The Same Subject Continued: The Insufficiency of the Present
Confederation to Preserve the Union
For the Independent
Journal.
Author: Alexander Hamilton and James Madison
To the People of the State of New York:
THE examples of ancient confederacies, cited in my last
paper, have not exhausted the source of experimental instruction on this
subject. There are existing institutions, founded on a similar principle, which
merit particular consideration. The first which presents itself is the Germanic
body.
In the early ages of Christianity, Germany was occupied by
seven distinct nations, who had no common chief. The Franks, one of the number,
having conquered the Gauls, established the kingdom which has taken its name
from them. In the ninth century Charlemagne, its warlike monarch, carried his
victorious arms in every direction; and Germany became a part of his vast
dominions. On the dismemberment, which took place under his sons, this part was
erected into a separate and independent empire. Charlemagne and his immediate
descendants possessed the reality, as well as the ensigns and dignity of
imperial power. But the principal vassals, whose fiefs had become hereditary,
and who composed the national diets which Charlemagne had not abolished,
gradually threw off the yoke and advanced to sovereign jurisdiction and
independence. The force of imperial sovereignty was insufficient to restrain
such powerful dependants; or to preserve the unity and tranquillity of the
empire. The most furious private wars, accompanied with every species of
calamity, were carried on between the different princes and states. The
imperial authority, unable to maintain the public order, declined by degrees
till it was almost extinct in the anarchy, which agitated the long interval
between the death of the last emperor of the Suabian, and the accession of the
first emperor of the Austrian lines. In the eleventh century the emperors
enjoyed full sovereignty: In the fifteenth they had little more than the
symbols and decorations of power.
Out of this feudal system, which has itself many of the
important features of a confederacy, has grown the federal system which
constitutes the Germanic empire. Its powers are vested in a diet representing
the component members of the confederacy; in the emperor, who is the executive
magistrate, with a negative on the decrees of the diet; and in the imperial
chamber and the aulic council, two judiciary tribunals having supreme
jurisdiction in controversies which concern the empire, or which happen among
its members.
The diet possesses the general power of legislating for the
empire; of making war and peace; contracting alliances; assessing quotas of
troops and money; constructing fortresses; regulating coin; admitting new
members; and subjecting disobedient members to the ban of the empire, by which
the party is degraded from his sovereign rights and his possessions forfeited.
The members of the confederacy are expressly restricted from entering into
compacts prejudicial to the empire; from imposing tolls and duties on their
mutual intercourse, without the consent of the emperor and diet; from altering
the value of money; from doing injustice to one another; or from affording
assistance or retreat to disturbers of the public peace. And the ban is
denounced against such as shall violate any of these restrictions. The members
of the diet, as such, are subject in all cases to be judged by the emperor and
diet, and in their private capacities by the aulic council and imperial
chamber.
The prerogatives of the emperor are numerous. The most
important of them are: his exclusive right to make propositions to the diet; to
negative its resolutions; to name ambassadors; to confer dignities and titles;
to fill vacant electorates; to found universities; to grant privileges not
injurious to the states of the empire; to receive and apply the public
revenues; and generally to watch over the public safety. In certain cases, the
electors form a council to him. In quality of emperor, he possesses no
territory within the empire, nor receives any revenue for his support. But his
revenue and dominions, in other qualities, constitute him one of the most
powerful princes in Europe.
From such a parade of constitutional powers, in the
representatives and head of this confederacy, the natural supposition would be,
that it must form an exception to the general character which belongs to its
kindred systems. Nothing would be further from the reality. The fundamental
principle on which it rests, that the empire is a community of sovereigns, that
the diet is a representation of sovereigns and that the laws are addressed to
sovereigns, renders the empire a nerveless body, incapable of regulating its
own members, insecure against external dangers, and agitated with unceasing
fermentations in its own bowels.
The history of Germany is a history of wars between the
emperor and the princes and states; of wars among the princes and states
themselves; of the licentiousness of the strong, and the oppression of the
weak; of foreign intrusions, and foreign intrigues; of requisitions of men and
money disregarded, or partially complied with; of attempts to enforce them,
altogether abortive, or attended with slaughter and desolation, involving the
innocent with the guilty; of general inbecility, confusion, and misery.
In the sixteenth century, the emperor, with one part of the
empire on his side, was seen engaged against the other princes and states. In
one of the conflicts, the emperor himself was put to flight, and very near
being made prisoner by the elector of Saxony. The late king of Prussia was more
than once pitted against his imperial sovereign; and commonly proved an
overmatch for him. Controversies and wars among the members themselves have
been so common, that the German annals are crowded with the bloody pages which
describe them. Previous to the peace of Westphalia, Germany was desolated by a
war of thirty years, in which the emperor, with one half of the empire, was on
one side, and Sweden, with the other half, on the opposite side. Peace was at length
negotiated, and dictated by foreign powers; and the articles of it, to which
foreign powers are parties, made a fundamental part of the Germanic
constitution.
If the nation happens, on any emergency, to be more united
by the necessity of self-defense, its situation is still deplorable. Military
preparations must be preceded by so many tedious discussions, arising from the
jealousies, pride, separate views, and clashing pretensions of sovereign
bodies, that before the diet can settle the arrangements, the enemy are in the
field; and before the federal troops are ready to take it, are retiring into
winter quarters.
The small body of national troops, which has been judged
necessary in time of peace, is defectively kept up, badly paid, infected with
local prejudices, and supported by irregular and disproportionate contributions
to the treasury.
The impossibility of maintaining order and dispensing
justice among these sovereign subjects, produced the experiment of dividing the
empire into nine or ten circles or districts; of giving them an interior
organization, and of charging them with the military execution of the laws
against delinquent and contumacious members. This experiment has only served to
demonstrate more fully the radical vice of the constitution. Each circle is the
miniature picture of the deformities of this political monster. They either
fail to execute their commissions, or they do it with all the devastation and
carnage of civil war. Sometimes whole circles are defaulters; and then they increase
the mischief which they were instituted to remedy.
We may form some judgment of this scheme of military
coercion from a sample given by Thuanus. In Donawerth, a free and imperial city
of the circle of Suabia, the Abb 300 de St. Croix enjoyed certain immunities
which had been reserved to him. In the exercise of these, on some public
occasions, outrages were committed on him by the people of the city. The
consequence was that the city was put under the ban of the empire, and the Duke
of Bavaria, though director of another circle, obtained an appointment to enforce
it. He soon appeared before the city with a corps of ten thousand troops, and
finding it a fit occasion, as he had secretly intended from the beginning, to
revive an antiquated claim, on the pretext that his ancestors had suffered the
place to be dismembered from his territory, [1] he took possession of it in his
own name, disarmed, and punished the inhabitants, and reannexed the city to his
domains.
It may be asked, perhaps, what has so long kept this
disjointed machine from falling entirely to pieces? The answer is obvious: The
weakness of most of the members, who are unwilling to expose themselves to the
mercy of foreign powers; the weakness of most of the principal members,
compared with the formidable powers all around them; the vast weight and influence
which the emperor derives from his separate and heriditary dominions; and the
interest he feels in preserving a system with which his family pride is
connected, and which constitutes him the first prince in Europe; --these causes
support a feeble and precarious Union; whilst the repellant quality, incident
to the nature of sovereignty, and which time continually strengthens, prevents
any reform whatever, founded on a proper consolidation. Nor is it to be
imagined, if this obstacle could be surmounted, that the neighboring powers
would suffer a revolution to take place which would give to the empire the
force and preeminence to which it is entitled. Foreign nations have long
considered themselves as interested in the changes made by events in this constitution;
and have, on various occasions, betrayed their policy of perpetuating its
anarchy and weakness.
If more direct examples were wanting, Poland, as a
government over local sovereigns, might not improperly be taken notice of. Nor
could any proof more striking be given of the calamities flowing from such
institutions. Equally unfit for self-government and self-defense, it has long
been at the mercy of its powerful neighbors; who have lately had the mercy to
disburden it of one third of its people and territories.
The connection among the Swiss cantons scarcely amounts to a
confederacy; though it is sometimes cited as an instance of the stability of
such institutions.
They have no common treasury; no common troops even in war;
no common coin; no common judicatory; nor any other common mark of sovereignty.
They are kept together by the peculiarity of their
topographical position; by their individual weakness and insignificancy; by the
fear of powerful neighbors, to one of which they were formerly subject; by the
few sources of contention among a people of such simple and homogeneous
manners; by their joint interest in their dependent possessions; by the mutual
aid they stand in need of, for suppressing insurrections and rebellions, an aid
expressly stipulated and often required and afforded; and by the necessity of
some regular and permanent provision for accomodating disputes among the
cantons. The provision is, that the parties at variance shall each choose four
judges out of the neutral cantons, who, in case of disagreement, choose an
umpire. This tribunal, under an oath of impartiality, pronounces definitive
sentence, which all the cantons are bound to enforce. The competency of this
regulation may be estimated by a clause in their treaty of 1683, with Victor
Amadeus of Savoy; in which he obliges himself to interpose as mediator in
disputes between the cantons, and to employ force, if necessary, against the
contumacious party.
So far as the peculiarity of their case will admit of
comparison with that of the United States, it serves to confirm the principle
intended to be established. Whatever efficacy the union may have had in
ordinary cases, it appears that the moment a cause of difference sprang up,
capable of trying its strength, it failed. The controversies on the subject of
religion, which in three instances have kindled violent and bloody contests,
may be said, in fact, to have severed the league. The Protestant and Catholic
cantons have since had their separate diets, where all the most important
concerns are adjusted, and which have left the general diet little other
business than to take care of the common bailages.
That separation had another consequence, which merits
attention. It produced opposite alliances with foreign powers: of Berne, at the
head of the Protestant association, with the United Provinces; and of Luzerne,
at the head of the Catholic association, with France.
PUBLIUS.
1. Pfeffel, "Nouvel Abreg. Chronol. de l'Hist., etc.,
d'Allemagne," says the pretext was to indemnify himself for the expense of
the expedition.
No comments:
Post a Comment