The Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson (Declaration)

Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу The Declaration of Independence - Thomas Jefferson (Declaration) страница 23

The Declaration of Independence - Thomas Jefferson (Declaration)

Скачать книгу

are wise enough to preserve the Union, we may for ages enjoy an advantage similar to that of an insulated situation. Europe is at a great distance from us. Her colonies in our vicinity will be likely to continue too much disproportioned in strength, to be able to give us any dangerous annoyance. Extensive military establishments cannot, in this position, be necessary to our security. But if we should be disunited, and the integral parts should either remain separated, or, which is most probable, should be thrown together into two or three confederacies, we should be, in a short course of time, in the predicament of the continental powers of Europe–our liberties would be a prey to the means of defending ourselves against the ambition and jealousy of each other.

      This is an idea not superficial or futile, but solid and weighty. It deserves the most serious and mature consideration of every prudent and honest man, of whatever party. If such men will make a firm and solemn pause, and meditate dispassionately on the importance of this interesting idea; if they will contemplate it, in all its attitudes, and trace it to all its consequences, they will not hesitate to part with trivial objections to a Constitution, the rejection of which would in all probability put a final period to the Union. The airy phantoms that flit before the distempered imaginations of some of its adversaries, would quickly give place to the more substantial forms of dangers, real, certain, and formidable.

      PUBLIUS.

      FEDERALIST IX:

       The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection

       Table of Contents

      To the People of the State of New York:

      A firm Union will be of the utmost moment to the peace and liberty of the States, as a barrier against domestic faction and insurrection. It is impossible to read the history of the petty Republics of Greece and Italy, without feeling sensations of horror and disgust, at the distractions with which they were continually agitated, and at the rapid succession of revolutions, by which they were kept in a state of perpetual vibration, between the extremes of tyranny and anarchy. If they exhibit occasional calms, these only serve as short-lived contrasts to the furious storms, that are to succeed. If, now and then, intervals of felicity open themselves to view, we behold them with a mixture of regret, arising from the reflection, that the pleasing scenes before us are soon to be overwhelmed by the tempestuous waves of sedition and party rage. If momentary rays of glory break forth from the gloom, while they dazzle us with a transient and fleeting brilliancy, they, at the same time, admonish us to lament, that the vices of Government should pervert the direction, and tarnish the lustre of those bright talents and exalted endowments, for which the favored soils that produced them have been so justly celebrated.

      From the disorders that disfigure the annals of those Republics, the advocates of despotism have drawn arguments, not only against the forms of Republican Government, but against the very principles of civil liberty. They have decried all free Government as inconsistent with the order of society, and have indulged themselves in malicious exultation over its friends and partisans. Happily for mankind, stupendous fabrics reared on the basis of liberty, which have flourished for ages, have, in a few glorious instances, refuted their gloomy sophisms. And, I trust, America will be the broad and solid foundation of other edifices, not less magnificent, which will be equally permanent monuments of their errors.

      But it is not to be denied, that the portraits they have sketched of Republican Government were too just copies of the originals from which they were taken. If it had been found impracticable to have devised models of a more perfect structure, the enlightened friends to liberty would have been obliged to abandon the cause of that species of Government as indefensible. The science of politics, however, like most other sciences, has received great improvement. The efficacy of various principles is now well understood, which were either not known at all, or imperfectly known to the ancients. The regular distribution of power into distinct departments; the introduction of legislative balances and checks; the institution of Courts composed of Judges holding their offices during good behavior; the representation of the people in the Legislature, by Deputies of their own election; these are either wholly new discoveries, or have made their principal progress towards perfection in modern times. They are means, and powerful means, by which the excellences of Republican Government may be retained, and its imperfections lessened, or avoided. To this catalogue of circumstances, that tend to the amelioration of popular systems of civil Government, I shall venture, however novel it may appear to some, to add one more, on a principle which has been made the foundation of an objection to the New Constitution; I mean the enlargement of the orbit within which such systems are to revolve, either in respect to the dimensions of a single State, or to the consolidation of several smaller States into one great Confederacy. The latter is that which immediately concerns the object under consideration. It will, however, be of use to examine the principle, in its application to a single State, which shall be attended to in another place.

      The utility of a Confederacy, as well to suppress faction, and to guard the internal tranquillity of States, as to increase their external force and security, is in reality not a new idea. It has been practised upon, in different countries and ages, and has received the sanction of the most approved writers on the subject of politics. The opponents of the Plan proposed, have, with great assiduity, cited and circulated the observations of Montesquieu on the necessity of a contracted territory for a Republican Government. But they seem not to have been apprised of the sentiments of that great man, expressed in another part of his work, nor to have adverted to the consequences of the principle, to which they subscribe with such ready acquiescence.

      When Montesquieu recommends a small extent for Republics, the standards he had in view were of dimensions far short of the limits of almost every one of these States. Neither Virginia, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New-York, North Carolina, nor Georgia, can by any means be compared with the models from which he reasoned, and to which the terms of his description apply. If we therefore take his ideas on this point, as the criterion of truth, we shall be driven to the alternative, either of taking refuge at once in the arms of Monarchy, or of splitting ourselves into an infinity of little, jealous, clashing, tumultuous Commonwealths, the wretched nurseries of unceasing discord, and the miserable objects of universal pity or contempt. Some of the writers, who have come forward on the other side of the question, seem to have been aware of the dilemma; and have even been bold enough to hint at the division of the larger States, as a desirable thing. Such an infatuated policy, such a desperate expedient, might, by the multiplication of petty offices, answer the views of men, who possess not qualifications to extend their influence beyond the narrow circles of personal intrigue; but it could never promote the greatness or happiness of the people of America.

      Referring the examination of the principle itself to another place, as has been already mentioned, it will be sufficient to remark here, that, in the sense of the author who has been most emphatically quoted upon the occasion, it would only dictate a reduction of the size of the more considerable members of the Union; but would not militate against their being all comprehended in one Confederate Government. And this is the true question, in the discussion of which we are at present interested.

      So far are the suggestions of Montesquieu from standing in opposition to a general Union of the States, that he explicitly treats of a Confederate Republic as the expedient for extending the sphere of popular Government, and reconciling the advantages of monarchy with those of republicanism.

      "It is very probable," (says he,16) "that mankind would have been obliged, at length, to live constantly under the Government of a single person, had they not contrived a kind of Constitution, that has all the internal advantages of a Republican, together with the external force of a Monarchical Government. I mean a Confederate Republic.

      "This form of Government is a Convention by which several smaller States agree to become members of a larger one, which they intend to form. It is a

Скачать книгу