New Constitution Creates a National Government, Will not Abate
Foreign Influence, Dangers of Civil War and Despotism
by A Farmer, A Farmer
There are but two modes by which men are connected in society,
the one which operates on individuals, this always has been, and ought
still to be called, national government; the other which binds States
and governments together (not corporations, for there is no
considerable nation on earth, despotic, monarchical, or republican,
that does not contain many subordinate corporations with various
constitutions) this last has heretofore been denominated a league or
confederacy. The term federalists is therefore improperly applied to
themselves, by the friends and supporters of the proposed
constitution. This abuse of language does not help the cause; every
degree of imposition serves only to irritate, but can never
convince. They are national men, and their opponents, or at least a
great majority of them, are federal, in the only true and strict sense
of the word.
Whether any form of national government is preferable for the
Americans, to a league or confederacy, is a previous question we must
first make up our minds upon.…
That a national government will add to the dignity and increase
the splendor of the United States abroad, can admit of no doubt: it is
essentially requisite for both. That it will render government, and
officers of government, more dignified at home is equally
certain. That these objects are more suited to the manners, if not
[the] genius and disposition of our people is, I fear, also true. That
it is requisite in order to keep us at peace among ourselves, is
doubtful. That it is necessary, to prevent foreigners from dividing
us, or interfering in our government, I deny positively; and, after
all, I have strong doubts whether all its advantages are not more
specious than solid. We are vain, like other nations. We wish to make
a noise in the world; and feel hurt that Europeans are not so
attentive to America in peace, as they were to America in war. We are
also, no doubt, desirous of cutting a figure in history. Should we not
reflect, that quiet is happiness? That content and pomp are
incompatible? I have either read or heard this truth, which the
Americans should never forget: That the silence of historians is the
surest record of the happiness of a people. The Swiss have been four
hundred years the envy of mankind, and there is yet scarcely an
history of their nation. What is history, but a disgusting and painful
detail of the butcheries of conquerors, and the woeful calamities of
the conquered? Many of us are proud, and are frequently disappointed
that office confers neither respect or difference. No man of merit can
ever be disgraced by office. A rogue in office may be feared in some
governments—he will be respected in none. After all, what we call
respect and difference only arise from contrast of situation, as most
of our ideas come by comparison and relation. Where the people are
free there can be no great contrast or distinction among honest
citizens in or out of office. In proportion as the people lose their
freedom, every gradation of distinction, between the Governors and
governed obtains, until the former become masters, and the latter
become slaves. In all governments virtue will command reverence. The
divine Cato knew every Roman citizen by name, and never assumed any
preeminence; yet Cato found, and his memory will find, respect and
reverence in the bosoms of mankind, until this world returns into that
nothing, from whence Omnipotence called it. That the people are not at
present disposed for, and are actually incapable of, governments of
simplicity and equal rights, I can no longer doubt. But whose fault is
it? We make them bad, by bad governments, and then abuse and despise
them for being so. Our people are capable of being made anything that
human nature was or is capable of, if we would only have a little
patience and give them good and wholesome institutions; but I see none
such and very little prospect of such. Alas! I see nothing in my
fellow-citizens, that will permit my still fostering the delusion,
that they are now capable of sustaining the weight of
SELF-GOVERNMENT: a burden to which Greek and
Roman shoulders proved unequal. The honor of supporting the dignity of
the human character, seems reserved to the hardy Helvetians alone. If
the body of the people will not govern themselves, and govern
themselves well too, the consequence is unavoidable—a
FEW will, and must govern them. Then it is that
government becomes truly a government by force only, where men
relinquish part of their natural rights to secure the rest, instead of
an union of will and force, to protect all their natural rights, which
ought to be the foundation of every rightful social compact.
Whether national government will be productive of internal
peace, is too uncertain to admit of decided opinion. I only hazard a
conjecture when I say, that our state disputes, in a confederacy,
would be disputes of levity and passion, which would subside before
injury. The people being free, government having no right to them, but
they to government, they would separate and divide as interest or
inclination prompted—as they do at this day, and always have done,
in Switzerland. In a national government, unless cautiously and
fortunately administered, the disputes will be the deep-rooted
differences of interest, where part of the empire must be injured by
the operation of general law; and then should the sword of government
be once drawn (which Heaven avert) I fear it will not be sheathed,
until we have waded through that series of desolation, which France,
Spain, and the other great kingdoms of the world have suffered, in
order to bring so many separate States into uniformity, of government
and law; in which event the legislative power can only be entrusted to
one man (as it is with them) who can have no local attachments,
partial interests, or private views to gratify.
That a national government will prevent the influence or danger
of foreign intrigue, or secure us from invasion, is in my judgment
directly the reverse of the truth. The only foreign, or at least evil
foreign influence, must be obtained through corruption. Where the
government is lodged in the body of the people, as in Switzerland,
they can never be corrupted; for no prince, or people, can have
resources enough to corrupt the majority of a nation; and if they
could, the play is not worth the candle. The facility of corruption is
increased in proportion as power tends by representation or
delegation, to a concentration in the hands of a few.…
As to any nation attacking a number of confederated independent
republics … it is not to be expected, more especially as the wealth
of the empire is there universally diffused, and will not be collected
into any one overgrown, luxurious and effeminate capital to become a
lure to the enterprizing ambitious. That extensive empire is a
misfortune to be deprecated, will not now be disputed. The balance of
power has long engaged the attention of all the European world, in
order to avoid the horrid evils of a general government. The same
government pervading a vast extent of territory, terrifies the minds
of individuals into meanness and submission. All human authority,
however organized, must have confined limits, or insolence and
oppression will prove the offspring of its grandeur, and the
difficulty or rather impossibility of escape prevents
resistance. Gibbon relates that some Roman Knights who had offended
government in Rome were taken up in Asia, in a very few days after. It
was the extensive territory of the Roman republic that produced a
Sylla, a Marius, a Caligula, a Nero, and an Elagabalus. In small
independent States contiguous to each other, the people run away and
leave despotism to reek its vengeance on itself; and thus it is that
moderation becomes with them, the law of self-preservation. These and
such reasons founded on the eternal and immutable nature of things
have long caused and will continue to cause much difference of
sentiment throughout our wide extensive territories. From our divided
and dispersed situation, and from the natural moderation of the
American character, it has hitherto proved a warfare of argument and
reason.
A Farmer