Objections to the Proposed Constitution From Extent of
Territory Answered
From the New York
Packet.
Friday, November 30,
1787.
Author: James Madison
To the People of the State of New York:
WE HAVE seen the necessity of the Union, as our bulwark against
foreign danger, as the conservator of peace among ourselves, as the guardian of
our commerce and other common interests, as the only substitute for those
military establishments which have subverted the liberties of the Old World,
and as the proper antidote for the diseases of faction, which have proved fatal
to other popular governments, and of which alarming symptoms have been betrayed
by our own. All that remains, within this branch of our inquiries, is to take
notice of an objection that may be drawn from the great extent of country which
the Union embraces. A few observations on this subject will be the more proper,
as it is perceived that the adversaries of the new Constitution are availing
themselves of the prevailing prejudice with regard to the practicable sphere of
republican administration, in order to supply, by imaginary difficulties, the
want of those solid objections which they endeavor in vain to find.
The error which limits republican government to a narrow
district has been unfolded and refuted in preceding papers. I remark here only
that it seems to owe its rise and prevalence chiefly to the confounding of a
republic with a democracy, applying to the former reasonings drawn from the
nature of the latter. The true distinction between these forms was also
adverted to on a former occasion. It is, that in a democracy, the people meet
and exercise the government in person; in a republic, they assemble and
administer it by their representatives and agents. A democracy, consequently,
will be confined to a small spot. A republic may be extended over a large
region.
To this accidental source of the error may be added the
artifice of some celebrated authors, whose writings have had a great share in
forming the modern standard of political opinions. Being subjects either of an
absolute or limited monarchy, they have endeavored to heighten the advantages,
or palliate the evils of those forms, by placing in comparison the vices and
defects of the republican, and by citing as specimens of the latter the
turbulent democracies of ancient Greece and modern Italy. Under the confusion
of names, it has been an easy task to transfer to a republic observations
applicable to a democracy only; and among others, the observation that it can
never be established but among a small number of people, living within a small
compass of territory.
Such a fallacy may have been the less perceived, as most of
the popular governments of antiquity were of the democratic species; and even
in modern Europe, to which we owe the great principle of representation, no
example is seen of a government wholly popular, and founded, at the same time,
wholly on that principle. If Europe has the merit of discovering this great
mechanical power in government, by the simple agency of which the will of the
largest political body may be concentred, and its force directed to any object
which the public good requires, America can claim the merit of making the
discovery the basis of unmixed and extensive republics. It is only to be
lamented that any of her citizens should wish to deprive her of the additional
merit of displaying its full efficacy in the establishment of the comprehensive
system now under her consideration.
As the natural limit of a democracy is that distance from
the central point which will just permit the most remote citizens to assemble
as often as their public functions demand, and will include no greater number
than can join in those functions; so the natural limit of a republic is that
distance from the centre which will barely allow the representatives to meet as
often as may be necessary for the administration of public affairs. Can it be
said that the limits of the United States exceed this distance? It will not be
said by those who recollect that the Atlantic coast is the longest side of the
Union, that during the term of thirteen years, the representatives of the
States have been almost continually assembled, and that the members from the
most distant States are not chargeable with greater intermissions of attendance
than those from the States in the neighborhood of Congress.
That we may form a juster estimate with regard to this
interesting subject, let us resort to the actual dimensions of the Union. The
limits, as fixed by the treaty of peace, are: on the east the Atlantic, on the
south the latitude of thirty-one degrees, on the west the Mississippi, and on
the north an irregular line running in some instances beyond the forty-fifth
degree, in others falling as low as the forty-second. The southern shore of
Lake Erie lies below that latitude. Computing the distance between the
thirty-first and forty-fifth degrees, it amounts to nine hundred and
seventy-three common miles; computing it from thirty-one to forty-two degrees,
to seven hundred and sixty-four miles and a half. Taking the mean for the
distance, the amount will be eight hundred and sixty-eight miles and
three-fourths. The mean distance from the Atlantic to the Mississippi does not
probably exceed seven hundred and fifty miles. On a comparison of this extent
with that of several countries in Europe, the practicability of rendering our
system commensurate to it appears to be demonstrable. It is not a great deal
larger than Germany, where a diet representing the whole empire is continually
assembled; or than Poland before the late dismemberment, where another national
diet was the depositary of the supreme power. Passing by France and Spain, we
find that in Great Britain, inferior as it may be in size, the representatives
of the northern extremity of the island have as far to travel to the national
council as will be required of those of the most remote parts of the Union.
Favorable as this view of the subject may be, some
observations remain which will place it in a light still more satisfactory.
In the first place it is to be remembered that the general
government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and
administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects,
which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained
by the separate provisions of any. The subordinate governments, which can
extend their care to all those other subjects which can be separately provided
for, will retain their due authority and activity. Were it proposed by the plan
of the convention to abolish the governments of the particular States, its
adversaries would have some ground for their objection; though it would not be
difficult to show that if they were abolished the general government would be
compelled, by the principle of self-preservation, to reinstate them in their
proper jurisdiction.
A second observation to be made is that the immediate object
of the federal Constitution is to secure the union of the thirteen primitive
States, which we know to be practicable; and to add to them such other States
as may arise in their own bosoms, or in their neighborhoods, which we cannot
doubt to be equally practicable. The arrangements that may be necessary for
those angles and fractions of our territory which lie on our northwestern frontier,
must be left to those whom further discoveries and experience will render more
equal to the task.
Let it be remarked, in the third place, that the intercourse
throughout the Union will be facilitated by new improvements. Roads will
everywhere be shortened, and kept in better order; accommodations for travelers
will be multiplied and meliorated; an interior navigation on our eastern side
will be opened throughout, or nearly throughout, the whole extent of the
thirteen States. The communication between the Western and Atlantic districts,
and between different parts of each, will be rendered more and more easy by
those numerous canals with which the beneficence of nature has intersected our
country, and which art finds it so little difficult to connect and complete.
A fourth and still more important consideration is, that as
almost every State will, on one side or other, be a frontier, and will thus
find, in regard to its safety, an inducement to make some sacrifices for the
sake of the general protection; so the States which lie at the greatest
distance from the heart of the Union, and which, of course, may partake least
of the ordinary circulation of its benefits, will be at the same time
immediately contiguous to foreign nations, and will consequently stand, on
particular occasions, in greatest need of its strength and resources. It may be
inconvenient for Georgia, or the States forming our western or northeastern
borders, to send their representatives to the seat of government; but they
would find it more so to struggle alone against an invading enemy, or even to
support alone the whole expense of those precautions which may be dictated by
the neighborhood of continual danger. If they should derive less benefit,
therefore, from the Union in some respects than the less distant States, they
will derive greater benefit from it in other respects, and thus the proper
equilibrium will be maintained throughout.
I submit to you, my fellow-citizens, these considerations,
in full confidence that the good sense which has so often marked your decisions
will allow them their due weight and effect; and that you will never suffer
difficulties, however formidable in appearance, or however fashionable the
error on which they may be founded, to drive you into the gloomy and perilous
scene into which the advocates for disunion would conduct you. Hearken not to
the unnatural voice which tells you that the people of America, knit together
as they are by so many cords of affection, can no longer live together as
members of the same family; can no longer continue the mutual guardians of
their mutual happiness; can no longer be fellow citizens of one great,
respectable, and flourishing empire. Hearken not to the voice which petulantly
tells you that the form of government recommended for your adoption is a
novelty in the political world; that it has never yet had a place in the
theories of the wildest projectors; that it rashly attempts what it is
impossible to accomplish. No, my countrymen, shut your ears against this
unhallowed language. Shut your hearts against the poison which it conveys; the
kindred blood which flows in the veins of American citizens, the mingled blood
which they have shed in defense of their sacred rights, consecrate their Union,
and excite horror at the idea of their becoming aliens, rivals, enemies. And if
novelties are to be shunned, believe me, the most alarming of all novelties,
the most wild of all projects, the most rash of all attempts, is that of
rendering us in pieces, in order to preserve our liberties and promote our
happiness. But why is the experiment of an extended republic to be rejected,
merely because it may comprise what is new? Is it not the glory of the people
of America, that, whilst they have paid a decent regard to the opinions of
former times and other nations, they have not suffered a blind veneration for
antiquity, for custom, or for names, to overrule the suggestions of their own
good sense, the knowledge of their own situation, and the lessons of their own
experience? To this manly spirit, posterity will be indebted for the
possession, and the world for the example, of the numerous innovations
displayed on the American theatre, in favor of private rights and public
happiness. Had no important step been taken by the leaders of the Revolution
for which a precedent could not be discovered, no government established of
which an exact model did not present itself, the people of the United States
might, at this moment have been numbered among the melancholy victims of
misguided councils, must at best have been laboring under the weight of some of
those forms which have crushed the liberties of the rest of mankind. Happily
for America, happily, we trust, for the whole human race, they pursued a new
and more noble course. They accomplished a revolution which has no parallel in
the annals of human society. They reared the fabrics of governments which have
no model on the face of the globe. They formed the design of a great
Confederacy, which it is incumbent on their successors to improve and
perpetuate. If their works betray imperfections, we wonder at the fewness of
them. If they erred most in the structure of the Union, this was the work most
difficult to be executed; this is the work which has been new modelled by the
act of your convention, and it is that act on which you are now to deliberate
and to decide.
PUBLIUS.
No comments:
Post a Comment