CHAPTER IV.

Excitement of the Public Mind caused by Hamilton's Measures--Great

Men brought thus into the Political Field--The Preponderance of

leading Politicians and Commercial Classes on the side of

Hamilton--Not so with the Landed Interest--Character of Farmers and

Planters of the United States--Position of the Landed Interest

toward the Anti-Federal Party and toward Hamilton's System--Success

in maintaining its Principles greater in the Southern than in the

Northern States and the Causes thereof--The Landed Interest the

Fountain of the old Republican Party--Course of that Party toward

Washington and his Administration--Decline of the Federal

Party--Hamilton's Course in the Convention the most Brilliant and

Creditable of his Political Career--His Candor and Devotion to

Principle on that Occasion--His subsequent Loss of the Confidence

of the Friends of Republican Government--Coincidences and Contrasts

in the Public Lives of Hamilton and Madison--Their several

Contributions in the First Congress to the Promotion of the

Financial Branch of the Public Service--The Fate and the Fruits of

each--The Country chiefly indebted to them for the

Constitution--Their Treatment of it after its Adoption not the

same--The Provision authorizing Amendments necessary to save the

Constitution from Rejection--Memorials from New York and

Virginia--Dread of a New Convention on the Part of the

Federalists--Madison's Amendments--Consequences of their

Adoption--Character of Madison's Statesmanship--Different Courses

of Hamilton and Madison on Questions of Constitutional

Power--Unconstitutionality of Hamilton's Measures--His

Consciousness thereof--His Sense of the Obligations of Public

Men--His View of the Constitution as "a Temporary Bond of

Union"--Subsequent Change of Opinion, but Final Return in 1802 to

his Original View--Separation between him and Madison--"Sapping and

Mining Policy" of Hamilton--That Policy counteracted by the

Republican Party--Discrimination between Washington and Hamilton in

the Adoption of the latter's Policy--Probable Ground of

Washington's Official Approval of the Bank Bill--Subsequent similar

Position and Conduct of Madison--Instances of a like Transcending

of Constitutional Limits under a supposed Necessity, by Jefferson

and by Jackson--The Hamiltonian Rule of Construction discarded by

Washington in the case of his Veto of the First Apportionment

Bill--Portions of the Community liable to be attracted to

Hamilton's Policy--The Principles of that Policy inaugurated in

England in 1688--Extension of its Influence in this Country to

almost every Class but the Landed Interest--Points of Agreement and

of Difference between Hamilton and Politicians of his School in our

Time--Exceptions to the General Rule--Influence of the Money Power

in attracting Literary and Professional Men--Great Preponderance in

Numbers of Newspapers and Periodicals supporting the Views of the

Money Power over those devoted to the Advocacy of Democratic

Principles--The same Fact observable in Monarchical

Countries--Caucuses and Conventions not necessary to the Harmony of

the Federal Party--Sagacity indicated by Hamilton's System--The

Secret of its Failure in the Numerical Preponderance, often

underrated, of the Agricultural Class--The Policy best adapted to

succeed with our People is that of a Strict Construction of the

Constitution as to the Powers of the General Government--Such the

Successful Policy of Jefferson, Madison, and Jackson--Struggles of

the Money Power Ineffectual till crowned with Exceptional Success

in the Overthrow of Van Buren's Administration--Latitudinarianism

of Hamilton's School--John Quincy Adams elected as a Convert to the

Principles of the Republican Party--His early Disavowal of those

Principles, and the consequent Overthrow of his

Administration--Relative Power of the Landed Interest--The Safety

of our Institutions depends on the Right Convictions of the great

Agricultural Class--Growth of the Money Power in England--The

Political Influence of that Power Beneficent in Europe but

Injurious in the United States.

I have already spoken of the extent to which the public mind was excited

by Hamilton's measures. Large portions of the people regarded the most

prominent among them as violations of the Constitution, and most of them

as servile imitations of the English system, inexpedient in themselves

and contrary to the genius and spirit of our institutions. Their

arraignment and vindication brought into the political field the ablest

men of the country at a period when she abounded in great men. The

American Revolution accomplished here that which the French Revolution,

then at its commencement, and similar crises in all countries and times,

have brought about, namely, the production of great men by great events,

developing and calling into action upon a large scale intellects the

powers of which, but for their application to great transactions, might

have remained unknown alike to their possessors and to the world. Among

the master minds which were thus roused to political activity were

Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, Patrick Henry, John

and Samuel Adams, John Jay, Chancellor Livingston, Gouverneur Morris,

George Clinton, Robert Yates, Chancellor Lansing, John Langdon, Elbridge

Gerry, Rufus King, Roger Sherman, John Dickinson, Speight and Williamson

and the Rutledges, Pinckneys, and Middletons of North and South

Carolina, Chace and Luther Martin of Maryland, Jackson, Few, and

Baldwin, of Georgia, John Mason, Marshall, Pendleton, and Wythe of

Virginia, and others; men, some of whom have under various circumstances

added celebrity to the best informed communities in the world and at one

of the brightest periods of the human intellect, and who, if they could

now be congregated, would eclipse the great men of any country.

Hamilton's measures, of which the funding system was the pioneer,

presented their first field, after the adoption of the Federal

Constitution, for the display of their opinions and talents. They

supported in those grave discussions, with few exceptions, relatively

the same principles by which they had been influenced in respect to

federal politics during the government of the Confederation, by which

also they and men of their stamp had been governed under the colonial

system, and to which they would have adhered, in all probability,

throughout the intermediate period if they had not been driven into open

rebellion by the indiscriminate and intolerable oppression of a bigoted

tyrant, and by their own innate hatred of wrong and outrage, without

immediate regard to the government that should result from their

revolution.

Jefferson was absent from the country during a large portion of the

government of the Confederation, and through the entire period of the

formation and adoption of the new Constitution. He sympathized

throughout with the feelings and concurred in the opinions of the

Anti-Federal party, with the exceptions that he was not opposed to

conferring on the Federal Government the powers to regulate commerce and

to raise its own revenues; was in favor of a convention for the

construction of a new constitution, and of the formation by that body of

a substantive and effective federal government, composed of legislative,

executive, and judicial departments; approved of the Constitution as

made, with modifications which were principally provided for by

amendments proposed and adopted, and was sincerely anxious for its

ratification. These things have, I know, been controverted and are still

disbelieved by many, but will be found fully established by references

to the following documents, viz.: Jefferson's "Correspondence," Vol. I.

p. 441; Vol. II. pp. 64, 162, 221, 236, 273, 303; Letter to Washington

expressing his anxiety for the adoption of the Constitution; p. 310,

some strong remarks in favor of it; p. 342, to Madison, congratulating

him on its adoption, and p. 348, to John Jay, to the same effect.

Of Madison's character and general course I have already spoken. His

position at the period now under consideration differed from that of all

his contemporaries in the public service. He had supported all the

commercial and financial measures advocated by the Federal party during

the government of the Confederation, and had been as active, and I think

as efficient, as Hamilton in his efforts to promote the call of the

Federal Convention; had opposed, with ability and firmness, the

Anti-Federal plan of a Constitution; had, as far as we have knowledge of

Washington's opinions, acted in concert with him in the Convention, and

was first selected by him at a later period to prepare his Farewell

Address; had combined his labors with those of Hamilton and Jay to

promote the ratification of the Constitution by the well-known papers of

the "Federalist," and, upon the whole, had done more than any other man

to secure that great object. Yet there had been no time, as before

observed, when he could with propriety have been regarded as a member of

the Federal party, in the sense in which Hamilton, Adams, and Jay were

so regarded, or when he did not possess the confidence of the

Anti-Federal party, in respect to all public questions other than those

to which I have referred, and, what is still more remarkable, there was

not, during the whole of this period, a single occasion on which his

perfect probity and disinterestedness were not very generally felt and

acknowledged.

Among the leading politicians of the epoch of which I speak, the

preponderance in numbers, in wealth, in social position, and possibly in

talent, was on the side of Hamilton; and when to these were added the

commercial and numerous other classes interested in and dependent upon

the money power then just rising into importance, an estimate may be

formed of his ability to give tone and direction to the state and to

society, and to cover with odium those who disapproved of his measures

by charging them with personal hostility to Washington, who so well

deserved the confidence and good will of all, and who enjoyed them to an

extent that led John Adams, at a much later day, to stigmatize the

deference paid to him as "impious homage." Hamilton wielded this great

power with tremendous effect, for, although his judgment in the

management of men was always deemed defective, he exerted, in the

promotion of his particular objects, talents and industry which could

not fail to produce great results. His activity and capacity for labor

were not equaled by any of his contemporaries save Madison; his powers

of persuasion and the effects of his eloquence were strikingly

exemplified by his success in making Mr. Jefferson believe, on his first

arrival at the seat of government from France, that the safety of the

Union depended upon the passage of the bill for the assumption of the

State debts, which had been at the moment rejected in the House of

Representatives by a majority of one or two, and in inducing him to

"hold the candle," as Jefferson afterwards described it, to a bargain by

which Messrs. White and Lee, Southern members, were prevailed upon to

vote for its reconsideration and passage on condition that Hamilton

would get the requisite number of Northern members to vote for the

establishment of the seat of the Federal Government on slave territory.

Jefferson gives an interesting account of the earnestness of Hamilton's

appeal to him on the subject, and of his own mortification and regret at

having been made a party to so exceptionable a transaction in support of

a measure he soon found the strongest reasons to condemn.[23]

[23] Jefferson's _Correspondence_, Vol. 4. p. 449.

The attention of every American community which possessed facilities for

foreign commerce or manufactures, or for any of the various pursuits

enumerated in his great report, and especially when they possessed also

superior skill and enterprise, was at once directed to Hamilton's scheme

of government for encouragement, and they certainly were not always

indisposed to accept the seductive offers held out to them. But

fortunately for the country and for the cause of good government there

was a class, happily formidable in numbers and in great and sterling

qualities, whom no wiles could win from their devotion to early

principles and whom government favors could not corrupt. That class was,

singularly enough, the landed interest. I say singularly, not because

their fidelity to principle was at variance with their history, but with

reference to the circumstance that, whilst in England it had been the

principal object in building up the money power to restrict the

influence of the landed interest, that power was here destined to be

itself kept in check by an interest of the same name, however different

in character.

Mr. Jefferson in his celebrated letter to Mazzei, in 1796, gives a

description, which could not be improved, of the then political

condition of the country and of its political parties: "Against us," he

says, "are the executive, the judiciary, two out of three branches of

the Legislature, all the officers of the Government, all who want to be

officers, all timid men who prefer the calm of despotism to the

boisterous sea of liberty, British merchants and Americans trading on

British capital, speculators and holders in the banks and public

funds,--a contrivance invented for the purpose of corruption, and for

assimilating us in all things to the rotten as well as the sound parts

of the British model. The whole body of our citizens, however, remain

true to their republican principles; the _whole landed interest is

republican_, and so is a great mass of talent." The term "landed

interest" in its general signification, and in the sense in which it was

used by Mr. Jefferson, referred to those who worked as well as owned the

land,--the farmers of the North and the planters of the South,--all who

made Agriculture their pursuit; a class which in the earlier periods of

our colonial condition constituted almost our entire population, and

have at every period in our history vastly exceeded in numbers those

engaged in all other pursuits. There is no point of resemblance between

them and the landed aristocracy of England, save in that they both

represent the landed interest of their respective countries and that

they were led in each to oppose the money power. Their difference in

other respects is sufficiently manifest.

A more estimable class of men than the farmers and planters of the

United States is not to be found in the world. From the landing of the

Pilgrims to the present day they have exerted an effective and salutary

influence, not only upon the condition of the country, in respect to its

material improvement, but upon the character and strength of our

political institutions. It was to their sagacity and firmness that the

colonies were chiefly indebted for their success in turning away and

defeating the fury of the savages, and in baffling the persevering

efforts of the mother country to enslave the provinces. For the most

part the descendants of ancestors who had been, to an almost

unprecedented extent, exposed to the faithlessness and persecutions of

power, they seldom failed to be on their guard against its approaches,

however artfully disguised. Every attempt to purchase their acquiescence

in measures that they regarded as encroachments upon their liberties or

subversive of their rights, through governmental favors, proved

abortive.

Grenville, when pressed, as prime minister, by the London merchants with

the dangers that threatened the collection of their American debts from

the effects of the stamp-tax, was prodigal in his offers of governmental

favors to secure the submission of the colonists to the odious measure.

"If one bounty," said he, "will not do, I will add two; if two will not

do, I will add three." But these offers, as well as all the efforts

which had been and were subsequently made by the Crown to quiet the

Colonies through bounties and commercial privileges, were unavailing.

The "landed interest," constituting a great majority of the colonists,

was too wise to be duped, and too honest to be corrupted, by special

favors of any description. Placed by the nature of their pursuits, in a

great measure, beyond the reach of court and official blandishments, and

less dependent on the special privileges of the Crown than those who

looked to them for their support, they uniformly regarded these offers

with distrust rather than desire. They had, from these and other

considerations, been led to embrace the principles upon which the

Revolution was founded with more earnestness, and to cherish them with a

more uncalculating devotion, than many of their Revolutionary

associates. The circumstance that a larger share of the defense of those

principles had devolved upon them, by reason of the excess of their

numbers, naturally commended more warmly to their hearts doctrines for

the establishment of which they had suffered so much inquietude and

encountered so many perils.

These considerations were alike applicable to, and equally influential

upon, the landed interest of the North and of the South. With

attachments undiminished and unchangeable to republican principles, pure

and simple, subject to such limitations only as were required by

convenience in their execution and necessary to deliberation in council,

principles the fruition of which had been the day-dream of their

ancestors through successive generations, and their own guiding-star in

the gloomiest period of the Revolution, the representatives of this

great interest, North and South, by large majorities, sustained the

Anti-Federal party until that party was overthrown through its great

error in respect to the Constitution, and were still ready to take their

stand in any organization that should have for its object opposition to

the heresies developed by Hamilton in his platform for the government of

the administration.

The principles upon which the landed interest acted from the start,

have, it must be admitted, been more successfully sustained in the

Southern than in the Northern States; not because they were originally

embraced with more sincerity, but from very different causes. The

commercial, manufacturing, and trading classes, to whom Hamilton's

policy was more particularly addressed, and upon whom it, beyond all

doubt, exerted a powerful influence, were, at the beginning, far more

numerous in the Northern than in the Southern States, and this disparity

in their respective conditions has been constantly increasing. It was

through the growing power of these classes, and of others similarly,

though perhaps not equally, exposed to its influence that the

Hamiltonian policy occasionally triumphed in the Northern States, and

their politics thus became more unstable than those of the South.

Mr. Bancroft happily and truly describes the peculiar condition of

Southern men in this regard. "An instinctive aversion," says he, "to too

much government was always a trait of Southern character expressed in

the solitary manner of settling in the country, in the absence of

municipal governments, in the indisposition of the scattered inhabitants

to engage in commerce, to collect in towns, or to associate in townships

under corporate powers. As a consequence there was little commercial

industry; and on the soil of Virginia there were no vast accumulations

of commercial wealth. The exchanges were made almost entirely--and it

continued so for more than a century--by factors of foreign merchants.

Thus the influence of wealth, under the modern form of stocks and

accumulations of money, was always inconsiderable; and men were so

widely scattered--like hermits among the heathen--that far the smallest

number were within the reach of the direct influence of the established

Church or of Government."[24]

[24] Bancroft's _Hist. United States_, Vol. II. p. 189.

In this description of the early, which is also measurably and

comparatively true of the present, state of the South, we find a

solution of the circumstance that the failure of Hamilton's policy was

so much more signal there than in other quarters, and that the

principles upon which it was founded have there been since so

perseveringly and unitedly resisted. The political principles of the

landed interest, constituting an immense majority of their people, have

prevailed in the administration of their State governments, save in

regard to the ratification of the Federal Constitution, from the

recognition of our Independence to the present day. There has also been

a remarkable consistency in the political positions of their public men.

In Virginia, which State has done so much to give a tone to national

politics, Patrick Henry has been almost, if not quite, the only

prominent man who abandoned the principles by which he had been governed

during the Confederation, and embraced those of Hamilton at the coming

in of the new government. Always admiring his character and conduct

during the Revolutionary era, and strongly impressed by the vehemence

and consistency with which he had, during the government of the

Confederation, opposed every measure that savored of English origin, I

pressed Mr. Jefferson, as far as was allowable, for the reasons of his

sudden and great change. His explanation was, "that Henry had been

smitten by Hamilton's financial policy."

The Republican party, forced into existence by Hamilton's obnoxious

measures, sprang chiefly from the landed interest. The declaration of

its illustrious founder, in his letter to Mazzei, that the country would

yet preserve its liberties, was mainly based on the fact that "the whole

landed interest was republican," and he could not have placed his

reliance on a surer foundation. Farthest removed, as has been already

said, from the seductive influence of the money power, abounding in

strong common sense and love of country, and always greatly superior in

numbers to the business men of all other classes, it constituted then,

and has ever since constituted, the balance wheel of the Government. All

it asks from administration is the maintenance of order, protection in

the enjoyment of its civil and political rights, and the management of

public affairs in a spirit of equal justice to all men. Whilst the

commercial and manufacturing classes are annually approaching the

National Legislature with appeals for aid and encouragement, and whilst

the Congressional committees charged with their interests are from time

to time convulsing the country with their measures, that which is

nominally the representative and guardian of agriculture not being asked

to do any thing for its support, very properly does nothing; having,

indeed, no power under the Constitution to do any thing for it, the

advantages of which are not common to all classes. What the farmers and

planters desire more than this are "the early and the latter rain," for

which they look to a source purer and more powerful than human

legislation.

Thus sustained, the Republican party of 1790, headed by Thomas

Jefferson, with the 'laboring oar' in the hands of James Madison, warmed

into action by Jefferson's more fervent though not more deeply seated

patriotism, and embracing "a great mass of talent," determined to oppose

every measure of Washington's administration which they believed to be

unauthorized by the Constitution, or anti-republican in its tendencies.

This resolution was carried out with unflinching firmness, but, whatever

has been said to the contrary, was made and designed to be performed in

a manner consistent with the respect they entertained for the character

and feelings of President Washington, and without even a desire to

displace him from the high office with which they had contributed to

invest him. It would have been strange if, in a state of party violence

so excited as that which naturally sprung up, the dominant party should

have refrained from aspersing the motives of their opponents by

attributing to them personal hostility to a chief so justly beloved by

the people as was Washington. Mr. Jefferson, in his letter to me,

referring to similar charges but speaking of a subsequent period, says

"General Washington, after the retirement of his first cabinet and the

composition of his second, entirely Federal, and at the head of which

was Mr. Pickering himself, had no opportunity of hearing both sides of

any question. His measures consequently took more the hue of the party

in whose hands he was. These measures were certainly not approved by the

Republicans; yet they were not imputed to him, but to the counselors

around him; and his prudence so far restrained their impassioned course

and bias that no act of strong mark during the remainder of his

administration excited much dissatisfaction. He lived too short a time

after, and too much withdrawn from information to correct the views into

which he had been deluded, and the continued assiduities of the party

drew him into the vortex of their intemperate career, separated him

still farther from his real friends, and excited him to actions and

expressions of dissatisfaction which grieved them but could not loosen

their affections from him."[25]

[25] See Appendix.

Such charges were freely made and with unsparing bitterness; yet I

cannot but think that unprejudiced minds, if it is not too soon to

expect to find many such upon this subject, would, on a careful review

of facts, acquit the Republican party of them. Madcaps, and those who,

looking to party for their daily bread, hope to commend themselves by

extremes and by violence to those whom they sustain, are to be found in

all parties and should not be allowed to make those to which they attach

themselves responsible for their acts. Nothing has ever been adduced

that may fairly be regarded as the act of the Republican party which

proves the existence of the disposition charged against it in regard to

General Washington; and the single fact that, although its opposition

commenced three years before the expiration of his first term, there was

not the slightest effort made to prevent his reëlection, or the

exhibition of any desire to prevent it, is, of itself, sufficient to

refute the charge of personal unfriendliness toward him. Nor did the

Republicans desire to embarrass his administration beyond what was

inevitable from their opposition to measures which they regarded as

unconstitutional or in the highest degree inexpedient, of which the bank

and funding system were appropriate illustrations.

The Federal party, without extraordinary or difficult attention and

care, might have preserved untarnished a character made respectable by

illustrious names and honorable history, notwithstanding the

overwhelming defeat to which it was subsequently exposed, and its

principles, however erroneous, might have stood a chance of restoration

to power in the course of those changes and overturns of men and things

to which public affairs and political parties have ever been subject.

Even error of opinion not unfrequently regains a lost ascendancy by

means of the perseverance and consistency with which it is adhered to,

and when the organization by which it has been upheld is maintained with

the fidelity and dignity that belong to a good cause. In all these

respects there was, on the part of the members of the Federal party, a

complete failure. They suffered its lead to fall into less respectable

hands, and its support to be lent to seceders (one after another) from

the Republican ranks between whom and themselves there was no identity

of political feeling, and still less of principle. The motives for this

course were usually censurable, and the results generally disastrous

from the beginning, and always so in the sequel. Hamilton, as has been

seen, twice threw himself in the path of his party to save it from such

degradation, for his intelligence and integrity appreciated the

impossibility of preserving the respect of the people at large for

principles, whose special advocates showed by their acts that they did

not themselves respect them. His counsels were unheeded, and the banner

of a once highly honored party continued to be trailed in the dust until

its name was disowned by its adherents with shame and disgust.

Those who agree with me in believing that General Hamilton was sincere

in the opinion he expressed that the republican system could not be made

adequate to the purpose of good government here, and that the welfare of

the country would be best promoted by approaching as near to the English

model as public sentiment would tolerate, are well justified in holding

him undeserving of censure for his introduction of the anti-republican

plan which he submitted to the Federal Convention. The right of the

people to "alter or abolish" existing systems, and "to institute new

government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its

powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their

safety and happiness," was the corner-stone of the Revolution, in

defense of which he had freely ventured his life. The Convention was not

only an appropriate but the appointed place for the assertion and

exercise of that right. So far from being a fit subject for censure, the

submission to that body by a man in Hamilton's position, with the claims

he had established upon the confidence and support of the people by his

superior abilities and his Revolutionary services, of propositions which

every body knew, and which he himself felt, were strongly adverse to the

prevailing current of public sentiment, and the intrepidity and

extraordinary talent with which he sustained them, without a single open

supporter in the Convention, solely because he believed them to be right

and their adoption necessary to the public good, exhibited a patriotic

and self-sacrificing spirit alike honorable to himself and to his

principles. His course in the Convention, for which he has been

extensively reviled, was in my judgment the most brilliant and

creditable portion of his political career. It presented an example of

candor and devotion to principle which there was not a single one among

his friends willing to follow, although there were, doubtless, a few who

felt substantially as he did and sympathized with all he said, and

although they all admired his gallant hearing while lamenting his

indiscretion. It was, unhappily for himself, the culminating point in

his political life, from which every subsequent step gradually lowered

him, until he justly forfeited the confidence and countenance of every

sincere friend to republican government.

Alas! how deeply is it to be lamented that this great statesman, as able

as an impracticable man can be, when he knew that he was about to

attempt a ladder upon the first round of which his boldest friend dared

not even to place his foot, had not rather followed, in some respects at

least, the example of his coadjutor and friend, James Madison. The

coincidences in the occurrence of opportunities to make themselves

useful to their country, and the contrasts in the ways in which these

were improved and the consequences that followed, to be found in the

public lives of these illustrious men, are both striking and

instructive. In regard to one subject a partial reference to them has

already been made. They were co-workers in a series of efforts to obtain

from the Congress of the Confederation authority for the Federal head to

levy and collect impost duties to enable it to perform the offices

devolved upon the General Government by the Articles of Confederation,

instead of trusting to the unsafe and unstable requisitions upon the

States. No sooner had the first Congress of the new Government,

established for that and other purposes, formed a quorum, than Mr.

Madison, as we have already seen, before the executive branch had been

organized, or even the President elect been informed of his election,

introduced bills for the imposition and collection of duties on imported

goods, which he pushed forward _de die in diem_ until they became laws,

and the duties were in the process of being collected, and the public

coffers in the way of being replenished. This good work he followed up

in due time by the introduction into Congress of resolutions (and the

most able support of them on its floor) in favor of a commercial policy

recommended by the Secretary of State, Mr. Jefferson, to improve our

trade and thus increase our revenue. These were the contributions of Mr.

Madison, simple, practical, and direct like their author, for promoting

the financial branch of the public service under the new Government,

which was committed by President Washington to the special

superintendence of Alexander Hamilton as Secretary of the Treasury.

The Secretary's contributions to the same objects consisted of two very

elaborate and very able reports, the first upon public credit,

recommending the establishment of a funding system, and the second in

favor of a national bank, embracing plans for each and, in the former, a

scheme to raise funds for the payment of the interest of a debt to be

funded. The _éclat_ which he acquired by these imposing state papers was

so great, and many minds are still so much dazzled by the traditional

splendor of their effects upon the credit and resources of the country

as to render it not a little embarrassing to discuss, in a plain,

matter-of-fact way, the questions of their real influence or

non-influence upon our finances.

In previous as well as in subsequent parts of this work will be found

notices of the rise, progress, and effects of Hamilton's funding system,

which, if they do not show that the measure, judged by its results,

partook more of the character of a castle in the air than of a wise and

practicable financial scheme, do not, I think, fall far short of it. But

both it and the bank are now only "obsolete ideas"--to remain so

probably while our Government endures. References, under such

circumstances, can only be usefully made to them to show the principles

and objects of men and parties.

Whilst Hamilton's measures have been, it is hoped and believed, forever

abandoned--the funding system by his own political friends, and a

national bank in consequence of its explicit and emphatic condemnation

by the whole country--those put into immediate and successful operation

by Madison not only performed at the time the useful office designed for

them by the Constitution, and gradually provided for the wants of the

existing Government, but have supplied it with a revenue abundantly

sufficient to pay the public debt and to defray all expenses and

disbursements required by the public service in war and in peace, with

rare and limited additions, for nearly three quarters of a century, and

will, in all likelihood, continue so to do to the end.

But the most interesting aspect of these coincidences and contrasts to

which I refer is to be found in the illustrations they furnish of the

use and abuse of the Constitution by those distinguished men and by

their followers respectively. Co-workers again in persevering efforts to

obtain from Congress or the States a call for a general convention to

revise the Articles of Confederation, it would be difficult to decide

which contributed most to effect that object, and it is not too much to

say that it would not have been then accomplished if the efforts of

either had been withheld. They were neither of them satisfied with the

Constitution framed by the Convention; Madison not entirely, Hamilton

scarcely at all. The former sympathized, as I have already said, with

Hamilton's distrust of the State governments, made unsuccessful efforts

to impose stringent restrictions upon their power, and would have been

better pleased with the Constitution if it had inclined more decidedly

in that direction.

They both signed the instrument notwithstanding; Hamilton under a sort

of protest against its sufficiency (or rather its want of it), and

Madison with apparent and, I doubt not, real cordiality. In the numbers

of the "Federalist," (of which they were the principal authors,) they

offered a joint and honorable testimonial to the Constitution, which

became in the sequel an enduring monument to their own associated

memories. Each rendered "yeoman's service" in the conventions,

respectively, of New York and Virginia, to decide upon its ratification;

in neither of which was the ratification probable at the beginning, and

in both there is the best reason to believe that, without their powerful

aid, it must have ultimately failed. In such an event the failure of the

Constitution would have been next to certain.

Although Gouverneur Morris's assertion that Hamilton had comparatively

nothing to do with the construction of the Federal Constitution is true,

yet as Madison had a greater agency in that work than any other

individual, and as the obtaining the call of the Convention and the

ratification of the Constitution, in which Madison and Hamilton acted

the chief parts, were also the portions of the whole transaction most

exposed to the action of the States and of the public mind, and

therefore the most difficult of accomplishment, it may with truth be

affirmed that there were not any fifty or a hundred other men taken

together to whom the country was as much indebted for the Federal

Constitution as to those two gentlemen. But in their subsequent

treatment of that sacred instrument, which each had done so much to

bring to maturity, they, unfortunately for the country, differed very

widely. The Constitution was ratified and adopted in the first instance

by more than the requisite number of States, and finally by the whole

thirteen. General Washington was elected President. He appointed

Alexander Hamilton to be Secretary of the Treasury, and James Madison

was elected a member of the first Congress. The latter, although

overruled in the Convention upon points which he deemed important,

acquiesced in the decisions of the majority, accepted the Constitution

in good faith with a determination to do all in his power, not only to

secure its ratification, but to give to the people and the States the

full benefit of its provisions as those were understood by them, and to

do this with the same fidelity and honor with which he would perform any

private arrangement to which he had made himself a party. Satisfied from

numerous exhibitions of public sentiment elsewhere as well as in the

State conventions, and perhaps more particularly in that of his own

State, not only that there was far greater opposition in the minds of

the people at large to the Constitution as it came from the hands of

the Convention than he at first supposed, but that it was, in point of

fact, defective in some particulars important in themselves and well

calculated to excite the solicitude of the masses, he determined to

leave no means within his reach unimproved to make it, by suitable and

seasonable amendments, what a brief experience convinced him that it

ought to be. It might perhaps be inferred, from some general expressions

used by him in the first Congress, that he felt as if something had been

said or done on his part rendering his attention to this matter a

special duty, although nothing of that nature is apparent; but, be that

as it may, there were other considerations imperative upon a mind so

circumspect and so just to prevent his losing sight of the subject.

Mr. John Quincy Adams asserts that the Constitution "was extorted from

the grinding necessity of a reluctant nation." Although this may be

deemed an exaggerated description no one can make himself familiar with

the history of that period without becoming sensible of the truth of two

positions, viz.: that vast numbers who were greatly dissatisfied with

the Constitution were induced to withhold their active opposition by the

embarrassed condition of the country, and that even this consideration

would not have sufficed to overcome the decided Anti-Federal majority

against it but for the provision authorizing amendments, and the

confident anticipation that such as were proper and necessary would be

speedily made. The consciousness of these truths, and a conviction that

a successful operation of, and general acquiescence in, the provisions

of the new Constitution were not to be expected unless proper steps were

immediately taken to appease the opposition still in force among the

Anti-Federalists, secured the early and unremitting attention of Mr.

Madison to that point.

This view of the expectations of the country upon the subject of

amendment and of the condition of the public mind in respect to it was

strongly confirmed by memorials presented to the first Congress, at its

first session, by the States of New York and Virginia, containing

averments framed in the strongest terms, that whilst they dreaded the

operation of the Constitution in its then imperfect state, they had,

notwithstanding, yielded their assent to its ratification from motives

of affection for their sister States, and from an invincible reluctance

to separate from them, and with a full confidence that its imperfections

would be speedily removed; that the existence of great and vital defects

in the Constitution was the prevailing conviction of those States; that

the dissatisfaction and uneasiness upon the subject amongst their people

would never cease to distract the country until the causes of them were

satisfactorily removed; that the matter would ill admit of postponement,

and concluding with applications to Congress that they should, without

delay, call a new convention with full powers to revise and amend the

Constitution. Although these memorials referred to the opinions

expressed by their respective State conventions that that instrument

ought to undergo further revision, which, in one of them, was a

unanimous expression, Congress nevertheless took no steps toward a

compliance with the request they contained. But the whole subject was

brought before it by Mr. Madison as soon as he had perfected his revenue

measures, and he caused amendments to be carried through that body, I

had almost said by his own unaided efforts, which were satisfactory to

the people--certainly to that portion of them by whom the Constitution

had been opposed.

A tolerably full and obviously fair account of the debates and

proceedings in the House of Representatives upon this subject--those in

the Senate, I fear, are lost--may be found in the first and second

volumes of Lloyd's "Register of the Proceedings and Debates of the

First House of Representatives of the United States," which I am sorry

to find has not been transferred to Colonel Benton's "Abridgment." The

subject, speaking of the ten amendments as one measure, was only second

in intrinsic importance, on account of the influence its success exerted

on the solidity and perpetuity of the new system, to the Constitution

itself, and the debates in point of ability and earnestness,

particularly on the part of Mr. Madison, not inferior to any of the

discussions by which that interesting period when the foundations of the

present government were laid was so greatly distinguished; one cannot

read them without acknowledging the difficulty of recalling another

instance in which a measure of equal gravity was so successfully carried

through a public body against the obvious and decided preferences of a

large majority of its members, or without admiring the extent to which

that success was achieved by the exertions of one man.

Now that the dangers which environed these proceedings have passed away,

they afford amusement to the curious in such matters by the picture they

furnish of the twists and turns to which men in high positions and of

generally fair views will sometimes resort to stave off distasteful

propositions, with the hope of ultimately defeating what they do not

feel it to be safe directly to oppose. The Virginia and New York

applications were presented by Mr. Bland, of the former, and Mr.

Lawrence, of the latter State, both friends of Hamilton; and although

both were solicitous that the applications should be respectfully

received, neither of them ever took a step to make them successful, nor

were they in favor of the amendments proposed by Mr. Madison. That

gentleman gave notice of his intention to bring the subject before the

House several weeks before the day he named for that purpose. When that

day arrived he moved that the House should resolve itself into a

committee of the whole to receive the amendments he proposed to offer.

Opposition to going into such committee came from almost all sides of

the House, some urging one species of objections and some another, but

generally indicative of decided unfriendliness to the views of the

mover. Perceiving that his motion was neither satisfactory nor likely to

succeed, Mr. Madison withdrew it, and submitted a proposition for the

appointment of a select committee to report such amendments to the

Constitution as they should think proper. Having done this, he, in a

very able speech, went over the whole subject, stated at length the

necessity that existed for some amendments, and the high expediency of

proposing others, and furnished a statement of those he had intended to

offer to the committee of the whole; these he trusted would now be

referred to the select committee, and thus the matter would proceed

there without interruption to the other business of the House.

The proposition for a select committee was not more fortunate or

acceptable than its predecessor. It was opposed from the same quarters,

and several who had evinced no favor toward the motion to go into

committee of the whole now said that, if the subject was to be taken up

at all, that would have been, but for its withdrawal, the preferable

mode. Mr. Madison declared himself, as he said, "unfortunate in not

satisfying gentlemen with respect to the mode of introducing the

business; he had thought, from the dignity and peculiarity of the

subject, that it ought to be referred to a committee of the whole; he

had accordingly made that motion first, but finding himself not likely

to succeed in that way, he had changed his ground. Fearing again to be

discomfited on his motion for a select committee, he would change his

mode, and move the propositions he had stated before directly to the

House, and it might then do what it thought proper with them. He

accordingly moved the propositions by way of Resolutions to be adopted

by the House."

This course was also objected to on several grounds; but the majority

saw that if the game of staving off the subject was not broken up by Mr.

Madison's third proposition, it had at least been so far exposed as to

require time to put it in some new form, and with that view Mr.

Lawrence, who, as already said, was not in favor of amendments, moved

that the subject be referred to a committee of the whole,--the

proposition first submitted by Mr. Madison,--which was done. This

occurred on the 8th of June. On the 21st of July thereafter Mr. Madison

"begged the House to indulge him in the further consideration of the

subject of amendments to the Constitution, and as there appeared, in

some degree, a moment of leisure, he would move to go into a committee

of the whole upon the subject, conformably to the order of the 8th of

last month."

This proposition was met by a motion from Mr. Fisher Ames, of

Massachusetts, to rescind the vote of the 8th of June, and to refer the

business to a select committee. This motion gave rise to speeches

professing not to be opposed to the consideration of amendments at a

proper time and under proper circumstances, but showing a decided

distrust of and distaste for the whole proceeding. The motion prevailed

by a vote of 34 to 15, and a select committee was appointed, of which

Mr. Vining, an opponent, was made chairman. The report of this committee

contained substantially the amendments proposed by Mr. Madison, with

some alterations and additions. These, after revision by the House, were

finally passed by a vote of two thirds in both Houses, submitted to the

States and ratified by them, as they now appear as the first ten of the

twelve amendments that have been made to the Federal Constitution since

its first adoption.

Some of Mr. Madison's colleagues occasionally expressed a desire for the

success of his propositions, and similar avowals were sometimes made by

two or three members from other States; but of substantial, persevering,

and effective assistance, he may, with truth, be said to have had none,

and two thirds of the House were at heart decidedly opposed to the

amendments that were made. With all his talents, industry, and

perseverance, Mr. Madison would not have been able to carry them if his

exertions had not been seconded by an influence still more efficacious.

The legislature of Virginia alluded to the defects of the Constitution

as "involving all the great and inalienable rights of freemen," declared

that its objections were not founded on speculative theory, but deduced

from principles which had been established by the melancholy examples of

other nations in different ages, and said, "they will never be removed

until the cause shall cease to exist." It announced the "cause of

amendment as a common cause," and its trust that commendable zeal would

be shown by others also for obtaining those "provisions which experience

had taught them were necessary to secure from danger the inalienable

rights of human nature." It expressed its impatience of delay and its

doubt as to the disposition of Congress; complained of the slowness of

its forms, but congratulated itself on the possession of another remedy,

which it was determined to pursue, under the Constitution itself--that

of a convention of The States.

The New York application, signed, as Speaker, by John Lansing, Jr., who

had left the Federal Convention in consequence of his dissatisfaction

with its proceedings and never returned to it, though not going as much

into details, employed language equally bold and uncompromising in

demanding from Congress another convention, which might propose such

amendments "as it might find best calculated to promote our common

interests, and secure to ourselves and our latest posterity the great

and inalienable rights of mankind." This memorial asserted not only that

the New York Convention had ratified "in the fullest confidence of

obtaining a revision of the Constitution by a general convention, as

appeared on the face of its ratification," but that that body (of which

Hamilton was a member) were unanimous in the opinion that such a

revision was necessary to recommend that instrument to the approbation

and support of a numerous body of its constituents.

These documents, and especially that of Virginia, pointed very

emphatically to the source of that discontent with the Constitution

which so extensively prevailed in the old Anti-Federal ranks. Even they

felt that the Constitution was much better than they had expected, and

the most considerate among them, those who were most capable of

suspending their suspicions as to the designs of their opponents long

enough to give the instrument a dispassionate consideration, were soon

satisfied--and Samuel Adams, who stood at the head of the Anti-Federal

party, admitted--that its general structure was free from any

insuperable objection. The life-tenure given to the Federal Judges was,

as it indeed might well be, regarded as inconsistent with republican

principles; but it was to be remembered that those officers were

expected to be, as they ought always to be, non-combatants in partisan

politics by reason of their appointment to act as arbiters of the fates

and fortunes of their countrymen. Upon the great point to which the

attention of such men was first directed, that of the ability of the

State governments to maintain their sovereignty and independence under

the new system, there was no real ground for apprehension. But the

Constitution was principally confined to what were more strictly public

concerns, the powers and duties of the Federal and State Governments in

regard to National and State affairs, with only a slight sprinkling of

provisions looking particularly to the protection of the citizen against

the exercise of arbitrary power; and it was accompanied by no Bill of

Rights, such as those to which the people had been accustomed in respect

to their State governments. In the latter cases they might more readily

have been reconciled to the absence of such provisions, as those

governments were carried on under their immediate observation, and they

formed a part of them in much larger portions than they could expect to

do of the Federal Government. The latter they were too much in the habit

of regarding, at that early period, as a foreign government only

remotely responsible to them. We have already spoken of the settled

character of their distrust of power for which there was only a remote,

if any, responsibility, and of their having been trained by experience

to expect only abuses from the exercise of such authority, whether in

State or Church,--an experience embracing the sorrowful and

well-remembered accounts of outrage and persecution against their

ancestors, and the cruel oppression of the then existing generation by

the distant government of the mother country. We have seen how great had

been their aversion and that of their ancestors to the establishment of

a general government, and with what difficulties their consent to the

call of the then recent Convention had been obtained, and what care had

been taken to restrict its power. It was not therefore surprising that a

large majority of them should have manifested such intense

dissatisfaction when a Constitution was presented for their approval

containing so few, so very few safeguards for the protection of "the

great and inalienable rights of freemen," as Virginia described

them--of the "great and inalienable rights of mankind," as the New York

Legislature styled them--points to which the masses, especially of the

Anti-Federalists, were so keenly alive.

These considerations and circumstances produced a sudden and extensive

spirit of discontent which, as those States avowed, never would be

appeased until its causes were removed, and with which Mr. Madison was

well satisfied the new Government would not be able to contend unless

some mode was devised to appease it. Although never a member of it, he

had, in his long and persevering efforts to obtain the Constitution,

"tasted the quality," so to speak, of the old Anti-Federal party, and

understood the stuff of which it was composed. He knew very well that

the call of Virginia upon her co-States to make the demand for

amendments "a common cause" would not be _brutum fulmen_, but that the

agitation for a new convention in such hands, and commenced under such

favorable circumstances, with so many materials of discontent already

made to their hands, would not cease until its object was gained, and

what would follow no man could tell. He was not so much of a Bourbon as

Hamilton; he had not pursued his thorny path through those trying scenes

without learning something of the character and temper of the people, or

without having his mind disabused of much that it had once entertained.

No man in the country was more opposed to the call of a new convention,

or more unwilling to make any amendments that would materially impair

the original structure of the Constitution. The former he omitted to

avow out of respect to the declared wishes of his State but the latter

he repeatedly announced because it was only in harmony with his past

course. But he knew that matters could not remain as they stood, and he

thought a series of amendments could be made, some of which he deemed

highly proper and all expedient, through which a large portion of the

Anti-Federalists might be conciliated without prejudice to the system

which had been adopted. This course, to be useful, must, he was

satisfied, be pursued at the very commencement of the new government. He

devoted himself, body and mind, to that object, and we have seen some of

the difficulties with which he had to contend. Although Hamilton was not

personally in Congress, he was well represented, and Madison found

there, besides, many other Bourbons, in the sense in which I use that

term. He prepared a plan according to the views I have described; and

few exhibitions of that kind can have been more interesting than to see

him stand between the Federal majority in the House and the few old

Anti-Federalists who were there, and avail himself of the votes of each

in turn to defeat the obnoxious efforts of the other; first to arrest by

Federal aid every attempt on the part of the few Anti-Federalists to mar

his project by seeking amendments which he was not himself prepared to

adopt, and then to frustrate by Anti-Federal votes the efforts of a

majority of the Federalists (though less than a majority of the House)

to defeat his entire scheme.

That the only alternative was between a new convention and the adoption

of amendments substantially like his, was the great fact which he

labored to impress upon the minds of the Federal members. He introduced

it in his public speeches with never-failing delicacy, but with

sufficient clearness to be understood, and doubtless enforced it at

private interviews as far as it was his habit to do such things. That

important truth was the fulcrum on which he rested his lever, and he

engineered his plan through the House and afterwards, as chairman of the

Committee of Conference, through both Houses (the majorities in each

alike unfriendly to it) with triumphant and under the circumstances most

extraordinary success.

The dread of another Federal Convention has never failed, when the

circumstances were sufficient to justify apprehension of its call, to

deter the Federalists from the adoption of projects obnoxious to the

democratic spirit of the country, however anxiously desired by

themselves. Pending the election of President in the House, between

Jefferson and Burr, the Republicans replied to the threat of putting the

Government in the hands of an officer by act of Congress, by an open,

united, and firm declaration that the day such an act passed, the Middle

States would arm, and that they would "call a convention to reorganize

and amend the Constitution;" upon the effect of which Mr. Jefferson

remarks, "the very word convention gives them the horrors, as, in the

present democratical spirit of America, they fear they should lose some

of the favorite morsels of the Constitution."

Mr. Madison's ten amendments consisted of provisions in favor of the

free exercise of religion, of speech, and of the press; of assembling

peaceably to petition the Government for a redress of grievances; of the

right to keep and bear arms; against quartering soldiers in any house

without the consent of the owner, except under certain qualifications;

against unreasonable searches and general warrants; against being held

to answer for crimes unless on presentment by a grand jury, with certain

exceptions; against being twice put in jeopardy for the same offense;

against being compelled to be a witness against one's self, or being

deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law;

against taking private property for public use without just

compensation; in favor of a trial by an impartial jury of the district

in certain cases at common law and in all criminal prosecutions, of the

party charged being informed of the nature of the accusation, of being

confronted with the witnesses against him, of having compulsory process

for obtaining witnesses and the assistance of counsel in his defense;

against excessive bail, excessive fines or cruel punishments; against

the enumeration of certain rights being construed to deny or disparage

others retained by the people; and, finally, that powers not delegated

to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the

States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people.

These provisions embraced the points upon which the public mind was most

susceptible, and upon which the old Anti-Federal party in particular had

been, with obvious reason, most excited.

That Mr. Madison's success in this great measure saved the Constitution

from the ordeal of another Federal Convention is a conclusion as certain

as any that rests upon a contingency which has not actually occurred,

and that it converted the residue of the Anti-Federal party which had

not supported the Constitution, whose members, as well as their

political predecessors in every stage of our history, constituted a

majority of the people, from opponents of that instrument into its

warmest friends, and that they and their successors have from that time

to the present period, either as Republicans or Democrats, occupied the

position of its _bonâ fide_ defenders in the sense in which it was

designed to be understood by those who constructed and by those who

ratified it, against every attempt to undermine or subvert it, are

undeniable facts.

It was by adding this great service to those he had rendered in

obtaining the Convention, and in framing the Constitution in that body,

that he deservedly won the noble title of "Father of the Constitution."

He was neither as great a man nor as thorough a Republican, certainly

not as thorough a Democrat, as Mr. Jefferson; he had less genius than

Hamilton; yet it is doing him no more than justice to say that, as a

civilian, he succeeded in making himself more practically useful to his

country than any other man she has produced. No one would have been more

ready than Mr. Jefferson to award to Mr. Madison this high distinction.

He either told me at Monticello, or I heard it from him at second-hand,

(I am uncertain which was the case,) that whilst he was in France, some

one whom he named asked him to say whom he thought the greatest man in

America, and that he replied, if the gentleman would ask him to name the

greatest man in the world he would comply with the request, which

addition being made, he answered "James Madison!"

Inquiry Into the Origin and Course of Political Parties in the United States · 第 4 / 10 章