuracy.
In this state of things, the acts of Congress could in various cases
be only complied with, through the intervention of thirteen separate
State Assemblies. The power given to Congress to adjust the affairs
of foreign relations, was rendered almost nugatory by the diversity
of commercial regulations of separate States. It became possible,
that a separate State might be at variance with a foreign nation, on
affairs not at all interesting to the other members of the Union, and
that internal discord might arise from opposite interests, rivalship
in commerce, the distribution of territory, and a variety of other
latent causes.[112] To avoid {181} these inconveniences and dangers,
the constitution was framed by a convention of delegates from the
States, whose session ended on the 17th of September, 1787. A Congress
was elected on the new establishment, and General Washington was
unanimously appointed President in the succeeding year.[113]
The constitution vests the legislative power in a Congress, consisting
of a House of Representatives, and a Senate, and the executive power in
the President. The members of the House of Representatives are elected
biennially by the people. Each State has at least one representative,
and not more than one for every thirty thousand persons in it, and two
Senators, who are elected by the State legislature, at intervals of
six years, and are distributed into three classes, so that the seats
of a third part of them are vacated biennially. The President, and
Vice-President are elected for four years by the ballot of electors
appointed by the legislatures of the States; the number of electors in
each State being equal to that of the representatives and senators,
whom the same state has a right to send to Congress.
Bills for raising revenue originate in the House of Representatives;
and every bill that passes both {182} houses, must be presented to the
President for his approbation. In the event of his disapproving of a
bill, it must be returned to the house where it was originated, and if
two-thirds of the members of both houses agree, on re-consideration,
to pass it, then the bill becomes a law. The President is
commander-in-chief of the army, navy, and militia, and may in certain
cases, grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United
States. With the concurrence of two-thirds of the Senate, he appoints
ambassadors, and other public ministers, consuls, judges of the
supreme court, and all other officers of the United States, whose
appointments are not provided for by the constitution; but the Congress
has the power of making future laws for vesting appointments in the
President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.
The President may fill up vacancies in the Senate during recess, by
granting commissions terminating at the end of next session. Whenever
two-thirds of both houses deem it necessary, they shall propose
amendments of the constitution; or shall call a convention for that, on
the application of two-thirds of the state legislatures.
The duties and powers of the general government are concisely defined
by the constitution, and may be expressed summarily, as embracing the
subjects of commerce, finance, negociation, and war. All other objects
are reserved, as falling under the jurisdiction of the separate state
assemblies. These include local legislation, administration of justice
between persons in the same states, and the supervision of agriculture.
Although it appears, that much care has been bestowed in drawing the
line that separates the prerogatives of the general government, from
those {183} of its individual members, still duties or powers derived
from implication, are occasionally assumed by both departments. We
have two recent examples in view. In 1819, the legislatures of several
states imposed a heavy tax on the branches of the United States Bank,
situated in the respective states. The United States Bank, it must be
noticed, is chartered by Congress, and is the organ through which the
national government transacts its pecuniary affairs. The bank refused
payment, and obtained a judgment in its favour by the supreme or
federal court.[114] Again, the admission of the territory of Missouri
as a State in the Union, has lately been discussed in Congress. One
of the principal points of the debate was the question, Whether the
pre-existing States have a right to dictate to States about to be
admitted into the Union, any restriction against slave-keeping? And
it is understood that scruples on this question of right have induced
several members to vote against the restriction, whose sentiments are
opposed to slavery.
The distribution of business, of which a brief outline has just been
given, is admirably adapted to an extensive sphere of action. The
national councils are thus devoted to national concerns, and not to
such petty affairs as framing public acts for demolishing the fences of
private property to make room for highways, nor in borough politics,
nor in deciding in the disputes of private individuals. Local affairs
are regulated by local authorities, who are best able to judge of them;
and this prevents any ground of complaint to arise against the national
government on account of these. The State legislatures are, besides,
filled annually by a free vote of the people, who have frequent
opportunities of allaying their own discontents by a change of men, and
a change of measures.
Those who predict an early dissolution of the {184} American Union,
and who affirm that the country is naturally divided into two nations
by the Allegany ridge, might with equal propriety say, that the Thames
and the Severn are destined to water the territories of two distinct
governments. And the remark that, in the event of the navigation of the
Mississippi being interrupted by an enemy, the western country would be
subjugated, is another position that may be applied to other rivers,
and to other countries. It is not to be forgotten that, previously to
the cession of Louisiana in 1801, the Spanish government claimed the
exclusive benefit of that river, and that the privilege of navigation
was the principal object that induced the government of the United
States to purchase the territory, in 1803. Louisiana being acquired
at the general expense, and not by the inhabitants of the western
country alone, makes it evident that the transaction was viewed as
an important national affair. Perhaps it was with the intention of
producing a dismemberment, that the ministry of England made the
attack on New Orleans. The defence was conducted in a national form,
and not exclusively by the people of the western country; and the
British government was not gratified by any overture of the inhabitants
for becoming tributary. The supposed conspiracy of Aaron Burr, for
detaching the transmontane country from the Eastern States, was not
found to amount to levying war against the Union.[115] The evidence
that could be obtained from his small party of associates and others,
was not sufficient to convict him. The demagogue is not looked on as
a personage dangerous to public tranquillity;--a decisive proof that
the American people are confident in the strength of the ties by which
they are knit together. The western settlements have the strongest
incitements to remain in close conjunction, with their eastern
neighbours. {185} A separation from them in times of war would cut off
all communication by land with the eastern coast; an inconvenience
that would greatly aggravate any attempt to blockade the mouth of the
Mississippi. A separation would retard the ingress of population; it
would injure internal trade; it would occasion an additional expense
in supporting a separate government, and it would deprive them of the
protection of the United States’ Navy. It will scarcely be alleged,
that the Eastern States have an interest in dissolving the compact
with the Western; as by that step they would not only forego a rapid
accumulation of strength, but would incur the danger of converting
fellow citizens into the most powerful enemies. They would lose that
important branch of revenue, which arises from the sale of public
lands, and they would no longer participate in the fur trade.
To infer the instability of the American republic from the frequency
of revolutions in Europe, is altogether preposterous. A different
state of society, and the difference of the political institutions to
be compared, remove that parity of condition essential to analogical
deduction. The executive power in America, does not extend to declaring
war at pleasure; nor to dissolving the legislature. The president,
whose term of service is only four years, has not the means nor the
motives for family aggrandizement which prevail under hereditary
succession. The members of the House of Representatives have their
seats from the universal suffrage of the people; and the senators get
their dignity and seats from the representatives in State Assemblies,
who are themselves popularly elected, and who cannot promote obnoxious
men without incurring public odium and future exclusion. The
representation is equally distributed. Placemen and pensioners {186}
are effectually debarred from being members of either house; under
these conditions the few have it not in their power to dictate to the
many. Ambitious projects, such as disfigure the histories of other
countries, are precluded. Accessions of territory are not obtained
by conquest, but by purchase. The object sought in these treaties is
the right of soil; and not the power of taxing or enslaving men. No
yoke is imposed but that upon the labouring steer. The domestic policy
of the United States exhibits twenty-four republics, each having its
own constitution, without any other restriction than conformity
to that of the nation. In regard of foreign relations and general
interests, all the States are cemented into one nation. If one or
more States are invaded, the citizens have a right to the protection
of the Union; and in the case of controversies or disputes between
States, the judicial power provided under the general constitution
is the umpire between them. Had the individual members of the United
States placed a hereditary sovereign at the head of each, and put the
reins of government in the hands of a few, we might have heard, before
this time, of American courtiers making treaties to last forever; and
violating them so soon as the strong found it convenient to attack the
weak; of wars furnishing pretexts for raising vast sums to support the
views of a party or a faction, perhaps for depriving the people of
their liberties, and subjugating their neighbours; and of winding up
the whole with holy leagues, admitting of no subsequent arbitrator but
the sword.
The organization, of which a brief outline has just been given, is, in
theory, well adapted to insure internal tranquillity, and protection
against invasion. In practice, it has hitherto been conducive {187}
to both these objects; and to a degree of national prosperity, that
is unparalleled in the present age. The people govern for themselves,
and are too sensible of the value of their rights to allow them to
pass into other hands. Power is delegated only for a short period;
and the representatives are closely watched by their constituents.
Should a congress propose to disfranchise a part of the people; or to
engraft a borough system on the present equal representation; or to
establish septennial elections; every member voting for the obnoxious
motion might expect to be marked out and expelled for ever. A case
somewhat in point occurred in 1817.[116] Congress then passed a law
for increasing the very moderate compensation for the services of
members. The act was conceived to be unconstitutional: an alarm was
sounded all over the country; the supporters of increased compensation
were left out in the election of 1818; and the offensive law was
repealed in the ensuing session. A veneration for the constitution is
probably the most universal characteristic of American citizens: but
they act, as if their united exertions were necessary to keep it in
force; and are sensible, that neglect on their part might soon render
the important document a dead letter. Every timely check given to the
progress of corruption, is removing the necessity of convulsion to a
later date. The people having the means of correction in their own
hands, the political institutions of this country are to be esteemed
as less mutable than the systems that consist entirely of the unmixed
ingredients of disease and death. It would be too sanguine to suppose
that the American people shall preserve their liberties for ever; but
it may be safe to affirm, that nothing decisive in the fate of this
country {188} is to be augured from the histories of republics without
representation, or of monarchies without popular control. Before
Americans relinquish free government, they must be ignorant of their
present knowledge; they must cease to teach their children to prize
their privileges; and no longer inculcate esteem for the memory of
their dauntless ancestors, who fought for the inheritance. Washington,
Franklin, and an host of other patriots, must be forgotten. The
avarice of foreign governments, and the sufferings of foreign people,
must pass into oblivion, and cease to be monitors. In short, a dark age
must arrive before the throne of despotism can be erected here.
FOOTNOTES:
[112] Those who would wish to have a collected view of the principles
of this subject, may consult the Federalist, a collection of
interesting essays on the new constitution, written in 1788, by Messrs.
Hamilton, Jay, and Madison.--FLINT.
[113] Some pious observers of the occurrences of Providence, have
remarked that the Spanish Armada, equipped for the invasion of Britain,
was destroyed in the year 1588; that the Revolution in that country
happened in 1688; and, in seeking for an event to mark the commencement
of another century, it has been observed by the loyal in Britain,
that his Majesty, George the Third, recovered from a most deplorable
visitation in 1788. If there be any American descendants of Britain,
who are pleased with a system of chronology that contemplates the great
events of Providence as revolving in a centenarian orbit, they may
also notice a corresponding occurrence in the consummation of their
liberties in the otherwise memorable year 1788.--FLINT.
[114] The power of a state to tax the United States Bank was settled in
the celebrated case of McCulloch _versus_ Maryland, handed down March
6, 1819 (4 Wheaton, 316). Ohio refused to be bound by this decision,
and her case was decided in 1824 (9 Wheaton, 738).--ED.
[115] A recent contribution to the history of the Aaron Burr
conspiracy, drawn largely from material in the Mexican archives, is
McCaleb’s _Aaron Burr Conspiracy_ (New York, 1903). Isaac Jenkinson’s
_Aaron Burr_ (Richmond, Indiana, 1902), throws new light on Burr’s
relations to Hamilton and Jefferson.--ED.
[116] This law was passed in March, 1816, and its effect was felt in
the elections of that same year. From Ohio, Delaware, and Vermont not
one congressman was re-elected; in Kentucky, but three out of ten;
in South Carolina, three out of nine; in Maryland, four out of nine;
and in Pennsylvania, thirteen out of twenty-three. Jefferson wrote to
Gallatin: “There has never been an instance before of so unanimous an
opinion of the people, and that through every state of the Union.”--ED.
LETTER XVI
State Legislatures--A predilection for dividing Counties, laying out
New Towns and Roads--The influence of Slavery on the habits of People
who live in the neighbourhood of Slave-Keeping States--Elopements from
Kentucky--Banking.
_Jeffersonville, (Indiana,) March 10, 1820._
The legislatures of new States consist only of a few members. The
consequence is, that public acts for the exclusive advantage of
private individuals are occasionally passed through influence or
intrigue; and the commendations which I have bestowed on the general
government of America must not be held to apply indiscriminately to
the administration of the _local_ governments, at least in newly
established {189} states. Much of the business (it is said) is
privately arranged, before the questions are discussed in the house.
Combinations are formed for effecting particular purposes. These are
called _log rolling_; a very significant metaphor, borrowed from the
practice of several farmers uniting in rolling together large timber to
be burnt. A number of bills are frequently conjoined by their movers,
so that a member who takes a deep interest in one must vote for all
of them, to obtain the suffrage of the separate partizans. The member
who deserts from the cabal might be leaving his own motion without any
other supporter but himself. An enlightened gentleman told me, that
he was induced to vote for the ridiculous law of this State regarding
intercourse between white and coloured people, in consequence of its
being previously conjoined with other bills.
The laying out of new counties, county towns, and lines of road,
seems to be a gratifying duty to back-wood legislators. Where a
county includes a considerable tract of country, it must be divided
into two. Where it is not large enough to admit of bisection, the
county wanted must be made up from the extremities of four or five
which are contiguous. A large population is not a prerequisite: yet
the convenience of the people is the pretext. A few neighbours who
propose that their settlement should be made the nucleus of the new
establishment, petition the Assembly for a subdivision. If this is
granted, commissioners are appointed to fix the new seat of justice. An
eager contest for private advantage ensues, and although the ostensible
object is public convenience, the new city is perhaps placed near the
outline of its jurisdiction.
You will be much surprised to hear of the avidity which prevails
in this country for towns consisting of a very few log cabins. For
a convenient {190} distribution of seats of justice, and for roads
that are at best openings cut through the woods, with the stumps
remaining, without side ditches, and without any other bridges through
marshes or streams, than a few pieces of timber laid down side by
side across the way. But an explanation is made, when you are told
that pettifoggers by this means create situations for themselves, and
a few of their constituents who are in the employment of squires,
county commissioners, prosecuting attornies, supervisors of roads, and
constables. With numbers the design is to increase the value of their
contiguous lands at the public expense, instead of improving them by
their own industry. By such means, they frequently succeed in selling
at an advance of fifty, or even a hundred per cent, per annum; and
remove to more recent settlements, where they are able to purchase a
larger extent of land, and where they can continue their favourite
trade of making counties, towns, and roads.
Towns are laid out by persons who sell lots of about a fourth or a
fifth part of an acre: these sometimes sell at from a hundred to three
hundred dollars, even in situations where scarcely a single spot of
the neighbouring woods is cleared. After a town has made some progress
in point of improvement and population, lots usually rise in price,
from three hundred to a thousand dollars; and, in the larger towns, to
a much higher value. At present the mania of purchasing town lots is
rather declining. Holders are unwilling to see the prices reduced. They
continue to talk of former rates, and to keep them up; on exchanging
one lot for two, say, that for the better one, one thousand dollars
is paid in two lots worth five hundred each. Their conduct very much
resembles that of a person who said, that he sold a dog at forty
guineas, and explained the transaction by stating, {191} “that he was
paid in two dogs, each worth half that sum.” I lately saw a town lot
sold for state or county taxes, at a fourth part of the price paid
for it two years ago. The rents of the worst kind of houses amount
to upwards of fifty per cent, per annum, on the price of erection. A
miserable cabin, that could scarcely be let at all in your country, or
would not rent at £1 10s. a-year, gives here as much per month. The
people are of consequence closely crowded together; several families
frequently inhabiting a house of one apartment, without any inner door,
so that when the street door is open, passengers may see the inmates
at table, and the other particulars of the house. The beds are ranged
round the walls, like so many looms in a weaver’s work-shop. In various
instances I have seen families living in temporary huts, built of small
pieces of decayed timber collected in the woods, laid upon one another
in the manner in which sawyers erect piles of timber to be dried. The
roofs were covered with bark, and the interstices of the walls left
open, so that at a distance I could count the persons within, as if
they had been birds in a cage. Near to this place a family lately
lived, for several weeks, under an old waggon that was turned upside
down. In towns along the banks of the Ohio, a class of people are to
be seen, who depend on traffic with travellers, and with the scanty
population in the rear of them. Without extravagant profits on the
trifling capital employed, they could not subsist. Many of them seem to
be immoral, dissipated, and without rural or domestic industry. Few of
their lots are cultivated as gardens; and the spinning-wheel, (so far
as I have observed,) is not to be seen in their houses.