diff options
Diffstat (limited to '815-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 815-h/815-h.htm | 21079 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 815-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 0 -> 59222 bytes |
2 files changed, 21079 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/815-h/815-h.htm b/815-h/815-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..37a7f24 --- /dev/null +++ b/815-h/815-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,21079 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" +"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> +<head> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> +<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> +<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Democracy in America, Part I. by Alexis de Tocqueville</title> + + <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> +<style type="text/css" xml:space="preserve"> + +body { margin-left: 20%; + margin-right: 20%; + text-align: justify; } + +h1, h2, h3, h4, h5 {text-align: center; font-style: normal; font-weight: +normal; line-height: 1.5; margin-top: .5em; margin-bottom: .5em;} + +h1 {font-size: 300%; + margin-top: 0.6em; + margin-bottom: 0.6em; + letter-spacing: 0.12em; + word-spacing: 0.2em; + text-indent: 0em;} +h2 {font-size: 150%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 1em;} +h3 {font-size: 140%; margin-top: 1em;} +h4 {font-size: 110%;} +h5 {font-size: 110%;} + +.no-break {page-break-before: avoid;} /* for epubs */ + +div.chapter {page-break-before: always; margin-top: 4em;} + +hr {width: 80%; margin-top: 2em; margin-bottom: 2em;} + +p {text-indent: 1em; + margin-top: 0.25em; + margin-bottom: 0.25em; } + +p.center {text-align: center; + text-indent: 0em; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 1em; } + +p.footnote {font-size: 90%; + text-indent: 0%; + margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 1em; } + +sup { vertical-align: top; font-size: 0.6em; } + +a:link {color:blue; text-decoration:none} +a:visited {color:blue; text-decoration:none} +a:hover {color:red} + + pre { font-style: italic; font-size: 90%; margin-left: 10%;} + +</style> +</head> +<body> +<div>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 815 ***</div> + +<h1>DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA</h1> + +<h2 class="no-break">By Alexis De Tocqueville</h2> + +<p class="center"> +AVOCAT À LA COUR ROYALE DE PARIS<br /> +ETC., ETC. +</p> + +<h3>Translated by<br /> +Henry Reeve, Esq.</h3> + +<p class="center"> +IN TWO VOLUMES.<br /> +VOL. I. +</p> + +<p class="center"> +LONDON:<br /> +SAUNDERS AND OTLEY, CONDUIT STREET<br /> +1835 +</p> + +<hr /> + +<h2>Contents</h2> + +<table summary="" style=""> + + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2H_4_0001"><big><b>Book One</b></big></a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2H_4_0002">Introductory Chapter</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0001">Chapter I: Exterior Form Of North America</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0002">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0003">Chapter II: Origin Of The Anglo-Americans—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0004">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0005">Chapter II: Origin Of The Anglo-Americans—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0006">Chapter III: Social Conditions Of The Anglo-Americans</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0007">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0008">Chapter IV: The Principle Of The Sovereignty Of The People In America</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0009">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0010">Chapter V: Necessity Of Examining The Condition Of The States—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0011">Chapter V: Necessity Of Examining The Condition Of The States—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0012">Chapter V: Necessity Of Examining The Condition Of The States—Part III</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0013">Chapter VI: Judicial Power In The United States</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0014">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0015">Chapter VII: Political Jurisdiction In The United States</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0016">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0017">Chapter VIII: The Federal Constitution—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0018">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2H_SUMM">Summary Of The Federal Constitution</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0019">Chapter VIII: The Federal Constitution—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0020">Chapter VIII: The Federal Constitution—Part III</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0021">Chapter VIII: The Federal Constitution—Part IV</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0022">Chapter VIII: The Federal Constitution—Part V</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0023">Chapter IX: Why The People May Strictly Be Said To Govern In The United</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0024">Chapter X: Parties In The United States</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0025">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2H_PART">Parties In The United States</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0026">Chapter XI: Liberty Of The Press In The United States</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0027">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0028">Chapter XII: Political Associations In The United States</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0029">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0030">Chapter XIII: Government Of The Democracy In America—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0031">Chapter XIII: Government Of The Democracy In America—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0032">Chapter XIII: Government Of The Democracy In America—Part III</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0033">Chapter XIV: Advantages American Society Derive From Democracy—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0034">Chapter XIV: Advantages American Society Derive From Democracy—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0035">Chapter XV: Unlimited Power Of Majority, And Its Consequences—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0036">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0037">Chapter XV: Unlimited Power Of Majority, And Its Consequences—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0038">Chapter XVI: Causes Mitigating Tyranny In The United States—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0039">Chapter Summary</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0040">Chapter XVI: Causes Mitigating Tyranny In The United States—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0041">Chapter XVII: Principal Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0042">Chapter XVII: Principal Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0043">Chapter XVII: Principal Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part III</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0044">Chapter XVII: Principal Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part IV</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0045">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races In The United States—Part I</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0046">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part II</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0047">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part III</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0048">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part IV</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0049">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part V</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0050">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part VI</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0051">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part VII</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0052">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part VIII</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0053">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part IX</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2HCH0054">Chapter XVIII: Future Condition Of Three Races—Part X</a></td> +</tr> + +<tr> +<td> <a href="#link2H_CONC">Conclusion</a></td> +</tr> + +</table> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2H_4_0001" id="link2H_4_0001"></a> Book One</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2H_4_0002" id="link2H_4_0002"></a> Introductory Chapter</h2> + +<p> +Amongst the novel objects that attracted my attention during my stay in the +United States, nothing struck me more forcibly than the general equality of +conditions. I readily discovered the prodigious influence which this primary +fact exercises on the whole course of society, by giving a certain direction to +public opinion, and a certain tenor to the laws; by imparting new maxims to the +governing powers, and peculiar habits to the governed. I speedily perceived +that the influence of this fact extends far beyond the political character and +the laws of the country, and that it has no less empire over civil society than +over the Government; it creates opinions, engenders sentiments, suggests the +ordinary practices of life, and modifies whatever it does not produce. The more +I advanced in the study of American society, the more I perceived that the +equality of conditions is the fundamental fact from which all others seem to be +derived, and the central point at which all my observations constantly +terminated. +</p> + +<p> +I then turned my thoughts to our own hemisphere, where I imagined that I +discerned something analogous to the spectacle which the New World presented to +me. I observed that the equality of conditions is daily progressing towards +those extreme limits which it seems to have reached in the United States, and +that the democracy which governs the American communities appears to be rapidly +rising into power in Europe. I hence conceived the idea of the book which is +now before the reader. +</p> + +<p> +It is evident to all alike that a great democratic revolution is going on +amongst us; but there are two opinions as to its nature and consequences. To +some it appears to be a novel accident, which as such may still be checked; to +others it seems irresistible, because it is the most uniform, the most ancient, +and the most permanent tendency which is to be found in history. Let us +recollect the situation of France seven hundred years ago, when the territory +was divided amongst a small number of families, who were the owners of the soil +and the rulers of the inhabitants; the right of governing descended with the +family inheritance from generation to generation; force was the only means by +which man could act on man, and landed property was the sole source of power. +Soon, however, the political power of the clergy was founded, and began to +exert itself: the clergy opened its ranks to all classes, to the poor and the +rich, the villein and the lord; equality penetrated into the Government through +the Church, and the being who as a serf must have vegetated in perpetual +bondage took his place as a priest in the midst of nobles, and not infrequently +above the heads of kings. +</p> + +<p> +The different relations of men became more complicated and more numerous as +society gradually became more stable and more civilized. Thence the want of +civil laws was felt; and the order of legal functionaries soon rose from the +obscurity of the tribunals and their dusty chambers, to appear at the court of +the monarch, by the side of the feudal barons in their ermine and their mail. +Whilst the kings were ruining themselves by their great enterprises, and the +nobles exhausting their resources by private wars, the lower orders were +enriching themselves by commerce. The influence of money began to be +perceptible in State affairs. The transactions of business opened a new road to +power, and the financier rose to a station of political influence in which he +was at once flattered and despised. Gradually the spread of mental +acquirements, and the increasing taste for literature and art, opened chances +of success to talent; science became a means of government, intelligence led to +social power, and the man of letters took a part in the affairs of the State. +The value attached to the privileges of birth decreased in the exact proportion +in which new paths were struck out to advancement. In the eleventh century +nobility was beyond all price; in the thirteenth it might be purchased; it was +conferred for the first time in 1270; and equality was thus introduced into the +Government by the aristocracy itself. +</p> + +<p> +In the course of these seven hundred years it sometimes happened that in order +to resist the authority of the Crown, or to diminish the power of their rivals, +the nobles granted a certain share of political rights to the people. Or, more +frequently, the king permitted the lower orders to enjoy a degree of power, +with the intention of repressing the aristocracy. In France the kings have +always been the most active and the most constant of levellers. When they were +strong and ambitious they spared no pains to raise the people to the level of +the nobles; when they were temperate or weak they allowed the people to rise +above themselves. Some assisted the democracy by their talents, others by their +vices. Louis XI and Louis XIV reduced every rank beneath the throne to the same +subjection; Louis XV descended, himself and all his Court, into the dust. +</p> + +<p> +As soon as land was held on any other than a feudal tenure, and personal +property began in its turn to confer influence and power, every improvement +which was introduced in commerce or manufacture was a fresh element of the +equality of conditions. Henceforward every new discovery, every new want which +it engendered, and every new desire which craved satisfaction, was a step +towards the universal level. The taste for luxury, the love of war, the sway of +fashion, and the most superficial as well as the deepest passions of the human +heart, co-operated to enrich the poor and to impoverish the rich. +</p> + +<p> +From the time when the exercise of the intellect became the source of strength +and of wealth, it is impossible not to consider every addition to science, +every fresh truth, and every new idea as a germ of power placed within the +reach of the people. Poetry, eloquence, and memory, the grace of wit, the glow +of imagination, the depth of thought, and all the gifts which are bestowed by +Providence with an equal hand, turned to the advantage of the democracy; and +even when they were in the possession of its adversaries they still served its +cause by throwing into relief the natural greatness of man; its conquests +spread, therefore, with those of civilization and knowledge, and literature +became an arsenal where the poorest and the weakest could always find weapons +to their hand. +</p> + +<p> +In perusing the pages of our history, we shall scarcely meet with a single +great event, in the lapse of seven hundred years, which has not turned to the +advantage of equality. The Crusades and the wars of the English decimated the +nobles and divided their possessions; the erection of communities introduced an +element of democratic liberty into the bosom of feudal monarchy; the invention +of fire-arms equalized the villein and the noble on the field of battle; +printing opened the same resources to the minds of all classes; the post was +organized so as to bring the same information to the door of the poor +man’s cottage and to the gate of the palace; and Protestantism proclaimed +that all men are alike able to find the road to heaven. The discovery of +America offered a thousand new paths to fortune, and placed riches and power +within the reach of the adventurous and the obscure. If we examine what has +happened in France at intervals of fifty years, beginning with the eleventh +century, we shall invariably perceive that a twofold revolution has taken place +in the state of society. The noble has gone down on the social ladder, and the +roturier has gone up; the one descends as the other rises. Every half century +brings them nearer to each other, and they will very shortly meet. +</p> + +<p> +Nor is this phenomenon at all peculiar to France. Whithersoever we turn our +eyes we shall witness the same continual revolution throughout the whole of +Christendom. The various occurrences of national existence have everywhere +turned to the advantage of democracy; all men have aided it by their exertions: +those who have intentionally labored in its cause, and those who have served it +unwittingly; those who have fought for it and those who have declared +themselves its opponents, have all been driven along in the same track, have +all labored to one end, some ignorantly and some unwillingly; all have been +blind instruments in the hands of God. +</p> + +<p> +The gradual development of the equality of conditions is therefore a +providential fact, and it possesses all the characteristics of a divine decree: +it is universal, it is durable, it constantly eludes all human interference, +and all events as well as all men contribute to its progress. Would it, then, +be wise to imagine that a social impulse which dates from so far back can be +checked by the efforts of a generation? Is it credible that the democracy which +has annihilated the feudal system and vanquished kings will respect the citizen +and the capitalist? Will it stop now that it has grown so strong and its +adversaries so weak? None can say which way we are going, for all terms of +comparison are wanting: the equality of conditions is more complete in the +Christian countries of the present day than it has been at any time or in any +part of the world; so that the extent of what already exists prevents us from +foreseeing what may be yet to come. +</p> + +<p> +The whole book which is here offered to the public has been written under the +impression of a kind of religious dread produced in the author’s mind by +the contemplation of so irresistible a revolution, which has advanced for +centuries in spite of such amazing obstacles, and which is still proceeding in +the midst of the ruins it has made. It is not necessary that God himself should +speak in order to disclose to us the unquestionable signs of His will; we can +discern them in the habitual course of nature, and in the invariable tendency +of events: I know, without a special revelation, that the planets move in the +orbits traced by the Creator’s finger. If the men of our time were led by +attentive observation and by sincere reflection to acknowledge that the gradual +and progressive development of social equality is at once the past and future +of their history, this solitary truth would confer the sacred character of a +Divine decree upon the change. To attempt to check democracy would be in that +case to resist the will of God; and the nations would then be constrained to +make the best of the social lot awarded to them by Providence. +</p> + +<p> +The Christian nations of our age seem to me to present a most alarming +spectacle; the impulse which is bearing them along is so strong that it cannot +be stopped, but it is not yet so rapid that it cannot be guided: their fate is +in their hands; yet a little while and it may be so no longer. The first duty +which is at this time imposed upon those who direct our affairs is to educate +the democracy; to warm its faith, if that be possible; to purify its morals; to +direct its energies; to substitute a knowledge of business for its +inexperience, and an acquaintance with its true interests for its blind +propensities; to adapt its government to time and place, and to modify it in +compliance with the occurrences and the actors of the age. A new science of +politics is indispensable to a new world. This, however, is what we think of +least; launched in the middle of a rapid stream, we obstinately fix our eyes on +the ruins which may still be described upon the shore we have left, whilst the +current sweeps us along, and drives us backwards towards the gulf. +</p> + +<p> +In no country in Europe has the great social revolution which I have been +describing made such rapid progress as in France; but it has always been borne +on by chance. The heads of the State have never had any forethought for its +exigencies, and its victories have been obtained without their consent or +without their knowledge. The most powerful, the most intelligent, and the most +moral classes of the nation have never attempted to connect themselves with it +in order to guide it. The people has consequently been abandoned to its wild +propensities, and it has grown up like those outcasts who receive their +education in the public streets, and who are unacquainted with aught but the +vices and wretchedness of society. The existence of a democracy was seemingly +unknown, when on a sudden it took possession of the supreme power. Everything +was then submitted to its caprices; it was worshipped as the idol of strength; +until, when it was enfeebled by its own excesses, the legislator conceived the +rash project of annihilating its power, instead of instructing it and +correcting its vices; no attempt was made to fit it to govern, but all were +bent on excluding it from the government. +</p> + +<p> +The consequence of this has been that the democratic revolution has been +effected only in the material parts of society, without that concomitant change +in laws, ideas, customs, and manners which was necessary to render such a +revolution beneficial. We have gotten a democracy, but without the conditions +which lessen its vices and render its natural advantages more prominent; and +although we already perceive the evils it brings, we are ignorant of the +benefits it may confer. +</p> + +<p> +While the power of the Crown, supported by the aristocracy, peaceably governed +the nations of Europe, society possessed, in the midst of its wretchedness, +several different advantages which can now scarcely be appreciated or +conceived. The power of a part of his subjects was an insurmountable barrier to +the tyranny of the prince; and the monarch, who felt the almost divine +character which he enjoyed in the eyes of the multitude, derived a motive for +the just use of his power from the respect which he inspired. High as they were +placed above the people, the nobles could not but take that calm and benevolent +interest in its fate which the shepherd feels towards his flock; and without +acknowledging the poor as their equals, they watched over the destiny of those +whose welfare Providence had entrusted to their care. The people never having +conceived the idea of a social condition different from its own, and +entertaining no expectation of ever ranking with its chiefs, received benefits +from them without discussing their rights. It grew attached to them when they +were clement and just, and it submitted without resistance or servility to +their exactions, as to the inevitable visitations of the arm of God. Custom, +and the manners of the time, had moreover created a species of law in the midst +of violence, and established certain limits to oppression. As the noble never +suspected that anyone would attempt to deprive him of the privileges which he +believed to be legitimate, and as the serf looked upon his own inferiority as a +consequence of the immutable order of nature, it is easy to imagine that a +mutual exchange of good-will took place between two classes so differently +gifted by fate. Inequality and wretchedness were then to be found in society; +but the souls of neither rank of men were degraded. Men are not corrupted by +the exercise of power or debased by the habit of obedience, but by the exercise +of a power which they believe to be illegal and by obedience to a rule which +they consider to be usurped and oppressive. On one side was wealth, strength, +and leisure, accompanied by the refinements of luxury, the elegance of taste, +the pleasures of wit, and the religion of art. On the other was labor and a +rude ignorance; but in the midst of this coarse and ignorant multitude it was +not uncommon to meet with energetic passions, generous sentiments, profound +religious convictions, and independent virtues. The body of a State thus +organized might boast of its stability, its power, and, above all, of its +glory. +</p> + +<p> +But the scene is now changed, and gradually the two ranks mingle; the divisions +which once severed mankind are lowered, property is divided, power is held in +common, the light of intelligence spreads, and the capacities of all classes +are equally cultivated; the State becomes democratic, and the empire of +democracy is slowly and peaceably introduced into the institutions and the +manners of the nation. I can conceive a society in which all men would profess +an equal attachment and respect for the laws of which they are the common +authors; in which the authority of the State would be respected as necessary, +though not as divine; and the loyalty of the subject to its chief magistrate +would not be a passion, but a quiet and rational persuasion. Every individual +being in the possession of rights which he is sure to retain, a kind of manly +reliance and reciprocal courtesy would arise between all classes, alike removed +from pride and meanness. The people, well acquainted with its true interests, +would allow that in order to profit by the advantages of society it is +necessary to satisfy its demands. In this state of things the voluntary +association of the citizens might supply the individual exertions of the +nobles, and the community would be alike protected from anarchy and from +oppression. +</p> + +<p> +I admit that, in a democratic State thus constituted, society will not be +stationary; but the impulses of the social body may be regulated and directed +forwards; if there be less splendor than in the halls of an aristocracy, the +contrast of misery will be less frequent also; the pleasures of enjoyment may +be less excessive, but those of comfort will be more general; the sciences may +be less perfectly cultivated, but ignorance will be less common; the +impetuosity of the feelings will be repressed, and the habits of the nation +softened; there will be more vices and fewer crimes. In the absence of +enthusiasm and of an ardent faith, great sacrifices may be obtained from the +members of a commonwealth by an appeal to their understandings and their +experience; each individual will feel the same necessity for uniting with his +fellow-citizens to protect his own weakness; and as he knows that if they are +to assist he must co-operate, he will readily perceive that his personal +interest is identified with the interest of the community. The nation, taken as +a whole, will be less brilliant, less glorious, and perhaps less strong; but +the majority of the citizens will enjoy a greater degree of prosperity, and the +people will remain quiet, not because it despairs of amelioration, but because +it is conscious of the advantages of its condition. If all the consequences of +this state of things were not good or useful, society would at least have +appropriated all such as were useful and good; and having once and for ever +renounced the social advantages of aristocracy, mankind would enter into +possession of all the benefits which democracy can afford. +</p> + +<p> +But here it may be asked what we have adopted in the place of those +institutions, those ideas, and those customs of our forefathers which we have +abandoned. The spell of royalty is broken, but it has not been succeeded by the +majesty of the laws; the people has learned to despise all authority, but fear +now extorts a larger tribute of obedience than that which was formerly paid by +reverence and by love. +</p> + +<p> +I perceive that we have destroyed those independent beings which were able to +cope with tyranny single-handed; but it is the Government that has inherited +the privileges of which families, corporations, and individuals have been +deprived; the weakness of the whole community has therefore succeeded that +influence of a small body of citizens, which, if it was sometimes oppressive, +was often conservative. The division of property has lessened the distance +which separated the rich from the poor; but it would seem that the nearer they +draw to each other, the greater is their mutual hatred, and the more vehement +the envy and the dread with which they resist each other’s claims to +power; the notion of Right is alike insensible to both classes, and Force +affords to both the only argument for the present, and the only guarantee for +the future. The poor man retains the prejudices of his forefathers without +their faith, and their ignorance without their virtues; he has adopted the +doctrine of self-interest as the rule of his actions, without understanding the +science which controls it, and his egotism is no less blind than his +devotedness was formerly. If society is tranquil, it is not because it relies +upon its strength and its well-being, but because it knows its weakness and its +infirmities; a single effort may cost it its life; everybody feels the evil, +but no one has courage or energy enough to seek the cure; the desires, the +regret, the sorrows, and the joys of the time produce nothing that is visible +or permanent, like the passions of old men which terminate in impotence. +</p> + +<p> +We have, then, abandoned whatever advantages the old state of things afforded, +without receiving any compensation from our present condition; we have +destroyed an aristocracy, and we seem inclined to survey its ruins with +complacency, and to fix our abode in the midst of them. +</p> + +<p> +The phenomena which the intellectual world presents are not less deplorable. +The democracy of France, checked in its course or abandoned to its lawless +passions, has overthrown whatever crossed its path, and has shaken all that it +has not destroyed. Its empire on society has not been gradually introduced or +peaceably established, but it has constantly advanced in the midst of disorder +and the agitation of a conflict. In the heat of the struggle each partisan is +hurried beyond the limits of his opinions by the opinions and the excesses of +his opponents, until he loses sight of the end of his exertions, and holds a +language which disguises his real sentiments or secret instincts. Hence arises +the strange confusion which we are witnessing. I cannot recall to my mind a +passage in history more worthy of sorrow and of pity than the scenes which are +happening under our eyes; it is as if the natural bond which unites the +opinions of man to his tastes and his actions to his principles was now broken; +the sympathy which has always been acknowledged between the feelings and the +ideas of mankind appears to be dissolved, and all the laws of moral analogy to +be abolished. +</p> + +<p> +Zealous Christians may be found amongst us whose minds are nurtured in the love +and knowledge of a future life, and who readily espouse the cause of human +liberty as the source of all moral greatness. Christianity, which has declared +that all men are equal in the sight of God, will not refuse to acknowledge that +all citizens are equal in the eye of the law. But, by a singular concourse of +events, religion is entangled in those institutions which democracy assails, +and it is not unfrequently brought to reject the equality it loves, and to +curse that cause of liberty as a foe which it might hallow by its alliance. +</p> + +<p> +By the side of these religious men I discern others whose looks are turned to +the earth more than to Heaven; they are the partisans of liberty, not only as +the source of the noblest virtues, but more especially as the root of all solid +advantages; and they sincerely desire to extend its sway, and to impart its +blessings to mankind. It is natural that they should hasten to invoke the +assistance of religion, for they must know that liberty cannot be established +without morality, nor morality without faith; but they have seen religion in +the ranks of their adversaries, and they inquire no further; some of them +attack it openly, and the remainder are afraid to defend it. +</p> + +<p> +In former ages slavery has been advocated by the venal and slavish-minded, +whilst the independent and the warm-hearted were struggling without hope to +save the liberties of mankind. But men of high and generous characters are now +to be met with, whose opinions are at variance with their inclinations, and who +praise that servility which they have themselves never known. Others, on the +contrary, speak in the name of liberty, as if they were able to feel its +sanctity and its majesty, and loudly claim for humanity those rights which they +have always disowned. There are virtuous and peaceful individuals whose pure +morality, quiet habits, affluence, and talents fit them to be the leaders of +the surrounding population; their love of their country is sincere, and they +are prepared to make the greatest sacrifices to its welfare, but they confound +the abuses of civilization with its benefits, and the idea of evil is +inseparable in their minds from that of novelty. +</p> + +<p> +Not far from this class is another party, whose object is to materialize +mankind, to hit upon what is expedient without heeding what is just, to acquire +knowledge without faith, and prosperity apart from virtue; assuming the title +of the champions of modern civilization, and placing themselves in a station +which they usurp with insolence, and from which they are driven by their own +unworthiness. Where are we then? The religionists are the enemies of liberty, +and the friends of liberty attack religion; the high-minded and the noble +advocate subjection, and the meanest and most servile minds preach +independence; honest and enlightened citizens are opposed to all progress, +whilst men without patriotism and without principles are the apostles of +civilization and of intelligence. Has such been the fate of the centuries which +have preceded our own? and has man always inhabited a world like the present, +where nothing is linked together, where virtue is without genius, and genius +without honor; where the love of order is confounded with a taste for +oppression, and the holy rites of freedom with a contempt of law; where the +light thrown by conscience on human actions is dim, and where nothing seems to +be any longer forbidden or allowed, honorable or shameful, false or true? I +cannot, however, believe that the Creator made man to leave him in an endless +struggle with the intellectual miseries which surround us: God destines a +calmer and a more certain future to the communities of Europe; I am +unacquainted with His designs, but I shall not cease to believe in them because +I cannot fathom them, and I had rather mistrust my own capacity than His +justice. +</p> + +<p> +There is a country in the world where the great revolution which I am speaking +of seems nearly to have reached its natural limits; it has been effected with +ease and simplicity, say rather that this country has attained the consequences +of the democratic revolution which we are undergoing without having experienced +the revolution itself. The emigrants who fixed themselves on the shores of +America in the beginning of the seventeenth century severed the democratic +principle from all the principles which repressed it in the old communities of +Europe, and transplanted it unalloyed to the New World. It has there been +allowed to spread in perfect freedom, and to put forth its consequences in the +laws by influencing the manners of the country. +</p> + +<p> +It appears to me beyond a doubt that sooner or later we shall arrive, like the +Americans, at an almost complete equality of conditions. But I do not conclude +from this that we shall ever be necessarily led to draw the same political +consequences which the Americans have derived from a similar social +organization. I am far from supposing that they have chosen the only form of +government which a democracy may adopt; but the identity of the efficient cause +of laws and manners in the two countries is sufficient to account for the +immense interest we have in becoming acquainted with its effects in each of +them. +</p> + +<p> +It is not, then, merely to satisfy a legitimate curiosity that I have examined +America; my wish has been to find instruction by which we may ourselves profit. +Whoever should imagine that I have intended to write a panegyric will perceive +that such was not my design; nor has it been my object to advocate any form of +government in particular, for I am of opinion that absolute excellence is +rarely to be found in any legislation; I have not even affected to discuss +whether the social revolution, which I believe to be irresistible, is +advantageous or prejudicial to mankind; I have acknowledged this revolution as +a fact already accomplished or on the eve of its accomplishment; and I have +selected the nation, from amongst those which have undergone it, in which its +development has been the most peaceful and the most complete, in order to +discern its natural consequences, and, if it be possible, to distinguish the +means by which it may be rendered profitable. I confess that in America I saw +more than America; I sought the image of democracy itself, with its +inclinations, its character, its prejudices, and its passions, in order to +learn what we have to fear or to hope from its progress. +</p> + +<p> +In the first part of this work I have attempted to show the tendency given to +the laws by the democracy of America, which is abandoned almost without +restraint to its instinctive propensities, and to exhibit the course it +prescribes to the Government and the influence it exercises on affairs. I have +sought to discover the evils and the advantages which it produces. I have +examined the precautions used by the Americans to direct it, as well as those +which they have not adopted, and I have undertaken to point out the causes +which enable it to govern society. I do not know whether I have succeeded in +making known what I saw in America, but I am certain that such has been my +sincere desire, and that I have never, knowingly, moulded facts to ideas, +instead of ideas to facts. +</p> + +<p> +Whenever a point could be established by the aid of written documents, I have +had recourse to the original text, and to the most authentic and approved +works. I have cited my authorities in the notes, and anyone may refer to them. +Whenever an opinion, a political custom, or a remark on the manners of the +country was concerned, I endeavored to consult the most enlightened men I met +with. If the point in question was important or doubtful, I was not satisfied +with one testimony, but I formed my opinion on the evidence of several +witnesses. Here the reader must necessarily believe me upon my word. I could +frequently have quoted names which are either known to him, or which deserve to +be so, in proof of what I advance; but I have carefully abstained from this +practice. A stranger frequently hears important truths at the fire-side of his +host, which the latter would perhaps conceal from the ear of friendship; he +consoles himself with his guest for the silence to which he is restricted, and +the shortness of the traveller’s stay takes away all fear of his +indiscretion. I carefully noted every conversation of this nature as soon as it +occurred, but these notes will never leave my writing-case; I had rather injure +the success of my statements than add my name to the list of those strangers +who repay the generous hospitality they have received by subsequent chagrin and +annoyance. +</p> + +<p> +I am aware that, notwithstanding my care, nothing will be easier than to +criticise this book, if anyone ever chooses to criticise it. Those readers who +may examine it closely will discover the fundamental idea which connects the +several parts together. But the diversity of the subjects I have had to treat +is exceedingly great, and it will not be difficult to oppose an isolated fact +to the body of facts which I quote, or an isolated idea to the body of ideas I +put forth. I hope to be read in the spirit which has guided my labors, and that +my book may be judged by the general impression it leaves, as I have formed my +own judgment not on any single reason, but upon the mass of evidence. It must +not be forgotten that the author who wishes to be understood is obliged to push +all his ideas to their utmost theoretical consequences, and often to the verge +of what is false or impracticable; for if it be necessary sometimes to quit the +rules of logic in active life, such is not the case in discourse, and a man +finds that almost as many difficulties spring from inconsistency of language as +usually arise from inconsistency of conduct. +</p> + +<p> +I conclude by pointing out myself what many readers will consider the principal +defect of the work. This book is written to favor no particular views, and in +composing it I have entertained no designs of serving or attacking any party; I +have undertaken not to see differently, but to look further than parties, and +whilst they are busied for the morrow I have turned my thoughts to the Future. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0001" id="link2HCH0001"></a> Chapter I: Exterior Form Of +North America</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0002" id="link2HCH0002"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +North America divided into two vast regions, one inclining towards the Pole, +the other towards the Equator—Valley of the Mississippi—Traces of +the Revolutions of the Globe—Shore of the Atlantic Ocean where the +English Colonies were founded—Difference in the appearance of North and +of South America at the time of their Discovery—Forests of North +America—Prairies—Wandering Tribes of Natives—Their outward +appearance, manners, and language—Traces of an unknown people. +</p> + +<p> +Exterior Form Of North America +</p> + +<p> +North America presents in its external form certain general features which it +is easy to discriminate at the first glance. A sort of methodical order seems +to have regulated the separation of land and water, mountains and valleys. A +simple, but grand, arrangement is discoverable amidst the confusion of objects +and the prodigious variety of scenes. This continent is divided, almost +equally, into two vast regions, one of which is bounded on the north by the +Arctic Pole, and by the two great oceans on the east and west. It stretches +towards the south, forming a triangle whose irregular sides meet at length +below the great lakes of Canada. The second region begins where the other +terminates, and includes all the remainder of the continent. The one slopes +gently towards the Pole, the other towards the Equator. +</p> + +<p> +The territory comprehended in the first region descends towards the north with +so imperceptible a slope that it may almost be said to form a level plain. +Within the bounds of this immense tract of country there are neither high +mountains nor deep valleys. Streams meander through it irregularly: great +rivers mix their currents, separate and meet again, disperse and form vast +marshes, losing all trace of their channels in the labyrinth of waters they +have themselves created; and thus, at length, after innumerable windings, fall +into the Polar Seas. The great lakes which bound this first region are not +walled in, like most of those in the Old World, between hills and rocks. Their +banks are flat, and rise but a few feet above the level of their waters; each +of them thus forming a vast bowl filled to the brim. The slightest change in +the structure of the globe would cause their waters to rush either towards the +Pole or to the tropical sea. +</p> + +<p> +The second region is more varied on its surface, and better suited for the +habitation of man. Two long chains of mountains divide it from one extreme to +the other; the Alleghany ridge takes the form of the shores of the Atlantic +Ocean; the other is parallel with the Pacific. The space which lies between +these two chains of mountains contains 1,341,649 square miles. *a Its surface +is therefore about six times as great as that of France. This vast territory, +however, forms a single valley, one side of which descends gradually from the +rounded summits of the Alleghanies, while the other rises in an uninterrupted +course towards the tops of the Rocky Mountains. At the bottom of the valley +flows an immense river, into which the various streams issuing from the +mountains fall from all parts. In memory of their native land, the French +formerly called this river the St. Louis. The Indians, in their pompous +language, have named it the Father of Waters, or the Mississippi. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a<br /> +[ Darby’s “View of the United States.”] +</p> + +<p> +The Mississippi takes its source above the limit of the two great regions of +which I have spoken, not far from the highest point of the table-land where +they unite. Near the same spot rises another river, *b which empties itself +into the Polar seas. The course of the Mississippi is at first dubious: it +winds several times towards the north, from whence it rose; and at length, +after having been delayed in lakes and marshes, it flows slowly onwards to the +south. Sometimes quietly gliding along the argillaceous bed which nature has +assigned to it, sometimes swollen by storms, the Mississippi waters 2,500 miles +in its course. *c At the distance of 1,364 miles from its mouth this river +attains an average depth of fifteen feet; and it is navigated by vessels of 300 +tons burden for a course of nearly 500 miles. Fifty-seven large navigable +rivers contribute to swell the waters of the Mississippi; amongst others, the +Missouri, which traverses a space of 2,500 miles; the Arkansas of 1,300 miles, +the Red River 1,000 miles, four whose course is from 800 to 1,000 miles in +length, viz., the Illinois, the St. Peter’s, the St. Francis, and the +Moingona; besides a countless multitude of rivulets which unite from all parts +their tributary streams. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ The Red River.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ Warden’s “Description of the United States.”] +</p> + +<p> +The valley which is watered by the Mississippi seems formed to be the bed of +this mighty river, which, like a god of antiquity, dispenses both good and evil +in its course. On the shores of the stream nature displays an inexhaustible +fertility; in proportion as you recede from its banks, the powers of vegetation +languish, the soil becomes poor, and the plants that survive have a sickly +growth. Nowhere have the great convulsions of the globe left more evident +traces than in the valley of the Mississippi; the whole aspect of the country +shows the powerful effects of water, both by its fertility and by its +barrenness. The waters of the primeval ocean accumulated enormous beds of +vegetable mould in the valley, which they levelled as they retired. Upon the +right shore of the river are seen immense plains, as smooth as if the +husbandman had passed over them with his roller. As you approach the mountains +the soil becomes more and more unequal and sterile; the ground is, as it were, +pierced in a thousand places by primitive rocks, which appear like the bones of +a skeleton whose flesh is partly consumed. The surface of the earth is covered +with a granite sand and huge irregular masses of stone, among which a few +plants force their growth, and give the appearance of a green field covered +with the ruins of a vast edifice. These stones and this sand discover, on +examination, a perfect analogy with those which compose the arid and broken +summits of the Rocky Mountains. The flood of waters which washed the soil to +the bottom of the valley afterwards carried away portions of the rocks +themselves; and these, dashed and bruised against the neighboring cliffs, were +left scattered like wrecks at their feet. *d The valley of the Mississippi is, +upon the whole, the most magnificent dwelling-place prepared by God for +man’s abode; and yet it may be said that at present it is but a mighty +desert. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ See Appendix, A.] +</p> + +<p> +On the eastern side of the Alleghanies, between the base of these mountains and +the Atlantic Ocean, there lies a long ridge of rocks and sand, which the sea +appears to have left behind as it retired. The mean breadth of this territory +does not exceed one hundred miles; but it is about nine hundred miles in +length. This part of the American continent has a soil which offers every +obstacle to the husbandman, and its vegetation is scanty and unvaried. +</p> + +<p> +Upon this inhospitable coast the first united efforts of human industry were +made. The tongue of arid land was the cradle of those English colonies which +were destined one day to become the United States of America. The centre of +power still remains here; whilst in the backwoods the true elements of the +great people to whom the future control of the continent belongs are gathering +almost in secrecy together. +</p> + +<p> +When the Europeans first landed on the shores of the West Indies, and +afterwards on the coast of South America, they thought themselves transported +into those fabulous regions of which poets had sung. The sea sparkled with +phosphoric light, and the extraordinary transparency of its waters discovered +to the view of the navigator all that had hitherto been hidden in the deep +abyss. *e Here and there appeared little islands perfumed with odoriferous +plants, and resembling baskets of flowers floating on the tranquil surface of +the ocean. Every object which met the sight, in this enchanting region, seemed +prepared to satisfy the wants or contribute to the pleasures of man. Almost all +the trees were loaded with nourishing fruits, and those which were useless as +food delighted the eye by the brilliancy and variety of their colors. In groves +of fragrant lemon-trees, wild figs, flowering myrtles, acacias, and oleanders, +which were hung with festoons of various climbing plants, covered with flowers, +a multitude of birds unknown in Europe displayed their bright plumage, +glittering with purple and azure, and mingled their warbling with the harmony +of a world teeming with life and motion. *f Underneath this brilliant exterior +death was concealed. But the air of these climates had so enervating an +influence that man, absorbed by present enjoyment, was rendered regardless of +the future. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ Malte Brun tells us (vol. v. p. 726) that the water of the Caribbean Sea is +so transparent that corals and fish are discernible at a depth of sixty +fathoms. The ship seemed to float in air, the navigator became giddy as his eye +penetrated through the crystal flood, and beheld submarine gardens, or beds of +shells, or gilded fishes gliding among tufts and thickets of seaweed.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ See Appendix, B.] +</p> + +<p> +North America appeared under a very different aspect; there everything was +grave, serious, and solemn: it seemed created to be the domain of intelligence, +as the South was that of sensual delight. A turbulent and foggy ocean washed +its shores. It was girt round by a belt of granite rocks, or by wide tracts of +sand. The foliage of its woods was dark and gloomy, for they were composed of +firs, larches, evergreen oaks, wild olive-trees, and laurels. Beyond this outer +belt lay the thick shades of the central forest, where the largest trees which +are produced in the two hemispheres grow side by side. The plane, the catalpa, +the sugar-maple, and the Virginian poplar mingled their branches with those of +the oak, the beech, and the lime. In these, as in the forests of the Old World, +destruction was perpetually going on. The ruins of vegetation were heaped upon +each other; but there was no laboring hand to remove them, and their decay was +not rapid enough to make room for the continual work of reproduction. Climbing +plants, grasses, and other herbs forced their way through the mass of dying +trees; they crept along their bending trunks, found nourishment in their dusty +cavities, and a passage beneath the lifeless bark. Thus decay gave its +assistance to life, and their respective productions were mingled together. The +depths of these forests were gloomy and obscure, and a thousand rivulets, +undirected in their course by human industry, preserved in them a constant +moisture. It was rare to meet with flowers, wild fruits, or birds beneath their +shades. The fall of a tree overthrown by age, the rushing torrent of a +cataract, the lowing of the buffalo, and the howling of the wind were the only +sounds which broke the silence of nature. +</p> + +<p> +To the east of the great river, the woods almost disappeared; in their stead +were seen prairies of immense extent. Whether Nature in her infinite variety +had denied the germs of trees to these fertile plains, or whether they had once +been covered with forests, subsequently destroyed by the hand of man, is a +question which neither tradition nor scientific research has been able to +resolve. +</p> + +<p> +These immense deserts were not, however, devoid of human inhabitants. Some +wandering tribes had been for ages scattered among the forest shades or the +green pastures of the prairie. From the mouth of the St. Lawrence to the delta +of the Mississippi, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean, these savages +possessed certain points of resemblance which bore witness of their common +origin; but at the same time they differed from all other known races of men: +*g they were neither white like the Europeans, nor yellow like most of the +Asiatics, nor black like the negroes. Their skin was reddish brown, their hair +long and shining, their lips thin, and their cheekbones very prominent. The +languages spoken by the North American tribes are various as far as regarded +their words, but they were subject to the same grammatical rules. These rules +differed in several points from such as had been observed to govern the origin +of language. The idiom of the Americans seemed to be the product of new +combinations, and bespoke an effort of the understanding of which the Indians +of our days would be incapable. *h +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ With the progress of discovery some resemblance has been found to exist +between the physical conformation, the language, and the habits of the Indians +of North America, and those of the Tongous, Mantchous, Mongols, Tartars, and +other wandering tribes of Asia. The land occupied by these tribes is not very +distant from Behring’s Strait, which allows of the supposition, that at a +remote period they gave inhabitants to the desert continent of America. But +this is a point which has not yet been clearly elucidated by science. See Malte +Brun, vol. v.; the works of Humboldt; Fischer, “Conjecture sur +l’Origine des Americains”; Adair, “History of the American +Indians.”] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ See Appendix, C.] +</p> + +<p> +The social state of these tribes differed also in many respects from all that +was seen in the Old World. They seemed to have multiplied freely in the midst +of their deserts without coming in contact with other races more civilized than +their own. Accordingly, they exhibited none of those indistinct, incoherent +notions of right and wrong, none of that deep corruption of manners, which is +usually joined with ignorance and rudeness among nations which, after advancing +to civilization, have relapsed into a state of barbarism. The Indian was +indebted to no one but himself; his virtues, his vices, and his prejudices were +his own work; he had grown up in the wild independence of his nature. +</p> + +<p> +If, in polished countries, the lowest of the people are rude and uncivil, it is +not merely because they are poor and ignorant, but that, being so, they are in +daily contact with rich and enlightened men. The sight of their own hard lot +and of their weakness, which is daily contrasted with the happiness and power +of some of their fellow-creatures, excites in their hearts at the same time the +sentiments of anger and of fear: the consciousness of their inferiority and of +their dependence irritates while it humiliates them. This state of mind +displays itself in their manners and language; they are at once insolent and +servile. The truth of this is easily proved by observation; the people are more +rude in aristocratic countries than elsewhere, in opulent cities than in rural +districts. In those places where the rich and powerful are assembled together +the weak and the indigent feel themselves oppressed by their inferior +condition. Unable to perceive a single chance of regaining their equality, they +give up to despair, and allow themselves to fall below the dignity of human +nature. +</p> + +<p> +This unfortunate effect of the disparity of conditions is not observable in +savage life: the Indians, although they are ignorant and poor, are equal and +free. At the period when Europeans first came among them the natives of North +America were ignorant of the value of riches, and indifferent to the enjoyments +which civilized man procures to himself by their means. Nevertheless there was +nothing coarse in their demeanor; they practised an habitual reserve and a kind +of aristocratic politeness. Mild and hospitable when at peace, though merciless +in war beyond any known degree of human ferocity, the Indian would expose +himself to die of hunger in order to succor the stranger who asked admittance +by night at the door of his hut; yet he could tear in pieces with his hands the +still quivering limbs of his prisoner. The famous republics of antiquity never +gave examples of more unshaken courage, more haughty spirits, or more +intractable love of independence than were hidden in former times among the +wild forests of the New World. *i The Europeans produced no great impression +when they landed upon the shores of North America; their presence engendered +neither envy nor fear. What influence could they possess over such men as we +have described? The Indian could live without wants, suffer without complaint, +and pour out his death-song at the stake. *j Like all the other members of the +great human family, these savages believed in the existence of a better world, +and adored under different names, God, the creator of the universe. Their +notions on the great intellectual truths were in general simple and +philosophical. *k +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ We learn from President Jefferson’s “Notes upon Virginia,” +p. 148, that among the Iroquois, when attacked by a superior force, aged men +refused to fly or to survive the destruction of their country; and they braved +death like the ancient Romans when their capital was sacked by the Gauls. +Further on, p. 150, he tells us that there is no example of an Indian who, +having fallen into the hands of his enemies, begged for his life; on the +contrary, the captive sought to obtain death at the hands of his conquerors by +the use of insult and provocation.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ See “Histoire de la Louisiane,” by Lepage Dupratz; Charlevoix, +“Histoire de la Nouvelle France”; “Lettres du Rev. G. +Hecwelder;” “Transactions of the American Philosophical +Society,” v. I; Jefferson’s “Notes on Virginia,” pp. +135-190. What is said by Jefferson is of especial weight, on account of the +personal merit of the writer, of his peculiar position, and of the +matter-of-fact age in which he lived.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ See Appendix, D.] +</p> + +<p> +Although we have here traced the character of a primitive people, yet it cannot +be doubted that another people, more civilized and more advanced in all +respects, had preceded it in the same regions. +</p> + +<p> +An obscure tradition which prevailed among the Indians to the north of the +Atlantic informs us that these very tribes formerly dwelt on the west side of +the Mississippi. Along the banks of the Ohio, and throughout the central +valley, there are frequently found, at this day, tumuli raised by the hands of +men. On exploring these heaps of earth to their centre, it is usual to meet +with human bones, strange instruments, arms and utensils of all kinds, made of +metal, or destined for purposes unknown to the present race. The Indians of our +time are unable to give any information relative to the history of this unknown +people. Neither did those who lived three hundred years ago, when America was +first discovered, leave any accounts from which even an hypothesis could be +formed. Tradition—that perishable, yet ever renewed monument of the +pristine world—throws no light upon the subject. It is an undoubted fact, +however, that in this part of the globe thousands of our fellow-beings had +lived. When they came hither, what was their origin, their destiny, their +history, and how they perished, no one can tell. How strange does it appear +that nations have existed, and afterwards so completely disappeared from the +earth that the remembrance of their very names is effaced; their languages are +lost; their glory is vanished like a sound without an echo; though perhaps +there is not one which has not left behind it some tomb in memory of its +passage! The most durable monument of human labor is that which recalls the +wretchedness and nothingness of man. +</p> + +<p> +Although the vast country which we have been describing was inhabited by many +indigenous tribes, it may justly be said at the time of its discovery by +Europeans to have formed one great desert. The Indians occupied without +possessing it. It is by agricultural labor that man appropriates the soil, and +the early inhabitants of North America lived by the produce of the chase. Their +implacable prejudices, their uncontrolled passions, their vices, and still more +perhaps their savage virtues, consigned them to inevitable destruction. The +ruin of these nations began from the day when Europeans landed on their shores; +it has proceeded ever since, and we are now witnessing the completion of it. +They seem to have been placed by Providence amidst the riches of the New World +to enjoy them for a season, and then surrender them. Those coasts, so admirably +adapted for commerce and industry; those wide and deep rivers; that +inexhaustible valley of the Mississippi; the whole continent, in short, seemed +prepared to be the abode of a great nation, yet unborn. +</p> + +<p> +In that land the great experiment was to be made, by civilized man, of the +attempt to construct society upon a new basis; and it was there, for the first +time, that theories hitherto unknown, or deemed impracticable, were to exhibit +a spectacle for which the world had not been prepared by the history of the +past. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0003" id="link2HCH0003"></a> Chapter II: Origin Of The +Anglo-Americans—Part I</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0004" id="link2HCH0004"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +Utility of knowing the origin of nations in order to understand their social +condition and their laws—America the only country in which the +starting-point of a great people has been clearly observable—In what +respects all who emigrated to British America were similar—In what they +differed—Remark applicable to all Europeans who established themselves on +the shores of the New World—Colonization of Virginia—Colonization +of New England—Original character of the first inhabitants of New +England—Their arrival—Their first laws—Their social +contract—Penal code borrowed from the Hebrew legislation—Religious +fervor—Republican spirit—Intimate union of the spirit of religion +with the spirit of liberty. +</p> + +<p> +Origin Of The Anglo-Americans, And Its Importance In Relation To Their Future +Condition. +</p> + +<p> +After the birth of a human being his early years are obscurely spent in the +toils or pleasures of childhood. As he grows up the world receives him, when +his manhood begins, and he enters into contact with his fellows. He is then +studied for the first time, and it is imagined that the germ of the vices and +the virtues of his maturer years is then formed. This, if I am not mistaken, is +a great error. We must begin higher up; we must watch the infant in its +mother’s arms; we must see the first images which the external world +casts upon the dark mirror of his mind; the first occurrences which he +witnesses; we must hear the first words which awaken the sleeping powers of +thought, and stand by his earliest efforts, if we would understand the +prejudices, the habits, and the passions which will rule his life. The entire +man is, so to speak, to be seen in the cradle of the child. +</p> + +<p> +The growth of nations presents something analogous to this: they all bear some +marks of their origin; and the circumstances which accompanied their birth and +contributed to their rise affect the whole term of their being. If we were able +to go back to the elements of states, and to examine the oldest monuments of +their history, I doubt not that we should discover the primal cause of the +prejudices, the habits, the ruling passions, and, in short, of all that +constitutes what is called the national character; we should then find the +explanation of certain customs which now seem at variance with the prevailing +manners; of such laws as conflict with established principles; and of such +incoherent opinions as are here and there to be met with in society, like those +fragments of broken chains which we sometimes see hanging from the vault of an +edifice, and supporting nothing. This might explain the destinies of certain +nations, which seem borne on by an unknown force to ends of which they +themselves are ignorant. But hitherto facts have been wanting to researches of +this kind: the spirit of inquiry has only come upon communities in their latter +days; and when they at length contemplated their origin, time had already +obscured it, or ignorance and pride adorned it with truth-concealing fables. +</p> + +<p> +America is the only country in which it has been possible to witness the +natural and tranquil growth of society, and where the influences exercised on +the future condition of states by their origin is clearly distinguishable. At +the period when the peoples of Europe landed in the New World their national +characteristics were already completely formed; each of them had a physiognomy +of its own; and as they had already attained that stage of civilization at +which men are led to study themselves, they have transmitted to us a faithful +picture of their opinions, their manners, and their laws. The men of the +sixteenth century are almost as well known to us as our contemporaries. +America, consequently, exhibits in the broad light of day the phenomena which +the ignorance or rudeness of earlier ages conceals from our researches. Near +enough to the time when the states of America were founded, to be accurately +acquainted with their elements, and sufficiently removed from that period to +judge of some of their results, the men of our own day seem destined to see +further than their predecessors into the series of human events. Providence has +given us a torch which our forefathers did not possess, and has allowed us to +discern fundamental causes in the history of the world which the obscurity of +the past concealed from them. If we carefully examine the social and political +state of America, after having studied its history, we shall remain perfectly +convinced that not an opinion, not a custom, not a law, I may even say not an +event, is upon record which the origin of that people will not explain. The +readers of this book will find the germ of all that is to follow in the present +chapter, and the key to almost the whole work. +</p> + +<p> +The emigrants who came, at different periods to occupy the territory now +covered by the American Union differed from each other in many respects; their +aim was not the same, and they governed themselves on different principles. +These men had, however, certain features in common, and they were all placed in +an analogous situation. The tie of language is perhaps the strongest and the +most durable that can unite mankind. All the emigrants spoke the same tongue; +they were all offsets from the same people. Born in a country which had been +agitated for centuries by the struggles of faction, and in which all parties +had been obliged in their turn to place themselves under the protection of the +laws, their political education had been perfected in this rude school, and +they were more conversant with the notions of right and the principles of true +freedom than the greater part of their European contemporaries. At the period +of their first emigrations the parish system, that fruitful germ of free +institutions, was deeply rooted in the habits of the English; and with it the +doctrine of the sovereignty of the people had been introduced into the bosom of +the monarchy of the House of Tudor. +</p> + +<p> +The religious quarrels which have agitated the Christian world were then rife. +England had plunged into the new order of things with headlong vehemence. The +character of its inhabitants, which had always been sedate and reflective, +became argumentative and austere. General information had been increased by +intellectual debate, and the mind had received a deeper cultivation. Whilst +religion was the topic of discussion, the morals of the people were reformed. +All these national features are more or less discoverable in the physiognomy of +those adventurers who came to seek a new home on the opposite shores of the +Atlantic. +</p> + +<p> +Another remark, to which we shall hereafter have occasion to recur, is +applicable not only to the English, but to the French, the Spaniards, and all +the Europeans who successively established themselves in the New World. All +these European colonies contained the elements, if not the development, of a +complete democracy. Two causes led to this result. It may safely be advanced, +that on leaving the mother-country the emigrants had in general no notion of +superiority over one another. The happy and the powerful do not go into exile, +and there are no surer guarantees of equality among men than poverty and +misfortune. It happened, however, on several occasions, that persons of rank +were driven to America by political and religious quarrels. Laws were made to +establish a gradation of ranks; but it was soon found that the soil of America +was opposed to a territorial aristocracy. To bring that refractory land into +cultivation, the constant and interested exertions of the owner himself were +necessary; and when the ground was prepared, its produce was found to be +insufficient to enrich a master and a farmer at the same time. The land was +then naturally broken up into small portions, which the proprietor cultivated +for himself. Land is the basis of an aristocracy, which clings to the soil that +supports it; for it is not by privileges alone, nor by birth, but by landed +property handed down from generation to generation, that an aristocracy is +constituted. A nation may present immense fortunes and extreme wretchedness, +but unless those fortunes are territorial there is no aristocracy, but simply +the class of the rich and that of the poor. +</p> + +<p> +All the British colonies had then a great degree of similarity at the epoch of +their settlement. All of them, from their first beginning, seemed destined to +witness the growth, not of the aristocratic liberty of their mother-country, +but of that freedom of the middle and lower orders of which the history of the +world had as yet furnished no complete example. +</p> + +<p> +In this general uniformity several striking differences were however +discernible, which it is necessary to point out. Two branches may be +distinguished in the Anglo-American family, which have hitherto grown up +without entirely commingling; the one in the South, the other in the North. +</p> + +<p> +Virginia received the first English colony; the emigrants took possession of it +in 1607. The idea that mines of gold and silver are the sources of national +wealth was at that time singularly prevalent in Europe; a fatal delusion, which +has done more to impoverish the nations which adopted it, and has cost more +lives in America, than the united influence of war and bad laws. The men sent +to Virginia *a were seekers of gold, adventurers, without resources and without +character, whose turbulent and restless spirit endangered the infant colony, *b +and rendered its progress uncertain. The artisans and agriculturists arrived +afterwards; and, although they were a more moral and orderly race of men, they +were in nowise above the level of the inferior classes in England. *c No lofty +conceptions, no intellectual system, directed the foundation of these new +settlements. The colony was scarcely established when slavery was introduced, +*d and this was the main circumstance which has exercised so prodigious an +influence on the character, the laws, and all the future prospects of the +South. Slavery, as we shall afterwards show, dishonors labor; it introduces +idleness into society, and with idleness, ignorance and pride, luxury and +distress. It enervates the powers of the mind, and benumbs the activity of man. +The influence of slavery, united to the English character, explains the manners +and the social condition of the Southern States. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ The charter granted by the Crown of England in 1609 stipulated, amongst other +conditions, that the adventurers should pay to the Crown a fifth of the produce +of all gold and silver mines. See Marshall’s “Life of +Washington,” vol. i. pp. 18-66.] [Footnote b: A large portion of the +adventurers, says Stith (“History of Virginia”), were unprincipled +young men of family, whom their parents were glad to ship off, discharged +servants, fraudulent bankrupts, or debauchees; and others of the same class, +people more apt to pillage and destroy than to assist the settlement, were the +seditious chiefs, who easily led this band into every kind of extravagance and +excess. See for the history of Virginia the following works:— +</p> + +<p> +“History of Virginia, from the First Settlements in the year 1624,” +by Smith. +</p> + +<p> +“History of Virginia,” by William Stith. +</p> + +<p> +“History of Virginia, from the Earliest Period,” by Beverley.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ It was not till some time later that a certain number of rich English +capitalists came to fix themselves in the colony.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ Slavery was introduced about the year 1620 by a Dutch vessel which landed +twenty negroes on the banks of the river James. See Chalmer.] +</p> + +<p> +In the North, the same English foundation was modified by the most opposite +shades of character; and here I may be allowed to enter into some details. The +two or three main ideas which constitute the basis of the social theory of the +United States were first combined in the Northern English colonies, more +generally denominated the States of New England. *e The principles of New +England spread at first to the neighboring states; they then passed +successively to the more distant ones; and at length they imbued the whole +Confederation. They now extend their influence beyond its limits over the whole +American world. The civilization of New England has been like a beacon lit upon +a hill, which, after it has diffused its warmth around, tinges the distant +horizon with its glow. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ The States of New England are those situated to the east of the Hudson; they +are now six in number: 1, Connecticut; 2, Rhode Island; 3, Massachusetts; 4, +Vermont; 5, New Hampshire; 6, Maine.] +</p> + +<p> +The foundation of New England was a novel spectacle, and all the circumstances +attending it were singular and original. The large majority of colonies have +been first inhabited either by men without education and without resources, +driven by their poverty and their misconduct from the land which gave them +birth, or by speculators and adventurers greedy of gain. Some settlements +cannot even boast so honorable an origin; St. Domingo was founded by +buccaneers; and the criminal courts of England originally supplied the +population of Australia. +</p> + +<p> +The settlers who established themselves on the shores of New England all +belonged to the more independent classes of their native country. Their union +on the soil of America at once presented the singular phenomenon of a society +containing neither lords nor common people, neither rich nor poor. These men +possessed, in proportion to their number, a greater mass of intelligence than +is to be found in any European nation of our own time. All, without a single +exception, had received a good education, and many of them were known in Europe +for their talents and their acquirements. The other colonies had been founded +by adventurers without family; the emigrants of New England brought with them +the best elements of order and morality—they landed in the desert +accompanied by their wives and children. But what most especially distinguished +them was the aim of their undertaking. They had not been obliged by necessity +to leave their country; the social position they abandoned was one to be +regretted, and their means of subsistence were certain. Nor did they cross the +Atlantic to improve their situation or to increase their wealth; the call which +summoned them from the comforts of their homes was purely intellectual; and in +facing the inevitable sufferings of exile their object was the triumph of an +idea. +</p> + +<p> +The emigrants, or, as they deservedly styled themselves, the Pilgrims, belonged +to that English sect the austerity of whose principles had acquired for them +the name of Puritans. Puritanism was not merely a religious doctrine, but it +corresponded in many points with the most absolute democratic and republican +theories. It was this tendency which had aroused its most dangerous +adversaries. Persecuted by the Government of the mother-country, and disgusted +by the habits of a society opposed to the rigor of their own principles, the +Puritans went forth to seek some rude and unfrequented part of the world, where +they could live according to their own opinions, and worship God in freedom. +</p> + +<p> +A few quotations will throw more light upon the spirit of these pious +adventures than all we can say of them. Nathaniel Morton, *f the historian of +the first years of the settlement, thus opens his subject: +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ “New England’s Memorial,” p. 13; Boston, 1826. See also +“Hutchinson’s History,” vol. ii. p. 440.] +</p> + +<p> +“Gentle Reader,—I have for some length of time looked upon it as a +duty incumbent, especially on the immediate successors of those that have had +so large experience of those many memorable and signal demonstrations of +God’s goodness, viz., the first beginners of this Plantation in New +England, to commit to writing his gracious dispensations on that behalf; having +so many inducements thereunto, not onely otherwise but so plentifully in the +Sacred Scriptures: that so, what we have seen, and what our fathers have told +us (Psalm lxxviii. 3, 4), we may not hide from our children, showing to the +generations to come the praises of the Lord; that especially the seed of +Abraham his servant, and the children of Jacob his chosen (Psalm cv. 5, 6), may +remember his marvellous works in the beginning and progress of the planting of +New England, his wonders and the judgments of his mouth; how that God brought a +vine into this wilderness; that he cast out the heathen, and planted it; that +he made room for it and caused it to take deep root; and it filled the land +(Psalm lxxx. 8, 9). And not onely so, but also that he hath guided his people +by his strength to his holy habitation and planted them in the mountain of his +inheritance in respect of precious Gospel enjoyments: and that as especially +God may have the glory of all unto whom it is most due; so also some rays of +glory may reach the names of those blessed Saints that were the main +instruments and the beginning of this happy enterprise.” +</p> + +<p> +It is impossible to read this opening paragraph without an involuntary feeling +of religious awe; it breathes the very savor of Gospel antiquity. The sincerity +of the author heightens his power of language. The band which to his eyes was a +mere party of adventurers gone forth to seek their fortune beyond seas appears +to the reader as the germ of a great nation wafted by Providence to a +predestined shore. +</p> + +<p> +The author thus continues his narrative of the departure of the first +pilgrims:— +</p> + +<p> +“So they left that goodly and pleasant city of Leyden, *g which had been +their resting-place for above eleven years; but they knew that they were +pilgrims and strangers here below, and looked not much on these things, but +lifted up their eyes to Heaven, their dearest country, where God hath prepared +for them a city (Heb. xi. 16), and therein quieted their spirits. When they +came to Delfs-Haven they found the ship and all things ready; and such of their +friends as could not come with them followed after them, and sundry came from +Amsterdam to see them shipt, and to take their leaves of them. One night was +spent with little sleep with the most, but with friendly entertainment and +Christian discourse, and other real expressions of true Christian love. The +next day they went on board, and their friends with them, where truly doleful +was the sight of that sad and mournful parting, to hear what sighs and sobs and +prayers did sound amongst them; what tears did gush from every eye, and pithy +speeches pierced each other’s heart, that sundry of the Dutch strangers +that stood on the Key as spectators could not refrain from tears. But the tide +(which stays for no man) calling them away, that were thus loth to depart, +their Reverend Pastor falling down on his knees, and they all with him, with +watery cheeks commended them with most fervent prayers unto the Lord and his +blessing; and then, with mutual embraces and many tears they took their leaves +one of another, which proved to be the last leave to many of them.” +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ The emigrants were, for the most part, godly Christians from the North of +England, who had quitted their native country because they were “studious +of reformation, and entered into covenant to walk with one another according to +the primitive pattern of the Word of God.” They emigrated to Holland, and +settled in the city of Leyden in 1610, where they abode, being lovingly +respected by the Dutch, for many years: they left it in 1620 for several +reasons, the last of which was, that their posterity would in a few generations +become Dutch, and so lose their interest in the English nation; they being +desirous rather to enlarge His Majesty’s dominions, and to live under +their natural prince.—Translator’s Note.] +</p> + +<p> +The emigrants were about 150 in number, including the women and the children. +Their object was to plant a colony on the shores of the Hudson; but after +having been driven about for some time in the Atlantic Ocean, they were forced +to land on that arid coast of New England which is now the site of the town of +Plymouth. The rock is still shown on which the pilgrims disembarked. *h +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ This rock is become an object of veneration in the United States. I have seen +bits of it carefully preserved in several towns of the Union. Does not this +sufficiently show how entirely all human power and greatness is in the soul of +man? Here is a stone which the feet of a few outcasts pressed for an instant, +and this stone becomes famous; it is treasured by a great nation, its very dust +is shared as a relic: and what is become of the gateways of a thousand +palaces?] +</p> + +<p> +“But before we pass on,” continues our historian, “let the +reader with me make a pause and seriously consider this poor people’s +present condition, the more to be raised up to admiration of God’s +goodness towards them in their preservation: for being now passed the vast +ocean, and a sea of troubles before them in expectation, they had now no +friends to welcome them, no inns to entertain or refresh them, no houses, or +much less towns to repair unto to seek for succour: and for the season it was +winter, and they that know the winters of the country know them to be sharp and +violent, subject to cruel and fierce storms, dangerous to travel to known +places, much more to search unknown coasts. Besides, what could they see but a +hideous and desolate wilderness, full of wilde beasts, and wilde men? and what +multitudes of them there were, they then knew not: for which way soever they +turned their eyes (save upward to Heaven) they could have but little solace or +content in respect of any outward object; for summer being ended, all things +stand in appearance with a weather-beaten face, and the whole country full of +woods and thickets, represented a wild and savage hew; if they looked behind +them, there was the mighty ocean which they had passed, and was now as a main +bar or gulph to separate them from all the civil parts of the world.” +</p> + +<p> +It must not be imagined that the piety of the Puritans was of a merely +speculative kind, or that it took no cognizance of the course of worldly +affairs. Puritanism, as I have already remarked, was scarcely less a political +than a religious doctrine. No sooner had the emigrants landed on the barren +coast described by Nathaniel Morton than it was their first care to constitute +a society, by passing the following Act: +</p> + +<p> +“In the name of God. Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal +subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, etc., etc., Having undertaken +for the glory of God, and advancement of the Christian Faith, and the honour of +our King and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts +of Virginia; Do by these presents solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God +and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body +politick, for our better ordering and preservation, and furtherance of the ends +aforesaid: and by virtue hereof do enact, constitute and frame such just and +equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and officers, from time to time, +as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the +Colony: unto which we promise all due submission and obedience,” etc. *i +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ The emigrants who founded the State of Rhode Island in 1638, those who landed +at New Haven in 1637, the first settlers in Connecticut in 1639, and the +founders of Providence in 1640, began in like manner by drawing up a social +contract, which was acceded to by all the interested parties. See +“Pitkin’s History,” pp. 42 and 47.] +</p> + +<p> +This happened in 1620, and from that time forwards the emigration went on. The +religious and political passions which ravaged the British Empire during the +whole reign of Charles I drove fresh crowds of sectarians every year to the +shores of America. In England the stronghold of Puritanism was in the middle +classes, and it was from the middle classes that the majority of the emigrants +came. The population of New England increased rapidly; and whilst the hierarchy +of rank despotically classed the inhabitants of the mother-country, the colony +continued to present the novel spectacle of a community homogeneous in all its +parts. A democracy, more perfect than any which antiquity had dreamt of, +started in full size and panoply from the midst of an ancient feudal society. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0005" id="link2HCH0005"></a> Chapter II: Origin Of The +Anglo-Americans—Part II</h2> + +<p> +The English Government was not dissatisfied with an emigration which removed +the elements of fresh discord and of further revolutions. On the contrary, +everything was done to encourage it, and great exertions were made to mitigate +the hardships of those who sought a shelter from the rigor of their +country’s laws on the soil of America. It seemed as if New England was a +region given up to the dreams of fancy and the unrestrained experiments of +innovators. +</p> + +<p> +The English colonies (and this is one of the main causes of their prosperity) +have always enjoyed more internal freedom and more political independence than +the colonies of other nations; but this principle of liberty was nowhere more +extensively applied than in the States of New England. +</p> + +<p> +It was generally allowed at that period that the territories of the New World +belonged to that European nation which had been the first to discover them. +Nearly the whole coast of North America thus became a British possession +towards the end of the sixteenth century. The means used by the English +Government to people these new domains were of several kinds; the King +sometimes appointed a governor of his own choice, who ruled a portion of the +New World in the name and under the immediate orders of the Crown; *j this is +the colonial system adopted by other countries of Europe. Sometimes grants of +certain tracts were made by the Crown to an individual or to a company, *k in +which case all the civil and political power fell into the hands of one or more +persons, who, under the inspection and control of the Crown, sold the lands and +governed the inhabitants. Lastly, a third system consisted in allowing a +certain number of emigrants to constitute a political society under the +protection of the mother-country, and to govern themselves in whatever was not +contrary to her laws. This mode of colonization, so remarkably favorable to +liberty, was only adopted in New England. *l +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ This was the case in the State of New York.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ Maryland, the Carolinas, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey were in this situation. +See “Pitkin’s History,” vol. i. pp. 11-31.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ See the work entitled “Historical Collection of State Papers and other +authentic Documents intended as materials for a History of the United States of +America, by Ebenezer Hasard. Philadelphia, 1792,” for a great number of +documents relating to the commencement of the colonies, which are valuable from +their contents and their authenticity: amongst them are the various charters +granted by the King of England, and the first acts of the local governments. +</p> + +<p> +See also the analysis of all these charters given by Mr. Story, Judge of the +Supreme Court of the United States, in the Introduction to his +“Commentary on the Constitution of the United States.” It results +from these documents that the principles of representative government and the +external forms of political liberty were introduced into all the colonies at +their origin. These principles were more fully acted upon in the North than in +the South, but they existed everywhere.] +</p> + +<p> +In 1628 *m a charter of this kind was granted by Charles I to the emigrants who +went to form the colony of Massachusetts. But, in general, charters were not +given to the colonies of New England till they had acquired a certain +existence. Plymouth, Providence, New Haven, the State of Connecticut, and that +of Rhode Island *n were founded without the co-operation and almost without the +knowledge of the mother-country. The new settlers did not derive their +incorporation from the seat of the empire, although they did not deny its +supremacy; they constituted a society of their own accord, and it was not till +thirty or forty years afterwards, under Charles II. that their existence was +legally recognized by a royal charter. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ See “Pitkin’s History,” p, 35. See the “History of +the Colony of Massachusetts Bay,” by Hutchinson, vol. i. p. 9.] [Footnote +n: See “Pitkin’s History,” pp. 42, 47.] +</p> + +<p> +This frequently renders its it difficult to detect the link which connected the +emigrants with the land of their forefathers in studying the earliest +historical and legislative records of New England. They exercised the rights of +sovereignty; they named their magistrates, concluded peace or declared war, +made police regulations, and enacted laws as if their allegiance was due only +to God. *o Nothing can be more curious and, at the same time more instructive, +than the legislation of that period; it is there that the solution of the great +social problem which the United States now present to the world is to be found. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ The inhabitants of Massachusetts had deviated from the forms which are +preserved in the criminal and civil procedure of England; in 1650 the decrees +of justice were not yet headed by the royal style. See Hutchinson, vol. i. p. +452.] +</p> + +<p> +Amongst these documents we shall notice, as especially characteristic, the code +of laws promulgated by the little State of Connecticut in 1650. *p The +legislators of Connecticut *q begin with the penal laws, and, strange to say, +they borrow their provisions from the text of Holy Writ. “Whosoever shall +worship any other God than the Lord,” says the preamble of the Code, +“shall surely be put to death.” This is followed by ten or twelve +enactments of the same kind, copied verbatim from the books of Exodus, +Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. Blasphemy, sorcery, adultery, *r and rape were +punished with death; an outrage offered by a son to his parents was to be +expiated by the same penalty. The legislation of a rude and half-civilized +people was thus applied to an enlightened and moral community. The consequence +was that the punishment of death was never more frequently prescribed by the +statute, and never more rarely enforced towards the guilty. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ Code of 1650, p. 28; Hartford, 1830.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ See also in “Hutchinson’s History,” vol. i. pp. 435, 456, +the analysis of the penal code adopted in 1648 by the Colony of Massachusetts: +this code is drawn up on the same principles as that of Connecticut.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ Adultery was also punished with death by the law of Massachusetts: and +Hutchinson, vol. i. p. 441, says that several persons actually suffered for +this crime. He quotes a curious anecdote on this subject, which occurred in the +year 1663. A married woman had had criminal intercourse with a young man; her +husband died, and she married the lover. Several years had elapsed, when the +public began to suspect the previous intercourse of this couple: they were +thrown into prison, put upon trial, and very narrowly escaped capital +punishment.] +</p> + +<p> +The chief care of the legislators, in this body of penal laws, was the +maintenance of orderly conduct and good morals in the community: they +constantly invaded the domain of conscience, and there was scarcely a sin which +was not subject to magisterial censure. The reader is aware of the rigor with +which these laws punished rape and adultery; intercourse between unmarried +persons was likewise severely repressed. The judge was empowered to inflict a +pecuniary penalty, a whipping, or marriage *s on the misdemeanants; and if the +records of the old courts of New Haven may be believed, prosecutions of this +kind were not unfrequent. We find a sentence bearing date the first of May, +1660, inflicting a fine and reprimand on a young woman who was accused of using +improper language, and of allowing herself to be kissed. *t The Code of 1650 +abounds in preventive measures. It punishes idleness and drunkenness with +severity. *u Innkeepers are forbidden to furnish more than a certain quantity +of liquor to each consumer; and simple lying, whenever it may be injurious, *v +is checked by a fine or a flogging. In other places, the legislator, entirely +forgetting the great principles of religious toleration which he had himself +upheld in Europe, renders attendance on divine service compulsory, *w and goes +so far as to visit with severe punishment, ** and even with death, the +Christians who chose to worship God according to a ritual differing from his +own. *x Sometimes indeed the zeal of his enactments induces him to descend to +the most frivolous particulars: thus a law is to be found in the same Code +which prohibits the use of tobacco. *y It must not be forgotten that these +fantastical and vexatious laws were not imposed by authority, but that they +were freely voted by all the persons interested, and that the manners of the +community were even more austere and more puritanical than the laws. In 1649 a +solemn association was formed in Boston to check the worldly luxury of long +hair. *z +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +s <br /> +[ Code of 1650, p. 48. It seems sometimes to have happened that the judges +superadded these punishments to each other, as is seen in a sentence pronounced +in 1643 (p. 114, “New Haven Antiquities”), by which Margaret +Bedford, convicted of loose conduct, was condemned to be whipped, and +afterwards to marry Nicholas Jemmings, her accomplice.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +t <br /> +[ “New Haven Antiquities,” p. 104. See also +“Hutchinson’s History,” for several causes equally +extraordinary.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +u <br /> +[ Code of 1650, pp. 50, 57.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +v <br /> +[ Ibid., p. 64.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +w <br /> +[ Ibid., p. 44.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +* <br /> +[ This was not peculiar to Connecticut. See, for instance, the law which, on +September 13, 1644, banished the Anabaptists from the State of Massachusetts. +(“Historical Collection of State Papers,” vol. i. p. 538.) See also +the law against the Quakers, passed on October 14, 1656: “Whereas,” +says the preamble, “an accursed race of heretics called Quakers has +sprung up,” etc. The clauses of the statute inflict a heavy fine on all +captains of ships who should import Quakers into the country. The Quakers who +may be found there shall be whipped and imprisoned with hard labor. Those +members of the sect who should defend their opinions shall be first fined, then +imprisoned, and finally driven out of the province.—“Historical +Collection of State Papers,” vol. i. p. 630.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +x <br /> +[ By the penal law of Massachusetts, any Catholic priest who should set foot in +the colony after having been once driven out of it was liable to capital +punishment.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +y <br /> +[ Code of 1650, p. 96.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +z <br /> +[ “New England’s Memorial,” p. 316. See Appendix, E.] +</p> + +<p> +These errors are no doubt discreditable to human reason; they attest the +inferiority of our nature, which is incapable of laying firm hold upon what is +true and just, and is often reduced to the alternative of two excesses. In +strict connection with this penal legislation, which bears such striking marks +of a narrow sectarian spirit, and of those religious passions which had been +warmed by persecution and were still fermenting among the people, a body of +political laws is to be found, which, though written two hundred years ago, is +still ahead of the liberties of our age. The general principles which are the +groundwork of modern constitutions—principles which were imperfectly +known in Europe, and not completely triumphant even in Great Britain, in the +seventeenth century—were all recognized and determined by the laws of New +England: the intervention of the people in public affairs, the free voting of +taxes, the responsibility of authorities, personal liberty, and trial by jury, +were all positively established without discussion. From these fruitful +principles consequences have been derived and applications have been made such +as no nation in Europe has yet ventured to attempt. +</p> + +<p> +In Connecticut the electoral body consisted, from its origin, of the whole +number of citizens; and this is readily to be understood, *a when we recollect +that this people enjoyed an almost perfect equality of fortune, and a still +greater uniformity of opinions. *b In Connecticut, at this period, all the +executive functionaries were elected, including the Governor of the State. *c +The citizens above the age of sixteen were obliged to bear arms; they formed a +national militia, which appointed its own officers, and was to hold itself at +all times in readiness to march for the defence of the country. *d +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ Constitution of 1638, p. 17.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ In 1641 the General Assembly of Rhode Island unanimously declared that the +government of the State was a democracy, and that the power was vested in the +body of free citizens, who alone had the right to make the laws and to watch +their execution.—Code of 1650, p. 70.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ “Pitkin’s History,” p. 47.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ Constitution of 1638, p. 12.] +</p> + +<p> +In the laws of Connecticut, as well as in all those of New England, we find the +germ and gradual development of that township independence which is the life +and mainspring of American liberty at the present day. The political existence +of the majority of the nations of Europe commenced in the superior ranks of +society, and was gradually and imperfectly communicated to the different +members of the social body. In America, on the other hand, it may be said that +the township was organized before the county, the county before the State, the +State before the Union. In New England townships were completely and +definitively constituted as early as 1650. The independence of the township was +the nucleus round which the local interests, passions, rights, and duties +collected and clung. It gave scope to the activity of a real political life +most thoroughly democratic and republican. The colonies still recognized the +supremacy of the mother-country; monarchy was still the law of the State; but +the republic was already established in every township. The towns named their +own magistrates of every kind, rated themselves, and levied their own taxes. *e +In the parish of New England the law of representation was not adopted, but the +affairs of the community were discussed, as at Athens, in the market-place, by +a general assembly of the citizens. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ Code of 1650, p. 80.] +</p> + +<p> +In studying the laws which were promulgated at this first era of the American +republics, it is impossible not to be struck by the remarkable acquaintance +with the science of government and the advanced theory of legislation which +they display. The ideas there formed of the duties of society towards its +members are evidently much loftier and more comprehensive than those of the +European legislators at that time: obligations were there imposed which were +elsewhere slighted. In the States of New England, from the first, the condition +of the poor was provided for; *f strict measures were taken for the maintenance +of roads, and surveyors were appointed to attend to them; *g registers were +established in every parish, in which the results of public deliberations, and +the births, deaths, and marriages of the citizens were entered; *h clerks were +directed to keep these registers; *i officers were charged with the +administration of vacant inheritances, and with the arbitration of litigated +landmarks; and many others were created whose chief functions were the +maintenance of public order in the community. *j The law enters into a thousand +useful provisions for a number of social wants which are at present very +inadequately felt in France. [Footnote f: Ibid., p. 78.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ Ibid., p. 49.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ See “Hutchinson’s History,” vol. i. p. 455.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ Code of 1650, p. 86.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ Ibid., p. 40.] +</p> + +<p> +But it is by the attention it pays to Public Education that the original +character of American civilization is at once placed in the clearest light. +“It being,” says the law, “one chief project of Satan to keep +men from the knowledge of the Scripture by persuading from the use of tongues, +to the end that learning may not be buried in the graves of our forefathers, in +church and commonwealth, the Lord assisting our endeavors. . . .” *k Here +follow clauses establishing schools in every township, and obliging the +inhabitants, under pain of heavy fines, to support them. Schools of a superior +kind were founded in the same manner in the more populous districts. The +municipal authorities were bound to enforce the sending of children to school +by their parents; they were empowered to inflict fines upon all who refused +compliance; and in case of continued resistance society assumed the place of +the parent, took possession of the child, and deprived the father of those +natural rights which he used to so bad a purpose. The reader will undoubtedly +have remarked the preamble of these enactments: in America religion is the road +to knowledge, and the observance of the divine laws leads man to civil freedom. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ Ibid., p. 90.] +</p> + +<p> +If, after having cast a rapid glance over the state of American society in +1650, we turn to the condition of Europe, and more especially to that of the +Continent, at the same period, we cannot fail to be struck with astonishment. +On the Continent of Europe, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, +absolute monarchy had everywhere triumphed over the ruins of the oligarchical +and feudal liberties of the Middle Ages. Never were the notions of right more +completely confounded than in the midst of the splendor and literature of +Europe; never was there less political activity among the people; never were +the principles of true freedom less widely circulated; and at that very time +those principles, which were scorned or unknown by the nations of Europe, were +proclaimed in the deserts of the New World, and were accepted as the future +creed of a great people. The boldest theories of the human reason were put into +practice by a community so humble that not a statesman condescended to attend +to it; and a legislation without a precedent was produced offhand by the +imagination of the citizens. In the bosom of this obscure democracy, which had +as yet brought forth neither generals, nor philosophers, nor authors, a man +might stand up in the face of a free people and pronounce the following fine +definition of liberty. *l +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ Mather’s “Magnalia Christi Americana,” vol. ii. p. 13. This +speech was made by Winthrop; he was accused of having committed arbitrary +actions during his magistracy, but after having made the speech of which the +above is a fragment, he was acquitted by acclamation, and from that time +forwards he was always re-elected governor of the State. See Marshal, vol. i. +p. 166.] +</p> + +<p> +“Nor would I have you to mistake in the point of your own liberty. There +is a liberty of a corrupt nature which is effected both by men and beasts to do +what they list, and this liberty is inconsistent with authority, impatient of +all restraint; by this liberty ‘sumus omnes deteriores’: ’tis +the grand enemy of truth and peace, and all the ordinances of God are bent +against it. But there is a civil, a moral, a federal liberty which is the +proper end and object of authority; it is a liberty for that only which is just +and good: for this liberty you are to stand with the hazard of your very lives +and whatsoever crosses it is not authority, but a distemper thereof. This +liberty is maintained in a way of subjection to authority; and the authority +set over you will, in all administrations for your good, be quietly submitted +unto by all but such as have a disposition to shake off the yoke and lose their +true liberty, by their murmuring at the honor and power of authority.” +</p> + +<p> +The remarks I have made will suffice to display the character of Anglo-American +civilization in its true light. It is the result (and this should be constantly +present to the mind of two distinct elements), which in other places have been +in frequent hostility, but which in America have been admirably incorporated +and combined with one another. I allude to the spirit of Religion and the +spirit of Liberty. +</p> + +<p> +The settlers of New England were at the same time ardent sectarians and daring +innovators. Narrow as the limits of some of their religious opinions were, they +were entirely free from political prejudices. Hence arose two tendencies, +distinct but not opposite, which are constantly discernible in the manners as +well as in the laws of the country. +</p> + +<p> +It might be imagined that men who sacrificed their friends, their family, and +their native land to a religious conviction were absorbed in the pursuit of the +intellectual advantages which they purchased at so dear a rate. The energy, +however, with which they strove for the acquirement of wealth, moral enjoyment, +and the comforts as well as liberties of the world, is scarcely inferior to +that with which they devoted themselves to Heaven. +</p> + +<p> +Political principles and all human laws and institutions were moulded and +altered at their pleasure; the barriers of the society in which they were born +were broken down before them; the old principles which had governed the world +for ages were no more; a path without a turn and a field without an horizon +were opened to the exploring and ardent curiosity of man: but at the limits of +the political world he checks his researches, he discreetly lays aside the use +of his most formidable faculties, he no longer consents to doubt or to +innovate, but carefully abstaining from raising the curtain of the sanctuary, +he yields with submissive respect to truths which he will not discuss. Thus, in +the moral world everything is classed, adapted, decided, and foreseen; in the +political world everything is agitated, uncertain, and disputed: in the one is +a passive, though a voluntary, obedience; in the other an independence scornful +of experience and jealous of authority. +</p> + +<p> +These two tendencies, apparently so discrepant, are far from conflicting; they +advance together, and mutually support each other. Religion perceives that +civil liberty affords a noble exercise to the faculties of man, and that the +political world is a field prepared by the Creator for the efforts of the +intelligence. Contented with the freedom and the power which it enjoys in its +own sphere, and with the place which it occupies, the empire of religion is +never more surely established than when it reigns in the hearts of men +unsupported by aught beside its native strength. Religion is no less the +companion of liberty in all its battles and its triumphs; the cradle of its +infancy, and the divine source of its claims. The safeguard of morality is +religion, and morality is the best security of law and the surest pledge of +freedom. *m +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ See Appendix, F.] +</p> + +<p> +Reasons Of Certain Anomalies Which The Laws And Customs Of The Anglo-Americans +Present +</p> + +<p> +Remains of aristocratic institutions in the midst of a complete +democracy—Why?—Distinction carefully to be drawn between what is of +Puritanical and what is of English origin. +</p> + +<p> +The reader is cautioned not to draw too general or too absolute an inference +from what has been said. The social condition, the religion, and the manners of +the first emigrants undoubtedly exercised an immense influence on the destiny +of their new country. Nevertheless they were not in a situation to found a +state of things solely dependent on themselves: no man can entirely shake off +the influence of the past, and the settlers, intentionally or involuntarily, +mingled habits and notions derived from their education and from the traditions +of their country with those habits and notions which were exclusively their +own. To form a judgment on the Anglo-Americans of the present day it is +therefore necessary to distinguish what is of Puritanical and what is of +English origin. +</p> + +<p> +Laws and customs are frequently to be met with in the United States which +contrast strongly with all that surrounds them. These laws seem to be drawn up +in a spirit contrary to the prevailing tenor of the American legislation; and +these customs are no less opposed to the tone of society. If the English +colonies had been founded in an age of darkness, or if their origin was already +lost in the lapse of years, the problem would be insoluble. +</p> + +<p> +I shall quote a single example to illustrate what I advance. The civil and +criminal procedure of the Americans has only two means of +action—committal and bail. The first measure taken by the magistrate is +to exact security from the defendant, or, in case of refusal, to incarcerate +him: the ground of the accusation and the importance of the charges against him +are then discussed. It is evident that a legislation of this kind is hostile to +the poor man, and favorable only to the rich. The poor man has not always a +security to produce, even in a civil cause; and if he is obliged to wait for +justice in prison, he is speedily reduced to distress. The wealthy individual, +on the contrary, always escapes imprisonment in civil causes; nay, more, he may +readily elude the punishment which awaits him for a delinquency by breaking his +bail. So that all the penalties of the law are, for him, reducible to fines. *n +Nothing can be more aristocratic than this system of legislation. Yet in +America it is the poor who make the law, and they usually reserve the greatest +social advantages to themselves. The explanation of the phenomenon is to be +found in England; the laws of which I speak are English, *o and the Americans +have retained them, however repugnant they may be to the tenor of their +legislation and the mass of their ideas. Next to its habits, the thing which a +nation is least apt to change is its civil legislation. Civil laws are only +familiarly known to legal men, whose direct interest it is to maintain them as +they are, whether good or bad, simply because they themselves are conversant +with them. The body of the nation is scarcely acquainted with them; it merely +perceives their action in particular cases; but it has some difficulty in +seizing their tendency, and obeys them without premeditation. I have quoted one +instance where it would have been easy to adduce a great number of others. The +surface of American society is, if I may use the expression, covered with a +layer of democracy, from beneath which the old aristocratic colors sometimes +peep. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ Crimes no doubt exist for which bail is inadmissible, but they are few in +number.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ See Blackstone; and Delolme, book I chap. x.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0006" id="link2HCH0006"></a> Chapter III: Social +Conditions Of The Anglo-Americans</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0007" id="link2HCH0007"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +A Social condition is commonly the result of circumstances, sometimes of laws, +oftener still of these two causes united; but wherever it exists, it may justly +be considered as the source of almost all the laws, the usages, and the ideas +which regulate the conduct of nations; whatever it does not produce it +modifies. It is therefore necessary, if we would become acquainted with the +legislation and the manners of a nation, to begin by the study of its social +condition. +</p> + +<p> +The Striking Characteristic Of The Social Condition Of The Anglo-Americans In +Its Essential Democracy. +</p> + +<p> +The first emigrants of New England—Their equality—Aristocratic laws +introduced in the South—Period of the Revolution—Change in the law +of descent—Effects produced by this change—Democracy carried to its +utmost limits in the new States of the West—Equality of education. +</p> + +<p> +Many important observations suggest themselves upon the social condition of the +Anglo-Americans, but there is one which takes precedence of all the rest. The +social condition of the Americans is eminently democratic; this was its +character at the foundation of the Colonies, and is still more strongly marked +at the present day. I have stated in the preceding chapter that great equality +existed among the emigrants who settled on the shores of New England. The germ +of aristocracy was never planted in that part of the Union. The only influence +which obtained there was that of intellect; the people were used to reverence +certain names as the emblems of knowledge and virtue. Some of their +fellow-citizens acquired a power over the rest which might truly have been +called aristocratic, if it had been capable of transmission from father to son. +</p> + +<p> +This was the state of things to the east of the Hudson: to the south-west of +that river, and in the direction of the Floridas, the case was different. In +most of the States situated to the south-west of the Hudson some great English +proprietors had settled, who had imported with them aristocratic principles and +the English law of descent. I have explained the reasons why it was impossible +ever to establish a powerful aristocracy in America; these reasons existed with +less force to the south-west of the Hudson. In the South, one man, aided by +slaves, could cultivate a great extent of country: it was therefore common to +see rich landed proprietors. But their influence was not altogether +aristocratic as that term is understood in Europe, since they possessed no +privileges; and the cultivation of their estates being carried on by slaves, +they had no tenants depending on them, and consequently no patronage. Still, +the great proprietors south of the Hudson constituted a superior class, having +ideas and tastes of its own, and forming the centre of political action. This +kind of aristocracy sympathized with the body of the people, whose passions and +interests it easily embraced; but it was too weak and too short-lived to excite +either love or hatred for itself. This was the class which headed the +insurrection in the South, and furnished the best leaders of the American +revolution. +</p> + +<p> +At the period of which we are now speaking society was shaken to its centre: +the people, in whose name the struggle had taken place, conceived the desire of +exercising the authority which it had acquired; its democratic tendencies were +awakened; and having thrown off the yoke of the mother-country, it aspired to +independence of every kind. The influence of individuals gradually ceased to be +felt, and custom and law united together to produce the same result. +</p> + +<p> +But the law of descent was the last step to equality. I am surprised that +ancient and modern jurists have not attributed to this law a greater influence +on human affairs. *a It is true that these laws belong to civil affairs; but +they ought nevertheless to be placed at the head of all political institutions; +for, whilst political laws are only the symbol of a nation’s condition, +they exercise an incredible influence upon its social state. They have, +moreover, a sure and uniform manner of operating upon society, affecting, as it +were, generations yet unborn. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ I understand by the law of descent all those laws whose principal object is +to regulate the distribution of property after the death of its owner. The law +of entail is of this number; it certainly prevents the owner from disposing of +his possessions before his death; but this is solely with the view of +preserving them entire for the heir. The principal object, therefore, of the +law of entail is to regulate the descent of property after the death of its +owner: its other provisions are merely means to this end.] +</p> + +<p> +Through their means man acquires a kind of preternatural power over the future +lot of his fellow-creatures. When the legislator has regulated the law of +inheritance, he may rest from his labor. The machine once put in motion will go +on for ages, and advance, as if self-guided, towards a given point. When framed +in a particular manner, this law unites, draws together, and vests property and +power in a few hands: its tendency is clearly aristocratic. On opposite +principles its action is still more rapid; it divides, distributes, and +disperses both property and power. Alarmed by the rapidity of its progress, +those who despair of arresting its motion endeavor to obstruct it by +difficulties and impediments; they vainly seek to counteract its effect by +contrary efforts; but it gradually reduces or destroys every obstacle, until by +its incessant activity the bulwarks of the influence of wealth are ground down +to the fine and shifting sand which is the basis of democracy. When the law of +inheritance permits, still more when it decrees, the equal division of a +father’s property amongst all his children, its effects are of two kinds: +it is important to distinguish them from each other, although they tend to the +same end. +</p> + +<p> +In virtue of the law of partible inheritance, the death of every proprietor +brings about a kind of revolution in property; not only do his possessions +change hands, but their very nature is altered, since they are parcelled into +shares, which become smaller and smaller at each division. This is the direct +and, as it were, the physical effect of the law. It follows, then, that in +countries where equality of inheritance is established by law, property, and +especially landed property, must have a tendency to perpetual diminution. The +effects, however, of such legislation would only be perceptible after a lapse +of time, if the law was abandoned to its own working; for supposing the family +to consist of two children (and in a country people as France is the average +number is not above three), these children, sharing amongst them the fortune of +both parents, would not be poorer than their father or mother. +</p> + +<p> +But the law of equal division exercises its influence not merely upon the +property itself, but it affects the minds of the heirs, and brings their +passions into play. These indirect consequences tend powerfully to the +destruction of large fortunes, and especially of large domains. Among nations +whose law of descent is founded upon the right of primogeniture landed estates +often pass from generation to generation without undergoing division, the +consequence of which is that family feeling is to a certain degree incorporated +with the estate. The family represents the estate, the estate the family; whose +name, together with its origin, its glory, its power, and its virtues, is thus +perpetuated in an imperishable memorial of the past and a sure pledge of the +future. +</p> + +<p> +When the equal partition of property is established by law, the intimate +connection is destroyed between family feeling and the preservation of the +paternal estate; the property ceases to represent the family; for as it must +inevitably be divided after one or two generations, it has evidently a constant +tendency to diminish, and must in the end be completely dispersed. The sons of +the great landed proprietor, if they are few in number, or if fortune befriends +them, may indeed entertain the hope of being as wealthy as their father, but +not that of possessing the same property as he did; the riches must necessarily +be composed of elements different from his. +</p> + +<p> +Now, from the moment that you divest the landowner of that interest in the +preservation of his estate which he derives from association, from tradition, +and from family pride, you may be certain that sooner or later he will dispose +of it; for there is a strong pecuniary interest in favor of selling, as +floating capital produces higher interest than real property, and is more +readily available to gratify the passions of the moment. +</p> + +<p> +Great landed estates which have once been divided never come together again; +for the small proprietor draws from his land a better revenue, in proportion, +than the large owner does from his, and of course he sells it at a higher rate. +*b The calculations of gain, therefore, which decide the rich man to sell his +domain will still more powerfully influence him against buying small estates to +unite them into a large one. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ I do not mean to say that the small proprietor cultivates his land better, +but he cultivates it with more ardor and care; so that he makes up by his labor +for his want of skill.] +</p> + +<p> +What is called family pride is often founded upon an illusion of self-love. A +man wishes to perpetuate and immortalize himself, as it were, in his +great-grandchildren. Where the esprit de famille ceases to act individual +selfishness comes into play. When the idea of family becomes vague, +indeterminate, and uncertain, a man thinks of his present convenience; he +provides for the establishment of his succeeding generation, and no more. +Either a man gives up the idea of perpetuating his family, or at any rate he +seeks to accomplish it by other means than that of a landed estate. Thus not +only does the law of partible inheritance render it difficult for families to +preserve their ancestral domains entire, but it deprives them of the +inclination to attempt it, and compels them in some measure to co-operate with +the law in their own extinction. +</p> + +<p> +The law of equal distribution proceeds by two methods: by acting upon things, +it acts upon persons; by influencing persons, it affects things. By these means +the law succeeds in striking at the root of landed property, and dispersing +rapidly both families and fortunes. *c +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ Land being the most stable kind of property, we find, from time to time, rich +individuals who are disposed to make great sacrifices in order to obtain it, +and who willingly forfeit a considerable part of their income to make sure of +the rest. But these are accidental cases. The preference for landed property is +no longer found habitually in any class but among the poor. The small +landowner, who has less information, less imagination, and fewer passions than +the great one, is generally occupied with the desire of increasing his estate: +and it often happens that by inheritance, by marriage, or by the chances of +trade, he is gradually furnished with the means. Thus, to balance the tendency +which leads men to divide their estates, there exists another, which incites +them to add to them. This tendency, which is sufficient to prevent estates from +being divided ad infinitum, is not strong enough to create great territorial +possessions, certainly not to keep them up in the same family.] +</p> + +<p> +Most certainly it is not for us Frenchmen of the nineteenth century, who daily +witness the political and social changes which the law of partition is bringing +to pass, to question its influence. It is perpetually conspicuous in our +country, overthrowing the walls of our dwellings and removing the landmarks of +our fields. But although it has produced great effects in France, much still +remains for it to do. Our recollections, opinions, and habits present powerful +obstacles to its progress. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States it has nearly completed its work of destruction, and there +we can best study its results. The English laws concerning the transmission of +property were abolished in almost all the States at the time of the Revolution. +The law of entail was so modified as not to interrupt the free circulation of +property. *d The first generation having passed away, estates began to be +parcelled out, and the change became more and more rapid with the progress of +time. At this moment, after a lapse of a little more than sixty years, the +aspect of society is totally altered; the families of the great landed +proprietors are almost all commingled with the general mass. In the State of +New York, which formerly contained many of these, there are but two who still +keep their heads above the stream, and they must shortly disappear. The sons of +these opulent citizens are become merchants, lawyers, or physicians. Most of +them have lapsed into obscurity. The last trace of hereditary ranks and +distinctions is destroyed—the law of partition has reduced all to one +level. [Footnote d: See Appendix, G.] +</p> + +<p> +I do not mean that there is any deficiency of wealthy individuals in the United +States; I know of no country, indeed, where the love of money has taken +stronger hold on the affections of men, and where the profounder contempt is +expressed for the theory of the permanent equality of property. But wealth +circulates with inconceivable rapidity, and experience shows that it is rare to +find two succeeding generations in the full enjoyment of it. +</p> + +<p> +This picture, which may perhaps be thought to be overcharged, still gives a +very imperfect idea of what is taking place in the new States of the West and +South-west. At the end of the last century a few bold adventurers began to +penetrate into the valleys of the Mississippi, and the mass of the population +very soon began to move in that direction: communities unheard of till then +were seen to emerge from the wilds: States whose names were not in existence a +few years before claimed their place in the American Union; and in the Western +settlements we may behold democracy arrived at its utmost extreme. In these +States, founded off-hand, and, as it were, by chance, the inhabitants are but +of yesterday. Scarcely known to one another, the nearest neighbors are ignorant +of each other’s history. In this part of the American continent, +therefore, the population has not experienced the influence of great names and +great wealth, nor even that of the natural aristocracy of knowledge and virtue. +None are there to wield that respectable power which men willingly grant to the +remembrance of a life spent in doing good before their eyes. The new States of +the West are already inhabited, but society has no existence among them. *e +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ This may have been true in 1832, but is not so in 1874, when great cities +like Chicago and San Francisco have sprung up in the Western States. But as yet +the Western States exert no powerful influence on American +society.—-Translator’s Note.] +</p> + +<p> +It is not only the fortunes of men which are equal in America; even their +requirements partake in some degree of the same uniformity. I do not believe +that there is a country in the world where, in proportion to the population, +there are so few uninstructed and at the same time so few learned individuals. +Primary instruction is within the reach of everybody; superior instruction is +scarcely to be obtained by any. This is not surprising; it is in fact the +necessary consequence of what we have advanced above. Almost all the Americans +are in easy circumstances, and can therefore obtain the first elements of human +knowledge. +</p> + +<p> +In America there are comparatively few who are rich enough to live without a +profession. Every profession requires an apprenticeship, which limits the time +of instruction to the early years of life. At fifteen they enter upon their +calling, and thus their education ends at the age when ours begins. Whatever is +done afterwards is with a view to some special and lucrative object; a science +is taken up as a matter of business, and the only branch of it which is +attended to is such as admits of an immediate practical application. In America +most of the rich men were formerly poor; most of those who now enjoy leisure +were absorbed in business during their youth; the consequence of which is, that +when they might have had a taste for study they had no time for it, and when +time is at their disposal they have no longer the inclination. +</p> + +<p> +There is no class, then, in America, in which the taste for intellectual +pleasures is transmitted with hereditary fortune and leisure, and by which the +labors of the intellect are held in honor. Accordingly there is an equal want +of the desire and the power of application to these objects. +</p> + +<p> +A middle standard is fixed in America for human knowledge. All approach as near +to it as they can; some as they rise, others as they descend. Of course, an +immense multitude of persons are to be found who entertain the same number of +ideas on religion, history, science, political economy, legislation, and +government. The gifts of intellect proceed directly from God, and man cannot +prevent their unequal distribution. But in consequence of the state of things +which we have here represented it happens that, although the capacities of men +are widely different, as the Creator has doubtless intended they should be, +they are submitted to the same method of treatment. +</p> + +<p> +In America the aristocratic element has always been feeble from its birth; and +if at the present day it is not actually destroyed, it is at any rate so +completely disabled that we can scarcely assign to it any degree of influence +in the course of affairs. The democratic principle, on the contrary, has gained +so much strength by time, by events, and by legislation, as to have become not +only predominant but all-powerful. There is no family or corporate authority, +and it is rare to find even the influence of individual character enjoy any +durability. +</p> + +<p> +America, then, exhibits in her social state a most extraordinary phenomenon. +Men are there seen on a greater equality in point of fortune and intellect, or, +in other words, more equal in their strength, than in any other country of the +world, or in any age of which history has preserved the remembrance. +</p> + +<p> +Political Consequences Of The Social Condition Of The Anglo-Americans +</p> + +<p> +The political consequences of such a social condition as this are easily +deducible. It is impossible to believe that equality will not eventually find +its way into the political world as it does everywhere else. To conceive of men +remaining forever unequal upon one single point, yet equal on all others, is +impossible; they must come in the end to be equal upon all. Now I know of only +two methods of establishing equality in the political world; every citizen must +be put in possession of his rights, or rights must be granted to no one. For +nations which are arrived at the same stage of social existence as the +Anglo-Americans, it is therefore very difficult to discover a medium between +the sovereignty of all and the absolute power of one man: and it would be vain +to deny that the social condition which I have been describing is equally +liable to each of these consequences. +</p> + +<p> +There is, in fact, a manly and lawful passion for equality which excites men to +wish all to be powerful and honored. This passion tends to elevate the humble +to the rank of the great; but there exists also in the human heart a depraved +taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to +their own level, and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality +with freedom. Not that those nations whose social condition is democratic +naturally despise liberty; on the contrary, they have an instinctive love of +it. But liberty is not the chief and constant object of their desires; equality +is their idol: they make rapid and sudden efforts to obtain liberty, and if +they miss their aim resign themselves to their disappointment; but nothing can +satisfy them except equality, and rather than lose it they resolve to perish. +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, in a State where the citizens are nearly on an equality, it +becomes difficult for them to preserve their independence against the +aggressions of power. No one among them being strong enough to engage in the +struggle with advantage, nothing but a general combination can protect their +liberty. And such a union is not always to be found. +</p> + +<p> +From the same social position, then, nations may derive one or the other of two +great political results; these results are extremely different from each other, +but they may both proceed from the same cause. +</p> + +<p> +The Anglo-Americans are the first nations who, having been exposed to this +formidable alternative, have been happy enough to escape the dominion of +absolute power. They have been allowed by their circumstances, their origin, +their intelligence, and especially by their moral feeling, to establish and +maintain the sovereignty of the people. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0008" id="link2HCH0008"></a> Chapter IV: The Principle Of +The Sovereignty Of The People In America</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0009" id="link2HCH0009"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +It predominates over the whole of society in America—Application made of +this principle by the Americans even before their Revolution—Development +given to it by that Revolution—Gradual and irresistible extension of the +elective qualification. +</p> + +<p> +The Principle Of The Sovereignty Of The People In America +</p> + +<p> +Whenever the political laws of the United States are to be discussed, it is +with the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people that we must begin. The +principle of the sovereignty of the people, which is to be found, more or less, +at the bottom of almost all human institutions, generally remains concealed +from view. It is obeyed without being recognized, or if for a moment it be +brought to light, it is hastily cast back into the gloom of the sanctuary. +“The will of the nation” is one of those expressions which have +been most profusely abused by the wily and the despotic of every age. To the +eyes of some it has been represented by the venal suffrages of a few of the +satellites of power; to others by the votes of a timid or an interested +minority; and some have even discovered it in the silence of a people, on the +supposition that the fact of submission established the right of command. +</p> + +<p> +In America the principle of the sovereignty of the people is not either barren +or concealed, as it is with some other nations; it is recognized by the customs +and proclaimed by the laws; it spreads freely, and arrives without impediment +at its most remote consequences. If there be a country in the world where the +doctrine of the sovereignty of the people can be fairly appreciated, where it +can be studied in its application to the affairs of society, and where its +dangers and its advantages may be foreseen, that country is assuredly America. +</p> + +<p> +I have already observed that, from their origin, the sovereignty of the people +was the fundamental principle of the greater number of British colonies in +America. It was far, however, from then exercising as much influence on the +government of society as it now does. Two obstacles, the one external, the +other internal, checked its invasive progress. It could not ostensibly disclose +itself in the laws of colonies which were still constrained to obey the +mother-country: it was therefore obliged to spread secretly, and to gain ground +in the provincial assemblies, and especially in the townships. +</p> + +<p> +American society was not yet prepared to adopt it with all its consequences. +The intelligence of New England, and the wealth of the country to the south of +the Hudson (as I have shown in the preceding chapter), long exercised a sort of +aristocratic influence, which tended to retain the exercise of social authority +in the hands of a few. The public functionaries were not universally elected, +and the citizens were not all of them electors. The electoral franchise was +everywhere placed within certain limits, and made dependent on a certain +qualification, which was exceedingly low in the North and more considerable in +the South. +</p> + +<p> +The American revolution broke out, and the doctrine of the sovereignty of the +people, which had been nurtured in the townships and municipalities, took +possession of the State: every class was enlisted in its cause; battles were +fought, and victories obtained for it, until it became the law of laws. +</p> + +<p> +A no less rapid change was effected in the interior of society, where the law +of descent completed the abolition of local influences. +</p> + +<p> +At the very time when this consequence of the laws and of the revolution was +apparent to every eye, victory was irrevocably pronounced in favor of the +democratic cause. All power was, in fact, in its hands, and resistance was no +longer possible. The higher orders submitted without a murmur and without a +struggle to an evil which was thenceforth inevitable. The ordinary fate of +falling powers awaited them; each of their several members followed his own +interests; and as it was impossible to wring the power from the hands of a +people which they did not detest sufficiently to brave, their only aim was to +secure its good-will at any price. The most democratic laws were consequently +voted by the very men whose interests they impaired; and thus, although the +higher classes did not excite the passions of the people against their order, +they accelerated the triumph of the new state of things; so that by a singular +change the democratic impulse was found to be most irresistible in the very +States where the aristocracy had the firmest hold. The State of Maryland, which +had been founded by men of rank, was the first to proclaim universal suffrage, +and to introduce the most democratic forms into the conduct of its government. +</p> + +<p> +When a nation modifies the elective qualification, it may easily be foreseen +that sooner or later that qualification will be entirely abolished. There is no +more invariable rule in the history of society: the further electoral rights +are extended, the greater is the need of extending them; for after each +concession the strength of the democracy increases, and its demands increase +with its strength. The ambition of those who are below the appointed rate is +irritated in exact proportion to the great number of those who are above it. +The exception at last becomes the rule, concession follows concession, and no +stop can be made short of universal suffrage. +</p> + +<p> +At the present day the principle of the sovereignty of the people has acquired, +in the United States, all the practical development which the imagination can +conceive. It is unencumbered by those fictions which have been thrown over it +in other countries, and it appears in every possible form according to the +exigency of the occasion. Sometimes the laws are made by the people in a body, +as at Athens; and sometimes its representatives, chosen by universal suffrage, +transact business in its name, and almost under its immediate control. +</p> + +<p> +In some countries a power exists which, though it is in a degree foreign to the +social body, directs it, and forces it to pursue a certain track. In others the +ruling force is divided, being partly within and partly without the ranks of +the people. But nothing of the kind is to be seen in the United States; there +society governs itself for itself. All power centres in its bosom; and scarcely +an individual is to be meet with who would venture to conceive, or, still less, +to express, the idea of seeking it elsewhere. The nation participates in the +making of its laws by the choice of its legislators, and in the execution of +them by the choice of the agents of the executive government; it may almost be +said to govern itself, so feeble and so restricted is the share left to the +administration, so little do the authorities forget their popular origin and +the power from which they emanate. *a [Footnote a: See Appendix, H.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0010" id="link2HCH0010"></a> Chapter V: Necessity Of +Examining The Condition Of The States—Part I</h2> + +<p> +Necessity Of Examining The Condition Of The States Before That Of The Union At +Large. +</p> + +<p> +It is proposed to examine in the following chapter what is the form of +government established in America on the principle of the sovereignty of the +people; what are its resources, its hindrances, its advantages, and its +dangers. The first difficulty which presents itself arises from the complex +nature of the constitution of the United States, which consists of two distinct +social structures, connected and, as it were, encased one within the other; two +governments, completely separate and almost independent, the one fulfilling the +ordinary duties and responding to the daily and indefinite calls of a +community, the other circumscribed within certain limits, and only exercising +an exceptional authority over the general interests of the country. In short, +there are twenty-four small sovereign nations, whose agglomeration constitutes +the body of the Union. To examine the Union before we have studied the States +would be to adopt a method filled with obstacles. The form of the Federal +Government of the United States was the last which was adopted; and it is in +fact nothing more than a modification or a summary of those republican +principles which were current in the whole community before it existed, and +independently of its existence. Moreover, the Federal Government is, as I have +just observed, the exception; the Government of the States is the rule. The +author who should attempt to exhibit the picture as a whole before he had +explained its details would necessarily fall into obscurity and repetition. +</p> + +<p> +The great political principles which govern American society at this day +undoubtedly took their origin and their growth in the State. It is therefore +necessary to become acquainted with the State in order to possess a clue to the +remainder. The States which at present compose the American Union all present +the same features, as far as regards the external aspect of their institutions. +Their political or administrative existence is centred in three focuses of +action, which may not inaptly be compared to the different nervous centres +which convey motion to the human body. The township is the lowest in order, +then the county, and lastly the State; and I propose to devote the following +chapter to the examination of these three divisions. +</p> + +<p> +The American System Of Townships And Municipal Bodies +</p> + +<p> +Why the Author begins the examination of the political institutions with the +township—Its existence in all nations—Difficulty of establishing +and preserving municipal independence—Its importance—Why the Author +has selected the township system of New England as the main topic of his +discussion. +</p> + +<p> +It is not undesignedly that I begin this subject with the Township. The village +or township is the only association which is so perfectly natural that wherever +a number of men are collected it seems to constitute itself. +</p> + +<p> +The town, or tithing, as the smallest division of a community, must necessarily +exist in all nations, whatever their laws and customs may be: if man makes +monarchies and establishes republics, the first association of mankind seems +constituted by the hand of God. But although the existence of the township is +coeval with that of man, its liberties are not the less rarely respected and +easily destroyed. A nation is always able to establish great political +assemblies, because it habitually contains a certain number of individuals +fitted by their talents, if not by their habits, for the direction of affairs. +The township is, on the contrary, composed of coarser materials, which are less +easily fashioned by the legislator. The difficulties which attend the +consolidation of its independence rather augment than diminish with the +increasing enlightenment of the people. A highly civilized community spurns the +attempts of a local independence, is disgusted at its numerous blunders, and is +apt to despair of success before the experiment is completed. Again, no +immunities are so ill protected from the encroachments of the supreme power as +those of municipal bodies in general: they are unable to struggle, +single-handed, against a strong or an enterprising government, and they cannot +defend their cause with success unless it be identified with the customs of the +nation and supported by public opinion. Thus until the independence of +townships is amalgamated with the manners of a people it is easily destroyed, +and it is only after a long existence in the laws that it can be thus +amalgamated. Municipal freedom is not the fruit of human device; it is rarely +created; but it is, as it were, secretly and spontaneously engendered in the +midst of a semi-barbarous state of society. The constant action of the laws and +the national habits, peculiar circumstances, and above all time, may +consolidate it; but there is certainly no nation on the continent of Europe +which has experienced its advantages. Nevertheless local assemblies of citizens +constitute the strength of free nations. Town-meetings are to liberty what +primary schools are to science; they bring it within the people’s reach, +they teach men how to use and how to enjoy it. A nation may establish a system +of free government, but without the spirit of municipal institutions it cannot +have the spirit of liberty. The transient passions and the interests of an +hour, or the chance of circumstances, may have created the external forms of +independence; but the despotic tendency which has been repelled will, sooner or +later, inevitably reappear on the surface. +</p> + +<p> +In order to explain to the reader the general principles on which the political +organization of the counties and townships of the United States rests, I have +thought it expedient to choose one of the States of New England as an example, +to examine the mechanism of its constitution, and then to cast a general glance +over the country. The township and the county are not organized in the same +manner in every part of the Union; it is, however, easy to perceive that the +same principles have guided the formation of both of them throughout the Union. +I am inclined to believe that these principles have been carried further in New +England than elsewhere, and consequently that they offer greater facilities to +the observations of a stranger. The institutions of New England form a complete +and regular whole; they have received the sanction of time, they have the +support of the laws, and the still stronger support of the manners of the +community, over which they exercise the most prodigious influence; they +consequently deserve our attention on every account. +</p> + +<p> +Limits Of The Township +</p> + +<p> +The township of New England is a division which stands between the commune and +the canton of France, and which corresponds in general to the English tithing, +or town. Its average population is from two to three thousand; *a so that, on +the one hand, the interests of its inhabitants are not likely to conflict, and, +on the other, men capable of conducting its affairs are always to be found +among its citizens. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ In 1830 there were 305 townships in the State of Massachusetts, and 610,014 +inhabitants, which gives an average of about 2,000 inhabitants to each +township.] +</p> + +<p> +Authorities Of The Township In New England +</p> + +<p> +The people the source of all power here as elsewhere—Manages its own +affairs—No corporation—The greater part of the authority vested in +the hands of the Selectmen—How the Selectmen +act—Town-meeting—Enumeration of the public officers of the +township—Obligatory and remunerated functions. +</p> + +<p> +In the township, as well as everywhere else, the people is the only source of +power; but in no stage of government does the body of citizens exercise a more +immediate influence. In America the people is a master whose exigencies demand +obedience to the utmost limits of possibility. +</p> + +<p> +In New England the majority acts by representatives in the conduct of the +public business of the State; but if such an arrangement be necessary in +general affairs, in the townships, where the legislative and administrative +action of the government is in more immediate contact with the subject, the +system of representation is not adopted. There is no corporation; but the body +of electors, after having designated its magistrates, directs them in +everything that exceeds the simple and ordinary executive business of the +State. *b +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ The same rules are not applicable to the great towns, which generally have a +mayor, and a corporation divided into two bodies; this, however, is an +exception which requires the sanction of a law.—See the Act of February +22, 1822, for appointing the authorities of the city of Boston. It frequently +happens that small towns as well as cities are subject to a peculiar +administration. In 1832, 104 townships in the State of New York were governed +in this manner.—Williams’ Register.] +</p> + +<p> +This state of things is so contrary to our ideas, and so different from our +customs, that it is necessary for me to adduce some examples to explain it +thoroughly. +</p> + +<p> +The public duties in the township are extremely numerous and minutely divided, +as we shall see further on; but the larger proportion of administrative power +is vested in the hands of a small number of individuals, called “the +Selectmen.” *c The general laws of the State impose a certain number of +obligations on the selectmen, which they may fulfil without the authorization +of the body they represent, but which they can only neglect on their own +responsibility. The law of the State obliges them, for instance, to draw up the +list of electors in their townships; and if they omit this part of their +functions, they are guilty of a misdemeanor. In all the affairs, however, which +are determined by the town-meeting, the selectmen are the organs of the popular +mandate, as in France the Maire executes the decree of the municipal council. +They usually act upon their own responsibility, and merely put in practice +principles which have been previously recognized by the majority. But if any +change is to be introduced in the existing state of things, or if they wish to +undertake any new enterprise, they are obliged to refer to the source of their +power. If, for instance, a school is to be established, the selectmen convoke +the whole body of the electors on a certain day at an appointed place; they +explain the urgency of the case; they give their opinion on the means of +satisfying it, on the probable expense, and the site which seems to be most +favorable. The meeting is consulted on these several points; it adopts the +principle, marks out the site, votes the rate, and confides the execution of +its resolution to the selectmen. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ Three selectmen are appointed in the small townships, and nine in the large +ones. See “The Town-Officer,” p. 186. See also the principal laws +of the State of Massachusetts relative to the selectmen: +</p> + +<p> +Act of February 20, 1786, vol. i. p. 219; February 24, 1796, vol. i. p. 488; +March 7, 1801, vol. ii. p. 45; June 16, 1795, vol. i. p. 475; March 12, 1808, +vol. ii. p. 186; February 28, 1787, vol. i. p. 302; June 22, 1797, vol. i. p. +539.] +</p> + +<p> +The selectmen have alone the right of calling a town-meeting, but they may be +requested to do so: if ten citizens are desirous of submitting a new project to +the assent of the township, they may demand a general convocation of the +inhabitants; the selectmen are obliged to comply, but they have only the right +of presiding at the meeting. *d +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ See Laws of Massachusetts, vol. i. p. 150, Act of March 25, 1786.] +</p> + +<p> +The selectmen are elected every year in the month of April or of May. The +town-meeting chooses at the same time a number of other municipal magistrates, +who are entrusted with important administrative functions. The assessors rate +the township; the collectors receive the rate. A constable is appointed to keep +the peace, to watch the streets, and to forward the execution of the laws; the +town-clerk records all the town votes, orders, grants, births, deaths, and +marriages; the treasurer keeps the funds; the overseer of the poor performs the +difficult task of superintending the action of the poor-laws; committee-men are +appointed to attend to the schools and to public instruction; and the +road-surveyors, who take care of the greater and lesser thoroughfares of the +township, complete the list of the principal functionaries. They are, however, +still further subdivided; and amongst the municipal officers are to be found +parish commissioners, who audit the expenses of public worship; different +classes of inspectors, some of whom are to direct the citizens in case of fire; +tithing-men, listers, haywards, chimney-viewers, fence-viewers to maintain the +bounds of property, timber-measurers, and sealers of weights and measures. *e +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ All these magistrates actually exist; their different functions are all +detailed in a book called “The Town-Officer,” by Isaac Goodwin, +Worcester, 1827; and in the “Collection of the General Laws of +Massachusetts,” 3 vols., Boston, 1823.] +</p> + +<p> +There are nineteen principal officers in a township. Every inhabitant is +constrained, on the pain of being fined, to undertake these different +functions; which, however, are almost all paid, in order that the poorer +citizens may be able to give up their time without loss. In general the +American system is not to grant a fixed salary to its functionaries. Every +service has its price, and they are remunerated in proportion to what they have +done. +</p> + +<p> +Existence Of The Township +</p> + +<p> +Every one the best judge of his own interest—Corollary of the principle +of the sovereignty of the people—Application of those doctrines in the +townships of America—The township of New England is sovereign in all that +concerns itself alone: subject to the State in all other matters—Bond of +the township and the State—In France the Government lends its agent to +the Commune—In America the reverse occurs. +</p> + +<p> +I have already observed that the principle of the sovereignty of the people +governs the whole political system of the Anglo-Americans. Every page of this +book will afford new instances of the same doctrine. In the nations by which +the sovereignty of the people is recognized every individual possesses an equal +share of power, and participates alike in the government of the State. Every +individual is, therefore, supposed to be as well informed, as virtuous, and as +strong as any of his fellow-citizens. He obeys the government, not because he +is inferior to the authorities which conduct it, or that he is less capable +than his neighbor of governing himself, but because he acknowledges the utility +of an association with his fellow-men, and because he knows that no such +association can exist without a regulating force. If he be a subject in all +that concerns the mutual relations of citizens, he is free and responsible to +God alone for all that concerns himself. Hence arises the maxim that every one +is the best and the sole judge of his own private interest, and that society +has no right to control a man’s actions, unless they are prejudicial to +the common weal, or unless the common weal demands his co-operation. This +doctrine is universally admitted in the United States. I shall hereafter +examine the general influence which it exercises on the ordinary actions of +life; I am now speaking of the nature of municipal bodies. +</p> + +<p> +The township, taken as a whole, and in relation to the government of the +country, may be looked upon as an individual to whom the theory I have just +alluded to is applied. Municipal independence is therefore a natural +consequence of the principle of the sovereignty of the people in the United +States: all the American republics recognize it more or less; but circumstances +have peculiarly favored its growth in New England. +</p> + +<p> +In this part of the Union the impulsion of political activity was given in the +townships; and it may almost be said that each of them originally formed an +independent nation. When the Kings of England asserted their supremacy, they +were contented to assume the central power of the State. The townships of New +England remained as they were before; and although they are now subject to the +State, they were at first scarcely dependent upon it. It is important to +remember that they have not been invested with privileges, but that they have, +on the contrary, forfeited a portion of their independence to the State. The +townships are only subordinate to the State in those interests which I shall +term social, as they are common to all the citizens. They are independent in +all that concerns themselves; and amongst the inhabitants of New England I +believe that not a man is to be found who would acknowledge that the State has +any right to interfere in their local interests. The towns of New England buy +and sell, sue or are sued, augment or diminish their rates, without the +slightest opposition on the part of the administrative authority of the State. +</p> + +<p> +They are bound, however, to comply with the demands of the community. If the +State is in need of money, a town can neither give nor withhold the supplies. +If the State projects a road, the township cannot refuse to let it cross its +territory; if a police regulation is made by the State, it must be enforced by +the town. A uniform system of instruction is organized all over the country, +and every town is bound to establish the schools which the law ordains. In +speaking of the administration of the United States I shall have occasion to +point out the means by which the townships are compelled to obey in these +different cases: I here merely show the existence of the obligation. Strict as +this obligation is, the government of the State imposes it in principle only, +and in its performance the township resumes all its independent rights. Thus, +taxes are voted by the State, but they are levied and collected by the +township; the existence of a school is obligatory, but the township builds, +pays, and superintends it. In France the State-collector receives the local +imposts; in America the town-collector receives the taxes of the State. Thus +the French Government lends its agents to the commune; in America the township +is the agent of the Government. This fact alone shows the extent of the +differences which exist between the two nations. +</p> + +<p> +Public Spirit Of The Townships Of New England +</p> + +<p> +How the township of New England wins the affections of its +inhabitants—Difficulty of creating local public spirit in +Europe—The rights and duties of the American township favorable to +it—Characteristics of home in the United States—Manifestations of +public spirit in New England—Its happy effects. +</p> + +<p> +In America, not only do municipal bodies exist, but they are kept alive and +supported by public spirit. The township of New England possesses two +advantages which infallibly secure the attentive interest of mankind, namely, +independence and authority. Its sphere is indeed small and limited, but within +that sphere its action is unrestrained; and its independence gives to it a real +importance which its extent and population may not always ensure. +</p> + +<p> +It is to be remembered that the affections of men generally lie on the side of +authority. Patriotism is not durable in a conquered nation. The New Englander +is attached to his township, not only because he was born in it, but because it +constitutes a social body of which he is a member, and whose government claims +and deserves the exercise of his sagacity. In Europe the absence of local +public spirit is a frequent subject of regret to those who are in power; +everyone agrees that there is no surer guarantee of order and tranquility, and +yet nothing is more difficult to create. If the municipal bodies were made +powerful and independent, the authorities of the nation might be disunited and +the peace of the country endangered. Yet, without power and independence, a +town may contain good subjects, but it can have no active citizens. Another +important fact is that the township of New England is so constituted as to +excite the warmest of human affections, without arousing the ambitious passions +of the heart of man. The officers of the country are not elected, and their +authority is very limited. Even the State is only a second-rate community, +whose tranquil and obscure administration offers no inducement sufficient to +draw men away from the circle of their interests into the turmoil of public +affairs. The federal government confers power and honor on the men who conduct +it; but these individuals can never be very numerous. The high station of the +Presidency can only be reached at an advanced period of life, and the other +federal functionaries are generally men who have been favored by fortune, or +distinguished in some other career. Such cannot be the permanent aim of the +ambitious. But the township serves as a centre for the desire of public esteem, +the want of exciting interests, and the taste for authority and popularity, in +the midst of the ordinary relations of life; and the passions which commonly +embroil society change their character when they find a vent so near the +domestic hearth and the family circle. +</p> + +<p> +In the American States power has been disseminated with admirable skill for the +purpose of interesting the greatest possible number of persons in the common +weal. Independently of the electors who are from time to time called into +action, the body politic is divided into innumerable functionaries and +officers, who all, in their several spheres, represent the same powerful whole +in whose name they act. The local administration thus affords an unfailing +source of profit and interest to a vast number of individuals. +</p> + +<p> +The American system, which divides the local authority among so many citizens, +does not scruple to multiply the functions of the town officers. For in the +United States it is believed, and with truth, that patriotism is a kind of +devotion which is strengthened by ritual observance. In this manner the +activity of the township is continually perceptible; it is daily manifested in +the fulfilment of a duty or the exercise of a right, and a constant though +gentle motion is thus kept up in society which animates without disturbing it. +</p> + +<p> +The American attaches himself to his home as the mountaineer clings to his +hills, because the characteristic features of his country are there more +distinctly marked than elsewhere. The existence of the townships of New England +is in general a happy one. Their government is suited to their tastes, and +chosen by themselves. In the midst of the profound peace and general comfort +which reign in America the commotions of municipal discord are unfrequent. The +conduct of local business is easy. The political education of the people has +long been complete; say rather that it was complete when the people first set +foot upon the soil. In New England no tradition exists of a distinction of +ranks; no portion of the community is tempted to oppress the remainder; and the +abuses which may injure isolated individuals are forgotten in the general +contentment which prevails. If the government is defective (and it would no +doubt be easy to point out its deficiencies), the fact that it really emanates +from those it governs, and that it acts, either ill or well, casts the +protecting spell of a parental pride over its faults. No term of comparison +disturbs the satisfaction of the citizen: England formerly governed the mass of +the colonies, but the people was always sovereign in the township where its +rule is not only an ancient but a primitive state. +</p> + +<p> +The native of New England is attached to his township because it is independent +and free: his co-operation in its affairs ensures his attachment to its +interest; the well-being it affords him secures his affection; and its welfare +is the aim of his ambition and of his future exertions: he takes a part in +every occurrence in the place; he practises the art of government in the small +sphere within his reach; he accustoms himself to those forms which can alone +ensure the steady progress of liberty; he imbibes their spirit; he acquires a +taste for order, comprehends the union or the balance of powers, and collects +clear practical notions on the nature of his duties and the extent of his +rights. +</p> + +<p> +The Counties Of New England +</p> + +<p> +The division of the countries in America has considerable analogy with that of +the arrondissements of France. The limits of the counties are arbitrarily laid +down, and the various districts which they contain have no necessary +connection, no common tradition or natural sympathy; their object is simply to +facilitate the administration of justice. +</p> + +<p> +The extent of the township was too small to contain a system of judicial +institutions; each county has, however, a court of justice, *f a sheriff to +execute its decrees, and a prison for criminals. There are certain wants which +are felt alike by all the townships of a county; it is therefore natural that +they should be satisfied by a central authority. In the State of Massachusetts +this authority is vested in the hands of several magistrates, who are appointed +by the Governor of the State, with the advice *g of his council. *h The +officers of the county have only a limited and occasional authority, which is +applicable to certain predetermined cases. The State and the townships possess +all the power requisite to conduct public business. The budget of the county is +drawn up by its officers, and is voted by the legislature, but there is no +assembly which directly or indirectly represents the county. It has, therefore, +properly speaking, no political existence. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ See the Act of February 14, 1821, Laws of Massachusetts, vol. i. p. 551.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ See the Act of February 20, 1819, Laws of Massachusetts, vol. ii. p. 494.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ The council of the Governor is an elective body.] A twofold tendency may be +discerned in the American constitutions, which impels the legislator to +centralize the legislative and to disperse the executive power. The township of +New England has in itself an indestructible element of independence; and this +distinct existence could only be fictitiously introduced into the county, where +its utility has not been felt. But all the townships united have but one +representation, which is the State, the centre of the national authority: +beyond the action of the township and that of the nation, nothing can be said +to exist but the influence of individual exertion. +</p> + +<p> +Administration In New England +</p> + +<p> +Administration not perceived in America—Why?—The Europeans believe +that liberty is promoted by depriving the social authority of some of its +rights; the Americans, by dividing its exercise—Almost all the +administration confined to the township, and divided amongst the +town-officers—No trace of an administrative body to be perceived, either +in the township or above it—The reason of this—How it happens that +the administration of the State is uniform—Who is empowered to enforce +the obedience of the township and the county to the law—The introduction +of judicial power into the administration—Consequence of the extension of +the elective principle to all functionaries—The Justice of the Peace in +New England—By whom appointed—County officer: ensures the +administration of the townships—Court of Sessions—Its +action—Right of inspection and indictment disseminated like the other +administrative functions—Informers encouraged by the division of fines. +</p> + +<p> +Nothing is more striking to an European traveller in the United States than the +absence of what we term the Government, or the Administration. Written laws +exist in America, and one sees that they are daily executed; but although +everything is in motion, the hand which gives the impulse to the social machine +can nowhere be discovered. Nevertheless, as all peoples are obliged to have +recourse to certain grammatical forms, which are the foundation of human +language, in order to express their thoughts; so all communities are obliged to +secure their existence by submitting to a certain dose of authority, without +which they fall a prey to anarchy. This authority may be distributed in several +ways, but it must always exist somewhere. +</p> + +<p> +There are two methods of diminishing the force of authority in a nation: The +first is to weaken the supreme power in its very principle, by forbidding or +preventing society from acting in its own defence under certain circumstances. +To weaken authority in this manner is what is generally termed in Europe to lay +the foundations of freedom. The second manner of diminishing the influence of +authority does not consist in stripping society of any of its rights, nor in +paralyzing its efforts, but in distributing the exercise of its privileges in +various hands, and in multiplying functionaries, to each of whom the degree of +power necessary for him to perform his duty is entrusted. There may be nations +whom this distribution of social powers might lead to anarchy; but in itself it +is not anarchical. The action of authority is indeed thus rendered less +irresistible and less perilous, but it is not totally suppressed. +</p> + +<p> +The revolution of the United States was the result of a mature and dignified +taste for freedom, and not of a vague or ill-defined craving for independence. +It contracted no alliance with the turbulent passions of anarchy; but its +course was marked, on the contrary, by an attachment to whatever was lawful and +orderly. +</p> + +<p> +It was never assumed in the United States that the citizen of a free country +has a right to do whatever he pleases; on the contrary, social obligations were +there imposed upon him more various than anywhere else. No idea was ever +entertained of attacking the principles or of contesting the rights of society; +but the exercise of its authority was divided, to the end that the office might +be powerful and the officer insignificant, and that the community should be at +once regulated and free. In no country in the world does the law hold so +absolute a language as in America, and in no country is the right of applying +it vested in so many hands. The administrative power in the United States +presents nothing either central or hierarchical in its constitution, which +accounts for its passing, unperceived. The power exists, but its representative +is not to be perceived. +</p> + +<p> +We have already seen that the independent townships of New England protect +their own private interests; and the municipal magistrates are the persons to +whom the execution of the laws of the State is most frequently entrusted. *i +Besides the general laws, the State sometimes passes general police +regulations; but more commonly the townships and town officers, conjointly with +justices of the peace, regulate the minor details of social life, according to +the necessities of the different localities, and promulgate such enactments as +concern the health of the community, and the peace as well as morality of the +citizens. *j Lastly, these municipal magistrates provide, of their own accord +and without any delegated powers, for those unforeseen emergencies which +frequently occur in society. *k +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ See “The Town-Officer,” especially at the words Selectmen, +Assessors, Collectors, Schools, Surveyors of Highways. I take one example in a +thousand: the State prohibits travelling on the Sunday; the tything-men, who +are town-officers, are specially charged to keep watch and to execute the law. +See the Laws of Massachusetts, vol. i. p. 410. +</p> + +<p> +The selectmen draw up the lists of electors for the election of the Governor, +and transmit the result of the ballot to the Secretary of the State. See Act of +February 24, 1796: Id., vol. i. p. 488.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ Thus, for instance, the selectmen authorize the construction of drains, point +out the proper sites for slaughter-houses and other trades which are a nuisance +to the neighborhood. See the Act of June 7, 1785: Id., vol. i. p. 193.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ The selectmen take measures for the security of the public in case of +contagious diseases, conjointly with the justices of the peace. See Act of June +22, 1797, vol. i. p. 539.] +</p> + +<p> +It results from what we have said that in the State of Massachusetts the +administrative authority is almost entirely restricted to the township, *l but +that it is distributed among a great number of individuals. In the French +commune there is properly but one official functionary, namely, the Maire; and +in New England we have seen that there are nineteen. These nineteen +functionaries do not in general depend upon one another. The law carefully +prescribes a circle of action to each of these magistrates; and within that +circle they have an entire right to perform their functions independently of +any other authority. Above the township scarcely any trace of a series of +official dignitaries is to be found. It sometimes happens that the county +officers alter a decision of the townships or town magistrates, *m but in +general the authorities of the county have no right to interfere with the +authorities of the township, *n except in such matters as concern the county. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ I say almost, for there are various circumstances in the annals of a township +which are regulated by the justice of the peace in his individual capacity, or +by the justices of the peace assembled in the chief town of the county; thus +licenses are granted by the justices. See the Act of February 28, 1787, vol. i. +p. 297.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ Thus licenses are only granted to such persons as can produce a certificate +of good conduct from the selectmen. If the selectmen refuse to give the +certificate, the party may appeal to the justices assembled in the Court of +Sessions, and they may grant the license. See Act of March 12, 1808, vol. ii. +p. 186. +</p> + +<p> +The townships have the right to make by-laws, and to enforce them by fines +which are fixed by law; but these by-laws must be approved by the Court of +Sessions. See Act of March 23, 1786, vol. i. p. 254.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ In Massachusetts the county magistrates are frequently called upon to +investigate the acts of the town magistrates; but it will be shown further on +that this investigation is a consequence, not of their administrative, but of +their judicial power.] +</p> + +<p> +The magistrates of the township, as well as those of the county, are bound to +communicate their acts to the central government in a very small number of +predetermined cases. *o But the central government is not represented by an +individual whose business it is to publish police regulations and ordinances +enforcing the execution of the laws; to keep up a regular communication with +the officers of the township and the county; to inspect their conduct, to +direct their actions, or to reprimand their faults. There is no point which +serves as a centre to the radii of the administration. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ The town committees of schools are obliged to make an annual report to the +Secretary of the State on the condition of the school. See Act of March 10, +1827, vol. iii. p. 183.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0011" id="link2HCH0011"></a> Chapter V: Necessity Of +Examining The Condition Of The States—Part II</h2> + +<p> +What, then, is the uniform plan on which the government is conducted, and how +is the compliance of the counties and their magistrates or the townships and +their officers enforced? In the States of New England the legislative authority +embraces more subjects than it does in France; the legislator penetrates to the +very core of the administration; the law descends to the most minute details; +the same enactment prescribes the principle and the method of its application, +and thus imposes a multitude of strict and rigorously defined obligations on +the secondary functionaries of the State. The consequence of this is that if +all the secondary functionaries of the administration conform to the law, +society in all its branches proceeds with the greatest uniformity: the +difficulty remains of compelling the secondary functionaries of the +administration to conform to the law. It may be affirmed that, in general, +society has only two methods of enforcing the execution of the laws at its +disposal: a discretionary power may be entrusted to a superior functionary of +directing all the others, and of cashiering them in case of disobedience; or +the courts of justice may be authorized to inflict judicial penalties on the +offender: but these two methods are not always available. +</p> + +<p> +The right of directing a civil officer presupposes that of cashiering him if he +does not obey orders, and of rewarding him by promotion if he fulfils his +duties with propriety. But an elected magistrate can neither be cashiered nor +promoted. All elective functions are inalienable until their term is expired. +In fact, the elected magistrate has nothing either to expect or to fear from +his constituents; and when all public offices are filled by ballot there can be +no series of official dignities, because the double right of commanding and of +enforcing obedience can never be vested in the same individual, and because the +power of issuing an order can never be joined to that of inflicting a +punishment or bestowing a reward. +</p> + +<p> +The communities therefore in which the secondary functionaries of the +government are elected are perforce obliged to make great use of judicial +penalties as a means of administration. This is not evident at first sight; for +those in power are apt to look upon the institution of elective functionaries +as one concession, and the subjection of the elected magistrate to the judges +of the land as another. They are equally averse to both these innovations; and +as they are more pressingly solicited to grant the former than the latter, they +accede to the election of the magistrate, and leave him independent of the +judicial power. Nevertheless, the second of these measures is the only thing +that can possibly counterbalance the first; and it will be found that an +elective authority which is not subject to judicial power will, sooner or +later, either elude all control or be destroyed. The courts of justice are the +only possible medium between the central power and the administrative bodies; +they alone can compel the elected functionary to obey, without violating the +rights of the elector. The extension of judicial power in the political world +ought therefore to be in the exact ratio of the extension of elective offices: +if these two institutions do not go hand in hand, the State must fall into +anarchy or into subjection. +</p> + +<p> +It has always been remarked that habits of legal business do not render men apt +to the exercise of administrative authority. The Americans have borrowed from +the English, their fathers, the idea of an institution which is unknown upon +the continent of Europe: I allude to that of the Justices of the Peace. The +Justice of the Peace is a sort of mezzo termine between the magistrate and the +man of the world, between the civil officer and the judge. A justice of the +peace is a well-informed citizen, though he is not necessarily versed in the +knowledge of the laws. His office simply obliges him to execute the police +regulations of society; a task in which good sense and integrity are of more +avail than legal science. The justice introduces into the administration a +certain taste for established forms and publicity, which renders him a most +unserviceable instrument of despotism; and, on the other hand, he is not +blinded by those superstitions which render legal officers unfit members of a +government. The Americans have adopted the system of the English justices of +the peace, but they have deprived it of that aristocratic character which is +discernible in the mother-country. The Governor of Massachusetts *p appoints a +certain number of justices of the peace in every county, whose functions last +seven years. *q He further designates three individuals from amongst the whole +body of justices who form in each county what is called the Court of Sessions. +The justices take a personal share in public business; they are sometimes +entrusted with administrative functions in conjunction with elected officers, +*r they sometimes constitute a tribunal, before which the magistrates summarily +prosecute a refractory citizen, or the citizens inform against the abuses of +the magistrate. But it is in the Court of Sessions that they exercise their +most important functions. This court meets twice a year in the county town; in +Massachusetts it is empowered to enforce the obedience of the greater number *s +of public officers. *t It must be observed, that in the State of Massachusetts +the Court of Sessions is at the same time an administrative body, properly so +called, and a political tribunal. It has been asserted that the county is a +purely administrative division. The Court of Sessions presides over that small +number of affairs which, as they concern several townships, or all the +townships of the county in common, cannot be entrusted to any one of them in +particular. *u In all that concerns county business the duties of the Court of +Sessions are purely administrative; and if in its investigations it +occasionally borrows the forms of judicial procedure, it is only with a view to +its own information, *v or as a guarantee to the community over which it +presides. But when the administration of the township is brought before it, it +always acts as a judicial body, and in some few cases as an official assembly. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ We shall hereafter learn what a Governor is: I shall content myself with +remarking in this place that he represents the executive power of the whole +State.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ See the Constitution of Massachusetts, chap. II. sect. 1. Section 9; chap. +III. Section 3.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ Thus, for example, a stranger arrives in a township from a country where a +contagious disease prevails, and he falls ill. Two justices of the peace can, +with the assent of the selectmen, order the sheriff of the county to remove and +take care of him.—Act of June 22, 1797, vol. i. p. 540. +</p> + +<p> +In general the justices interfere in all the important acts of the +administration, and give them a semi-judicial character.] [Footnote s: I say +the greater number, because certain administrative misdemeanors are brought +before ordinary tribunals. If, for instance, a township refuses to make the +necessary expenditure for its schools or to name a school-committee, it is +liable to a heavy fine. But this penalty is pronounced by the Supreme Judicial +Court or the Court of Common Pleas. See Act of March 10, 1827, Laws of +Massachusetts, vol. iii. p. 190. Or when a township neglects to provide the +necessary war-stores.—Act of February 21, 1822: Id., vol. ii. p. 570.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +t <br /> +[ In their individual capacity the justices of the peace take a part in the +business of the counties and townships.] [Footnote u: These affairs may be +brought under the following heads:—1. The erection of prisons and courts +of justice. 2. The county budget, which is afterwards voted by the State. 3. +The distribution of the taxes so voted. 4. Grants of certain patents. 5. The +laying down and repairs of the country roads.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +v <br /> +[ Thus, when a road is under consideration, almost all difficulties are +disposed of by the aid of the jury.] +</p> + +<p> +The first difficulty is to procure the obedience of an authority as entirely +independent of the general laws of the State as the township is. We have stated +that assessors are annually named by the town-meetings to levy the taxes. If a +township attempts to evade the payment of the taxes by neglecting to name its +assessors, the Court of Sessions condemns it to a heavy penalty. *w The fine is +levied on each of the inhabitants; and the sheriff of the county, who is the +officer of justice, executes the mandate. Thus it is that in the United States +the authority of the Government is mysteriously concealed under the forms of a +judicial sentence; and its influence is at the same time fortified by that +irresistible power with which men have invested the formalities of law. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +w <br /> +[ See Act of February 20, 1786, Laws of Massachusetts, vol. i. p. 217.] +</p> + +<p> +These proceedings are easy to follow and to understand. The demands made upon a +township are in general plain and accurately defined; they consist in a simple +fact without any complication, or in a principle without its application in +detail. *x But the difficulty increases when it is not the obedience of the +township, but that of the town officers which is to be enforced. All the +reprehensible actions of which a public functionary may be guilty are reducible +to the following heads: +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +x <br /> +[ There is an indirect method of enforcing the obedience of a township. Suppose +that the funds which the law demands for the maintenance of the roads have not +been voted, the town surveyor is then authorized, ex officio, to levy the +supplies. As he is personally responsible to private individuals for the state +of the roads, and indictable before the Court of Sessions, he is sure to employ +the extraordinary right which the law gives him against the township. Thus by +threatening the officer the Court of Sessions exacts compliance from the town. +See Act of March 5, 1787, Id., vol. i. p. 305.] +</p> + +<p> +He may execute the law without energy or zeal; +</p> + +<p> +He may neglect to execute the law; +</p> + +<p> +He may do what the law enjoins him not to do. +</p> + +<p> +The last two violations of duty can alone come under the cognizance of a +tribunal; a positive and appreciable fact is the indispensable foundation of an +action at law. Thus, if the selectmen omit to fulfil the legal formalities +usual at town elections, they may be condemned to pay a fine; *y but when the +public officer performs his duty without ability, and when he obeys the letter +of the law without zeal or energy, he is at least beyond the reach of judicial +interference. The Court of Sessions, even when it is invested with its official +powers, is in this case unable to compel him to a more satisfactory obedience. +The fear of removal is the only check to these quasi-offences; and as the Court +of Sessions does not originate the town authorities, it cannot remove +functionaries whom it does not appoint. Moreover, a perpetual investigation +would be necessary to convict the officer of negligence or lukewarmness; and +the Court of Sessions sits but twice a year and then only judges such offences +as are brought before its notice. The only security of that active and +enlightened obedience which a court of justice cannot impose upon public +officers lies in the possibility of their arbitrary removal. In France this +security is sought for in powers exercised by the heads of the administration; +in America it is sought for in the principle of election. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +y <br /> +[ Laws of Massachusetts, vol. ii. p. 45.] +</p> + +<p> +Thus, to recapitulate in a few words what I have been showing: If a public +officer in New England commits a crime in the exercise of his functions, the +ordinary courts of justice are always called upon to pass sentence upon him. If +he commits a fault in his official capacity, a purely administrative tribunal +is empowered to punish him; and, if the affair is important or urgent, the +judge supplies the omission of the functionary. *z Lastly, if the same +individual is guilty of one of those intangible offences of which human justice +has no cognizance, he annually appears before a tribunal from which there is no +appeal, which can at once reduce him to insignificance and deprive him of his +charge. This system undoubtedly possesses great advantages, but its execution +is attended with a practical difficulty which it is important to point out. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +z <br /> +[ If, for instance, a township persists in refusing to name its assessors, the +Court of Sessions nominates them; and the magistrates thus appointed are +invested with the same authority as elected officers. See the Act quoted above, +February 20, 1787.] +</p> + +<p> +I have already observed that the administrative tribunal, which is called the +Court of Sessions, has no right of inspection over the town officers. It can +only interfere when the conduct of a magistrate is specially brought under its +notice; and this is the delicate part of the system. The Americans of New +England are unacquainted with the office of public prosecutor in the Court of +Sessions, *a and it may readily be perceived that it could not have been +established without difficulty. If an accusing magistrate had merely been +appointed in the chief town of each county, and if he had been unassisted by +agents in the townships, he would not have been better acquainted with what was +going on in the county than the members of the Court of Sessions. But to +appoint agents in each township would have been to centre in his person the +most formidable of powers, that of a judicial administration. Moreover, laws +are the children of habit, and nothing of the kind exists in the legislation of +England. The Americans have therefore divided the offices of inspection and of +prosecution, as well as all the other functions of the administration. Grand +jurors are bound by the law to apprise the court to which they belong of all +the misdemeanors which may have been committed in their county. *b There are +certain great offences which are officially prosecuted by the States; *c but +more frequently the task of punishing delinquents devolves upon the fiscal +officer, whose province it is to receive the fine: thus the treasurer of the +township is charged with the prosecution of such administrative offences as +fall under his notice. But a more special appeal is made by American +legislation to the private interest of the citizen; *d and this great principle +is constantly to be met with in studying the laws of the United States. +American legislators are more apt to give men credit for intelligence than for +honesty, and they rely not a little on personal cupidity for the execution of +the laws. When an individual is really and sensibly injured by an +administrative abuse, it is natural that his personal interest should induce +him to prosecute. But if a legal formality be required, which, however +advantageous to the community, is of small importance to individuals, +plaintiffs may be less easily found; and thus, by a tacit agreement, the laws +may fall into disuse. Reduced by their system to this extremity, the Americans +are obliged to encourage informers by bestowing on them a portion of the +penalty in certain cases, *e and to insure the execution of the laws by the +dangerous expedient of degrading the morals of the people. The only +administrative authority above the county magistrates is, properly speaking, +that of the Government. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ I say the Court of Sessions, because in common courts there is a magistrate +who exercises some of the functions of a public prosecutor.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ The grand-jurors are, for instance, bound to inform the court of the bad +state of the roads.—Laws of Massachusetts, vol. i. p. 308.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ If, for instance, the treasurer of the county holds back his +accounts.—Laws of Massachusetts, vol. i. p. 406.] [Footnote d: Thus, if a +private individual breaks down or is wounded in consequence of the badness of a +road, he can sue the township or the county for damages at the +sessions.—Laws of Massachusetts, vol. i. p. 309.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ In cases of invasion or insurrection, if the town-officers neglect to furnish +the necessary stores and ammunition for the militia, the township may be +condemned to a fine of from $200 to $500. It may readily be imagined that in +such a case it might happen that no one cared to prosecute; hence the law adds +that all the citizens may indict offences of this kind, and that half of the +fine shall belong to the plaintiff. See Act of March 6, 1810, vol. ii. p. 236. +The same clause is frequently to be met with in the law of Massachusetts. Not +only are private individuals thus incited to prosecute the public officers, but +the public officers are encouraged in the same manner to bring the disobedience +of private individuals to justice. If a citizen refuses to perform the work +which has been assigned to him upon a road, the road surveyor may prosecute +him, and he receives half the penalty for himself. See the Laws above quoted, +vol. i. p. 308.] +</p> + +<p> +General Remarks On The Administration Of The United States Differences of the +States of the Union in their system of administration—Activity and +perfection of the local authorities decrease towards the South—Power of +the magistrate increases; that of the elector diminishes—Administration +passes from the township to the county—States of New York, Ohio, +Pennsylvania—Principles of administration applicable to the whole +Union—Election of public officers, and inalienability of their +functions—Absence of gradation of ranks—Introduction of judicial +resources into the administration. +</p> + +<p> +I have already premised that, after having examined the constitution of the +township and the county of New England in detail, I should take a general view +of the remainder of the Union. Townships and a local activity exist in every +State; but in no part of the confederation is a township to be met with +precisely similar to those of New England. The more we descend towards the +South, the less active does the business of the township or parish become; the +number of magistrates, of functions, and of rights decreases; the population +exercises a less immediate influence on affairs; town meetings are less +frequent, and the subjects of debate less numerous. The power of the elected +magistrate is augmented and that of the elector diminished, whilst the public +spirit of the local communities is less awakened and less influential. *f These +differences may be perceived to a certain extent in the State of New York; they +are very sensible in Pennsylvania; but they become less striking as we advance +to the northwest. The majority of the emigrants who settle in the northwestern +States are natives of New England, and they carry the habits of their mother +country with them into that which they adopt. A township in Ohio is by no means +dissimilar from a township in Massachusetts. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ For details see the Revised Statutes of the State of New York, part i. chap. +xi. vol. i. pp. 336-364, entitled, “Of the Powers, Duties, and Privileges +of Towns.” +</p> + +<p> +See in the Digest of the Laws of Pennsylvania, the words Assessors, Collector, +Constables, Overseer of the Poor, Supervisors of Highways; and in the Acts of a +general nature of the State of Ohio, the Act of February 25, 1834, relating to +townships, p. 412; besides the peculiar dispositions relating to divers +town-officers, such as Township’s Clerk, Trustees, Overseers of the Poor, +Fence Viewers, Appraisers of Property, Township’s Treasurer, Constables, +Supervisors of Highways.] +</p> + +<p> +We have seen that in Massachusetts the mainspring of public administration lies +in the township. It forms the common centre of the interests and affections of +the citizens. But this ceases to be the case as we descend to States in which +knowledge is less generally diffused, and where the township consequently +offers fewer guarantees of a wise and active administration. As we leave New +England, therefore, we find that the importance of the town is gradually +transferred to the county, which becomes the centre of administration, and the +intermediate power between the Government and the citizen. In Massachusetts the +business of the county is conducted by the Court of Sessions, which is composed +of a quorum named by the Governor and his council; but the county has no +representative assembly, and its expenditure is voted by the national +legislature. In the great State of New York, on the contrary, and in those of +Ohio and Pennsylvania, the inhabitants of each county choose a certain number +of representatives, who constitute the assembly of the county. *g The county +assembly has the right of taxing the inhabitants to a certain extent; and in +this respect it enjoys the privileges of a real legislative body: at the same +time it exercises an executive power in the county, frequently directs the +administration of the townships, and restricts their authority within much +narrower bounds than in Massachusetts. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ See the Revised Statutes of the State of New York, part i. chap. xi. vol. i. +p. 340. Id. chap. xii. p. 366; also in the Acts of the State of Ohio, an act +relating to county commissioners, February 25, 1824, p. 263. See the Digest of +the Laws of Pennsylvania, at the words County-rates and Levies, p. 170. In the +State of New York each township elects a representative, who has a share in the +administration of the county as well as in that of the township.] +</p> + +<p> +Such are the principal differences which the systems of county and town +administration present in the Federal States. Were it my intention to examine +the provisions of American law minutely, I should have to point out still +further differences in the executive details of the several communities. But +what I have already said may suffice to show the general principles on which +the administration of the United States rests. These principles are differently +applied; their consequences are more or less numerous in various localities; +but they are always substantially the same. The laws differ, and their outward +features change, but their character does not vary. If the township and the +county are not everywhere constituted in the same manner, it is at least true +that in the United States the county and the township are always based upon the +same principle, namely, that everyone is the best judge of what concerns +himself alone, and the most proper person to supply his private wants. The +township and the county are therefore bound to take care of their special +interests: the State governs, but it does not interfere with their +administration. Exceptions to this rule may be met with, but not a contrary +principle. +</p> + +<p> +The first consequence of this doctrine has been to cause all the magistrates to +be chosen either by or at least from amongst the citizens. As the officers are +everywhere elected or appointed for a certain period, it has been impossible to +establish the rules of a dependent series of authorities; there are almost as +many independent functionaries as there are functions, and the executive power +is disseminated in a multitude of hands. Hence arose the indispensable +necessity of introducing the control of the courts of justice over the +administration, and the system of pecuniary penalties, by which the secondary +bodies and their representatives are constrained to obey the laws. This system +obtains from one end of the Union to the other. The power of punishing the +misconduct of public officers, or of performing the part of the executive in +urgent cases, has not, however, been bestowed on the same judges in all the +States. The Anglo-Americans derived the institution of justices of the peace +from a common source; but although it exists in all the States, it is not +always turned to the same use. The justices of the peace everywhere participate +in the administration of the townships and the counties, *h either as public +officers or as the judges of public misdemeanors, but in most of the States the +more important classes of public offences come under the cognizance of the +ordinary tribunals. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ In some of the Southern States the county courts are charged with all the +details of the administration. See the Statutes of the State of Tennessee, +arts. Judiciary, Taxes, etc.] +</p> + +<p> +The election of public officers, or the inalienability of their functions, the +absence of a gradation of powers, and the introduction of a judicial control +over the secondary branches of the administration, are the universal +characteristics of the American system from Maine to the Floridas. In some +States (and that of New York has advanced most in this direction) traces of a +centralized administration begin to be discernible. In the State of New York +the officers of the central government exercise, in certain cases, a sort of +inspection or control over the secondary bodies. *i +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ For instance, the direction of public instruction centres in the hands of the +Government. The legislature names the members of the University, who are +denominated Regents; the Governor and Lieutentant-Governor of the State are +necessarily of the number.—Revised Statutes, vol. i. p. 455. The Regents +of the University annually visit the colleges and academies, and make their +report to the legislature. Their superintendence is not inefficient, for +several reasons: the colleges in order to become corporations stand in need of +a charter, which is only granted on the recommendation of the Regents; every +year funds are distributed by the State for the encouragement of learning, and +the Regents are the distributors of this money. See chap. xv. +“Instruction,” Revised Statutes, vol. i. p. 455. +</p> + +<p> +The school-commissioners are obliged to send an annual report to the +Superintendent of the Republic.—Id. p. 488. +</p> + +<p> +A similar report is annually made to the same person on the number and +condition of the poor.—Id. p. 631.] +</p> + +<p> +At other times they constitute a court of appeal for the decision of affairs. +*j In the State of New York judicial penalties are less used than in other +parts as a means of administration, and the right of prosecuting the offences +of public officers is vested in fewer hands. *k The same tendency is faintly +observable in some other States; *l but in general the prominent feature of the +administration in the United States is its excessive local independence. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ If any one conceives himself to be wronged by the school-commissioners (who +are town-officers), he can appeal to the superintendent of the primary schools, +whose decision is final.—Revised Statutes, vol. i. p. 487. +</p> + +<p> +Provisions similar to those above cited are to be met with from time to time in +the laws of the State of New York; but in general these attempts at +centralization are weak and unproductive. The great authorities of the State +have the right of watching and controlling the subordinate agents, without that +of rewarding or punishing them. The same individual is never empowered to give +an order and to punish disobedience; he has therefore the right of commanding, +without the means of exacting compliance. In 1830 the Superintendent of Schools +complained in his Annual Report addressed to the legislature that several +school-commissioners had neglected, notwithstanding his application, to furnish +him with the accounts which were due. He added that if this omission continued +he should be obliged to prosecute them, as the law directs, before the proper +tribunals.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ Thus the district-attorney is directed to recover all fines below the sum of +fifty dollars, unless such a right has been specially awarded to another +magistrate.—Revised Statutes, vol. i. p. 383.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ Several traces of centralization may be discovered in Massachusetts; for +instance, the committees of the town-schools are directed to make an annual +report to the Secretary of State. See Laws of Massachusetts, vol. i. p. 367.] +</p> + +<p> +Of The State +</p> + +<p> +I have described the townships and the administration; it now remains for me to +speak of the State and the Government. This is ground I may pass over rapidly, +without fear of being misunderstood; for all I have to say is to be found in +written forms of the various constitutions, which are easily to be procured. +These constitutions rest upon a simple and rational theory; their forms have +been adopted by all constitutional nations, and are become familiar to us. In +this place, therefore, it is only necessary for me to give a short analysis; I +shall endeavor afterwards to pass judgment upon what I now describe. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0012" id="link2HCH0012"></a> Chapter V: Necessity Of +Examining The Condition Of The States—Part III</h2> <h3>Legislative Power +Of The State</h3> <p> +Division of the Legislative Body into two Houses—Senate—House of +Representatives—Different functions of these two Bodies. +</p> + +<p> +The legislative power of the State is vested in two assemblies, the first of +which generally bears the name of the Senate. The Senate is commonly a +legislative body; but it sometimes becomes an executive and judicial one. It +takes a part in the government in several ways, according to the constitution +of the different States; *m but it is in the nomination of public functionaries +that it most commonly assumes an executive power. It partakes of judicial power +in the trial of certain political offences, and sometimes also in the decision +of certain civil cases. *n The number of its members is always small. The other +branch of the legislature, which is usually called the House of +Representatives, has no share whatever in the administration, and only takes a +part in the judicial power inasmuch as it impeaches public functionaries before +the Senate. The members of the two Houses are nearly everywhere subject to the +same conditions of election. They are chosen in the same manner, and by the +same citizens. The only difference which exists between them is, that the term +for which the Senate is chosen is in general longer than that of the House of +Representatives. The latter seldom remain in office longer than a year; the +former usually sit two or three years. By granting to the senators the +privilege of being chosen for several years, and being renewed seriatim, the +law takes care to preserve in the legislative body a nucleus of men already +accustomed to public business, and capable of exercising a salutary influence +upon the junior members. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ In Massachusetts the Senate is not invested with any administrative +functions.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ As in the State of New York.] +</p> + +<p> +The Americans, plainly, did not desire, by this separation of the legislative +body into two branches, to make one house hereditary and the other elective; +one aristocratic and the other democratic. It was not their object to create in +the one a bulwark to power, whilst the other represented the interests and +passions of the people. The only advantages which result from the present +constitution of the United States are the division of the legislative power and +the consequent check upon political assemblies; with the creation of a tribunal +of appeal for the revision of the laws. +</p> + +<p> +Time and experience, however, have convinced the Americans that if these are +its only advantages, the division of the legislative power is still a principle +of the greatest necessity. Pennsylvania was the only one of the United States +which at first attempted to establish a single House of Assembly, and Franklin +himself was so far carried away by the necessary consequences of the principle +of the sovereignty of the people as to have concurred in the measure; but the +Pennsylvanians were soon obliged to change the law, and to create two Houses. +Thus the principle of the division of the legislative power was finally +established, and its necessity may henceforward be regarded as a demonstrated +truth. This theory, which was nearly unknown to the republics of +antiquity—which was introduced into the world almost by accident, like so +many other great truths—and misunderstood by several modern nations, is +at length become an axiom in the political science of the present age. +</p> + +<p> +[See Benjamin Franklin] +</p> + +<p> +The Executive Power Of The State +</p> + +<p> +Office of Governor in an American State—The place he occupies in relation +to the Legislature—His rights and his duties—His dependence on the +people. +</p> + +<p> +The executive power of the State may with truth be said to be represented by +the Governor, although he enjoys but a portion of its rights. The supreme +magistrate, under the title of Governor, is the official moderator and +counsellor of the legislature. He is armed with a veto or suspensive power, +which allows him to stop, or at least to retard, its movements at pleasure. He +lays the wants of the country before the legislative body, and points out the +means which he thinks may be usefully employed in providing for them; he is the +natural executor of its decrees in all the undertakings which interest the +nation at large. *o In the absence of the legislature, the Governor is bound to +take all necessary steps to guard the State against violent shocks and +unforeseen dangers. The whole military power of the State is at the disposal of +the Governor. He is the commander of the militia, and head of the armed force. +When the authority, which is by general consent awarded to the laws, is +disregarded, the Governor puts himself at the head of the armed force of the +State, to quell resistance, and to restore order. Lastly, the Governor takes no +share in the administration of townships and counties, except it be indirectly +in the nomination of Justices of the Peace, which nomination he has not the +power to cancel. *p The Governor is an elected magistrate, and is generally +chosen for one or two years only; so that he always continues to be strictly +dependent upon the majority who returned him. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ Practically speaking, it is not always the Governor who executes the plans of +the Legislature; it often happens that the latter, in voting a measure, names +special agents to superintend the execution of it.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ In some of the States the justices of the peace are not elected by the +Governor.] +</p> + +<p> +Political Effects Of The System Of Local Administration In The United States +</p> + +<p> +Necessary distinction between the general centralization of Government and the +centralization of the local administration—Local administration not +centralized in the United States: great general centralization of the +Government—Some bad consequences resulting to the United States from the +local administration—Administrative advantages attending this order of +things—The power which conducts the Government is less regular, less +enlightened, less learned, but much greater than in Europe—Political +advantages of this order of things—In the United States the interests of +the country are everywhere kept in view—Support given to the Government +by the community—Provincial institutions more necessary in proportion as +the social condition becomes more democratic—Reason of this. +</p> + +<p> +Centralization is become a word of general and daily use, without any precise +meaning being attached to it. Nevertheless, there exist two distinct kinds of +centralization, which it is necessary to discriminate with accuracy. Certain +interests are common to all parts of a nation, such as the enactment of its +general laws and the maintenance of its foreign relations. Other interests are +peculiar to certain parts of the nation; such, for instance, as the business of +different townships. When the power which directs the general interests is +centred in one place, or vested in the same persons, it constitutes a central +government. In like manner the power of directing partial or local interests, +when brought together into one place, constitutes what may be termed a central +administration. +</p> + +<p> +Upon some points these two kinds of centralization coalesce; but by classifying +the objects which fall more particularly within the province of each of them, +they may easily be distinguished. It is evident that a central government +acquires immense power when united to administrative centralization. Thus +combined, it accustoms men to set their own will habitually and completely +aside; to submit, not only for once, or upon one point, but in every respect, +and at all times. Not only, therefore, does this union of power subdue them +compulsorily, but it affects them in the ordinary habits of life, and +influences each individual, first separately and then collectively. +</p> + +<p> +These two kinds of centralization mutually assist and attract each other; but +they must not be supposed to be inseparable. It is impossible to imagine a more +completely central government than that which existed in France under Louis +XIV.; when the same individual was the author and the interpreter of the laws, +and the representative of France at home and abroad, he was justified in +asserting that the State was identified with his person. Nevertheless, the +administration was much less centralized under Louis XIV. than it is at the +present day. +</p> + +<p> +In England the centralization of the government is carried to great perfection; +the State has the compact vigor of a man, and by the sole act of its will it +puts immense engines in motion, and wields or collects the efforts of its +authority. Indeed, I cannot conceive that a nation can enjoy a secure or +prosperous existence without a powerful centralization of government. But I am +of opinion that a central administration enervates the nations in which it +exists by incessantly diminishing their public spirit. If such an +administration succeeds in condensing at a given moment, on a given point, all +the disposable resources of a people, it impairs at least the renewal of those +resources. It may ensure a victory in the hour of strife, but it gradually +relaxes the sinews of strength. It may contribute admirably to the transient +greatness of a man, but it cannot ensure the durable prosperity of a nation. +</p> + +<p> +If we pay proper attention, we shall find that whenever it is said that a State +cannot act because it has no central point, it is the centralization of the +government in which it is deficient. It is frequently asserted, and we are +prepared to assent to the proposition, that the German empire was never able to +bring all its powers into action. But the reason was, that the State was never +able to enforce obedience to its general laws, because the several members of +that great body always claimed the right, or found the means, of refusing their +co-operation to the representatives of the common authority, even in the +affairs which concerned the mass of the people; in other words, because there +was no centralization of government. The same remark is applicable to the +Middle Ages; the cause of all the confusion of feudal society was that the +control, not only of local but of general interests, was divided amongst a +thousand hands, and broken up in a thousand different ways; the absence of a +central government prevented the nations of Europe from advancing with energy +in any straightforward course. +</p> + +<p> +We have shown that in the United States no central administration and no +dependent series of public functionaries exist. Local authority has been +carried to lengths which no European nation could endure without great +inconvenience, and which has even produced some disadvantageous consequences in +America. But in the United States the centralization of the Government is +complete; and it would be easy to prove that the national power is more compact +than it has ever been in the old nations of Europe. Not only is there but one +legislative body in each State; not only does there exist but one source of +political authority; but district assemblies and county courts have not in +general been multiplied, lest they should be tempted to exceed their +administrative duties, and interfere with the Government. In America the +legislature of each State is supreme; nothing can impede its authority; neither +privileges, nor local immunities, nor personal influence, nor even the empire +of reason, since it represents that majority which claims to be the sole organ +of reason. Its own determination is, therefore, the only limit to this action. +In juxtaposition to it, and under its immediate control, is the representative +of the executive power, whose duty it is to constrain the refractory to submit +by superior force. The only symptom of weakness lies in certain details of the +action of the Government. The American republics have no standing armies to +intimidate a discontented minority; but as no minority has as yet been reduced +to declare open war, the necessity of an army has not been felt. *q The State +usually employs the officers of the township or the county to deal with the +citizens. Thus, for instance, in New England, the assessor fixes the rate of +taxes; the collector receives them; the town-treasurer transmits the amount to +the public treasury; and the disputes which may arise are brought before the +ordinary courts of justice. This method of collecting taxes is slow as well as +inconvenient, and it would prove a perpetual hindrance to a Government whose +pecuniary demands were large. It is desirable that, in whatever materially +affects its existence, the Government should be served by officers of its own, +appointed by itself, removable at pleasure, and accustomed to rapid methods of +proceeding. But it will always be easy for the central government, organized as +it is in America, to introduce new and more efficacious modes of action, +proportioned to its wants. [Footnote q: [The Civil War of 1860-65 cruelly +belied this statement, and in the course of the struggle the North alone called +two millions and a half of men to arms; but to the honor of the United States +it must be added that, with the cessation of the contest, this army disappeared +as rapidly as it had been raised.—Translator’s Note.]] +</p> + +<p> +The absence of a central government will not, then, as has often been asserted, +prove the destruction of the republics of the New World; far from supposing +that the American governments are not sufficiently centralized, I shall prove +hereafter that they are too much so. The legislative bodies daily encroach upon +the authority of the Government, and their tendency, like that of the French +Convention, is to appropriate it entirely to themselves. Under these +circumstances the social power is constantly changing hands, because it is +subordinate to the power of the people, which is too apt to forget the maxims +of wisdom and of foresight in the consciousness of its strength: hence arises +its danger; and thus its vigor, and not its impotence, will probably be the +cause of its ultimate destruction. +</p> + +<p> +The system of local administration produces several different effects in +America. The Americans seem to me to have outstepped the limits of sound policy +in isolating the administration of the Government; for order, even in +second-rate affairs, is a matter of national importance. *r As the State has no +administrative functionaries of its own, stationed on different points of its +territory, to whom it can give a common impulse, the consequence is that it +rarely attempts to issue any general police regulations. The want of these +regulations is severely felt, and is frequently observed by Europeans. The +appearance of disorder which prevails on the surface leads him at first to +imagine that society is in a state of anarchy; nor does he perceive his mistake +till he has gone deeper into the subject. Certain undertakings are of +importance to the whole State; but they cannot be put in execution, because +there is no national administration to direct them. Abandoned to the exertions +of the towns or counties, under the care of elected or temporary agents, they +lead to no result, or at least to no durable benefit. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ The authority which represents the State ought not, I think, to waive the +right of inspecting the local administration, even when it does not interfere +more actively. Suppose, for instance, that an agent of the Government was +stationed at some appointed spot in the country, to prosecute the misdemeanors +of the town and county officers, would not a more uniform order be the result, +without in any way compromising the independence of the township? Nothing of +the kind, however, exists in America: there is nothing above the county-courts, +which have, as it were, only an incidental cognizance of the offences they are +meant to repress.] +</p> + +<p> +The partisans of centralization in Europe are wont to maintain that the +Government directs the affairs of each locality better than the citizens could +do it for themselves; this may be true when the central power is enlightened, +and when the local districts are ignorant; when it is as alert as they are +slow; when it is accustomed to act, and they to obey. Indeed, it is evident +that this double tendency must augment with the increase of centralization, and +that the readiness of the one and the incapacity of the others must become more +and more prominent. But I deny that such is the case when the people is as +enlightened, as awake to its interests, and as accustomed to reflect on them, +as the Americans are. I am persuaded, on the contrary, that in this case the +collective strength of the citizens will always conduce more efficaciously to +the public welfare than the authority of the Government. It is difficult to +point out with certainty the means of arousing a sleeping population, and of +giving it passions and knowledge which it does not possess; it is, I am well +aware, an arduous task to persuade men to busy themselves about their own +affairs; and it would frequently be easier to interest them in the punctilios +of court etiquette than in the repairs of their common dwelling. But whenever a +central administration affects to supersede the persons most interested, I am +inclined to suppose that it is either misled or desirous to mislead. However +enlightened and however skilful a central power may be, it cannot of itself +embrace all the details of the existence of a great nation. Such vigilance +exceeds the powers of man. And when it attempts to create and set in motion so +many complicated springs, it must submit to a very imperfect result, or consume +itself in bootless efforts. +</p> + +<p> +Centralization succeeds more easily, indeed, in subjecting the external actions +of men to a certain uniformity, which at least commands our regard, +independently of the objects to which it is applied, like those devotees who +worship the statue and forget the deity it represents. Centralization imparts +without difficulty an admirable regularity to the routine of business; provides +for the details of the social police with sagacity; represses the smallest +disorder and the most petty misdemeanors; maintains society in a status quo +alike secure from improvement and decline; and perpetuates a drowsy precision +in the conduct of affairs, which is hailed by the heads of the administration +as a sign of perfect order and public tranquillity: *s in short, it excels more +in prevention than in action. Its force deserts it when society is to be +disturbed or accelerated in its course; and if once the co-operation of private +citizens is necessary to the furtherance of its measures, the secret of its +impotence is disclosed. Even whilst it invokes their assistance, it is on the +condition that they shall act exactly as much as the Government chooses, and +exactly in the manner it appoints. They are to take charge of the details, +without aspiring to guide the system; they are to work in a dark and +subordinate sphere, and only to judge the acts in which they have themselves +cooperated by their results. These, however, are not conditions on which the +alliance of the human will is to be obtained; its carriage must be free and its +actions responsible, or (such is the constitution of man) the citizen had +rather remain a passive spectator than a dependent actor in schemes with which +he is unacquainted. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +s <br /> +[ China appears to me to present the most perfect instance of that species of +well-being which a completely central administration may furnish to the nations +among which it exists. Travellers assure us that the Chinese have peace without +happiness, industry without improvement, stability without strength, and public +order without public morality. The condition of society is always tolerable, +never excellent. I am convinced that, when China is opened to European +observation, it will be found to contain the most perfect model of a central +administration which exists in the universe.] +</p> + +<p> +It is undeniable that the want of those uniform regulations which control the +conduct of every inhabitant of France is not unfrequently felt in the United +States. Gross instances of social indifference and neglect are to be met with, +and from time to time disgraceful blemishes are seen in complete contrast with +the surrounding civilization. Useful undertakings which cannot succeed without +perpetual attention and rigorous exactitude are very frequently abandoned in +the end; for in America, as well as in other countries, the people is subject +to sudden impulses and momentary exertions. The European who is accustomed to +find a functionary always at hand to interfere with all he undertakes has some +difficulty in accustoming himself to the complex mechanism of the +administration of the townships. In general it may be affirmed that the lesser +details of the police, which render life easy and comfortable, are neglected in +America; but that the essential guarantees of man in society are as strong +there as elsewhere. In America the power which conducts the Government is far +less regular, less enlightened, and less learned, but an hundredfold more +authoritative than in Europe. In no country in the world do the citizens make +such exertions for the common weal; and I am acquainted with no people which +has established schools as numerous and as efficacious, places of public +worship better suited to the wants of the inhabitants, or roads kept in better +repair. Uniformity or permanence of design, the minute arrangement of details, +*t and the perfection of an ingenious administration, must not be sought for in +the United States; but it will be easy to find, on the other hand, the symptoms +of a power which, if it is somewhat barbarous, is at least robust; and of an +existence which is checkered with accidents indeed, but cheered at the same +time by animation and effort. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +t <br /> +[ A writer of talent, who, in the comparison which he has drawn between the +finances of France and those of the United States, has proved that ingenuity +cannot always supply the place of a knowledge of facts, very justly reproaches +the Americans for the sort of confusion which exists in the accounts of the +expenditure in the townships; and after giving the model of a departmental +budget in France, he adds:—“We are indebted to centralization, that +admirable invention of a great man, for the uniform order and method which +prevail alike in all the municipal budgets, from the largest town to the +humblest commune.” Whatever may be my admiration of this result, when I +see the communes of France, with their excellent system of accounts, plunged +into the grossest ignorance of their true interests, and abandoned to so +incorrigible an apathy that they seem to vegetate rather than to live; when, on +the other hand, I observe the activity, the information, and the spirit of +enterprise which keep society in perpetual labor, in those American townships +whose budgets are drawn up with small method and with still less uniformity, I +am struck by the spectacle; for to my mind the end of a good government is to +ensure the welfare of a people, and not to establish order and regularity in +the midst of its misery and its distress. I am therefore led to suppose that +the prosperity of the American townships and the apparent confusion of their +accounts, the distress of the French communes and the perfection of their +budget, may be attributable to the same cause. At any rate I am suspicious of a +benefit which is united to so many evils, and I am not averse to an evil which +is compensated by so many benefits.] +</p> + +<p> +Granting for an instant that the villages and counties of the United States +would be more usefully governed by a remote authority which they had never seen +than by functionaries taken from the midst of them—admitting, for the +sake of argument, that the country would be more secure, and the resources of +society better employed, if the whole administration centred in a single +arm—still the political advantages which the Americans derive from their +system would induce me to prefer it to the contrary plan. It profits me but +little, after all, that a vigilant authority should protect the tranquillity of +my pleasures and constantly avert all dangers from my path, without my care or +my concern, if this same authority is the absolute mistress of my liberty and +of my life, and if it so monopolizes all the energy of existence that when it +languishes everything languishes around it, that when it sleeps everything must +sleep, that when it dies the State itself must perish. +</p> + +<p> +In certain countries of Europe the natives consider themselves as a kind of +settlers, indifferent to the fate of the spot upon which they live. The +greatest changes are effected without their concurrence and (unless chance may +have apprised them of the event) without their knowledge; nay more, the citizen +is unconcerned as to the condition of his village, the police of his street, +the repairs of the church or of the parsonage; for he looks upon all these +things as unconnected with himself, and as the property of a powerful stranger +whom he calls the Government. He has only a life-interest in these possessions, +and he entertains no notions of ownership or of improvement. This want of +interest in his own affairs goes so far that, if his own safety or that of his +children is endangered, instead of trying to avert the peril, he will fold his +arms, and wait till the nation comes to his assistance. This same individual, +who has so completely sacrificed his own free will, has no natural propensity +to obedience; he cowers, it is true, before the pettiest officer; but he braves +the law with the spirit of a conquered foe as soon as its superior force is +removed: his oscillations between servitude and license are perpetual. When a +nation has arrived at this state it must either change its customs and its laws +or perish: the source of public virtue is dry, and, though it may contain +subjects, the race of citizens is extinct. Such communities are a natural prey +to foreign conquests, and if they do not disappear from the scene of life, it +is because they are surrounded by other nations similar or inferior to +themselves: it is because the instinctive feeling of their country’s +claims still exists in their hearts; and because an involuntary pride in the +name it bears, or a vague reminiscence of its bygone fame, suffices to give +them the impulse of self-preservation. +</p> + +<p> +Nor can the prodigious exertions made by tribes in the defence of a country to +which they did not belong be adduced in favor of such a system; for it will be +found that in these cases their main incitement was religion. The permanence, +the glory, or the prosperity of the nation were become parts of their faith, +and in defending the country they inhabited they defended that Holy City of +which they were all citizens. The Turkish tribes have never taken an active +share in the conduct of the affairs of society, but they accomplished +stupendous enterprises as long as the victories of the Sultan were the triumphs +of the Mohammedan faith. In the present age they are in rapid decay, because +their religion is departing, and despotism only remains. Montesquieu, who +attributed to absolute power an authority peculiar to itself, did it, as I +conceive, an undeserved honor; for despotism, taken by itself, can produce no +durable results. On close inspection we shall find that religion, and not fear, +has ever been the cause of the long-lived prosperity of an absolute government. +Whatever exertions may be made, no true power can be founded among men which +does not depend upon the free union of their inclinations; and patriotism and +religion are the only two motives in the world which can permanently direct the +whole of a body politic to one end. +</p> + +<p> +Laws cannot succeed in rekindling the ardor of an extinguished faith, but men +may be interested in the fate of their country by the laws. By this influence +the vague impulse of patriotism, which never abandons the human heart, may be +directed and revived; and if it be connected with the thoughts, the passions, +and the daily habits of life, it may be consolidated into a durable and +rational sentiment. +</p> + +<p> +Let it not be said that the time for the experiment is already past; for the +old age of nations is not like the old age of men, and every fresh generation +is a new people ready for the care of the legislator. +</p> + +<p> +It is not the administrative but the political effects of the local system that +I most admire in America. In the United States the interests of the country are +everywhere kept in view; they are an object of solicitude to the people of the +whole Union, and every citizen is as warmly attached to them as if they were +his own. He takes pride in the glory of his nation; he boasts of its success, +to which he conceives himself to have contributed, and he rejoices in the +general prosperity by which he profits. The feeling he entertains towards the +State is analogous to that which unites him to his family, and it is by a kind +of egotism that he interests himself in the welfare of his country. +</p> + +<p> +The European generally submits to a public officer because he represents a +superior force; but to an American he represents a right. In America it may be +said that no one renders obedience to man, but to justice and to law. If the +opinion which the citizen entertains of himself is exaggerated, it is at least +salutary; he unhesitatingly confides in his own powers, which appear to him to +be all-sufficient. When a private individual meditates an undertaking, however +directly connected it may be with the welfare of society, he never thinks of +soliciting the co-operation of the Government, but he publishes his plan, +offers to execute it himself, courts the assistance of other individuals, and +struggles manfully against all obstacles. Undoubtedly he is often less +successful than the State might have been in his position; but in the end the +sum of these private undertakings far exceeds all that the Government could +have done. +</p> + +<p> +As the administrative authority is within the reach of the citizens, whom it in +some degree represents, it excites neither their jealousy nor their hatred; as +its resources are limited, every one feels that he must not rely solely on its +assistance. Thus, when the administration thinks fit to interfere, it is not +abandoned to itself as in Europe; the duties of the private citizens are not +supposed to have lapsed because the State assists in their fulfilment, but +every one is ready, on the contrary, to guide and to support it. This action of +individual exertions, joined to that of the public authorities, frequently +performs what the most energetic central administration would be unable to +execute. It would be easy to adduce several facts in proof of what I advance, +but I had rather give only one, with which I am more thoroughly acquainted. *u +In America the means which the authorities have at their disposal for the +discovery of crimes and the arrest of criminals are few. The State police does +not exist, and passports are unknown. The criminal police of the United States +cannot be compared to that of France; the magistrates and public prosecutors +are not numerous, and the examinations of prisoners are rapid and oral. +Nevertheless in no country does crime more rarely elude punishment. The reason +is, that every one conceives himself to be interested in furnishing evidence of +the act committed, and in stopping the delinquent. During my stay in the United +States I witnessed the spontaneous formation of committees for the pursuit and +prosecution of a man who had committed a great crime in a certain county. In +Europe a criminal is an unhappy being who is struggling for his life against +the ministers of justice, whilst the population is merely a spectator of the +conflict; in America he is looked upon as an enemy of the human race, and the +whole of mankind is against him. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +u <br /> +[ See Appendix, I.] +</p> + +<p> +I believe that provincial institutions are useful to all nations, but nowhere +do they appear to me to be more indispensable than amongst a democratic people. +In an aristocracy order can always be maintained in the midst of liberty, and +as the rulers have a great deal to lose order is to them a first-rate +consideration. In like manner an aristocracy protects the people from the +excesses of despotism, because it always possesses an organized power ready to +resist a despot. But a democracy without provincial institutions has no +security against these evils. How can a populace, unaccustomed to freedom in +small concerns, learn to use it temperately in great affairs? What resistance +can be offered to tyranny in a country where every private individual is +impotent, and where the citizens are united by no common tie? Those who dread +the license of the mob, and those who fear the rule of absolute power, ought +alike to desire the progressive growth of provincial liberties. +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, I am convinced that democratic nations are most exposed to +fall beneath the yoke of a central administration, for several reasons, amongst +which is the following. The constant tendency of these nations is to +concentrate all the strength of the Government in the hands of the only power +which directly represents the people, because beyond the people nothing is to +be perceived but a mass of equal individuals confounded together. But when the +same power is already in possession of all the attributes of the Government, it +can scarcely refrain from penetrating into the details of the administration, +and an opportunity of doing so is sure to present itself in the end, as was the +case in France. In the French Revolution there were two impulses in opposite +directions, which must never be confounded—the one was favorable to +liberty, the other to despotism. Under the ancient monarchy the King was the +sole author of the laws, and below the power of the sovereign certain vestiges +of provincial institutions, half destroyed, were still distinguishable. These +provincial institutions were incoherent, ill compacted, and frequently absurd; +in the hands of the aristocracy they had sometimes been converted into +instruments of oppression. The Revolution declared itself the enemy of royalty +and of provincial institutions at the same time; it confounded all that had +preceded it—despotic power and the checks to its abuses—in +indiscriminate hatred, and its tendency was at once to overthrow and to +centralize. This double character of the French Revolution is a fact which has +been adroitly handled by the friends of absolute power. Can they be accused of +laboring in the cause of despotism when they are defending that central +administration which was one of the great innovations of the Revolution? *v In +this manner popularity may be conciliated with hostility to the rights of the +people, and the secret slave of tyranny may be the professed admirer of +freedom. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +v <br /> +[ See Appendix K.] +</p> + +<p> +I have visited the two nations in which the system of provincial liberty has +been most perfectly established, and I have listened to the opinions of +different parties in those countries. In America I met with men who secretly +aspired to destroy the democratic institutions of the Union; in England I found +others who attacked the aristocracy openly, but I know of no one who does not +regard provincial independence as a great benefit. In both countries I have +heard a thousand different causes assigned for the evils of the State, but the +local system was never mentioned amongst them. I have heard citizens attribute +the power and prosperity of their country to a multitude of reasons, but they +all placed the advantages of local institutions in the foremost rank. Am I to +suppose that when men who are naturally so divided on religious opinions and on +political theories agree on one point (and that one of which they have daily +experience), they are all in error? The only nations which deny the utility of +provincial liberties are those which have fewest of them; in other words, those +who are unacquainted with the institution are the only persons who pass a +censure upon it. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0013" id="link2HCH0013"></a> Chapter VI: Judicial Power In +The United States</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0014" id="link2HCH0014"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +The Anglo-Americans have retained the characteristics of judicial power which +are common to all nations—They have, however, made it a powerful +political organ—How—In what the judicial system of the +Anglo-Americans differs from that of all other nations—Why the American +judges have the right of declaring the laws to be unconstitutional—How +they use this right—Precautions taken by the legislator to prevent its +abuse. +</p> + +<p> +Judicial Power In The United States And Its Influence On Political Society. +</p> + +<p> +I have thought it essential to devote a separate chapter to the judicial +authorities of the United States, lest their great political importance should +be lessened in the reader’s eyes by a merely incidental mention of them. +Confederations have existed in other countries beside America, and republics +have not been established upon the shores of the New World alone; the +representative system of government has been adopted in several States of +Europe, but I am not aware that any nation of the globe has hitherto organized +a judicial power on the principle now adopted by the Americans. The judicial +organization of the United States is the institution which a stranger has the +greatest difficulty in understanding. He hears the authority of a judge invoked +in the political occurrences of every day, and he naturally concludes that in +the United States the judges are important political functionaries; +nevertheless, when he examines the nature of the tribunals, they offer nothing +which is contrary to the usual habits and privileges of those bodies, and the +magistrates seem to him to interfere in public affairs of chance, but by a +chance which recurs every day. +</p> + +<p> +When the Parliament of Paris remonstrated, or refused to enregister an edict, +or when it summoned a functionary accused of malversation to its bar, its +political influence as a judicial body was clearly visible; but nothing of the +kind is to be seen in the United States. The Americans have retained all the +ordinary characteristics of judicial authority, and have carefully restricted +its action to the ordinary circle of its functions. +</p> + +<p> +The first characteristic of judicial power in all nations is the duty of +arbitration. But rights must be contested in order to warrant the interference +of a tribunal; and an action must be brought to obtain the decision of a judge. +As long, therefore, as the law is uncontested, the judicial authority is not +called upon to discuss it, and it may exist without being perceived. When a +judge in a given case attacks a law relating to that case, he extends the +circle of his customary duties, without however stepping beyond it; since he is +in some measure obliged to decide upon the law in order to decide the case. But +if he pronounces upon a law without resting upon a case, he clearly steps +beyond his sphere, and invades that of the legislative authority. +</p> + +<p> +The second characteristic of judicial power is that it pronounces on special +cases, and not upon general principles. If a judge in deciding a particular +point destroys a general principle, by passing a judgment which tends to reject +all the inferences from that principle, and consequently to annul it, he +remains within the ordinary limits of his functions. But if he directly attacks +a general principle without having a particular case in view, he leaves the +circle in which all nations have agreed to confine his authority, he assumes a +more important, and perhaps a more useful, influence than that of the +magistrate, but he ceases to be a representative of the judicial power. +</p> + +<p> +The third characteristic of the judicial power is its inability to act unless +it is appealed to, or until it has taken cognizance of an affair. This +characteristic is less general than the other two; but, notwithstanding the +exceptions, I think it may be regarded as essential. The judicial power is by +its nature devoid of action; it must be put in motion in order to produce a +result. When it is called upon to repress a crime, it punishes the criminal; +when a wrong is to be redressed, it is ready to redress it; when an act +requires interpretation, it is prepared to interpret it; but it does not pursue +criminals, hunt out wrongs, or examine into evidence of its own accord. A +judicial functionary who should open proceedings, and usurp the censorship of +the laws, would in some measure do violence to the passive nature of his +authority. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans have retained these three distinguishing characteristics of the +judicial power; an American judge can only pronounce a decision when litigation +has arisen, he is only conversant with special cases, and he cannot act until +the cause has been duly brought before the court. His position is therefore +perfectly similar to that of the magistrate of other nations; and he is +nevertheless invested with immense political power. If the sphere of his +authority and his means of action are the same as those of other judges, it may +be asked whence he derives a power which they do not possess. The cause of this +difference lies in the simple fact that the Americans have acknowledged the +right of the judges to found their decisions on the constitution rather than on +the laws. In other words, they have left them at liberty not to apply such laws +as may appear to them to be unconstitutional. +</p> + +<p> +I am aware that a similar right has been claimed—but claimed in +vain—by courts of justice in other countries; but in America it is +recognized by all authorities; and not a party, nor so much as an individual, +is found to contest it. This fact can only be explained by the principles of +the American constitution. In France the constitution is (or at least is +supposed to be) immutable; and the received theory is that no power has the +right of changing any part of it. In England the Parliament has an acknowledged +right to modify the constitution; as, therefore, the constitution may undergo +perpetual changes, it does not in reality exist; the Parliament is at once a +legislative and a constituent assembly. The political theories of America are +more simple and more rational. An American constitution is not supposed to be +immutable as in France, nor is it susceptible of modification by the ordinary +powers of society as in England. It constitutes a detached whole, which, as it +represents the determination of the whole people, is no less binding on the +legislator than on the private citizen, but which may be altered by the will of +the people in predetermined cases, according to established rules. In America +the constitution may therefore vary, but as long as it exists it is the origin +of all authority, and the sole vehicle of the predominating force. *a +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ [The fifth article of the original Constitution of the United States provides +the mode in which amendments of the Constitution may be made. Amendments must +be proposed by two-thirds of both Houses of Congress, and ratified by the +Legislatures of three-fourths of the several States. Fifteen amendments of the +Constitution have been made at different times since 1789, the most important +of which are the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth, framed and ratified +after the Civil War. The original Constitution of the United States, followed +by these fifteen amendments, is printed at the end of this edition. +—Translator’s Note, 1874.]] +</p> + +<p> +It is easy to perceive in what manner these differences must act upon the +position and the rights of the judicial bodies in the three countries I have +cited. If in France the tribunals were authorized to disobey the laws on the +ground of their being opposed to the constitution, the supreme power would in +fact be placed in their hands, since they alone would have the right of +interpreting a constitution, the clauses of which can be modified by no +authority. They would therefore take the place of the nation, and exercise as +absolute a sway over society as the inherent weakness of judicial power would +allow them to do. Undoubtedly, as the French judges are incompetent to declare +a law to be unconstitutional, the power of changing the constitution is +indirectly given to the legislative body, since no legal barrier would oppose +the alterations which it might prescribe. But it is better to grant the power +of changing the constitution of the people to men who represent (however +imperfectly) the will of the people, than to men who represent no one but +themselves. +</p> + +<p> +It would be still more unreasonable to invest the English judges with the right +of resisting the decisions of the legislative body, since the Parliament which +makes the laws also makes the constitution; and consequently a law emanating +from the three powers of the State can in no case be unconstitutional. But +neither of these remarks is applicable to America. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States the constitution governs the legislator as much as the +private citizen; as it is the first of laws it cannot be modified by a law, and +it is therefore just that the tribunals should obey the constitution in +preference to any law. This condition is essential to the power of the +judicature, for to select that legal obligation by which he is most strictly +bound is the natural right of every magistrate. +</p> + +<p> +In France the constitution is also the first of laws, and the judges have the +same right to take it as the ground of their decisions, but were they to +exercise this right they must perforce encroach on rights more sacred than +their own, namely, on those of society, in whose name they are acting. In this +case the State-motive clearly prevails over the motives of an individual. In +America, where the nation can always reduce its magistrates to obedience by +changing its constitution, no danger of this kind is to be feared. Upon this +point, therefore, the political and the logical reasons agree, and the people +as well as the judges preserve their privileges. +</p> + +<p> +Whenever a law which the judge holds to be unconstitutional is argued in a +tribunal of the United States he may refuse to admit it as a rule; this power +is the only one which is peculiar to the American magistrate, but it gives rise +to immense political influence. Few laws can escape the searching analysis of +the judicial power for any length of time, for there are few which are not +prejudicial to some private interest or other, and none which may not be +brought before a court of justice by the choice of parties, or by the necessity +of the case. But from the time that a judge has refused to apply any given law +in a case, that law loses a portion of its moral cogency. The persons to whose +interests it is prejudicial learn that means exist of evading its authority, +and similar suits are multiplied, until it becomes powerless. One of two +alternatives must then be resorted to: the people must alter the constitution, +or the legislature must repeal the law. The political power which the Americans +have intrusted to their courts of justice is therefore immense, but the evils +of this power are considerably diminished by the obligation which has been +imposed of attacking the laws through the courts of justice alone. If the judge +had been empowered to contest the laws on the ground of theoretical +generalities, if he had been enabled to open an attack or to pass a censure on +the legislator, he would have played a prominent part in the political sphere; +and as the champion or the antagonist of a party, he would have arrayed the +hostile passions of the nation in the conflict. But when a judge contests a law +applied to some particular case in an obscure proceeding, the importance of his +attack is concealed from the public gaze, his decision bears upon the interest +of an individual, and if the law is slighted it is only collaterally. Moreover, +although it is censured, it is not abolished; its moral force may be +diminished, but its cogency is by no means suspended, and its final destruction +can only be accomplished by the reiterated attacks of judicial functionaries. +It will readily be understood that by connecting the censorship of the laws +with the private interests of members of the community, and by intimately +uniting the prosecution of the law with the prosecution of an individual, +legislation is protected from wanton assailants, and from the daily aggressions +of party spirit. The errors of the legislator are exposed whenever their evil +consequences are most felt, and it is always a positive and appreciable fact +which serves as the basis of a prosecution. +</p> + +<p> +I am inclined to believe this practice of the American courts to be at once the +most favorable to liberty as well as to public order. If the judge could only +attack the legislator openly and directly, he would sometimes be afraid to +oppose any resistance to his will; and at other moments party spirit might +encourage him to brave it at every turn. The laws would consequently be +attacked when the power from which they emanate is weak, and obeyed when it is +strong. That is to say, when it would be useful to respect them they would be +contested, and when it would be easy to convert them into an instrument of +oppression they would be respected. But the American judge is brought into the +political arena independently of his own will. He only judges the law because +he is obliged to judge a case. The political question which he is called upon +to resolve is connected with the interest of the suitors, and he cannot refuse +to decide it without abdicating the duties of his post. He performs his +functions as a citizen by fulfilling the precise duties which belong to his +profession as a magistrate. It is true that upon this system the judicial +censorship which is exercised by the courts of justice over the legislation +cannot extend to all laws indiscriminately, inasmuch as some of them can never +give rise to that exact species of contestation which is termed a lawsuit; and +even when such a contestation is possible, it may happen that no one cares to +bring it before a court of justice. The Americans have often felt this +disadvantage, but they have left the remedy incomplete, lest they should give +it an efficacy which might in some cases prove dangerous. Within these limits +the power vested in the American courts of justice of pronouncing a statute to +be unconstitutional forms one of the most powerful barriers which has ever been +devised against the tyranny of political assemblies. +</p> + +<p> +Other Powers Granted To American Judges +</p> + +<p> +The United States all the citizens have the right of indicting public +functionaries before the ordinary tribunals—How they use this +right—Art. 75 of the French Constitution of the An VIII—The +Americans and the English cannot understand the purport of this clause. +</p> + +<p> +It is perfectly natural that in a free country like America all the citizens +should have the right of indicting public functionaries before the ordinary +tribunals, and that all the judges should have the power of punishing public +offences. The right granted to the courts of justice of judging the agents of +the executive government, when they have violated the laws, is so natural a one +that it cannot be looked upon as an extraordinary privilege. Nor do the springs +of government appear to me to be weakened in the United States by the custom +which renders all public officers responsible to the judges of the land. The +Americans seem, on the contrary, to have increased by this means that respect +which is due to the authorities, and at the same time to have rendered those +who are in power more scrupulous of offending public opinion. I was struck by +the small number of political trials which occur in the United States, but I +had no difficulty in accounting for this circumstance. A lawsuit, of whatever +nature it may be, is always a difficult and expensive undertaking. It is easy +to attack a public man in a journal, but the motives which can warrant an +action at law must be serious. A solid ground of complaint must therefore exist +to induce an individual to prosecute a public officer, and public officers are +careful not to furnish these grounds of complaint when they are afraid of being +prosecuted. +</p> + +<p> +This does not depend upon the republican form of American institutions, for the +same facts present themselves in England. These two nations do not regard the +impeachment of the principal officers of State as a sufficient guarantee of +their independence. But they hold that the right of minor prosecutions, which +are within the reach of the whole community, is a better pledge of freedom than +those great judicial actions which are rarely employed until it is too late. +</p> + +<p> +In the Middle Ages, when it was very difficult to overtake offenders, the +judges inflicted the most dreadful tortures on the few who were arrested, which +by no means diminished the number of crimes. It has since been discovered that +when justice is more certain and more mild, it is at the same time more +efficacious. The English and the Americans hold that tyranny and oppression are +to be treated like any other crime, by lessening the penalty and facilitating +conviction. +</p> + +<p> +In the year VIII of the French Republic a constitution was drawn up in which +the following clause was introduced: “Art. 75. All the agents of the +government below the rank of ministers can only be prosecuted for offences +relating to their several functions by virtue of a decree of the Conseil +d’Etat; in which the case the prosecution takes place before the ordinary +tribunals.” This clause survived the “Constitution de l’An +VIII,” and it is still maintained in spite of the just complaints of the +nation. I have always found the utmost difficulty in explaining its meaning to +Englishmen or Americans. They were at once led to conclude that the Conseil +d’Etat in France was a great tribunal, established in the centre of the +kingdom, which exercised a preliminary and somewhat tyrannical jurisdiction in +all political causes. But when I told them that the Conseil d’Etat was +not a judicial body, in the common sense of the term, but an administrative +council composed of men dependent on the Crown, so that the king, after having +ordered one of his servants, called a Prefect, to commit an injustice, has the +power of commanding another of his servants, called a Councillor of State, to +prevent the former from being punished; when I demonstrated to them that the +citizen who has been injured by the order of the sovereign is obliged to +solicit from the sovereign permission to obtain redress, they refused to credit +so flagrant an abuse, and were tempted to accuse me of falsehood or of +ignorance. It frequently happened before the Revolution that a Parliament +issued a warrant against a public officer who had committed an offence, and +sometimes the proceedings were stopped by the authority of the Crown, which +enforced compliance with its absolute and despotic will. It is painful to +perceive how much lower we are sunk than our forefathers, since we allow things +to pass under the color of justice and the sanction of the law which violence +alone could impose upon them. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0015" id="link2HCH0015"></a> Chapter VII: Political +Jurisdiction In The United States</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0016" id="link2HCH0016"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +Definition of political jurisdiction—What is understood by political +jurisdiction in France, in England, and in the United States—In America +the political judge can only pass sentence on public officers—He more +frequently passes a sentence of removal from office than a +penalty—Political jurisdiction as it exists in the United States is, +notwithstanding its mildness, and perhaps in consequence of that mildness, a +most powerful instrument in the hands of the majority. +</p> + +<p> +Political Jurisdiction In The United States +</p> + +<p> +I understand, by political jurisdiction, that temporary right of pronouncing a +legal decision with which a political body may be invested. +</p> + +<p> +In absolute governments no utility can accrue from the introduction of +extraordinary forms of procedure; the prince in whose name an offender is +prosecuted is as much the sovereign of the courts of justice as of everything +else, and the idea which is entertained of his power is of itself a sufficient +security. The only thing he has to fear is, that the external formalities of +justice should be neglected, and that his authority should be dishonored from a +wish to render it more absolute. But in most free countries, in which the +majority can never exercise the same influence upon the tribunals as an +absolute monarch, the judicial power has occasionally been vested for a time in +the representatives of the nation. It has been thought better to introduce a +temporary confusion between the functions of the different authorities than to +violate the necessary principle of the unity of government. +</p> + +<p> +England, France, and the United States have established this political +jurisdiction by law; and it is curious to examine the different adaptations +which these three great nations have made of the principle. In England and in +France the House of Lords and the Chambre des Paris *a constitute the highest +criminal court of their respective nations, and although they do not habitually +try all political offences, they are competent to try them all. Another +political body enjoys the right of impeachment before the House of Lords: the +only difference which exists between the two countries in this respect is, that +in England the Commons may impeach whomsoever they please before the Lords, +whilst in France the Deputies can only employ this mode of prosecution against +the ministers of the Crown. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ [As it existed under the constitutional monarchy down to 1848.]] +</p> + +<p> +In both countries the Upper House may make use of all the existing penal laws +of the nation to punish the delinquents. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States, as well as in Europe, one branch of the legislature is +authorized to impeach and another to judge: the House of Representatives +arraigns the offender, and the Senate awards his sentence. But the Senate can +only try such persons as are brought before it by the House of Representatives, +and those persons must belong to the class of public functionaries. Thus the +jurisdiction of the Senate is less extensive than that of the Peers of France, +whilst the right of impeachment by the Representatives is more general than +that of the Deputies. But the great difference which exists between Europe and +America is, that in Europe political tribunals are empowered to inflict all the +dispositions of the penal code, while in America, when they have deprived the +offender of his official rank, and have declared him incapable of filling any +political office for the future, their jurisdiction terminates and that of the +ordinary tribunals begins. +</p> + +<p> +Suppose, for instance, that the President of the United States has committed +the crime of high treason; the House of Representatives impeaches him, and the +Senate degrades him; he must then be tried by a jury, which alone can deprive +him of his liberty or his life. This accurately illustrates the subject we are +treating. The political jurisdiction which is established by the laws of Europe +is intended to try great offenders, whatever may be their birth, their rank, or +their powers in the State; and to this end all the privileges of the courts of +justice are temporarily extended to a great political assembly. The legislator +is then transformed into the magistrate; he is called upon to admit, to +distinguish, and to punish the offence; and as he exercises all the authority +of a judge, the law restricts him to the observance of all the duties of that +high office, and of all the formalities of justice. When a public functionary +is impeached before an English or a French political tribunal, and is found +guilty, the sentence deprives him ipso facto of his functions, and it may +pronounce him to be incapable of resuming them or any others for the future. +But in this case the political interdict is a consequence of the sentence, and +not the sentence itself. In Europe the sentence of a political tribunal is to +be regarded as a judicial verdict rather than as an administrative measure. In +the United States the contrary takes place; and although the decision of the +Senate is judicial in its form, since the Senators are obliged to comply with +the practices and formalities of a court of justice; although it is judicial in +respect to the motives on which it is founded, since the Senate is in general +obliged to take an offence at common law as the basis of its sentence; +nevertheless the object of the proceeding is purely administrative. If it had +been the intention of the American legislator to invest a political body with +great judicial authority, its action would not have been limited to the circle +of public functionaries, since the most dangerous enemies of the State may be +in the possession of no functions at all; and this is especially true in +republics, where party influence is the first of authorities, and where the +strength of many a reader is increased by his exercising no legal power. +</p> + +<p> +If it had been the intention of the American legislator to give society the +means of repressing State offences by exemplary punishment, according to the +practice of ordinary justice, the resources of the penal code would all have +been placed at the disposal of the political tribunals. But the weapon with +which they are intrusted is an imperfect one, and it can never reach the most +dangerous offenders, since men who aim at the entire subversion of the laws are +not likely to murmur at a political interdict. +</p> + +<p> +The main object of the political jurisdiction which obtains in the United +States is, therefore, to deprive the ill-disposed citizen of an authority which +he has used amiss, and to prevent him from ever acquiring it again. This is +evidently an administrative measure sanctioned by the formalities of a judicial +decision. In this matter the Americans have created a mixed system; they have +surrounded the act which removes a public functionary with the securities of a +political trial; and they have deprived all political condemnations of their +severest penalties. Every link of the system may easily be traced from this +point; we at once perceive why the American constitutions subject all the civil +functionaries to the jurisdiction of the Senate, whilst the military, whose +crimes are nevertheless more formidable, are exempted from that tribunal. In +the civil service none of the American functionaries can be said to be +removable; the places which some of them occupy are inalienable, and the others +are chosen for a term which cannot be shortened. It is therefore necessary to +try them all in order to deprive them of their authority. But military officers +are dependent on the chief magistrate of the State, who is himself a civil +functionary, and the decision which condemns him is a blow upon them all. +</p> + +<p> +If we now compare the American and the European systems, we shall meet with +differences no less striking in the different effects which each of them +produces or may produce. In France and in England the jurisdiction of political +bodies is looked upon as an extraordinary resource, which is only to be +employed in order to rescue society from unwonted dangers. It is not to be +denied that these tribunals, as they are constituted in Europe, are apt to +violate the conservative principle of the balance of power in the State, and to +threaten incessantly the lives and liberties of the subject. The same political +jurisdiction in the United States is only indirectly hostile to the balance of +power; it cannot menace the lives of the citizens, and it does not hover, as in +Europe, over the heads of the community, since those only who have submitted to +its authority on accepting office are exposed to the severity of its +investigations. It is at the same time less formidable and less efficacious; +indeed, it has not been considered by the legislators of the United States as a +remedy for the more violent evils of society, but as an ordinary means of +conducting the government. In this respect it probably exercises more real +influence on the social body in America than in Europe. We must not be misled +by the apparent mildness of the American legislation in all that relates to +political jurisdiction. It is to be observed, in the first place, that in the +United States the tribunal which passes sentence is composed of the same +elements, and subject to the same influences, as the body which impeaches the +offender, and that this uniformity gives an almost irresistible impulse to the +vindictive passions of parties. If political judges in the United States cannot +inflict such heavy penalties as those of Europe, there is the less chance of +their acquitting a prisoner; and the conviction, if it is less formidable, is +more certain. The principal object of the political tribunals of Europe is to +punish the offender; the purpose of those in America is to deprive him of his +authority. A political condemnation in the United States may, therefore, be +looked upon as a preventive measure; and there is no reason for restricting the +judges to the exact definitions of criminal law. Nothing can be more alarming +than the excessive latitude with which political offences are described in the +laws of America. Article II., Section 4, of the Constitution of the United +States runs thus:—“The President, Vice-President, and all civil +officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, +and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and +misdemeanors.” Many of the Constitutions of the States are even less +explicit. “Public officers,” says the Constitution of +Massachusetts, *b “shall be impeached for misconduct or +maladministration;” the Constitution of Virginia declares that all the +civil officers who shall have offended against the State, by maladministration, +corruption, or other high crimes, may be impeached by the House of Delegates; +in some constitutions no offences are specified, in order to subject the public +functionaries to an unlimited responsibility. *c But I will venture to affirm +that it is precisely their mildness which renders the American laws most +formidable in this respect. We have shown that in Europe the removal of a +functionary and his political interdiction are the consequences of the penalty +he is to undergo, and that in America they constitute the penalty itself. The +consequence is that in Europe political tribunals are invested with rights +which they are afraid to use, and that the fear of punishing too much hinders +them from punishing at all. But in America no one hesitates to inflict a +penalty from which humanity does not recoil. To condemn a political opponent to +death, in order to deprive him of his power, is to commit what all the world +would execrate as a horrible assassination; but to declare that opponent +unworthy to exercise that authority, to deprive him of it, and to leave him +uninjured in life and limb, may be judged to be the fair issue of the struggle. +But this sentence, which it is so easy to pronounce, is not the less fatally +severe to the majority of those upon whom it is inflicted. Great criminals may +undoubtedly brave its intangible rigor, but ordinary offenders will dread it as +a condemnation which destroys their position in the world, casts a blight upon +their honor, and condemns them to a shameful inactivity worse than death. The +influence exercised in the United States upon the progress of society by the +jurisdiction of political bodies may not appear to be formidable, but it is +only the more immense. It does not directly coerce the subject, but it renders +the majority more absolute over those in power; it does not confer an unbounded +authority on the legislator which can be exerted at some momentous crisis, but +it establishes a temperate and regular influence, which is at all times +available. If the power is decreased, it can, on the other hand, be more +conveniently employed and more easily abused. By preventing political tribunals +from inflicting judicial punishments the Americans seem to have eluded the +worst consequences of legislative tyranny, rather than tyranny itself; and I am +not sure that political jurisdiction, as it is constituted in the United +States, is not the most formidable weapon which has ever been placed in the +rude grasp of a popular majority. When the American republics begin to +degenerate it will be easy to verify the truth of this observation, by +remarking whether the number of political impeachments augments.*d +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ Chap. I. sect. ii. Section 8.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ See the constitutions of Illinois, Maine, Connecticut, and Georgia.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ See Appendix, N. +</p> + +<p> +[The impeachment of President Andrew Johnson in 1868—which was resorted +to by his political opponents solely as a means of turning him out of office, +for it could not be contended that he had been guilty of high crimes and +misdemeanors, and he was in fact honorably acquitted and reinstated in +office—is a striking confirmation of the truth of this +remark.—Translator’s Note, 1874.]] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0017" id="link2HCH0017"></a> Chapter VIII: The Federal +Constitution—Part I</h2> + +<p> +I have hitherto considered each State as a separate whole, and I have explained +the different springs which the people sets in motion, and the different means +of action which it employs. But all the States which I have considered as +independent are forced to submit, in certain cases, to the supreme authority of +the Union. The time is now come for me to examine separately the supremacy with +which the Union has been invested, and to cast a rapid glance over the Federal +Constitution. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0018" id="link2HCH0018"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +Origin of the first Union—Its weakness—Congress appeals to the +constituent authority—Interval of two years between this appeal and the +promulgation of the new Constitution. +</p> + +<p> +History Of The Federal Constitution +</p> + +<p> +The thirteen colonies which simultaneously threw off the yoke of England +towards the end of the last century professed, as I have already observed, the +same religion, the same language, the same customs, and almost the same laws; +they were struggling against a common enemy; and these reasons were +sufficiently strong to unite them one to another, and to consolidate them into +one nation. But as each of them had enjoyed a separate existence and a +government within its own control, the peculiar interests and customs which +resulted from this system were opposed to a compact and intimate union which +would have absorbed the individual importance of each in the general importance +of all. Hence arose two opposite tendencies, the one prompting the +Anglo-Americans to unite, the other to divide their strength. As long as the +war with the mother-country lasted the principle of union was kept alive by +necessity; and although the laws which constituted it were defective, the +common tie subsisted in spite of their imperfections. *a But no sooner was +peace concluded than the faults of the legislation became manifest, and the +State seemed to be suddenly dissolved. Each colony became an independent +republic, and assumed an absolute sovereignty. The federal government, +condemned to impotence by its constitution, and no longer sustained by the +presence of a common danger, witnessed the outrages offered to its flag by the +great nations of Europe, whilst it was scarcely able to maintain its ground +against the Indian tribes, and to pay the interest of the debt which had been +contracted during the war of independence. It was already on the verge of +destruction, when it officially proclaimed its inability to conduct the +government, and appealed to the constituent authority of the nation. *b If +America ever approached (for however brief a time) that lofty pinnacle of glory +to which the fancy of its inhabitants is wont to point, it was at the solemn +moment at which the power of the nation abdicated, as it were, the empire of +the land. All ages have furnished the spectacle of a people struggling with +energy to win its independence; and the efforts of the Americans in throwing +off the English yoke have been considerably exaggerated. Separated from their +enemies by three thousand miles of ocean, and backed by a powerful ally, the +success of the United States may be more justly attributed to their +geographical position than to the valor of their armies or the patriotism of +their citizens. It would be ridiculous to compare the American was to the wars +of the French Revolution, or the efforts of the Americans to those of the +French when they were attacked by the whole of Europe, without credit and +without allies, yet capable of opposing a twentieth part of their population to +the world, and of bearing the torch of revolution beyond their frontiers whilst +they stifled its devouring flame within the bosom of their country. But it is a +novelty in the history of society to see a great people turn a calm and +scrutinizing eye upon itself, when apprised by the legislature that the wheels +of government are stopped; to see it carefully examine the extent of the evil, +and patiently wait for two whole years until a remedy was discovered, which it +voluntarily adopted without having wrung a tear or a drop of blood from +mankind. At the time when the inadequacy of the first constitution was +discovered America possessed the double advantage of that calm which had +succeeded the effervescence of the revolution, and of those great men who had +led the revolution to a successful issue. The assembly which accepted the task +of composing the second constitution was small; *c but George Washington was +its President, and it contained the choicest talents and the noblest hearts +which had ever appeared in the New World. This national commission, after long +and mature deliberation, offered to the acceptance of the people the body of +general laws which still rules the Union. All the States adopted it +successively. *d The new Federal Government commenced its functions in 1789, +after an interregnum of two years. The Revolution of America terminated when +that of France began. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ See the articles of the first confederation formed in 1778. This constitution +was not adopted by all the States until 1781. See also the analysis given of +this constitution in “The Federalist” from No. 15 to No. 22, +inclusive, and Story’s “Commentaries on the Constitution of the +United States,” pp. 85-115.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ Congress made this declaration on February 21, 1787.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ It consisted of fifty-five members; Washington, Madison, Hamilton, and the +two Morrises were amongst the number.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ It was not adopted by the legislative bodies, but representatives were +elected by the people for this sole purpose; and the new constitution was +discussed at length in each of these assemblies.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2H_SUMM" id="link2H_SUMM"></a> Summary Of The Federal +Constitution</h2> + +<p> +Division of authority between the Federal Government and the States—The +Government of the States is the rule, the Federal Government the exception. +</p> + +<p> +The first question which awaited the Americans was intricate, and by no means +easy of solution: the object was so to divide the authority of the different +States which composed the Union that each of them should continue to govern +itself in all that concerned its internal prosperity, whilst the entire nation, +represented by the Union, should continue to form a compact body, and to +provide for the general exigencies of the people. It was as impossible to +determine beforehand, with any degree of accuracy, the share of authority which +each of two governments was to enjoy, as to foresee all the incidents in the +existence of a nation. +</p> + +<p> +The obligations and the claims of the Federal Government were simple and easily +definable, because the Union had been formed with the express purpose of +meeting the general exigencies of the people; but the claims and obligations of +the States were, on the other hand, complicated and various, because those +Governments had penetrated into all the details of social life. The attributes +of the Federal Government were therefore carefully enumerated and all that was +not included amongst them was declared to constitute a part of the privileges +of the several Governments of the States. Thus the government of the States +remained the rule, and that of the Confederation became the exception. *e +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ See the Amendment to the Federal Constitution; “Federalist,” No. +32; Story, p. 711; Kent’s “Commentaries,” vol. i. p. 364. +</p> + +<p> +It is to be observed that whenever the exclusive right of regulating certain +matters is not reserved to Congress by the Constitution, the States may take up +the affair until it is brought before the National Assembly. For instance, +Congress has the right of making a general law on bankruptcy, which, however, +it neglects to do. Each State is then at liberty to make a law for itself. This +point has been established by discussion in the law-courts, and may be said to +belong more properly to jurisprudence.] +</p> + +<p> +But as it was foreseen that, in practice, questions might arise as to the exact +limits of this exceptional authority, and that it would be dangerous to submit +these questions to the decision of the ordinary courts of justice, established +in the States by the States themselves, a high Federal court was created, *f +which was destined, amongst other functions, to maintain the balance of power +which had been established by the Constitution between the two rival +Governments. *g +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ The action of this court is indirect, as we shall hereafter show.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ It is thus that “The Federalist,” No. 45, explains the division +of supremacy between the Union and the States: “The powers delegated by +the Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are +to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will +be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and +foreign commerce. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all +the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the internal +order and prosperity of the State.” I shall often have occasion to quote +“The Federalist” in this work. When the bill which has since become +the Constitution of the United States was submitted to the approval of the +people, and the discussions were still pending, three men, who had already +acquired a portion of that celebrity which they have since enjoyed—John +Jay, Hamilton, and Madison—formed an association with the intention of +explaining to the nation the advantages of the measure which was proposed. With +this view they published a series of articles in the shape of a journal, which +now form a complete treatise. They entitled their journal “The +Federalist,” a name which has been retained in the work. “The +Federalist” is an excellent book, which ought to be familiar to the +statesmen of all countries, although it especially concerns America.] +</p> + +<p> +Prerogative Of The Federal Government +</p> + +<p> +Power of declaring war, making peace, and levying general taxes vested in the +Federal Government—What part of the internal policy of the country it may +direct—The Government of the Union in some respects more central than the +King’s Government in the old French monarchy. +</p> + +<p> +The external relations of a people may be compared to those of private +individuals, and they cannot be advantageously maintained without the agency of +a single head of a Government. The exclusive right of making peace and war, of +concluding treaties of commerce, of raising armies, and equipping fleets, was +granted to the Union. *h The necessity of a national Government was less +imperiously felt in the conduct of the internal policy of society; but there +are certain general interests which can only be attended to with advantage by a +general authority. The Union was invested with the power of controlling the +monetary system, of directing the post office, and of opening the great roads +which were to establish a communication between the different parts of the +country. *i The independence of the Government of each State was formally +recognized in its sphere; nevertheless, the Federal Government was authorized +to interfere in the internal affairs of the States *j in a few predetermined +cases, in which an indiscreet abuse of their independence might compromise the +security of the Union at large. Thus, whilst the power of modifying and +changing their legislation at pleasure was preserved in all the republics, they +were forbidden to enact ex post facto laws, or to create a class of nobles in +their community. *k Lastly, as it was necessary that the Federal Government +should be able to fulfil its engagements, it was endowed with an unlimited +power of levying taxes. *l +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ See Constitution, sect. 8; “Federalist,” Nos. 41 and 42; +Kent’s “Commentaries,” vol. i. p. 207; Story, pp. 358-382; +Ibid. pp. 409-426.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ Several other privileges of the same kind exist, such as that which empowers +the Union to legislate on bankruptcy, to grant patents, and other matters in +which its intervention is clearly necessary.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ Even in these cases its interference is indirect. The Union interferes by +means of the tribunals, as will be hereafter shown.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ Federal Constitution, sect. 10, art. I.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ Constitution, sects. 8, 9, and 10; “Federalist,” Nos. 30-36, +inclusive, and 41-44; Kent’s “Commentaries,” vol. i. pp. 207 +and 381; Story, pp. 329 and 514.] +</p> + +<p> +In examining the balance of power as established by the Federal Constitution; +in remarking on the one hand the portion of sovereignty which has been reserved +to the several States, and on the other the share of power which the Union has +assumed, it is evident that the Federal legislators entertained the clearest +and most accurate notions on the nature of the centralization of government. +The United States form not only a republic, but a confederation; nevertheless +the authority of the nation is more central than it was in several of the +monarchies of Europe when the American Constitution was formed. Take, for +instance, the two following examples. +</p> + +<p> +Thirteen supreme courts of justice existed in France, which, generally +speaking, had the right of interpreting the law without appeal; and those +provinces which were styled pays d’etats were authorized to refuse their +assent to an impost which had been levied by the sovereign who represented the +nation. In the Union there is but one tribunal to interpret, as there is one +legislature to make the laws; and an impost voted by the representatives of the +nation is binding upon all the citizens. In these two essential points, +therefore, the Union exercises more central authority than the French monarchy +possessed, although the Union is only an assemblage of confederate republics. +</p> + +<p> +In Spain certain provinces had the right of establishing a system of +custom-house duties peculiar to themselves, although that privilege belongs, by +its very nature, to the national sovereignty. In America the Congress alone has +the right of regulating the commercial relations of the States. The government +of the Confederation is therefore more centralized in this respect than the +kingdom of Spain. It is true that the power of the Crown in France or in Spain +was always able to obtain by force whatever the Constitution of the country +denied, and that the ultimate result was consequently the same; but I am here +discussing the theory of the Constitution. +</p> + +<p> +Federal Powers +</p> + +<p> +After having settled the limits within which the Federal Government was to act, +the next point was to determine the powers which it was to exert. +</p> + +<p> +Legislative Powers *m +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ [In this chapter the author points out the essence of the conflict between +the seceding States and the Union which caused the Civil War of 1861.]] +</p> + +<p> +Division of the Legislative Body into two branches—Difference in the +manner of forming the two Houses—The principle of the independence of the +States predominates in the formation of the Senate—The principle of the +sovereignty of the nation in the composition of the House of +Representatives—Singular effects of the fact that a Constitution can only +be logical in the early stages of a nation. +</p> + +<p> +The plan which had been laid down beforehand for the Constitutions of the +several States was followed, in many points, in the organization of the powers +of the Union. The Federal legislature of the Union was composed of a Senate and +a House of Representatives. A spirit of conciliation prescribed the observance +of distinct principles in the formation of these two assemblies. I have already +shown that two contrary interests were opposed to each other in the +establishment of the Federal Constitution. These two interests had given rise +to two opinions. It was the wish of one party to convert the Union into a +league of independent States, or a sort of congress, at which the +representatives of the several peoples would meet to discuss certain points of +their common interests. The other party desired to unite the inhabitants of the +American colonies into one sole nation, and to establish a Government which +should act as the sole representative of the nation, as far as the limited +sphere of its authority would permit. The practical consequences of these two +theories were exceedingly different. +</p> + +<p> +The question was, whether a league was to be established instead of a national +Government; whether the majority of the State, instead of the majority of the +inhabitants of the Union, was to give the law: for every State, the small as +well as the great, would then remain in the full enjoyment of its independence, +and enter the Union upon a footing of perfect equality. If, however, the +inhabitants of the United States were to be considered as belonging to one and +the same nation, it would be just that the majority of the citizens of the +Union should prescribe the law. Of course the lesser States could not subscribe +to the application of this doctrine without, in fact, abdicating their +existence in relation to the sovereignty of the Confederation; since they would +have passed from the condition of a co-equal and co-legislative authority to +that of an insignificant fraction of a great people. But if the former system +would have invested them with an excessive authority, the latter would have +annulled their influence altogether. Under these circumstances the result was, +that the strict rules of logic were evaded, as is usually the case when +interests are opposed to arguments. A middle course was hit upon by the +legislators, which brought together by force two systems theoretically +irreconcilable. +</p> + +<p> +The principle of the independence of the States prevailed in the formation of +the Senate, and that of the sovereignty of the nation predominated in the +composition of the House of Representatives. It was decided that each State +should send two senators to Congress, and a number of representatives +proportioned to its population. *n It results from this arrangement that the +State of New York has at the present day forty representatives and only two +senators; the State of Delaware has two senators and only one representative; +the State of Delaware is therefore equal to the State of New York in the +Senate, whilst the latter has forty times the influence of the former in the +House of Representatives. Thus, if the minority of the nation preponderates in +the Senate,. it may paralyze the decisions of the majority represented in the +other House, which is contrary to the spirit of constitutional government. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ Every ten years Congress fixes anew the number of representatives which each +State is to furnish. The total number was 69 in 1789, and 240 in 1833. (See +“American Almanac,” 1834, p. 194.) The Constitution decided that +there should not be more than one representative for every 30,000 persons; but +no minimum was fixed on. The Congress has not thought fit to augment the number +of representatives in proportion to the increase of population. The first Act +which was passed on the subject (April 14, 1792: see “Laws of the United +States,” by Story, vol. i. p. 235) decided that there should be one +representative for every 33,000 inhabitants. The last Act, which was passed in +1832, fixes the proportion at one for 48,000. The population represented is +composed of all the free men and of three-fifths of the slaves. +</p> + +<p> +[The last Act of apportionment, passed February 2, 1872, fixes the +representation at one to 134,684 inhabitants. There are now (1875) 283 members +of the lower House of Congress, and 9 for the States at large, making in all +292 members. The old States have of course lost the representatives which the +new States have gained.—Translator’s Note.]] +</p> + +<p> +These facts show how rare and how difficult it is rationally and logically to +combine all the several parts of legislation. In the course of time different +interests arise, and different principles are sanctioned by the same people; +and when a general constitution is to be established, these interests and +principles are so many natural obstacles to the rigorous application of any +political system, with all its consequences. The early stages of national +existence are the only periods at which it is possible to maintain the complete +logic of legislation; and when we perceive a nation in the enjoyment of this +advantage, before we hasten to conclude that it is wise, we should do well to +remember that it is young. When the Federal Constitution was formed, the +interests of independence for the separate States, and the interest of union +for the whole people, were the only two conflicting interests which existed +amongst the Anglo-Americans, and a compromise was necessarily made between +them. +</p> + +<p> +It is, however, just to acknowledge that this part of the Constitution has not +hitherto produced those evils which might have been feared. All the States are +young and contiguous; their customs, their ideas, and their exigencies are not +dissimilar; and the differences which result from their size or inferiority do +not suffice to set their interests at variance. The small States have +consequently never been induced to league themselves together in the Senate to +oppose the designs of the larger ones; and indeed there is so irresistible an +authority in the legitimate expression of the will of a people that the Senate +could offer but a feeble opposition to the vote of the majority of the House of +Representatives. +</p> + +<p> +It must not be forgotten, on the other hand, that it was not in the power of +the American legislators to reduce to a single nation the people for whom they +were making laws. The object of the Federal Constitution was not to destroy the +independence of the States, but to restrain it. By acknowledging the real +authority of these secondary communities (and it was impossible to deprive them +of it), they disavowed beforehand the habitual use of constraint in enforcing g +the decisions of the majority. Upon this principle the introduction of the +influence of the States into the mechanism of the Federal Government was by no +means to be wondered at, since it only attested the existence of an +acknowledged power, which was to be humored and not forcibly checked. +</p> + +<p> +A Further Difference Between The Senate And The House Of Representatives +</p> + +<p> +The Senate named by the provincial legislators, the Representatives by the +people—Double election of the former; single election of the +latter—Term of the different offices—Peculiar functions of each +House. +</p> + +<p> +The Senate not only differs from the other House in the principle which it +represents, but also in the mode of its election, in the term for which it is +chosen, and in the nature of its functions. The House of Representatives is +named by the people, the Senate by the legislators of each State; the former is +directly elected, the latter is elected by an elected body; the term for which +the representatives are chosen is only two years, that of the senators is six. +The functions of the House of Representatives are purely legislative, and the +only share it takes in the judicial power is in the impeachment of public +officers. The Senate co-operates in the work of legislation, and tries those +political offences which the House of Representatives submits to its decision. +It also acts as the great executive council of the nation; the treaties which +are concluded by the President must be ratified by the Senate, and the +appointments he may make must be definitely approved by the same body. *o +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ See “The Federalist,” Nos. 52-56, inclusive; Story, pp. 199-314; +Constitution of the United States, sects. 2 and 3.] The Executive Power *p +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ See “The Federalist,” Nos. 67-77; Constitution of the United +States, art. 2; Story, p. 315, pp. 615-780; Kent’s +“Commentaries,” p. 255.] +</p> + +<p> +Dependence of the President—He is elective and responsible—He is +free to act in his own sphere under the inspection, but not under the +direction, of the Senate—His salary fixed at his entry into +office—Suspensive veto. +</p> + +<p> +The American legislators undertook a difficult task in attempting to create an +executive power dependent on the majority of the people, and nevertheless +sufficiently strong to act without restraint in its own sphere. It was +indispensable to the maintenance of the republican form of government that the +representative of the executive power should be subject to the will of the +nation. +</p> + +<p> +The President is an elective magistrate. His honor, his property, his liberty, +and his life are the securities which the people has for the temperate use of +his power. But in the exercise of his authority he cannot be said to be +perfectly independent; the Senate takes cognizance of his relations with +foreign powers, and of the distribution of public appointments, so that he can +neither be bribed nor can he employ the means of corruption. The legislators of +the Union acknowledged that the executive power would be incompetent to fulfil +its task with dignity and utility, unless it enjoyed a greater degree of +stability and of strength than had been granted to it in the separate States. +</p> + +<p> +The President is chosen for four years, and he may be reelected; so that the +chances of a prolonged administration may inspire him with hopeful undertakings +for the public good, and with the means of carrying them into execution. The +President was made the sole representative of the executive power of the Union, +and care was taken not to render his decisions subordinate to the vote of a +council—a dangerous measure, which tends at the same time to clog the +action of the Government and to diminish its responsibility. The Senate has the +right of annulling g certain acts of the President; but it cannot compel him to +take any steps, nor does it participate in the exercise of the executive power. +</p> + +<p> +The action of the legislature on the executive power may be direct; and we have +just shown that the Americans carefully obviated this influence; but it may, on +the other hand, be indirect. Public assemblies which have the power of +depriving an officer of state of his salary encroach upon his independence; and +as they are free to make the laws, it is to be feared lest they should +gradually appropriate to themselves a portion of that authority which the +Constitution had vested in his hands. This dependence of the executive power is +one of the defects inherent in republican constitutions. The Americans have not +been able to counteract the tendency which legislative assemblies have to get +possession of the government, but they have rendered this propensity less +irresistible. The salary of the President is fixed, at the time of his entering +upon office, for the whole period of his magistracy. The President is, +moreover, provided with a suspensive veto, which allows him to oppose the +passing of such laws as might destroy the portion of independence which the +Constitution awards him. The struggle between the President and the legislature +must always be an unequal one, since the latter is certain of bearing down all +resistance by persevering in its plans; but the suspensive veto forces it at +least to reconsider the matter, and, if the motion be persisted in, it must +then be backed by a majority of two-thirds of the whole house. The veto is, in +fact, a sort of appeal to the people. The executive power, which, without this +security, might have been secretly oppressed, adopts this means of pleading its +cause and stating its motives. But if the legislature is certain of +overpowering all resistance by persevering in its plans, I reply, that in the +constitutions of all nations, of whatever kind they may be, a certain point +exists at which the legislator is obliged to have recourse to the good sense +and the virtue of his fellow-citizens. This point is more prominent and more +discoverable in republics, whilst it is more remote and more carefully +concealed in monarchies, but it always exists somewhere. There is no country in +the world in which everything can be provided for by the laws, or in which +political institutions can prove a substitute for common sense and public +morality. +</p> + +<p> +Differences Between The Position Of The President Of The United States And That +Of A Constitutional King Of France +</p> + +<p> +Executive power in the Northern States as limited and as partial as the +supremacy which it represents—Executive power in France as universal as +the supremacy it represents—The King a branch of the +legislature—The President the mere executor of the law—Other +differences resulting from the duration of the two powers—The President +checked in the exercise of the executive authority—The King independent +in its exercise—Notwithstanding these discrepancies France is more akin +to a republic than the Union to a monarchy—Comparison of the number of +public officers depending upon the executive power in the two countries. +</p> + +<p> +The executive power has so important an influence on the destinies of nations +that I am inclined to pause for an instant at this portion of my subject, in +order more clearly to explain the part it sustains in America. In order to form +an accurate idea of the position of the President of the United States, it may +not be irrelevant to compare it to that of one of the constitutional kings of +Europe. In this comparison I shall pay but little attention to the external +signs of power, which are more apt to deceive the eye of the observer than to +guide his researches. When a monarchy is being gradually transformed into a +republic, the executive power retains the titles, the honors, the etiquette, +and even the funds of royalty long after its authority has disappeared. The +English, after having cut off the head of one king and expelled another from +his throne, were accustomed to accost the successor of those princes upon their +knees. On the other hand, when a republic falls under the sway of a single +individual, the demeanor of the sovereign is simple and unpretending, as if his +authority was not yet paramount. When the emperors exercised an unlimited +control over the fortunes and the lives of their fellow-citizens, it was +customary to call them Caesar in conversation, and they were in the habit of +supping without formality at their friends’ houses. It is therefore +necessary to look below the surface. +</p> + +<p> +The sovereignty of the United States is shared between the Union and the +States, whilst in France it is undivided and compact: hence arises the first +and the most notable difference which exists between the President of the +United States and the King of France. In the United States the executive power +is as limited and partial as the sovereignty of the Union in whose name it +acts; in France it is as universal as the authority of the State. The Americans +have a federal and the French a national Government. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0019" id="link2HCH0019"></a> Chapter VIII: The Federal +Constitution—Part II</h2> + +<p> +This cause of inferiority results from the nature of things, but it is not the +only one; the second in importance is as follows: Sovereignty may be defined to +be the right of making laws: in France, the King really exercises a portion of +the sovereign power, since the laws have no weight till he has given his assent +to them; he is, moreover, the executor of all they ordain. The President is +also the executor of the laws, but he does not really co-operate in their +formation, since the refusal of his assent does not annul them. He is therefore +merely to be considered as the agent of the sovereign power. But not only does +the King of France exercise a portion of the sovereign power, he also +contributes to the nomination of the legislature, which exercises the other +portion. He has the privilege of appointing the members of one chamber, and of +dissolving the other at his pleasure; whereas the President of the United +States has no share in the formation of the legislative body, and cannot +dissolve any part of it. The King has the same right of bringing forward +measures as the Chambers; a right which the President does not possess. The +King is represented in each assembly by his ministers, who explain his +intentions, support his opinions, and maintain the principles of the +Government. The President and his ministers are alike excluded from Congress; +so that his influence and his opinions can only penetrate indirectly into that +great body. The King of France is therefore on an equal footing with the +legislature, which can no more act without him than he can without it. The +President exercises an authority inferior to, and depending upon, that of the +legislature. +</p> + +<p> +Even in the exercise of the executive power, properly so called—the point +upon which his position seems to be most analogous to that of the King of +France—the President labors under several causes of inferiority. The +authority of the King, in France, has, in the first place, the advantage of +duration over that of the President, and durability is one of the chief +elements of strength; nothing is either loved or feared but what is likely to +endure. The President of the United States is a magistrate elected for four +years; the King, in France, is an hereditary sovereign. In the exercise of the +executive power the President of the United States is constantly subject to a +jealous scrutiny. He may make, but he cannot conclude, a treaty; he may +designate, but he cannot appoint, a public officer. *q The King of France is +absolute within the limits of his authority. The President of the United States +is responsible for his actions; but the person of the King is declared +inviolable by the French Charter. *r +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ The Constitution had left it doubtful whether the President was obliged to +consult the Senate in the removal as well as in the appointment of Federal +officers. “The Federalist” (No. 77) seemed to establish the +affirmative; but in 1789 Congress formally decided that, as the President was +responsible for his actions, he ought not to be forced to employ agents who had +forfeited his esteem. See Kent’s “Commentaries”, vol. i. p. +289.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ [This comparison applied to the Constitutional King of France and to the +powers he held under the Charter of 1830, till the overthrow of the monarchy in +1848.—Translator’s Note.]] +</p> + +<p> +Nevertheless, the supremacy of public opinion is no less above the head of the +one than of the other. This power is less definite, less evident, and less +sanctioned by the laws in France than in America, but in fact it exists. In +America, it acts by elections and decrees; in France it proceeds by +revolutions; but notwithstanding the different constitutions of these two +countries, public opinion is the predominant authority in both of them. The +fundamental principle of legislation—a principle essentially +republican—is the same in both countries, although its consequences may +be different, and its results more or less extensive. Whence I am led to +conclude that France with its King is nearer akin to a republic than the Union +with its President is to a monarchy. +</p> + +<p> +In what I have been saying I have only touched upon the main points of +distinction; and if I could have entered into details, the contrast would have +been rendered still more striking. I have remarked that the authority of the +President in the United States is only exercised within the limits of a partial +sovereignty, whilst that of the King in France is undivided. I might have gone +on to show that the power of the King’s government in France exceeds its +natural limits, however extensive they may be, and penetrates in a thousand +different ways into the administration of private interests. Amongst the +examples of this influence may be quoted that which results from the great +number of public functionaries, who all derive their appointments from the +Government. This number now exceeds all previous limits; it amounts to 138,000 +*s nominations, each of which may be considered as an element of power. The +President of the United States has not the exclusive right of making any public +appointments, and their whole number scarcely exceeds 12,000. *t +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +s <br /> +[ The sums annually paid by the State to these officers amount to 200,000,000 +fr. ($40,000,000).] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +t <br /> +[ This number is extracted from the “National Calendar” for 1833. +The “National Calendar” is an American almanac which contains the +names of all the Federal officers. It results from this comparison that the +King of France has eleven times as many places at his disposal as the +President, although the population of France is not much more than double that +of the Union. +</p> + +<p> +[I have not the means of ascertaining the number of appointments now at the +disposal of the President of the United States, but his patronage and the abuse +of it have largely increased since 1833.—Translator’s Note, 1875.]] +</p> + +<p> +Accidental Causes Which May Increase The Influence Of The Executive Government +</p> + +<p> +External security of the Union—Army of six thousand men—Few +ships—The President has no opportunity of exercising his great +prerogatives—In the prerogatives he exercises he is weak. +</p> + +<p> +If the executive government is feebler in America than in France, the cause is +more attributable to the circumstances than to the laws of the country. +</p> + +<p> +It is chiefly in its foreign relations that the executive power of a nation is +called upon to exert its skill and its vigor. If the existence of the Union +were perpetually threatened, and if its chief interests were in daily +connection with those of other powerful nations, the executive government would +assume an increased importance in proportion to the measures expected of it, +and those which it would carry into effect. The President of the United States +is the commander-in-chief of the army, but of an army composed of only six +thousand men; he commands the fleet, but the fleet reckons but few sail; he +conducts the foreign relations of the Union, but the United States are a nation +without neighbors. Separated from the rest of the world by the ocean, and too +weak as yet to aim at the dominion of the seas, they have no enemies, and their +interests rarely come into contact with those of any other nation of the globe. +</p> + +<p> +The practical part of a Government must not be judged by the theory of its +constitution. The President of the United States is in the possession of almost +royal prerogatives, which he has no opportunity of exercising; and those +privileges which he can at present use are very circumscribed. The laws allow +him to possess a degree of influence which circumstances do not permit him to +employ. +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, the great strength of the royal prerogative in France arises +from circumstances far more than from the laws. There the executive government +is constantly struggling against prodigious obstacles, and exerting all its +energies to repress them; so that it increases by the extent of its +achievements, and by the importance of the events it controls, without +modifying its constitution. If the laws had made it as feeble and as +circumscribed as it is in the Union, its influence would very soon become still +more preponderant. +</p> + +<p> +Why The President Of The United States Does Not Require The Majority Of The Two +Houses In Order To Carry On The Government It is an established axiom in Europe +that a constitutional King cannot persevere in a system of government which is +opposed by the two other branches of the legislature. But several Presidents of +the United States have been known to lose the majority in the legislative body +without being obliged to abandon the supreme power, and without inflicting a +serious evil upon society. I have heard this fact quoted as an instance of the +independence and the power of the executive government in America: a +moment’s reflection will convince us, on the contrary, that it is a proof +of its extreme weakness. +</p> + +<p> +A King in Europe requires the support of the legislature to enable him to +perform the duties imposed upon him by the Constitution, because those duties +are enormous. A constitutional King in Europe is not merely the executor of the +law, but the execution of its provisions devolves so completely upon him that +he has the power of paralyzing its influence if it opposes his designs. He +requires the assistance of the legislative assemblies to make the law, but +those assemblies stand in need of his aid to execute it: these two authorities +cannot subsist without each other, and the mechanism of government is stopped +as soon as they are at variance. +</p> + +<p> +In America the President cannot prevent any law from being passed, nor can he +evade the obligation of enforcing it. His sincere and zealous co-operation is +no doubt useful, but it is not indispensable, in the carrying on of public +affairs. All his important acts are directly or indirectly submitted to the +legislature, and of his own free authority he can do but little. It is +therefore his weakness, and not his power, which enables him to remain in +opposition to Congress. In Europe, harmony must reign between the Crown and the +other branches of the legislature, because a collision between them may prove +serious; in America, this harmony is not indispensable, because such a +collision is impossible. +</p> + +<p> +Election Of The President +</p> + +<p> +Dangers of the elective system increase in proportion to the extent of the +prerogative—This system possible in America because no powerful executive +authority is required—What circumstances are favorable to the elective +system—Why the election of the President does not cause a deviation from +the principles of the Government—Influence of the election of the +President on secondary functionaries. +</p> + +<p> +The dangers of the system of election applied to the head of the executive +government of a great people have been sufficiently exemplified by experience +and by history, and the remarks I am about to make refer to America alone. +These dangers may be more or less formidable in proportion to the place which +the executive power occupies, and to the importance it possesses in the State; +and they may vary according to the mode of election and the circumstances in +which the electors are placed. The most weighty argument against the election +of a chief magistrate is, that it offers so splendid a lure to private +ambition, and is so apt to inflame men in the pursuit of power, that when +legitimate means are wanting force may not unfrequently seize what right +denied. +</p> + +<p> +It is clear that the greater the privileges of the executive authority are, the +greater is the temptation; the more the ambition of the candidates is excited, +the more warmly are their interests espoused by a throng of partisans who hope +to share the power when their patron has won the prize. The dangers of the +elective system increase, therefore, in the exact ratio of the influence +exercised by the executive power in the affairs of State. The revolutions of +Poland were not solely attributable to the elective system in general, but to +the fact that the elected monarch was the sovereign of a powerful kingdom. +Before we can discuss the absolute advantages of the elective system we must +make preliminary inquiries as to whether the geographical position, the laws, +the habits, the manners, and the opinions of the people amongst whom it is to +be introduced will admit of the establishment of a weak and dependent executive +government; for to attempt to render the representative of the State a powerful +sovereign, and at the same time elective, is, in my opinion, to entertain two +incompatible designs. To reduce hereditary royalty to the condition of an +elective authority, the only means that I am acquainted with are to +circumscribe its sphere of action beforehand, gradually to diminish its +prerogatives, and to accustom the people to live without its protection. +Nothing, however, is further from the designs of the republicans of Europe than +this course: as many of them owe their hatred of tyranny to the sufferings +which they have personally undergone, it is oppression, and not the extent of +the executive power, which excites their hostility, and they attack the former +without perceiving how nearly it is connected with the latter. +</p> + +<p> +Hitherto no citizen has shown any disposition to expose his honor and his life +in order to become the President of the United States; because the power of +that office is temporary, limited, and subordinate. The prize of fortune must +be great to encourage adventurers in so desperate a game. No candidate has as +yet been able to arouse the dangerous enthusiasm or the passionate sympathies +of the people in his favor, for the very simple reason that when he is at the +head of the Government he has but little power, but little wealth, and but +little glory to share amongst his friends; and his influence in the State is +too small for the success or the ruin of a faction to depend upon the elevation +of an individual to power. +</p> + +<p> +The great advantage of hereditary monarchies is, that as the private interest +of a family is always intimately connected with the interests of the State, the +executive government is never suspended for a single instant; and if the +affairs of a monarchy are not better conducted than those of a republic, at +least there is always some one to conduct them, well or ill, according to his +capacity. In elective States, on the contrary, the wheels of government cease +to act, as it were, of their own accord at the approach of an election, and +even for some time previous to that event. The laws may indeed accelerate the +operation of the election, which may be conducted with such simplicity and +rapidity that the seat of power will never be left vacant; but, notwithstanding +these precautions, a break necessarily occurs in the minds of the people. +</p> + +<p> +At the approach of an election the head of the executive government is wholly +occupied by the coming struggle; his future plans are doubtful; he can +undertake nothing new, and the he will only prosecute with indifference those +designs which another will perhaps terminate. “I am so near the time of +my retirement from office,” said President Jefferson on the 21st of +January, 1809 (six weeks before the election), “that I feel no passion, I +take no part, I express no sentiment. It appears to me just to leave to my +successor the commencement of those measures which he will have to prosecute, +and for which he will be responsible.” +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, the eyes of the nation are centred on a single point; all +are watching the gradual birth of so important an event. The wider the +influence of the executive power extends, the greater and the more necessary is +its constant action, the more fatal is the term of suspense; and a nation which +is accustomed to the government, or, still more, one used to the administrative +protection of a powerful executive authority would be infallibly convulsed by +an election of this kind. In the United States the action of the Government may +be slackened with impunity, because it is always weak and circumscribed. *u +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +u <br /> +[ [This, however, may be a great danger. The period during which Mr. Buchanan +retained office, after the election of Mr. Lincoln, from November, 1860, to +March, 1861, was that which enabled the seceding States of the South to +complete their preparations for the Civil War, and the Executive Government was +paralyzed. No greater evil could befall a nation.—Translator’s +Note.]] +</p> + +<p> +One of the principal vices of the elective system is that it always introduces +a certain degree of instability into the internal and external policy of the +State. But this disadvantage is less sensibly felt if the share of power vested +in the elected magistrate is small. In Rome the principles of the Government +underwent no variation, although the Consuls were changed every year, because +the Senate, which was an hereditary assembly, possessed the directing +authority. If the elective system were adopted in Europe, the condition of most +of the monarchical States would be changed at every new election. In America +the President exercises a certain influence on State affairs, but he does not +conduct them; the preponderating power is vested in the representatives of the +whole nation. The political maxims of the country depend therefore on the mass +of the people, not on the President alone; and consequently in America the +elective system has no very prejudicial influence on the fixed principles of +the Government. But the want of fixed principles is an evil so inherent in the +elective system that it is still extremely perceptible in the narrow sphere to +which the authority of the President extends. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans have admitted that the head of the executive power, who has to +bear the whole responsibility of the duties he is called upon to fulfil, ought +to be empowered to choose his own agents, and to remove them at pleasure: the +legislative bodies watch the conduct of the President more than they direct it. +The consequence of this arrangement is, that at every new election the fate of +all the Federal public officers is in suspense. Mr. Quincy Adams, on his entry +into office, discharged the majority of the individuals who had been appointed +by his predecessor: and I am not aware that General Jackson allowed a single +removable functionary employed in the Federal service to retain his place +beyond the first year which succeeded his election. It is sometimes made a +subject of complaint that in the constitutional monarchies of Europe the fate +of the humbler servants of an Administration depends upon that of the +Ministers. But in elective Governments this evil is far greater. In a +constitutional monarchy successive ministries are rapidly formed; but as the +principal representative of the executive power does not change, the spirit of +innovation is kept within bounds; the changes which take place are in the +details rather than in the principles of the administrative system; but to +substitute one system for another, as is done in America every four years, by +law, is to cause a sort of revolution. As to the misfortunes which may fall +upon individuals in consequence of this state of things, it must be allowed +that the uncertain situation of the public officers is less fraught with evil +consequences in America than elsewhere. It is so easy to acquire an independent +position in the United States that the public officer who loses his place may +be deprived of the comforts of life, but not of the means of subsistence. +</p> + +<p> +I remarked at the beginning of this chapter that the dangers of the elective +system applied to the head of the State are augmented or decreased by the +peculiar circumstances of the people which adopts it. However the functions of +the executive power may be restricted, it must always exercise a great +influence upon the foreign policy of the country, for a negotiation cannot be +opened or successfully carried on otherwise than by a single agent. The more +precarious and the more perilous the position of a people becomes, the more +absolute is the want of a fixed and consistent external policy, and the more +dangerous does the elective system of the Chief Magistrate become. The policy +of the Americans in relation to the whole world is exceedingly simple; for it +may almost be said that no country stands in need of them, nor do they require +the co-operation of any other people. Their independence is never threatened. +In their present condition, therefore, the functions of the executive power are +no less limited by circumstances than by the laws; and the President may +frequently change his line of policy without involving the State in difficulty +or destruction. +</p> + +<p> +Whatever the prerogatives of the executive power may be, the period which +immediately precedes an election and the moment of its duration must always be +considered as a national crisis, which is perilous in proportion to the +internal embarrassments and the external dangers of the country. Few of the +nations of Europe could escape the calamities of anarchy or of conquest every +time they might have to elect a new sovereign. In America society is so +constituted that it can stand without assistance upon its own basis; nothing is +to be feared from the pressure of external dangers, and the election of the +President is a cause of agitation, but not of ruin. +</p> + +<p> +Mode Of Election +</p> + +<p> +Skill of the American legislators shown in the mode of election adopted by +them—Creation of a special electoral body—Separate votes of these +electors—Case in which the House of Representatives is called upon to +choose the President—Results of the twelve elections which have taken +place since the Constitution has been established. +</p> + +<p> +Besides the dangers which are inherent in the system, many other difficulties +may arise from the mode of election, which may be obviated by the precaution of +the legislator. When a people met in arms on some public spot to choose its +head, it was exposed to all the chances of civil war resulting from so martial +a mode of proceeding, besides the dangers of the elective system in itself. The +Polish laws, which subjected the election of the sovereign to the veto of a +single individual, suggested the murder of that individual or prepared the way +to anarchy. +</p> + +<p> +In the examination of the institutions and the political as well as social +condition of the United States, we are struck by the admirable harmony of the +gifts of fortune and the efforts of man. The nation possessed two of the main +causes of internal peace; it was a new country, but it was inhabited by a +people grown old in the exercise of freedom. America had no hostile neighbors +to dread; and the American legislators, profiting by these favorable +circumstances, created a weak and subordinate executive power which could +without danger be made elective. +</p> + +<p> +It then only remained for them to choose the least dangerous of the various +modes of election; and the rules which they laid down upon this point admirably +correspond to the securities which the physical and political constitution of +the country already afforded. Their object was to find the mode of election +which would best express the choice of the people with the least possible +excitement and suspense. It was admitted in the first place that the simple +majority should be decisive; but the difficulty was to obtain this majority +without an interval of delay which it was most important to avoid. It rarely +happens that an individual can at once collect the majority of the suffrages of +a great people; and this difficulty is enhanced in a republic of confederate +States, where local influences are apt to preponderate. The means by which it +was proposed to obviate this second obstacle was to delegate the electoral +powers of the nation to a body of representatives. This mode of election +rendered a majority more probable; for the fewer the electors are, the greater +is the chance of their coming to a final decision. It also offered an +additional probability of a judicious choice. It then remained to be decided +whether this right of election was to be entrusted to a legislative body, the +habitual representative assembly of the nation, or whether an electoral +assembly should be formed for the express purpose of proceeding to the +nomination of a President. The Americans chose the latter alternative, from a +belief that the individuals who were returned to make the laws were incompetent +to represent the wishes of the nation in the election of its chief magistrate; +and that, as they are chosen for more than a year, the constituency they +represent might have changed its opinion in that time. It was thought that if +the legislature was empowered to elect the head of the executive power, its +members would, for some time before the election, be exposed to the manoeuvres +of corruption and the tricks of intrigue; whereas the special electors would, +like a jury, remain mixed up with the crowd till the day of action, when they +would appear for the sole purpose of giving their votes. +</p> + +<p> +It was therefore established that every State should name a certain number of +electors, *v who in their turn should elect the President; and as it had been +observed that the assemblies to which the choice of a chief magistrate had been +entrusted in elective countries inevitably became the centres of passion and of +cabal; that they sometimes usurped an authority which did not belong to them; +and that their proceedings, or the uncertainty which resulted from them, were +sometimes prolonged so much as to endanger the welfare of the State, it was +determined that the electors should all vote upon the same day, without being +convoked to the same place. *w This double election rendered a majority +probable, though not certain; for it was possible that as many differences +might exist between the electors as between their constituents. In this case it +was necessary to have recourse to one of three measures; either to appoint new +electors, or to consult a second time those already appointed, or to defer the +election to another authority. The first two of these alternatives, +independently of the uncertainty of their results, were likely to delay the +final decision, and to perpetuate an agitation which must always be accompanied +with danger. The third expedient was therefore adopted, and it was agreed that +the votes should be transmitted sealed to the President of the Senate, and that +they should be opened and counted in the presence of the Senate and the House +of Representatives. If none of the candidates has a majority, the House of +Representatives then proceeds immediately to elect a President, but with the +condition that it must fix upon one of the three candidates who have the +highest numbers. *x +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +v <br /> +[ As many as it sends members to Congress. The number of electors at the +election of 1833 was 288. (See “The National Calendar,” 1833.)] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +w <br /> +[ The electors of the same State assemble, but they transmit to the central +government the list of their individual votes, and not the mere result of the +vote of the majority.] [Footnote x: In this case it is the majority of the +States, and not the majority of the members, which decides the question; so +that New York has not more influence in the debate than Rhode Island. Thus the +citizens of the Union are first consulted as members of one and the same +community; and, if they cannot agree, recourse is had to the division of the +States, each of which has a separate and independent vote. This is one of the +singularities of the Federal Constitution which can only be explained by the +jar of conflicting interests.] +</p> + +<p> +Thus it is only in case of an event which cannot often happen, and which can +never be foreseen, that the election is entrusted to the ordinary +representatives of the nation; and even then they are obliged to choose a +citizen who has already been designated by a powerful minority of the special +electors. It is by this happy expedient that the respect which is due to the +popular voice is combined with the utmost celerity of execution and those +precautions which the peace of the country demands. But the decision of the +question by the House of Representatives does not necessarily offer an +immediate solution of the difficulty, for the majority of that assembly may +still be doubtful, and in this case the Constitution prescribes no remedy. +Nevertheless, by restricting the number of candidates to three, and by +referring the matter to the judgment of an enlightened public body, it has +smoothed all the obstacles *y which are not inherent in the elective system. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +y <br /> +[ Jefferson, in 1801, was not elected until the thirty-sixth time of +balloting.] +</p> + +<p> +In the forty-four years which have elapsed since the promulgation of the +Federal Constitution the United States have twelve times chosen a President. +Ten of these elections took place simultaneously by the votes of the special +electors in the different States. The House of Representatives has only twice +exercised its conditional privilege of deciding in cases of uncertainty; the +first time was at the election of Mr. Jefferson in 1801; the second was in +1825, when Mr. Quincy Adams was named. *z +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +z <br /> +[ [General Grant is now (1874) the eighteenth President of the United States.]] +</p> + +<p> +Crises Of The Election +</p> + +<p> +The Election may be considered as a national crisis—Why?—Passions +of the people—Anxiety of the President—Calm which succeeds the +agitation of the election. +</p> + +<p> +I have shown what the circumstances are which favored the adoption of the +elective system in the United States, and what precautions were taken by the +legislators to obviate its dangers. The Americans are habitually accustomed to +all kinds of elections, and they know by experience the utmost degree of +excitement which is compatible with security. The vast extent of the country +and the dissemination of the inhabitants render a collision between parties +less probable and less dangerous there than elsewhere. The political +circumstances under which the elections have hitherto been carried on have +presented no real embarrassments to the nation. +</p> + +<p> +Nevertheless, the epoch of the election of a President of the United States may +be considered as a crisis in the affairs of the nation. The influence which he +exercises on public business is no doubt feeble and indirect; but the choice of +the President, which is of small importance to each individual citizen, +concerns the citizens collectively; and however trifling an interest may be, it +assumes a great degree of importance as soon as it becomes general. The +President possesses but few means of rewarding his supporters in comparison to +the kings of Europe, but the places which are at his disposal are sufficiently +numerous to interest, directly or indirectly, several thousand electors in his +success. Political parties in the United States are led to rally round an +individual, in order to acquire a more tangible shape in the eyes of the crowd, +and the name of the candidate for the Presidency is put forward as the symbol +and personification of their theories. For these reasons parties are strongly +interested in gaining the election, not so much with a view to the triumph of +their principles under the auspices of the President-elect as to show by the +majority which returned him, the strength of the supporters of those +principles. +</p> + +<p> +For a long while before the appointed time is at hand the election becomes the +most important and the all-engrossing topic of discussion. The ardor of faction +is redoubled; and all the artificial passions which the imagination can create +in the bosom of a happy and peaceful land are agitated and brought to light. +The President, on the other hand, is absorbed by the cares of self-defence. He +no longer governs for the interest of the State, but for that of his +re-election; he does homage to the majority, and instead of checking its +passions, as his duty commands him to do, he frequently courts its worst +caprices. As the election draws near, the activity of intrigue and the +agitation of the populace increase; the citizens are divided into hostile +camps, each of which assumes the name of its favorite candidate; the whole +nation glows with feverish excitement; the election is the daily theme of the +public papers, the subject of private conversation, the end of every thought +and every action, the sole interest of the present. As soon as the choice is +determined, this ardor is dispelled; and as a calmer season returns, the +current of the State, which had nearly broken its banks, sinks to its usual +level: *a but who can refrain from astonishment at the causes of the storm. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ [Not always. The election of President Lincoln was the signal of civil +war.—Translator’s Note.]] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0020" id="link2HCH0020"></a> Chapter VIII: The Federal +Constitution—Part III</h2> <h3>Re-election Of The President</h3> <p> +When the head of the executive power is re-eligible, it is the State which is +the source of intrigue and corruption—The desire of being re-elected the +chief aim of a President of the United States—Disadvantage of the system +peculiar to America—The natural evil of democracy is that it subordinates +all authority to the slightest desires of the majority—The re-election of +the President encourages this evil. +</p> + +<p> +It may be asked whether the legislators of the United States did right or wrong +in allowing the re-election of the President. It seems at first sight contrary +to all reason to prevent the head of the executive power from being elected a +second time. The influence which the talents and the character of a single +individual may exercise upon the fate of a whole people, in critical +circumstances or arduous times, is well known: a law preventing the re-election +of the chief magistrate would deprive the citizens of the surest pledge of the +prosperity and the security of the commonwealth; and, by a singular +inconsistency, a man would be excluded from the government at the very time +when he had shown his ability in conducting its affairs. +</p> + +<p> +But if these arguments are strong, perhaps still more powerful reasons may be +advanced against them. Intrigue and corruption are the natural defects of +elective government; but when the head of the State can be re-elected these +evils rise to a great height, and compromise the very existence of the country. +When a simple candidate seeks to rise by intrigue, his manoeuvres must +necessarily be limited to a narrow sphere; but when the chief magistrate enters +the lists, he borrows the strength of the government for his own purposes. In +the former case the feeble resources of an individual are in action; in the +latter, the State itself, with all its immense influence, is busied in the work +of corruption and cabal. The private citizen, who employs the most immoral +practices to acquire power, can only act in a manner indirectly prejudicial to +the public prosperity. But if the representative of the executive descends into +the combat, the cares of government dwindle into second-rate importance, and +the success of his election is his first concern. All laws and all the +negotiations he undertakes are to him nothing more than electioneering schemes; +places become the reward of services rendered, not to the nation, but to its +chief; and the influence of the government, if not injurious to the country, is +at least no longer beneficial to the community for which it was created. +</p> + +<p> +It is impossible to consider the ordinary course of affairs in the United +States without perceiving that the desire of being re-elected is the chief aim +of the President; that his whole administration, and even his most indifferent +measures, tend to this object; and that, as the crisis approaches, his personal +interest takes the place of his interest in the public good. The principle of +re-eligibility renders the corrupt influence of elective government still more +extensive and pernicious. +</p> + +<p> +In America it exercises a peculiarly fatal influence on the sources of national +existence. Every government seems to be afflicted by some evil which is +inherent in its nature, and the genius of the legislator is shown in eluding +its attacks. A State may survive the influence of a host of bad laws, and the +mischief they cause is frequently exaggerated; but a law which encourages the +growth of the canker within must prove fatal in the end, although its bad +consequences may not be immediately perceived. +</p> + +<p> +The principle of destruction in absolute monarchies lies in the excessive and +unreasonable extension of the prerogative of the crown; and a measure tending +to remove the constitutional provisions which counterbalance this influence +would be radically bad, even if its immediate consequences were unattended with +evil. By a parity of reasoning, in countries governed by a democracy, where the +people is perpetually drawing all authority to itself, the laws which increase +or accelerate its action are the direct assailants of the very principle of the +government. +</p> + +<p> +The greatest proof of the ability of the American legislators is, that they +clearly discerned this truth, and that they had the courage to act up to it. +They conceived that a certain authority above the body of the people was +necessary, which should enjoy a degree of independence, without, however, being +entirely beyond the popular control; an authority which would be forced to +comply with the permanent determinations of the majority, but which would be +able to resist its caprices, and to refuse its most dangerous demands. To this +end they centred the whole executive power of the nation in a single arm; they +granted extensive prerogatives to the President, and they armed him with the +veto to resist the encroachments of the legislature. +</p> + +<p> +But by introducing the principle of re-election they partly destroyed their +work; and they rendered the President but little inclined to exert the great +power they had vested in his hands. If ineligible a second time, the President +would be far from independent of the people, for his responsibility would not +be lessened; but the favor of the people would not be so necessary to him as to +induce him to court it by humoring its desires. If re-eligible (and this is +more especially true at the present day, when political morality is relaxed, +and when great men are rare), the President of the United States becomes an +easy tool in the hands of the majority. He adopts its likings and its +animosities, he hastens to anticipate its wishes, he forestalls its complaints, +he yields to its idlest cravings, and instead of guiding it, as the legislature +intended that he should do, he is ever ready to follow its bidding. Thus, in +order not to deprive the State of the talents of an individual, those talents +have been rendered almost useless; and to reserve an expedient for +extraordinary perils, the country has been exposed to daily dangers. +</p> + +<p> +Federal Courts *b +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ See chap. VI, entitled “Judicial Power in the United States.” +This chapter explains the general principles of the American theory of judicial +institutions. See also the Federal Constitution, Art. 3. See “The +Federalists,” Nos. 78-83, inclusive; and a work entitled +“Constitutional Law,” being a view of the practice and jurisdiction +of the courts of the United States, by Thomas Sergeant. See Story, pp. 134, +162, 489, 511, 581, 668; and the organic law of September 24, 1789, in the +“Collection of the Laws of the United States,” by Story, vol. i. p. +53.] +</p> + +<p> +Political importance of the judiciary in the United States—Difficulty of +treating this subject—Utility of judicial power in +confederations—What tribunals could be introduced into the +Union—Necessity of establishing federal courts of +justice—Organization of the national judiciary—The Supreme +Court—In what it differs from all known tribunals. +</p> + +<p> +I have inquired into the legislative and executive power of the Union, and the +judicial power now remains to be examined; but in this place I cannot conceal +my fears from the reader. Their judicial institutions exercise a great +influence on the condition of the Anglo-Americans, and they occupy a prominent +place amongst what are probably called political institutions: in this respect +they are peculiarly deserving of our attention. But I am at a loss to explain +the political action of the American tribunals without entering into some +technical details of their constitution and their forms of proceeding; and I +know not how to descend to these minutiae without wearying the curiosity of the +reader by the natural aridity of the subject, or without risking to fall into +obscurity through a desire to be succinct. I can scarcely hope to escape these +various evils; for if I appear too lengthy to a man of the world, a lawyer may +on the other hand complain of my brevity. But these are the natural +disadvantages of my subject, and more especially of the point which I am about +to discuss. +</p> + +<p> +The great difficulty was, not to devise the Constitution to the Federal +Government, but to find out a method of enforcing its laws. Governments have in +general but two means of overcoming the opposition of the people they govern, +viz., the physical force which is at their own disposal, and the moral force +which they derive from the decisions of the courts of justice. +</p> + +<p> +A government which should have no other means of exacting obedience than open +war must be very near its ruin, for one of two alternatives would then probably +occur: if its authority was small and its character temperate, it would not +resort to violence till the last extremity, and it would connive at a number of +partial acts of insubordination, in which case the State would gradually fall +into anarchy; if it was enterprising and powerful, it would perpetually have +recourse to its physical strength, and would speedily degenerate into a +military despotism. So that its activity would not be less prejudicial to the +community than its inaction. +</p> + +<p> +The great end of justice is to substitute the notion of right for that of +violence, and to place a legal barrier between the power of the government and +the use of physical force. The authority which is awarded to the intervention +of a court of justice by the general opinion of mankind is so surprisingly +great that it clings to the mere formalities of justice, and gives a bodily +influence to the shadow of the law. The moral force which courts of justice +possess renders the introduction of physical force exceedingly rare, and is +very frequently substituted for it; but if the latter proves to be +indispensable, its power is doubled by the association of the idea of law. +</p> + +<p> +A federal government stands in greater need of the support of judicial +institutions than any other, because it is naturally weak and exposed to +formidable opposition. *c If it were always obliged to resort to violence in +the first instance, it could not fulfil its task. The Union, therefore, +required a national judiciary to enforce the obedience of the citizens to the +laws, and to repeal the attacks which might be directed against them. The +question then remained as to what tribunals were to exercise these privileges; +were they to be entrusted to the courts of justice which were already organized +in every State? or was it necessary to create federal courts? It may easily be +proved that the Union could not adapt the judicial power of the States to its +wants. The separation of the judiciary from the administrative power of the +State no doubt affects the security of every citizen and the liberty of all. +But it is no less important to the existence of the nation that these several +powers should have the same origin, should follow the same principles, and act +in the same sphere; in a word, that they should be correlative and homogeneous. +No one, I presume, ever suggested the advantage of trying offences committed in +France by a foreign court of justice, in order to secure the impartiality of +the judges. The Americans form one people in relation to their Federal +Government; but in the bosom of this people divers political bodies have been +allowed to subsist which are dependent on the national Government in a few +points, and independent in all the rest; which have all a distinct origin, +maxims peculiar to themselves, and special means of carrying on their affairs. +To entrust the execution of the laws of the Union to tribunals instituted by +these political bodies would be to allow foreign judges to preside over the +nation. Nay, more; not only is each State foreign to the Union at large, but it +is in perpetual opposition to the common interests, since whatever authority +the Union loses turns to the advantage of the States. Thus to enforce the laws +of the Union by means of the tribunals of the States would be to allow not only +foreign but partial judges to preside over the nation. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ Federal laws are those which most require courts of justice, and those at the +same time which have most rarely established them. The reason is that +confederations have usually been formed by independent States, which +entertained no real intention of obeying the central Government, and which very +readily ceded the right of command to the federal executive, and very prudently +reserved the right of non-compliance to themselves.] +</p> + +<p> +But the number, still more than the mere character, of the tribunals of the +States rendered them unfit for the service of the nation. When the Federal +Constitution was formed there were already thirteen courts of justice in the +United States which decided causes without appeal. That number is now increased +to twenty-four. To suppose that a State can subsist when its fundamental laws +may be subjected to four-and-twenty different interpretations at the same time +is to advance a proposition alike contrary to reason and to experience. +</p> + +<p> +The American legislators therefore agreed to create a federal judiciary power +to apply the laws of the Union, and to determine certain questions affecting +general interests, which were carefully determined beforehand. The entire +judicial power of the Union was centred in one tribunal, which was denominated +the Supreme Court of the United States. But, to facilitate the expedition of +business, inferior courts were appended to it, which were empowered to decide +causes of small importance without appeal, and with appeal causes of more +magnitude. The members of the Supreme Court are named neither by the people nor +the legislature, but by the President of the United States, acting with the +advice of the Senate. In order to render them independent of the other +authorities, their office was made inalienable; and it was determined that +their salary, when once fixed, should not be altered by the legislature. *d It +was easy to proclaim the principle of a Federal judiciary, but difficulties +multiplied when the extent of its jurisdiction was to be determined. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ The Union was divided into districts, in each of which a resident Federal +judge was appointed, and the court in which he presided was termed a +“District Court.” Each of the judges of the Supreme Court annually +visits a certain portion of the Republic, in order to try the most important +causes upon the spot; the court presided over by this magistrate is styled a +“Circuit Court.” Lastly, all the most serious cases of litigation +are brought before the Supreme Court, which holds a solemn session once a year, +at which all the judges of the Circuit Courts must attend. The jury was +introduced into the Federal Courts in the same manner, and in the same cases, +as into the courts of the States. +</p> + +<p> +It will be observed that no analogy exists between the Supreme Court of the +United States and the French Cour de Cassation, since the latter only hears +appeals on questions of law. The Supreme Court decides upon the evidence of the +fact as well as upon the law of the case, whereas the Cour de Cassation does +not pronounce a decision of its own, but refers the cause to the arbitration of +another tribunal. See the law of September 24, 1789, “Laws of the United +States,” by Story, vol. i. p. 53.] +</p> + +<p> +Means Of Determining The Jurisdiction Of The Federal Courts Difficulty of +determining the jurisdiction of separate courts of justice in +confederations—The courts of the Union obtained the right of fixing their +own jurisdiction—In what respect this rule attacks the portion of +sovereignty reserved to the several States—The sovereignty of these +States restricted by the laws, and the interpretation of the +laws—Consequently, the danger of the several States is more apparent than +real. +</p> + +<p> +As the Constitution of the United States recognized two distinct powers in +presence of each other, represented in a judicial point of view by two distinct +classes of courts of justice, the utmost care which could be taken in defining +their separate jurisdictions would have been insufficient to prevent frequent +collisions between those tribunals. The question then arose to whom the right +of deciding the competency of each court was to be referred. +</p> + +<p> +In nations which constitute a single body politic, when a question is debated +between two courts relating to their mutual jurisdiction, a third tribunal is +generally within reach to decide the difference; and this is effected without +difficulty, because in these nations the questions of judicial competency have +no connection with the privileges of the national supremacy. But it was +impossible to create an arbiter between a superior court of the Union and the +superior court of a separate State which would not belong to one of these two +classes. It was, therefore, necessary to allow one of these courts to judge its +own cause, and to take or to retain cognizance of the point which was +contested. To grant this privilege to the different courts of the States would +have been to destroy the sovereignty of the Union de facto after having +established it de jure; for the interpretation of the Constitution would soon +have restored that portion of independence to the States of which the terms of +that act deprived them. The object of the creation of a Federal tribunal was to +prevent the courts of the States from deciding questions affecting the national +interests in their own department, and so to form a uniform body of +jurisprudene for the interpretation of the laws of the Union. This end would +not have been accomplished if the courts of the several States had been +competent to decide upon cases in their separate capacities from which they +were obliged to abstain as Federal tribunals. The Supreme Court of the United +States was therefore invested with the right of determining all questions of +jurisdiction. *e +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ In order to diminish the number of these suits, it was decided that in a +great many Federal causes the courts of the States should be empowered to +decide conjointly with those of the Union, the losing party having then a right +of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court of +Virginia contested the right of the Supreme Court of the United States to judge +an appeal from its decisions, but unsuccessfully. See “Kent’s +Commentaries,” vol. i. p. 300, pp. 370 et seq.; Story’s +“Commentaries,” p. 646; and “The Organic Law of the United +States,” vol. i. p. 35.] +</p> + +<p> +This was a severe blow upon the independence of the States, which was thus +restricted not only by the laws, but by the interpretation of them; by one +limit which was known, and by another which was dubious; by a rule which was +certain, and a rule which was arbitrary. It is true the Constitution had laid +down the precise limits of the Federal supremacy, but whenever this supremacy +is contested by one of the States, a Federal tribunal decides the question. +Nevertheless, the dangers with which the independence of the States was +threatened by this mode of proceeding are less serious than they appeared to +be. We shall see hereafter that in America the real strength of the country is +vested in the provincial far more than in the Federal Government. The Federal +judges are conscious of the relative weakness of the power in whose name they +act, and they are more inclined to abandon a right of jurisdiction in cases +where it is justly their own than to assert a privilege to which they have no +legal claim. +</p> + +<p> +Different Cases Of Jurisdiction +</p> + +<p> +The matter and the party are the first conditions of the Federal +jurisdiction—Suits in which ambassadors are engaged—Suits of the +Union—Of a separate State—By whom tried—Causes resulting from +the laws of the Union—Why judged by the Federal tribunals—Causes +relating to the performance of contracts tried by the Federal +courts—Consequence of this arrangement. +</p> + +<p> +After having appointed the means of fixing the competency of the Federal +courts, the legislators of the Union defined the cases which should come within +their jurisdiction. It was established, on the one hand, that certain parties +must always be brought before the Federal courts, without any regard to the +special nature of the cause; and, on the other, that certain causes must always +be brought before the same courts, without any regard to the quality of the +parties in the suit. These distinctions were therefore admitted to be the basis +of the Federal jurisdiction. +</p> + +<p> +Ambassadors are the representatives of nations in a state of amity with the +Union, and whatever concerns these personages concerns in some degree the whole +Union. When an ambassador is a party in a suit, that suit affects the welfare +of the nation, and a Federal tribunal is naturally called upon to decide it. +</p> + +<p> +The Union itself may be invoked in legal proceedings, and in this case it would +be alike contrary to the customs of all nations and to common sense to appeal +to a tribunal representing any other sovereignty than its own; the Federal +courts, therefore, take cognizance of these affairs. +</p> + +<p> +When two parties belonging to two different States are engaged in a suit, the +case cannot with propriety be brought before a court of either State. The +surest expedient is to select a tribunal like that of the Union, which can +excite the suspicions of neither party, and which offers the most natural as +well as the most certain remedy. +</p> + +<p> +When the two parties are not private individuals, but States, an important +political consideration is added to the same motive of equity. The quality of +the parties in this case gives a national importance to all their disputes; and +the most trifling litigation of the States may be said to involve the peace of +the whole Union. *f +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ The Constitution also says that the Federal courts shall decide +“controversies between a State and the citizens of another State.” +And here a most important question of a constitutional nature arose, which was, +whether the jurisdiction given by the Constitution in cases in which a State is +a party extended to suits brought against a State as well as by it, or was +exclusively confined to the latter. The question was most elaborately +considered in the case of Chisholm v. Georgia, and was decided by the majority +of the Supreme Court in the affirmative. The decision created general alarm +among the States, and an amendment was proposed and ratified by which the power +was entirely taken away, so far as it regards suits brought against a State. +See Story’s “Commentaries,” p. 624, or in the large edition +Section 1677.] +</p> + +<p> +The nature of the cause frequently prescribes the rule of competency. Thus all +the questions which concern maritime commerce evidently fall under the +cognizance of the Federal tribunals. *g Almost all these questions are +connected with the interpretation of the law of nations, and in this respect +they essentially interest the Union in relation to foreign powers. Moreover, as +the sea is not included within the limits of any peculiar jurisdiction, the +national courts can only hear causes which originate in maritime affairs. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ As for instance, all cases of piracy.] +</p> + +<p> +The Constitution comprises under one head almost all the cases which by their +very nature come within the limits of the Federal courts. The rule which it +lays down is simple, but pregnant with an entire system of ideas, and with a +vast multitude of facts. It declares that the judicial power of the Supreme +Court shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising under the laws of the +United States. +</p> + +<p> +Two examples will put the intention of the legislator in the clearest light: +</p> + +<p> +The Constitution prohibits the States from making laws on the value and +circulation of money: If, notwithstanding this prohibition, a State passes a +law of this kind, with which the interested parties refuse to comply because it +is contrary to the Constitution, the case must come before a Federal court, +because it arises under the laws of the United States. Again, if difficulties +arise in the levying of import duties which have been voted by Congress, the +Federal court must decide the case, because it arises under the interpretation +of a law of the United States. +</p> + +<p> +This rule is in perfect accordance with the fundamental principles of the +Federal Constitution. The Union, as it was established in 1789, possesses, it +is true, a limited supremacy; but it was intended that within its limits it +should form one and the same people. *h Within those limits the Union is +sovereign. When this point is established and admitted, the inference is easy; +for if it be acknowledged that the United States constitute one and the same +people within the bounds prescribed by their Constitution, it is impossible to +refuse them the rights which belong to other nations. But it has been allowed, +from the origin of society, that every nation has the right of deciding by its +own courts those questions which concern the execution of its own laws. To this +it is answered that the Union is in so singular a position that in relation to +some matters it constitutes a people, and that in relation to all the rest it +is a nonentity. But the inference to be drawn is, that in the laws relating to +these matters the Union possesses all the rights of absolute sovereignty. The +difficulty is to know what these matters are; and when once it is resolved (and +we have shown how it was resolved, in speaking of the means of determining the +jurisdiction of the Federal courts) no further doubt can arise; for as soon as +it is established that a suit is Federal—that is to say, that it belongs +to the share of sovereignty reserved by the Constitution of the Union—the +natural consequence is that it should come within the jurisdiction of a Federal +court. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ This principle was in some measure restricted by the introduction of the +several States as independent powers into the Senate, and by allowing them to +vote separately in the House of Representatives when the President is elected +by that body. But these are exceptions, and the contrary principle is the +rule.] +</p> + +<p> +Whenever the laws of the United States are attacked, or whenever they are +resorted to in self-defence, the Federal courts must be appealed to. Thus the +jurisdiction of the tribunals of the Union extends and narrows its limits +exactly in the same ratio as the sovereignty of the Union augments or +decreases. We have shown that the principal aim of the legislators of 1789 was +to divide the sovereign authority into two parts. In the one they placed the +control of all the general interests of the Union, in the other the control of +the special interests of its component States. Their chief solicitude was to +arm the Federal Government with sufficient power to enable it to resist, within +its sphere, the encroachments of the several States. As for these communities, +the principle of independence within certain limits of their own was adopted in +their behalf; and they were concealed from the inspection, and protected from +the control, of the central Government. In speaking of the division of +authority, I observed that this latter principle had not always been held +sacred, since the States are prevented from passing certain laws which +apparently belong to their own particular sphere of interest. When a State of +the Union passes a law of this kind, the citizens who are injured by its +execution can appeal to the Federal courts. +</p> + +<p> +Thus the jurisdiction of the Federal courts extends not only to all the cases +which arise under the laws of the Union, but also to those which arise under +laws made by the several States in opposition to the Constitution. The States +are prohibited from making ex post facto laws in criminal cases, and any person +condemned by virtue of a law of this kind can appeal to the judicial power of +the Union. The States are likewise prohibited from making laws which may have a +tendency to impair the obligations of contracts. *i If a citizen thinks that an +obligation of this kind is impaired by a law passed in his State, he may refuse +to obey it, and may appeal to the Federal courts. *j +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ It is perfectly clear, says Mr. Story (“Commentaries,” p. 503, or +in the large edition Section 1379), that any law which enlarges, abridges, or +in any manner changes the intention of the parties, resulting from the +stipulations in the contract, necessarily impairs it. He gives in the same +place a very long and careful definition of what is understood by a contract in +Federal jurisprudence. A grant made by the State to a private individual, and +accepted by him, is a contract, and cannot be revoked by any future law. A +charter granted by the State to a company is a contract, and equally binding to +the State as to the grantee. The clause of the Constitution here referred to +insures, therefore, the existence of a great part of acquired rights, but not +of all. Property may legally be held, though it may not have passed into the +possessor’s hands by means of a contract; and its possession is an +acquired right, not guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ A remarkable instance of this is given by Mr. Story (p. 508, or in the large +edition Section 1388): “Dartmouth College in New Hampshire had been +founded by a charter granted to certain individuals before the American +Revolution, and its trustees formed a corporation under this charter. The +legislature of New Hampshire had, without the consent of this corporation, +passed an act changing the organization of the original provincial charter of +the college, and transferring all the rights, privileges, and franchises from +the old charter trustees to new trustees appointed under the act. The +constitutionality of the act was contested, and, after solemn arguments, it was +deliberately held by the Supreme Court that the provincial charter was a +contract within the meaning of the Constitution (Art. I. Section 10), and that +the emendatory act was utterly void, as impairing the obligation of that +charter. The college was deemed, like other colleges of private foundation, to +be a private eleemosynary institution, endowed by its charter with a capacity +to take property unconnected with the Government. Its funds were bestowed upon +the faith of the charter, and those funds consisted entirely of private +donations. It is true that the uses were in some sense public, that is, for the +general benefit, and not for the mere benefit of the corporators; but this did +not make the corporation a public corporation. It was a private institution for +general charity. It was not distinguishable in principle from a private +donation, vested in private trustees, for a public charity, or for a particular +purpose of beneficence. And the State itself, if it had bestowed funds upon a +charity of the same nature, could not resume those funds.”] +</p> + +<p> +This provision appears to me to be the most serious attack upon the +independence of the States. The rights awarded to the Federal Government for +purposes of obvious national importance are definite and easily comprehensible; +but those with which this last clause invests it are not either clearly +appreciable or accurately defined. For there are vast numbers of political laws +which influence the existence of obligations of contracts, which may thus +furnish an easy pretext for the aggressions of the central authority. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0021" id="link2HCH0021"></a> Chapter VIII: The Federal +Constitution—Part IV</h2> <h3>Procedure Of The Federal Courts</h3> <p> +Natural weakness of the judiciary power in confederations—Legislators +ought to strive as much as possible to bring private individuals, and not +States, before the Federal Courts—How the Americans have succeeded in +this—Direct prosecution of private individuals in the Federal +Courts—Indirect prosecution of the States which violate the laws of the +Union—The decrees of the Supreme Court enervate but do not destroy the +provincial laws. +</p> + +<p> +I have shown what the privileges of the Federal courts are, and it is no less +important to point out the manner in which they are exercised. The irresistible +authority of justice in countries in which the sovereignty in undivided is +derived from the fact that the tribunals of those countries represent the +entire nation at issue with the individual against whom their decree is +directed, and the idea of power is thus introduced to corroborate the idea of +right. But this is not always the case in countries in which the sovereignty is +divided; in them the judicial power is more frequently opposed to a fraction of +the nation than to an isolated individual, and its moral authority and physical +strength are consequently diminished. In federal States the power of the judge +is naturally decreased, and that of the justiciable parties is augmented. The +aim of the legislator in confederate States ought therefore to be to render the +position of the courts of justice analogous to that which they occupy in +countries where the sovereignty is undivided; in other words, his efforts ought +constantly to tend to maintain the judicial power of the confederation as the +representative of the nation, and the justiciable party as the representative +of an individual interest. +</p> + +<p> +Every government, whatever may be its constitution, requires the means of +constraining its subjects to discharge their obligations, and of protecting its +privileges from their assaults. As far as the direct action of the Government +on the community is concerned, the Constitution of the United States contrived, +by a master-stroke of policy, that the federal courts, acting in the name of +the laws, should only take cognizance of parties in an individual capacity. +For, as it had been declared that the Union consisted of one and the same +people within the limits laid down by the Constitution, the inference was that +the Government created by this Constitution, and acting within these limits, +was invested with all the privileges of a national government, one of the +principal of which is the right of transmitting its injunctions directly to the +private citizen. When, for instance, the Union votes an impost, it does not +apply to the States for the levying of it, but to every American citizen in +proportion to his assessment. The Supreme Court, which is empowered to enforce +the execution of this law of the Union, exerts its influence not upon a +refractory State, but upon the private taxpayer; and, like the judicial power +of other nations, it is opposed to the person of an individual. It is to be +observed that the Union chose its own antagonist; and as that antagonist is +feeble, he is naturally worsted. +</p> + +<p> +But the difficulty increases when the proceedings are not brought forward by +but against the Union. The Constitution recognizes the legislative power of the +States; and a law so enacted may impair the privileges of the Union, in which +case a collision in unavoidable between that body and the State which has +passed the law: and it only remains to select the least dangerous remedy, which +is very clearly deducible from the general principles I have before +established. *k +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ See Chapter VI. on “Judicial Power in America.”] +</p> + +<p> +It may be conceived that, in the case under consideration, the Union might have +used the State before a Federal court, which would have annulled the act, and +by this means it would have adopted a natural course of proceeding; but the +judicial power would have been placed in open hostility to the State, and it +was desirable to avoid this predicament as much as possible. The Americans hold +that it is nearly impossible that a new law should not impair the interests of +some private individual by its provisions: these private interests are assumed +by the American legislators as the ground of attack against such measures as +may be prejudicial to the Union, and it is to these cases that the protection +of the Supreme Court is extended. +</p> + +<p> +Suppose a State vends a certain portion of its territory to a company, and that +a year afterwards it passes a law by which the territory is otherwise disposed +of, and that clause of the Constitution which prohibits laws impairing the +obligation of contracts violated. When the purchaser under the second act +appears to take possession, the possessor under the first act brings his action +before the tribunals of the Union, and causes the title of the claimant to be +pronounced null and void. *l Thus, in point of fact, the judicial power of the +Union is contesting the claims of the sovereignty of a State; but it only acts +indirectly and upon a special application of detail: it attacks the law in its +consequences, not in its principle, and it rather weakens than destroys it. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ See Kent’s “Commentaries,” vol. i. p. 387.] +</p> + +<p> +The last hypothesis that remained was that each State formed a corporation +enjoying a separate existence and distinct civil rights, and that it could +therefore sue or be sued before a tribunal. Thus a State could bring an action +against another State. In this instance the Union was not called upon to +contest a provincial law, but to try a suit in which a State was a party. This +suit was perfectly similar to any other cause, except that the quality of the +parties was different; and here the danger pointed out at the beginning of this +chapter exists with less chance of being avoided. The inherent disadvantage of +the very essence of Federal constitutions is that they engender parties in the +bosom of the nation which present powerful obstacles to the free course of +justice. +</p> + +<p> +High Rank Of The Supreme Court Amongst The Great Powers Of State No nation ever +constituted so great a judicial power as the Americans—Extent of its +prerogative—Its political influence—The tranquillity and the very +existence of the Union depend on the discretion of the seven Federal Judges. +</p> + +<p> +When we have successively examined in detail the organization of the Supreme +Court, and the entire prerogatives which it exercises, we shall readily admit +that a more imposing judicial power was never constituted by any people. The +Supreme Court is placed at the head of all known tribunals, both by the nature +of its rights and the class of justiciable parties which it controls. +</p> + +<p> +In all the civilized countries of Europe the Government has always shown the +greatest repugnance to allow the cases to which it was itself a party to be +decided by the ordinary course of justice. This repugnance naturally attains +its utmost height in an absolute Government; and, on the other hand, the +privileges of the courts of justice are extended with the increasing liberties +of the people: but no European nation has at present held that all judicial +controversies, without regard to their origin, can be decided by the judges of +common law. +</p> + +<p> +In America this theory has been actually put in practice, and the Supreme Court +of the United States is the sole tribunal of the nation. Its power extends to +all the cases arising under laws and treaties made by the executive and +legislative authorities, to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, +and in general to all points which affect the law of nations. It may even be +affirmed that, although its constitution is essentially judicial, its +prerogatives are almost entirely political. Its sole object is to enforce the +execution of the laws of the Union; and the Union only regulates the relations +of the Government with the citizens, and of the nation with Foreign Powers: the +relations of citizens amongst themselves are almost exclusively regulated by +the sovereignty of the States. +</p> + +<p> +A second and still greater cause of the preponderance of this court may be +adduced. In the nations of Europe the courts of justice are only called upon to +try the controversies of private individuals; but the Supreme Court of the +United States summons sovereign powers to its bar. When the clerk of the court +advances on the steps of the tribunal, and simply says, “The State of New +York versus the State of Ohio,” it is impossible not to feel that the +Court which he addresses is no ordinary body; and when it is recollected that +one of these parties represents one million, and the other two millions of men, +one is struck by the responsibility of the seven judges whose decision is about +to satisfy or to disappoint so large a number of their fellow-citizens. +</p> + +<p> +The peace, the prosperity, and the very existence of the Union are vested in +the hands of the seven judges. Without their active co-operation the +Constitution would be a dead letter: the Executive appeals to them for +assistance against the encroachments of the legislative powers; the Legislature +demands their protection from the designs of the Executive; they defend the +Union from the disobedience of the States, the States from the exaggerated +claims of the Union, the public interest against the interests of private +citizens, and the conservative spirit of order against the fleeting innovations +of democracy. Their power is enormous, but it is clothed in the authority of +public opinion. They are the all-powerful guardians of a people which respects +law, but they would be impotent against popular neglect or popular contempt. +The force of public opinion is the most intractable of agents, because its +exact limits cannot be defined; and it is not less dangerous to exceed than to +remain below the boundary prescribed. +</p> + +<p> +The Federal judges must not only be good citizens, and men possessed of that +information and integrity which are indispensable to magistrates, but they must +be statesmen—politicians, not unread in the signs of the times, not +afraid to brave the obstacles which can be subdued, nor slow to turn aside such +encroaching elements as may threaten the supremacy of the Union and the +obedience which is due to the laws. +</p> + +<p> +The President, who exercises a limited power, may err without causing great +mischief in the State. Congress may decide amiss without destroying the Union, +because the electoral body in which Congress originates may cause it to retract +its decision by changing its members. But if the Supreme Court is ever composed +of imprudent men or bad citizens, the Union may be plunged into anarchy or +civil war. +</p> + +<p> +The real cause of this danger, however, does not lie in the constitution of the +tribunal, but in the very nature of Federal Governments. We have observed that +in confederate peoples it is especially necessary to consolidate the judicial +authority, because in no other nations do those independent persons who are +able to cope with the social body exist in greater power or in a better +condition to resist the physical strength of the Government. But the more a +power requires to be strengthened, the more extensive and independent it must +be made; and the dangers which its abuse may create are heightened by its +independence and its strength. The source of the evil is not, therefore, in the +constitution of the power, but in the constitution of those States which render +its existence necessary. +</p> + +<p> +In What Respects The Federal Constitution Is Superior To That Of The States +</p> + +<p> +In what respects the Constitution of the Union can be compared to that of the +States—Superiority of the Constitution of the Union attributable to the +wisdom of the Federal legislators—Legislature of the Union less dependent +on the people than that of the States—Executive power more independent in +its sphere—Judicial power less subjected to the inclinations of the +majority—Practical consequence of these facts—The dangers inherent +in a democratic government eluded by the Federal legislators, and increased by +the legislators of the States. +</p> + +<p> +The Federal Constitution differs essentially from that of the States in the +ends which it is intended to accomplish, but in the means by which these ends +are promoted a greater analogy exists between them. The objects of the +Governments are different, but their forms are the same; and in this special +point of view there is some advantage in comparing them together. +</p> + +<p> +I am of opinion that the Federal Constitution is superior to all the +Constitutions of the States, for several reasons. +</p> + +<p> +The present Constitution of the Union was formed at a later period than those +of the majority of the States, and it may have derived some ameliorations from +past experience. But we shall be led to acknowledge that this is only a +secondary cause of its superiority, when we recollect that eleven new States *n +have been added to the American Confederation since the promulgation of the +Federal Constitution, and that these new republics have always rather +exaggerated than avoided the defects which existed in the former Constitutions. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ [The number of States has now risen to 46 (1874), besides the District of +Columbia.]] +</p> + +<p> +The chief cause of the superiority of the Federal Constitution lay in the +character of the legislators who composed it. At the time when it was formed +the dangers of the Confederation were imminent, and its ruin seemed inevitable. +In this extremity the people chose the men who most deserved the esteem, rather +than those who had gained the affections, of the country. I have already +observed that distinguished as almost all the legislators of the Union were for +their intelligence, they were still more so for their patriotism. They had all +been nurtured at a time when the spirit of liberty was braced by a continual +struggle against a powerful and predominant authority. When the contest was +terminated, whilst the excited passions of the populace persisted in warring +with dangers which had ceased to threaten them, these men stopped short in +their career; they cast a calmer and more penetrating look upon the country +which was now their own; they perceived that the war of independence was +definitely ended, and that the only dangers which America had to fear were +those which might result from the abuse of the freedom she had won. They had +the courage to say what they believed to be true, because they were animated by +a warm and sincere love of liberty; and they ventured to propose restrictions, +because they were resolutely opposed to destruction. *o +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ At this time Alexander Hamilton, who was one of the principal founders of the +Constitution, ventured to express the following sentiments in “The +Federalist,” No. 71:— +</p> + +<p> +“There are some who would be inclined to regard the servile pliancy of +the Executive to a prevailing current, either in the community or in the +Legislature, as its best recommendation. But such men entertain very crude +notions, as well of the purposes for which government was instituted as of the +true means by which the public happiness may be promoted. The Republican +principle demands that the deliberative sense of the community should govern +the conduct of those to whom they entrust the management of their affairs; but +it does not require an unqualified complaisance to every sudden breeze of +passion, or to every transient impulse which the people may receive from the +arts of men who flatter their prejudices to betray their interests. It is a +just observation, that the people commonly intend the public good. This often +applies to their very errors. But their good sense would despise the adulator +who should pretend that they always reason right about the means of promoting +it. They know from experience that they sometimes err; and the wonder is that +they so seldom err as they do, beset, as they continually are, by the wiles of +parasites and sycophants; by the snares of the ambitious, the avaricious, the +desperate; by the artifices of men who possess their confidence more than they +deserve it, and of those who seek to possess rather than to deserve it. When +occasions present themselves in which the interests of the people are at +variance with their inclinations, it is the duty of persons whom they have +appointed to be the guardians of those interests to withstand the temporary +delusion, in order to give them time and opportunity for more cool and sedate +reflection. Instances might be cited in which a conduct of this kind has saved +the people from very fatal consequences of their own mistakes, and has procured +lasting monuments of their gratitude to the men who had courage and magnanimity +enough to serve them at the peril of their displeasure.”] +</p> + +<p> +The greater number of the Constitutions of the States assign one year for the +duration of the House of Representatives, and two years for that of the Senate; +so that members of the legislative body are constantly and narrowly tied down +by the slightest desires of their constituents. The legislators of the Union +were of opinion that this excessive dependence of the Legislature tended to +alter the nature of the main consequences of the representative system, since +it vested the source, not only of authority, but of government, in the people. +They increased the length of the time for which the representatives were +returned, in order to give them freer scope for the exercise of their own +judgment. +</p> + +<p> +The Federal Constitution, as well as the Constitutions of the different States, +divided the legislative body into two branches. But in the States these two +branches were composed of the same elements, and elected in the same manner. +The consequence was that the passions and inclinations of the populace were as +rapidly and as energetically represented in one chamber as in the other, and +that laws were made with all the characteristics of violence and precipitation. +By the Federal Constitution the two houses originate in like manner in the +choice of the people; but the conditions of eligibility and the mode of +election were changed, to the end that, if, as is the case in certain nations, +one branch of the Legislature represents the same interests as the other, it +may at least represent a superior degree of intelligence and discretion. A +mature age was made one of the conditions of the senatorial dignity, and the +Upper House was chosen by an elected assembly of a limited number of members. +</p> + +<p> +To concentrate the whole social force in the hands of the legislative body is +the natural tendency of democracies; for as this is the power which emanates +the most directly from the people, it is made to participate most fully in the +preponderating authority of the multitude, and it is naturally led to +monopolize every species of influence. This concentration is at once +prejudicial to a well-conducted administration, and favorable to the despotism +of the majority. The legislators of the States frequently yielded to these +democratic propensities, which were invariably and courageously resisted by the +founders of the Union. +</p> + +<p> +In the States the executive power is vested in the hands of a magistrate, who +is apparently placed upon a level with the Legislature, but who is in reality +nothing more than the blind agent and the passive instrument of its decisions. +He can derive no influence from the duration of his functions, which terminate +with the revolving year, or from the exercise of prerogatives which can +scarcely be said to exist. The Legislature can condemn him to inaction by +intrusting the execution of the laws to special committees of its own members, +and can annul his temporary dignity by depriving him of his salary. The Federal +Constitution vests all the privileges and all the responsibility of the +executive power in a single individual. The duration of the Presidency is fixed +at four years; the salary of the individual who fills that office cannot be +altered during the term of his functions; he is protected by a body of official +dependents, and armed with a suspensive veto. In short, every effort was made +to confer a strong and independent position upon the executive authority within +the limits which had been prescribed to it. +</p> + +<p> +In the Constitutions of all the States the judicial power is that which remains +the most independent of the legislative authority; nevertheless, in all the +States the Legislature has reserved to itself the right of regulating the +emoluments of the judges, a practice which necessarily subjects these +magistrates to its immediate influence. In some States the judges are only +temporarily appointed, which deprives them of a great portion of their power +and their freedom. In others the legislative and judicial powers are entirely +confounded; thus the Senate of New York, for instance, constitutes in certain +cases the Superior Court of the State. The Federal Constitution, on the other +hand, carefully separates the judicial authority from all external influences; +and it provides for the independence of the judges, by declaring that their +salary shall not be altered, and that their functions shall be inalienable. +</p> + +<p> +The practical consequences of these different systems may easily be perceived. +An attentive observer will soon remark that the business of the Union is +incomparably better conducted than that of any individual State. The conduct of +the Federal Government is more fair and more temperate than that of the States, +its designs are more fraught with wisdom, its projects are more durable and +more skilfully combined, its measures are put into execution with more vigor +and consistency. +</p> + +<p> +I recapitulate the substance of this chapter in a few words: The existence of +democracies is threatened by two dangers, viz., the complete subjection of the +legislative body to the caprices of the electoral body, and the concentration +of all the powers of the Government in the legislative authority. The growth of +these evils has been encouraged by the policy of the legislators of the States, +but it has been resisted by the legislators of the Union by every means which +lay within their control. +</p> + +<p> +Characteristics Which Distinguish The Federal Constitution Of The United States +Of America From All Other Federal Constitutions American Union appears to +resemble all other confederations—Nevertheless its effects are +different—Reason of this—Distinctions between the Union and all +other confederations—The American Government not a federal but an +imperfect national Government. +</p> + +<p> +The United States of America do not afford either the first or the only +instance of confederate States, several of which have existed in modern Europe, +without adverting to those of antiquity. Switzerland, the Germanic Empire, and +the Republic of the United Provinces either have been or still are +confederations. In studying the constitutions of these different countries, the +politician is surprised to observe that the powers with which they invested the +Federal Government are nearly identical with the privileges awarded by the +American Constitution to the Government of the United States. They confer upon +the central power the same rights of making peace and war, of raising money and +troops, and of providing for the general exigencies and the common interests of +the nation. Nevertheless the Federal Government of these different peoples has +always been as remarkable for its weakness and inefficiency as that of the +Union is for its vigorous and enterprising spirit. Again, the first American +Confederation perished through the excessive weakness of its Government; and +this weak Government was, notwithstanding, in possession of rights even more +extensive than those of the Federal Government of the present day. But the more +recent Constitution of the United States contains certain principles which +exercise a most important influence, although they do not at once strike the +observer. +</p> + +<p> +This Constitution, which may at first sight be confounded with the federal +constitutions which preceded it, rests upon a novel theory, which may be +considered as a great invention in modern political science. In all the +confederations which had been formed before the American Constitution of 1789 +the allied States agreed to obey the injunctions of a Federal Government; but +they reserved to themselves the right of ordaining and enforcing the execution +of the laws of the Union. The American States which combined in 1789 agreed +that the Federal Government should not only dictate the laws, but that it +should execute it own enactments. In both cases the right is the same, but the +exercise of the right is different; and this alteration produced the most +momentous consequences. +</p> + +<p> +In all the confederations which had been formed before the American Union the +Federal Government demanded its supplies at the hands of the separate +Governments; and if the measure it prescribed was onerous to any one of those +bodies means were found to evade its claims: if the State was powerful, it had +recourse to arms; if it was weak, it connived at the resistance which the law +of the Union, its sovereign, met with, and resorted to inaction under the plea +of inability. Under these circumstances one of the two alternatives has +invariably occurred; either the most preponderant of the allied peoples has +assumed the privileges of the Federal authority and ruled all the States in its +name, *p or the Federal Government has been abandoned by its natural +supporters, anarchy has arisen between the confederates, and the Union has lost +all powers of action. *q +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ This was the case in Greece, when Philip undertook to execute the decree of +the Amphictyons; in the Low Countries, where the province of Holland always +gave the law; and, in our own time, in the Germanic Confederation, in which +Austria and Prussia assume a great degree of influence over the whole country, +in the name of the Diet.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ Such has always been the situation of the Swiss Confederation, which would +have perished ages ago but for the mutual jealousies of its neighbors.] +</p> + +<p> +In America the subjects of the Union are not States, but private citizens: the +national Government levies a tax, not upon the State of Massachusetts, but upon +each inhabitant of Massachusetts. All former confederate governments presided +over communities, but that of the Union rules individuals; its force is not +borrowed, but self-derived; and it is served by its own civil and military +officers, by its own army, and its own courts of justice. It cannot be doubted +that the spirit of the nation, the passions of the multitude, and the +provincial prejudices of each State tend singularly to diminish the authority +of a Federal authority thus constituted, and to facilitate the means of +resistance to its mandates; but the comparative weakness of a restricted +sovereignty is an evil inherent in the Federal system. In America, each State +has fewer opportunities of resistance and fewer temptations to non-compliance; +nor can such a design be put in execution (if indeed it be entertained) without +an open violation of the laws of the Union, a direct interruption of the +ordinary course of justice, and a bold declaration of revolt; in a word, +without taking a decisive step which men hesitate to adopt. +</p> + +<p> +In all former confederations the privileges of the Union furnished more +elements of discord than of power, since they multiplied the claims of the +nation without augmenting the means of enforcing them: and in accordance with +this fact it may be remarked that the real weakness of federal governments has +almost always been in the exact ratio of their nominal power. Such is not the +case in the American Union, in which, as in ordinary governments, the Federal +Government has the means of enforcing all it is empowered to demand. +</p> + +<p> +The human understanding more easily invents new things than new words, and we +are thence constrained to employ a multitude of improper and inadequate +expressions. When several nations form a permanent league and establish a +supreme authority, which, although it has not the same influence over the +members of the community as a national government, acts upon each of the +Confederate States in a body, this Government, which is so essentially +different from all others, is denominated a Federal one. Another form of +society is afterwards discovered, in which several peoples are fused into one +and the same nation with regard to certain common interests, although they +remain distinct, or at least only confederate, with regard to all their other +concerns. In this case the central power acts directly upon those whom it +governs, whom it rules, and whom it judges, in the same manner, as, but in a +more limited circle than, a national government. Here the term Federal +Government is clearly no longer applicable to a state of things which must be +styled an incomplete national Government: a form of government has been found +out which is neither exactly national nor federal; but no further progress has +been made, and the new word which will one day designate this novel invention +does not yet exist. +</p> + +<p> +The absence of this new species of confederation has been the cause which has +brought all Unions to Civil War, to subjection, or to a stagnant apathy, and +the peoples which formed these leagues have been either too dull to discern, or +too pusillanimous to apply this great remedy. The American Confederation +perished by the same defects. +</p> + +<p> +But the Confederate States of America had been long accustomed to form a +portion of one empire before they had won their independence; they had not +contracted the habit of governing themselves, and their national prejudices had +not taken deep root in their minds. Superior to the rest of the world in +political knowledge, and sharing that knowledge equally amongst themselves, +they were little agitated by the passions which generally oppose the extension +of federal authority in a nation, and those passions were checked by the wisdom +of the chief citizens. The Americans applied the remedy with prudent firmness +as soon as they were conscious of the evil; they amended their laws, and they +saved their country. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0022" id="link2HCH0022"></a> Chapter VIII: The Federal +Constitution—Part V</h2> + +<p> +Advantages Of The Federal System In General, And Its Special Utility In +America. +</p> + +<p> +Happiness and freedom of small nations—Power of great nations—Great +empires favorable to the growth of civilization—Strength often the first +element of national prosperity—Aim of the Federal system to unite the +twofold advantages resulting from a small and from a large +territory—Advantages derived by the United States from this +system—The law adapts itself to the exigencies of the population; +population does not conform to the exigencies of the law—Activity, +amelioration, love and enjoyment of freedom in the American +communities—Public spirit of the Union the abstract of provincial +patriotism—Principles and things circulate freely over the territory of +the United States—The Union is happy and free as a little nation, and +respected as a great empire. +</p> + +<p> +In small nations the scrutiny of society penetrates into every part, and the +spirit of improvement enters into the most trifling details; as the ambition of +the people is necessarily checked by its weakness, all the efforts and +resources of the citizens are turned to the internal benefit of the community, +and are not likely to evaporate in the fleeting breath of glory. The desires of +every individual are limited, because extraordinary faculties are rarely to be +met with. The gifts of an equal fortune render the various conditions of life +uniform, and the manners of the inhabitants are orderly and simple. Thus, if +one estimate the gradations of popular morality and enlightenment, we shall +generally find that in small nations there are more persons in easy +circumstances, a more numerous population, and a more tranquil state of +society, than in great empires. +</p> + +<p> +When tyranny is established in the bosom of a small nation, it is more galling +than elsewhere, because, as it acts within a narrow circle, every point of that +circle is subject to its direct influence. It supplies the place of those great +designs which it cannot entertain by a violent or an exasperating interference +in a multitude of minute details; and it leaves the political world, to which +it properly belongs, to meddle with the arrangements of domestic life. Tastes +as well as actions are to be regulated at its pleasure; and the families of the +citizens as well as the affairs of the State are to be governed by its +decisions. This invasion of rights occurs, however, but seldom, and freedom is +in truth the natural state of small communities. The temptations which the +Government offers to ambition are too weak, and the resources of private +individuals are too slender, for the sovereign power easily to fall within the +grasp of a single citizen; and should such an event have occurred, the subjects +of the State can without difficulty overthrow the tyrant and his oppression by +a simultaneous effort. +</p> + +<p> +Small nations have therefore ever been the cradle of political liberty; and the +fact that many of them have lost their immunities by extending their dominion +shows that the freedom they enjoyed was more a consequence of the inferior size +than of the character of the people. +</p> + +<p> +The history of the world affords no instance of a great nation retaining the +form of republican government for a long series of years, *r and this has led +to the conclusion that such a state of things is impracticable. For my own +part, I cannot but censure the imprudence of attempting to limit the possible +and to judge the future on the part of a being who is hourly deceived by the +most palpable realities of life, and who is constantly taken by surprise in the +circumstances with which he is most familiar. But it may be advanced with +confidence that the existence of a great republic will always be exposed to far +greater perils than that of a small one. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ I do not speak of a confederation of small republics, but of a great +consolidated Republic.] +</p> + +<p> +All the passions which are most fatal to republican institutions spread with an +increasing territory, whilst the virtues which maintain their dignity do not +augment in the same proportion. The ambition of the citizens increases with the +power of the State; the strength of parties with the importance of the ends +they have in view; but that devotion to the common weal which is the surest +check on destructive passions is not stronger in a large than in a small +republic. It might, indeed, be proved without difficulty that it is less +powerful and less sincere. The arrogance of wealth and the dejection of +wretchedness, capital cities of unwonted extent, a lax morality, a vulgar +egotism, and a great confusion of interests, are the dangers which almost +invariably arise from the magnitude of States. But several of these evils are +scarcely prejudicial to a monarchy, and some of them contribute to maintain its +existence. In monarchical States the strength of the government is its own; it +may use, but it does not depend on, the community, and the authority of the +prince is proportioned to the prosperity of the nation; but the only security +which a republican government possesses against these evils lies in the support +of the majority. This support is not, however, proportionably greater in a +large republic than it is in a small one; and thus, whilst the means of attack +perpetually increase both in number and in influence, the power of resistance +remains the same, or it may rather be said to diminish, since the propensities +and interests of the people are diversified by the increase of the population, +and the difficulty of forming a compact majority is constantly augmented. It +has been observed, moreover, that the intensity of human passions is +heightened, not only by the importance of the end which they propose to attain, +but by the multitude of individuals who are animated by them at the same time. +Every one has had occasion to remark that his emotions in the midst of a +sympathizing crowd are far greater than those which he would have felt in +solitude. In great republics the impetus of political passion is irresistible, +not only because it aims at gigantic purposes, but because it is felt and +shared by millions of men at the same time. +</p> + +<p> +It may therefore be asserted as a general proposition that nothing is more +opposed to the well-being and the freedom of man than vast empires. +Nevertheless it is important to acknowledge the peculiar advantages of great +States. For the very reason which renders the desire of power more intense in +these communities than amongst ordinary men, the love of glory is also more +prominent in the hearts of a class of citizens, who regard the applause of a +great people as a reward worthy of their exertions, and an elevating +encouragement to man. If we would learn why it is that great nations contribute +more powerfully to the spread of human improvement than small States, we shall +discover an adequate cause in the rapid and energetic circulation of ideas, and +in those great cities which are the intellectual centres where all the rays of +human genius are reflected and combined. To this it may be added that most +important discoveries demand a display of national power which the Government +of a small State is unable to make; in great nations the Government entertains +a greater number of general notions, and is more completely disengaged from the +routine of precedent and the egotism of local prejudice; its designs are +conceived with more talent, and executed with more boldness. +</p> + +<p> +In time of peace the well-being of small nations is undoubtedly more general +and more complete, but they are apt to suffer more acutely from the calamities +of war than those great empires whose distant frontiers may for ages avert the +presence of the danger from the mass of the people, which is therefore more +frequently afflicted than ruined by the evil. +</p> + +<p> +But in this matter, as in many others, the argument derived from the necessity +of the case predominates over all others. If none but small nations existed, I +do not doubt that mankind would be more happy and more free; but the existence +of great nations is unavoidable. +</p> + +<p> +This consideration introduces the element of physical strength as a condition +of national prosperity. It profits a people but little to be affluent and free +if it is perpetually exposed to be pillaged or subjugated; the number of its +manufactures and the extent of its commerce are of small advantage if another +nation has the empire of the seas and gives the law in all the markets of the +globe. Small nations are often impoverished, not because they are small, but +because they are weak; the great empires prosper less because they are great +than because they are strong. Physical strength is therefore one of the first +conditions of the happiness and even of the existence of nations. Hence it +occurs that, unless very peculiar circumstances intervene, small nations are +always united to large empires in the end, either by force or by their own +consent: yet I am unacquainted with a more deplorable spectacle than that of a +people unable either to defend or to maintain its independence. +</p> + +<p> +The Federal system was created with the intention of combining the different +advantages which result from the greater and the lesser extent of nations; and +a single glance over the United States of America suffices to discover the +advantages which they have derived from its adoption. +</p> + +<p> +In great centralized nations the legislator is obliged to impart a character of +uniformity to the laws which does not always suit the diversity of customs and +of districts; as he takes no cognizance of special cases, he can only proceed +upon general principles; and the population is obliged to conform to the +exigencies of the legislation, since the legislation cannot adapt itself to the +exigencies and the customs of the population, which is the cause of endless +trouble and misery. This disadvantage does not exist in confederations. +Congress regulates the principal measures of the national Government, and all +the details of the administration are reserved to the provincial legislatures. +It is impossible to imagine how much this division of sovereignty contributes +to the well-being of each of the States which compose the Union. In these small +communities, which are never agitated by the desire of aggrandizement or the +cares of self-defence, all public authority and private energy is employed in +internal amelioration. The central government of each State, which is in +immediate juxtaposition to the citizens, is daily apprised of the wants which +arise in society; and new projects are proposed every year, which are discussed +either at town meetings or by the legislature of the State, and which are +transmitted by the press to stimulate the zeal and to excite the interest of +the citizens. This spirit of amelioration is constantly alive in the American +republics, without compromising their tranquillity; the ambition of power +yields to the less refined and less dangerous love of comfort. It is generally +believed in America that the existence and the permanence of the republican +form of government in the New World depend upon the existence and the +permanence of the Federal system; and it is not unusual to attribute a large +share of the misfortunes which have befallen the new States of South America to +the injudicious erection of great republics, instead of a divided and +confederate sovereignty. +</p> + +<p> +It is incontestably true that the love and the habits of republican government +in the United States were engendered in the townships and in the provincial +assemblies. In a small State, like that of Connecticut for instance, where +cutting a canal or laying down a road is a momentous political question, where +the State has no army to pay and no wars to carry on, and where much wealth and +much honor cannot be bestowed upon the chief citizens, no form of government +can be more natural or more appropriate than that of a republic. But it is this +same republican spirit, it is these manners and customs of a free people, which +are engendered and nurtured in the different States, to be afterwards applied +to the country at large. The public spirit of the Union is, so to speak, +nothing more than an abstract of the patriotic zeal of the provinces. Every +citizen of the United States transfuses his attachment to his little republic +in the common store of American patriotism. In defending the Union he defends +the increasing prosperity of his own district, the right of conducting its +affairs, and the hope of causing measures of improvement to be adopted which +may be favorable to his own interest; and these are motives which are wont to +stir men more readily than the general interests of the country and the glory +of the nation. +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, if the temper and the manners of the inhabitants especially +fitted them to promote the welfare of a great republic, the Federal system +smoothed the obstacles which they might have encountered. The confederation of +all the American States presents none of the ordinary disadvantages resulting +from great agglomerations of men. The Union is a great republic in extent, but +the paucity of objects for which its Government provides assimilates it to a +small State. Its acts are important, but they are rare. As the sovereignty of +the Union is limited and incomplete, its exercise is not incompatible with +liberty; for it does not excite those insatiable desires of fame and power +which have proved so fatal to great republics. As there is no common centre to +the country, vast capital cities, colossal wealth, abject poverty, and sudden +revolutions are alike unknown; and political passion, instead of spreading over +the land like a torrent of desolation, spends its strength against the +interests and the individual passions of every State. +</p> + +<p> +Nevertheless, all commodities and ideas circulate throughout the Union as +freely as in a country inhabited by one people. Nothing checks the spirit of +enterprise. Government avails itself of the assistance of all who have talents +or knowledge to serve it. Within the frontiers of the Union the profoundest +peace prevails, as within the heart of some great empire; abroad, it ranks with +the most powerful nations of the earth; two thousand miles of coast are open to +the commerce of the world; and as it possesses the keys of the globe, its flags +is respected in the most remote seas. The Union is as happy and as free as a +small people, and as glorious and as strong as a great nation. +</p> + +<p> +Why The Federal System Is Not Adapted To All Peoples, And How The +Anglo-Americans Were Enabled To Adopt It. +</p> + +<p> +Every Federal system contains defects which baffle the efforts of the +legislator—The Federal system is complex—It demands a daily +exercise of discretion on the part of the citizens—Practical knowledge of +government common amongst the Americans—Relative weakness of the +Government of the Union, another defect inherent in the Federal +system—The Americans have diminished without remedying it—The +sovereignty of the separate States apparently weaker, but really stronger, than +that of the Union—Why?—Natural causes of union must exist between +confederate peoples besides the laws—What these causes are amongst the +Anglo-Americans—Maine and Georgia, separated by a distance of a thousand +miles, more naturally united than Normandy and Brittany—War, the main +peril of confederations—This proved even by the example of the United +States—The Union has no great wars to fear—Why?—Dangers to +which Europeans would be exposed if they adopted the Federal system of the +Americans. +</p> + +<p> +When a legislator succeeds, after persevering efforts, in exercising an +indirect influence upon the destiny of nations, his genius is lauded by +mankind, whilst, in point of fact, the geographical position of the country +which he is unable to change, a social condition which arose without his +co-operation, manners and opinions which he cannot trace to their source, and +an origin with which he is unacquainted, exercise so irresistible an influence +over the courses of society that he is himself borne away by the current, after +an ineffectual resistance. Like the navigator, he may direct the vessel which +bears him along, but he can neither change its structure, nor raise the winds, +nor lull the waters which swell beneath him. +</p> + +<p> +I have shown the advantages which the Americans derive from their federal +system; it remains for me to point out the circumstances which rendered that +system practicable, as its benefits are not to be enjoyed by all nations. The +incidental defects of the Federal system which originate in the laws may be +corrected by the skill of the legislator, but there are further evils inherent +in the system which cannot be counteracted by the peoples which adopt it. These +nations must therefore find the strength necessary to support the natural +imperfections of their Government. +</p> + +<p> +The most prominent evil of all Federal systems is the very complex nature of +the means they employ. Two sovereignties are necessarily in presence of each +other. The legislator may simplify and equalize the action of these two +sovereignties, by limiting each of them to a sphere of authority accurately +defined; but he cannot combine them into one, or prevent them from coming into +collision at certain points. The Federal system therefore rests upon a theory +which is necessarily complicated, and which demands the daily exercise of a +considerable share of discretion on the part of those it governs. +</p> + +<p> +A proposition must be plain to be adopted by the understanding of a people. A +false notion which is clear and precise will always meet with a greater number +of adherents in the world than a true principle which is obscure or involved. +Hence it arises that parties, which are like small communities in the heart of +the nation, invariably adopt some principle or some name as a symbol, which +very inadequately represents the end they have in view and the means which are +at their disposal, but without which they could neither act nor subsist. The +governments which are founded upon a single principle or a single feeling which +is easily defined are perhaps not the best, but they are unquestionably the +strongest and the most durable in the world. +</p> + +<p> +In examining the Constitution of the United States, which is the most perfect +federal constitution that ever existed, one is startled, on the other hand, at +the variety of information and the excellence of discretion which it +presupposes in the people whom it is meant to govern. The government of the +Union depends entirely upon legal fictions; the Union is an ideal nation which +only exists in the mind, and whose limits and extent can only be discerned by +the understanding. +</p> + +<p> +When once the general theory is comprehended, numberless difficulties remain to +be solved in its application; for the sovereignty of the Union is so involved +in that of the States that it is impossible to distinguish its boundaries at +the first glance. The whole structure of the Government is artificial and +conventional; and it would be ill adapted to a people which has not been long +accustomed to conduct its own affairs, or to one in which the science of +politics has not descended to the humblest classes of society. I have never +been more struck by the good sense and the practical judgment of the Americans +than in the ingenious devices by which they elude the numberless difficulties +resulting from their Federal Constitution. I scarcely ever met with a plain +American citizen who could not distinguish, with surprising facility, the +obligations created by the laws of Congress from those created by the laws of +his own State; and who, after having discriminated between the matters which +come under the cognizance of the Union and those which the local legislature is +competent to regulate, could not point out the exact limit of the several +jurisdictions of the Federal courts and the tribunals of the State. +</p> + +<p> +The Constitution of the United States is like those exquisite productions of +human industry which ensure wealth and renown to their inventors, but which are +profitless in any other hands. This truth is exemplified by the condition of +Mexico at the present time. The Mexicans were desirous of establishing a +federal system, and they took the Federal Constitution of their neighbors, the +Anglo-Americans, as their model, and copied it with considerable accuracy. *s +But although they had borrowed the letter of the law, they were unable to +create or to introduce the spirit and the sense which give it life. They were +involved in ceaseless embarrassments between the mechanism of their double +government; the sovereignty of the States and that of the Union perpetually +exceeded their respective privileges, and entered into collision; and to the +present day Mexico is alternately the victim of anarchy and the slave of +military despotism. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +s <br /> +[ See the Mexican Constitution of 1824.] +</p> + +<p> +The second and the most fatal of all the defects I have alluded to, and that +which I believe to be inherent in the federal system, is the relative weakness +of the government of the Union. The principle upon which all confederations +rest is that of a divided sovereignty. The legislator may render this partition +less perceptible, he may even conceal it for a time from the public eye, but he +cannot prevent it from existing, and a divided sovereignty must always be less +powerful than an entire supremacy. The reader has seen in the remarks I have +made on the Constitution of the United States that the Americans have displayed +singular ingenuity in combining the restriction of the power of the Union +within the narrow limits of a federal government with the semblance and, to a +certain extent, with the force of a national government. By this means the +legislators of the Union have succeeded in diminishing, though not in +counteracting the natural danger of confederations. +</p> + +<p> +It has been remarked that the American Government does not apply itself to the +States, but that it immediately transmits its injunctions to the citizens, and +compels them as isolated individuals to comply with its demands. But if the +Federal law were to clash with the interests and the prejudices of a State, it +might be feared that all the citizens of that State would conceive themselves +to be interested in the cause of a single individual who should refuse to obey. +If all the citizens of the State were aggrieved at the same time and in the +same manner by the authority of the Union, the Federal Government would vainly +attempt to subdue them individually; they would instinctively unite in a common +defence, and they would derive a ready-prepared organization from the share of +sovereignty which the institution of their State allows them to enjoy. Fiction +would give way to reality, and an organized portion of the territory might then +contest the central authority. *t The same observation holds good with regard +to the Federal jurisdiction. If the courts of the Union violated an important +law of a State in a private case, the real, if not the apparent, contest would +arise between the aggrieved State represented by a citizen and the Union +represented by its courts of justice. *u +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +t <br /> +[ [This is precisely what occurred in 1862, and the following paragraph +describes correctly the feelings and notions of the South. General Lee held +that his primary allegiance was due, not to the Union, but to Virginia.]] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +u <br /> +[ For instance, the Union possesses by the Constitution the right of selling +unoccupied lands for its own profit. Supposing that the State of Ohio should +claim the same right in behalf of certain territories lying within its +boundaries, upon the plea that the Constitution refers to those lands alone +which do not belong to the jurisdiction of any particular State, and +consequently should choose to dispose of them itself, the litigation would be +carried on in the names of the purchasers from the State of Ohio and the +purchasers from the Union, and not in the names of Ohio and the Union. But what +would become of this legal fiction if the Federal purchaser was confirmed in +his right by the courts of the Union, whilst the other competitor was ordered +to retain possession by the tribunals of the State of Ohio?] +</p> + +<p> +He would have but a partial knowledge of the world who should imagine that it +is possible, by the aid of legal fictions, to prevent men from finding out and +employing those means of gratifying their passions which have been left open to +them; and it may be doubted whether the American legislators, when they +rendered a collision between the two sovereigns less probable, destroyed the +cause of such a misfortune. But it may even be affirmed that they were unable +to ensure the preponderance of the Federal element in a case of this kind. The +Union is possessed of money and of troops, but the affections and the +prejudices of the people are in the bosom of the States. The sovereignty of the +Union is an abstract being, which is connected with but few external objects; +the sovereignty of the States is hourly perceptible, easily understood, +constantly active; and if the former is of recent creation, the latter is +coeval with the people itself. The sovereignty of the Union is factitious, that +of the States is natural, and derives its existence from its own simple +influence, like the authority of a parent. The supreme power of the nation only +affects a few of the chief interests of society; it represents an immense but +remote country, and claims a feeling of patriotism which is vague and ill +defined; but the authority of the States controls every individual citizen at +every hour and in all circumstances; it protects his property, his freedom, and +his life; and when we recollect the traditions, the customs, the prejudices of +local and familiar attachment with which it is connected, we cannot doubt of +the superiority of a power which is interwoven with every circumstance that +renders the love of one’s native country instinctive in the human heart. +</p> + +<p> +Since legislators are unable to obviate such dangerous collisions as occur +between the two sovereignties which coexist in the federal system, their first +object must be, not only to dissuade the confederate States from warfare, but +to encourage such institutions as may promote the maintenance of peace. Hence +it results that the Federal compact cannot be lasting unless there exists in +the communities which are leagued together a certain number of inducements to +union which render their common dependence agreeable, and the task of the +Government light, and that system cannot succeed without the presence of +favorable circumstances added to the influence of good laws. All the peoples +which have ever formed a confederation have been held together by a certain +number of common interests, which served as the intellectual ties of +association. +</p> + +<p> +But the sentiments and the principles of man must be taken into consideration +as well as his immediate interests. A certain uniformity of civilization is not +less necessary to the durability of a confederation than a uniformity of +interests in the States which compose it. In Switzerland the difference which +exists between the Canton of Uri and the Canton of Vaud is equal to that +between the fifteenth and the nineteenth centuries; and, properly speaking, +Switzerland has never possessed a federal government. The union between these +two cantons only subsists upon the map, and their discrepancies would soon be +perceived if an attempt were made by a central authority to prescribe the same +laws to the whole territory. +</p> + +<p> +One of the circumstances which most powerfully contribute to support the +Federal Government in America is that the States have not only similar +interests, a common origin, and a common tongue, but that they are also arrived +at the same stage of civilization; which almost always renders a union +feasible. I do not know of any European nation, how small soever it may be, +which does not present less uniformity in its different provinces than the +American people, which occupies a territory as extensive as one-half of Europe. +The distance from the State of Maine to that of Georgia is reckoned at about +one thousand miles; but the difference between the civilization of Maine and +that of Georgia is slighter than the difference between the habits of Normandy +and those of Brittany. Maine and Georgia, which are placed at the opposite +extremities of a great empire, are consequently in the natural possession of +more real inducements to form a confederation than Normandy and Brittany, which +are only separated by a bridge. +</p> + +<p> +The geographical position of the country contributed to increase the facilities +which the American legislators derived from the manners and customs of the +inhabitants; and it is to this circumstance that the adoption and the +maintenance of the Federal system are mainly attributable. +</p> + +<p> +The most important occurrence which can mark the annals of a people is the +breaking out of a war. In war a people struggles with the energy of a single +man against foreign nations in the defence of its very existence. The skill of +a government, the good sense of the community, and the natural fondness which +men entertain for their country, may suffice to maintain peace in the interior +of a district, and to favor its internal prosperity; but a nation can only +carry on a great war at the cost of more numerous and more painful sacrifices; +and to suppose that a great number of men will of their own accord comply with +these exigencies of the State is to betray an ignorance of mankind. All the +peoples which have been obliged to sustain a long and serious warfare have +consequently been led to augment the power of their government. Those which +have not succeeded in this attempt have been subjugated. A long war almost +always places nations in the wretched alternative of being abandoned to ruin by +defeat or to despotism by success. War therefore renders the symptoms of the +weakness of a government most palpable and most alarming; and I have shown that +the inherent defeat of federal governments is that of being weak. +</p> + +<p> +The Federal system is not only deficient in every kind of centralized +administration, but the central government itself is imperfectly organized, +which is invariably an influential cause of inferiority when the nation is +opposed to other countries which are themselves governed by a single authority. +In the Federal Constitution of the United States, by which the central +government possesses more real force, this evil is still extremely sensible. An +example will illustrate the case to the reader. +</p> + +<p> +The Constitution confers upon Congress the right of calling forth militia to +execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions; and +another article declares that the President of the United States is the +commander-in-chief of the militia. In the war of 1812 the President ordered the +militia of the Northern States to march to the frontiers; but Connecticut and +Massachusetts, whose interests were impaired by the war, refused to obey the +command. They argued that the Constitution authorizes the Federal Government to +call forth the militia in case of insurrection or invasion, but that in the +present instance there was neither invasion nor insurrection. They added, that +the same Constitution which conferred upon the Union the right of calling forth +the militia reserved to the States that of naming the officers; and that +consequently (as they understood the clause) no officer of the Union had any +right to command the militia, even during war, except the President in person; +and in this case they were ordered to join an army commanded by another +individual. These absurd and pernicious doctrines received the sanction not +only of the governors and the legislative bodies, but also of the courts of +justice in both States; and the Federal Government was constrained to raise +elsewhere the troops which it required. *v +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +v <br /> +[ Kent’s “Commentaries,” vol. i. p. 244. I have selected an +example which relates to a time posterior to the promulgation of the present +Constitution. If I had gone back to the days of the Confederation, I might have +given still more striking instances. The whole nation was at that time in a +state of enthusiastic excitement; the Revolution was represented by a man who +was the idol of the people; but at that very period Congress had, to say the +truth, no resources at all at its disposal. Troops and supplies were +perpetually wanting. The best-devised projects failed in the execution, and the +Union, which was constantly on the verge of destruction, was saved by the +weakness of its enemies far more than by its own strength. [All doubt as to the +powers of the Federal Executive was, however, removed by its efforts in the +Civil War, and those powers were largely extended.]] +</p> + +<p> +The only safeguard which the American Union, with all the relative perfection +of its laws, possesses against the dissolution which would be produced by a +great war, lies in its probable exemption from that calamity. Placed in the +centre of an immense continent, which offers a boundless field for human +industry, the Union is almost as much insulated from the world as if its +frontiers were girt by the ocean. Canada contains only a million of +inhabitants, and its population is divided into two inimical nations. The rigor +of the climate limits the extension of its territory, and shuts up its ports +during the six months of winter. From Canada to the Gulf of Mexico a few savage +tribes are to be met with, which retire, perishing in their retreat, before six +thousand soldiers. To the South, the Union has a point of contact with the +empire of Mexico; and it is thence that serious hostilities may one day be +expected to arise. But for a long while to come the uncivilized state of the +Mexican community, the depravity of its morals, and its extreme poverty, will +prevent that country from ranking high amongst nations. *w As for the Powers of +Europe, they are too distant to be formidable. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +w <br /> +[ [War broke out between the United States and Mexico in 1846, and ended in the +conquest of an immense territory, including California.]] +</p> + +<p> +The great advantage of the United States does not, then, consist in a Federal +Constitution which allows them to carry on great wars, but in a geographical +position which renders such enterprises extremely improbable. +</p> + +<p> +No one can be more inclined than I am myself to appreciate the advantages of +the federal system, which I hold to be one of the combinations most favorable +to the prosperity and freedom of man. I envy the lot of those nations which +have been enabled to adopt it; but I cannot believe that any confederate +peoples could maintain a long or an equal contest with a nation of similar +strength in which the government should be centralized. A people which should +divide its sovereignty into fractional powers, in the presence of the great +military monarchies of Europe, would, in my opinion, by that very act, abdicate +its power, and perhaps its existence and its name. But such is the admirable +position of the New World that man has no other enemy than himself; and that, +in order to be happy and to be free, it suffices to seek the gifts of +prosperity and the knowledge of freedom. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0023" id="link2HCH0023"></a> Chapter IX: Why The People +May Strictly Be Said To Govern In The United</h2> + +<p> +States +</p> + +<p> +I have hitherto examined the institutions of the United States; I have passed +their legislation in review, and I have depicted the present characteristics of +political society in that country. But a sovereign power exists above these +institutions and beyond these characteristic features which may destroy or +modify them at its pleasure—I mean that of the people. It remains to be +shown in what manner this power, which regulates the laws, acts: its +propensities and its passions remain to be pointed out, as well as the secret +springs which retard, accelerate, or direct its irresistible course; and the +effects of its unbounded authority, with the destiny which is probably reserved +for it. +</p> + +<p> +In America the people appoints the legislative and the executive power, and +furnishes the jurors who punish all offences against the laws. The American +institutions are democratic, not only in their principle but in all their +consequences; and the people elects its representatives directly, and for the +most part annually, in order to ensure their dependence. The people is +therefore the real directing power; and although the form of government is +representative, it is evident that the opinions, the prejudices, the interests, +and even the passions of the community are hindered by no durable obstacles +from exercising a perpetual influence on society. In the United States the +majority governs in the name of the people, as is the case in all the countries +in which the people is supreme. The majority is principally composed of +peaceful citizens who, either by inclination or by interest, are sincerely +desirous of the welfare of their country. But they are surrounded by the +incessant agitation of parties, which attempt to gain their co-operation and to +avail themselves of their support. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0024" id="link2HCH0024"></a> Chapter X: Parties In The +United States</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0025" id="link2HCH0025"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +Great distinction to be made between parties—Parties which are to each +other as rival nations—Parties properly so called—Difference +between great and small parties—Epochs which produce them—Their +characteristics—America has had great parties—They are +extinct—Federalists—Republicans—Defeat of the +Federalists—Difficulty of creating parties in the United +States—What is done with this intention—Aristocratic or democratic +character to be met with in all parties—Struggle of General Jackson +against the Bank. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2H_PART" id="link2H_PART"></a> Parties In The United States +</h2> + +<p> +A great distinction must be made between parties. Some countries are so large +that the different populations which inhabit them have contradictory interests, +although they are the subjects of the same Government, and they may thence be +in a perpetual state of opposition. In this case the different fractions of the +people may more properly be considered as distinct nations than as mere +parties; and if a civil war breaks out, the struggle is carried on by rival +peoples rather than by factions in the State. +</p> + +<p> +But when the citizens entertain different opinions upon subjects which affect +the whole country alike, such, for instance, as the principles upon which the +government is to be conducted, then distinctions arise which may correctly be +styled parties. Parties are a necessary evil in free governments; but they have +not at all times the same character and the same propensities. +</p> + +<p> +At certain periods a nation may be oppressed by such insupportable evils as to +conceive the design of effecting a total change in its political constitution; +at other times the mischief lies still deeper, and the existence of society +itself is endangered. Such are the times of great revolutions and of great +parties. But between these epochs of misery and of confusion there are periods +during which human society seems to rest, and mankind to make a pause. This +pause is, indeed, only apparent, for time does not stop its course for nations +any more than for men; they are all advancing towards a goal with which they +are unacquainted; and we only imagine them to be stationary when their progress +escapes our observation, as men who are going at a foot-pace seem to be +standing still to those who run. +</p> + +<p> +But however this may be, there are certain epochs at which the changes that +take place in the social and political constitution of nations are so slow and +so insensible that men imagine their present condition to be a final state; and +the human mind, believing itself to be firmly based upon certain foundations, +does not extend its researches beyond the horizon which it descries. These are +the times of small parties and of intrigue. +</p> + +<p> +The political parties which I style great are those which cling to principles +more than to their consequences; to general, and not to especial cases; to +ideas, and not to men. These parties are usually distinguished by a nobler +character, by more generous passions, more genuine convictions, and a more bold +and open conduct than the others. In them private interest, which always plays +the chief part in political passions, is more studiously veiled under the +pretext of the public good; and it may even be sometimes concealed from the +eyes of the very persons whom it excites and impels. +</p> + +<p> +Minor parties are, on the other hand, generally deficient in political faith. +As they are not sustained or dignified by a lofty purpose, they ostensibly +display the egotism of their character in their actions. They glow with a +factitious zeal; their language is vehement, but their conduct is timid and +irresolute. The means they employ are as wretched as the end at which they aim. +Hence it arises that when a calm state of things succeeds a violent revolution, +the leaders of society seem suddenly to disappear, and the powers of the human +mind to lie concealed. Society is convulsed by great parties, by minor ones it +is agitated; it is torn by the former, by the latter it is degraded; and if +these sometimes save it by a salutary perturbation, those invariably disturb it +to no good end. +</p> + +<p> +America has already lost the great parties which once divided the nation; and +if her happiness is considerably increased, her morality has suffered by their +extinction. When the War of Independence was terminated, and the foundations of +the new Government were to be laid down, the nation was divided between two +opinions—two opinions which are as old as the world, and which are +perpetually to be met with under all the forms and all the names which have +ever obtained in free communities—the one tending to limit, the other to +extend indefinitely, the power of the people. The conflict of these two +opinions never assumed that degree of violence in America which it has +frequently displayed elsewhere. Both parties of the Americans were, in fact, +agreed upon the most essential points; and neither of them had to destroy a +traditionary constitution, or to overthrow the structure of society, in order +to ensure its own triumph. In neither of them, consequently, were a great +number of private interests affected by success or by defeat; but moral +principles of a high order, such as the love of equality and of independence, +were concerned in the struggle, and they sufficed to kindle violent passions. +</p> + +<p> +The party which desired to limit the power of the people endeavored to apply +its doctrines more especially to the Constitution of the Union, whence it +derived its name of Federal. The other party, which affected to be more +exclusively attached to the cause of liberty, took that of Republican. America +is a land of democracy, and the Federalists were always in a minority; but they +reckoned on their side almost all the great men who had been called forth by +the War of Independence, and their moral influence was very considerable. Their +cause was, moreover, favored by circumstances. The ruin of the Confederation +had impressed the people with a dread of anarchy, and the Federalists did not +fail to profit by this transient disposition of the multitude. For ten or +twelve years they were at the head of affairs, and they were able to apply +some, though not all, of their principles; for the hostile current was becoming +from day to day too violent to be checked or stemmed. In 1801 the Republicans +got possession of the Government; Thomas Jefferson was named President; and he +increased the influence of their party by the weight of his celebrity, the +greatness of his talents, and the immense extent of his popularity. +</p> + +<p> +The means by which the Federalists had maintained their position were +artificial, and their resources were temporary; it was by the virtues or the +talents of their leaders that they had risen to power. When the Republicans +attained to that lofty station, their opponents were overwhelmed by utter +defeat. An immense majority declared itself against the retiring party, and the +Federalists found themselves in so small a minority that they at once despaired +of their future success. From that moment the Republican or Democratic party *a +has proceeded from conquest to conquest, until it has acquired absolute +supremacy in the country. The Federalists, perceiving that they were vanquished +without resource, and isolated in the midst of the nation, fell into two +divisions, of which one joined the victorious Republicans, and the other +abandoned its rallying-point and its name. Many years have already elapsed +since they ceased to exist as a party. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ [It is scarcely necessary to remark that in more recent times the +signification of these terms has changed. The Republicans are the +representatives of the old Federalists, and the Democrats of the old +Republicans.—Trans. Note (1861).]] The accession of the Federalists to +power was, in my opinion, one of the most fortunate incidents which accompanied +the formation of the great American Union; they resisted the inevitable +propensities of their age and of the country. But whether their theories were +good or bad, they had the effect of being inapplicable, as a system, to the +society which they professed to govern, and that which occurred under the +auspices of Jefferson must therefore have taken place sooner or later. But +their Government gave the new republic time to acquire a certain stability, and +afterwards to support the rapid growth of the very doctrines which they had +combated. A considerable number of their principles were in point of fact +embodied in the political creed of their opponents; and the Federal +Constitution which subsists at the present day is a lasting monument of their +patriotism and their wisdom. +</p> + +<p> +Great political parties are not, then, to be met with in the United States at +the present time. Parties, indeed, may be found which threaten the future +tranquillity of the Union; but there are none which seem to contest the present +form of Government or the present course of society. The parties by which the +Union is menaced do not rest upon abstract principles, but upon temporal +interests. These interests, disseminated in the provinces of so vast an empire, +may be said to constitute rival nations rather than parties. Thus, upon a +recent occasion, the North contended for the system of commercial prohibition, +and the South took up arms in favor of free trade, simply because the North is +a manufacturing and the South an agricultural district; and that the +restrictive system which was profitable to the one was prejudicial to the +other. *b +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ [The divisions of North and South have since acquired a far greater degree of +intensity, and the South, though conquered, still presents a formidable spirit +of opposition to Northern government.—Translator’s Note, 1875.]] +</p> + +<p> +In the absence of great parties, the United States abound with lesser +controversies; and public opinion is divided into a thousand minute shades of +difference upon questions of very little moment. The pains which are taken to +create parties are inconceivable, and at the present day it is no easy task. In +the United States there is no religious animosity, because all religion is +respected, and no sect is predominant; there is no jealousy of rank, because +the people is everything, and none can contest its authority; lastly, there is +no public indigence to supply the means of agitation, because the physical +position of the country opens so wide a field to industry that man is able to +accomplish the most surprising undertakings with his own native resources. +Nevertheless, ambitious men are interested in the creation of parties, since it +is difficult to eject a person from authority upon the mere ground that his +place is coveted by others. The skill of the actors in the political world lies +therefore in the art of creating parties. A political aspirant in the United +States begins by discriminating his own interest, and by calculating upon those +interests which may be collected around and amalgamated with it; he then +contrives to discover some doctrine or some principle which may suit the +purposes of this new association, and which he adopts in order to bring forward +his party and to secure his popularity; just as the imprimatur of a King was in +former days incorporated with the volume which it authorized, but to which it +nowise belonged. When these preliminaries are terminated, the new party is +ushered into the political world. +</p> + +<p> +All the domestic controversies of the Americans at first appear to a stranger +to be so incomprehensible and so puerile that he is at a loss whether to pity a +people which takes such arrant trifles in good earnest, or to envy the +happiness which enables it to discuss them. But when he comes to study the +secret propensities which govern the factions of America, he easily perceives +that the greater part of them are more or less connected with one or the other +of those two divisions which have always existed in free communities. The +deeper we penetrate into the working of these parties, the more do we perceive +that the object of the one is to limit, and that of the other to extend, the +popular authority. I do not assert that the ostensible end, or even that the +secret aim, of American parties is to promote the rule of aristocracy or +democracy in the country; but I affirm that aristocratic or democratic passions +may easily be detected at the bottom of all parties, and that, although they +escape a superficial observation, they are the main point and the very soul of +every faction in the United States. +</p> + +<p> +To quote a recent example. When the President attacked the Bank, the country +was excited and parties were formed; the well-informed classes rallied round +the Bank, the common people round the President. But it must not be imagined +that the people had formed a rational opinion upon a question which offers so +many difficulties to the most experienced statesmen. The Bank is a great +establishment which enjoys an independent existence, and the people, accustomed +to make and unmake whatsoever it pleases, is startled to meet with this +obstacle to its authority. In the midst of the perpetual fluctuation of society +the community is irritated by so permanent an institution, and is led to attack +it in order to see whether it can be shaken and controlled, like all the other +institutions of the country. +</p> + +<p> +Remains Of The Aristocratic Party In The United States +</p> + +<p> +Secret opposition of wealthy individuals to democracy—Their +retirement—Their taste for exclusive pleasures and for luxury at +home—Their simplicity abroad—Their affected condescension towards +the people. +</p> + +<p> +It sometimes happens in a people amongst which various opinions prevail that +the balance of the several parties is lost, and one of them obtains an +irresistible preponderance, overpowers all obstacles, harasses its opponents, +and appropriates all the resources of society to its own purposes. The +vanquished citizens despair of success and they conceal their dissatisfaction +in silence and in general apathy. The nation seems to be governed by a single +principle, and the prevailing party assumes the credit of having restored peace +and unanimity to the country. But this apparent unanimity is merely a cloak to +alarming dissensions and perpetual opposition. +</p> + +<p> +This is precisely what occurred in America; when the democratic party got the +upper hand, it took exclusive possession of the conduct of affairs, and from +that time the laws and the customs of society have been adapted to its +caprices. At the present day the more affluent classes of society are so +entirely removed from the direction of political affairs in the United States +that wealth, far from conferring a right to the exercise of power, is rather an +obstacle than a means of attaining to it. The wealthy members of the community +abandon the lists, through unwillingness to contend, and frequently to contend +in vain, against the poorest classes of their fellow citizens. They concentrate +all their enjoyments in the privacy of their homes, where they occupy a rank +which cannot be assumed in public; and they constitute a private society in the +State, which has its own tastes and its own pleasures. They submit to this +state of things as an irremediable evil, but they are careful not to show that +they are galled by its continuance; it is even not uncommon to hear them laud +the delights of a republican government, and the advantages of democratic +institutions when they are in public. Next to hating their enemies, men are +most inclined to flatter them. +</p> + +<p> +Mark, for instance, that opulent citizen, who is as anxious as a Jew of the +Middle Ages to conceal his wealth. His dress is plain, his demeanor unassuming; +but the interior of his dwelling glitters with luxury, and none but a few +chosen guests whom he haughtily styles his equals are allowed to penetrate into +this sanctuary. No European noble is more exclusive in his pleasures, or more +jealous of the smallest advantages which his privileged station confers upon +him. But the very same individual crosses the city to reach a dark +counting-house in the centre of traffic, where every one may accost him who +pleases. If he meets his cobbler upon the way, they stop and converse; the two +citizens discuss the affairs of the State in which they have an equal interest, +and they shake hands before they part. +</p> + +<p> +But beneath this artificial enthusiasm, and these obsequious attentions to the +preponderating power, it is easy to perceive that the wealthy members of the +community entertain a hearty distaste to the democratic institutions of their +country. The populace is at once the object of their scorn and of their fears. +If the maladministration of the democracy ever brings about a revolutionary +crisis, and if monarchical institutions ever become practicable in the United +States, the truth of what I advance will become obvious. +</p> + +<p> +The two chief weapons which parties use in order to ensure success are the +public press and the formation of associations. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0026" id="link2HCH0026"></a> Chapter XI: Liberty Of The +Press In The United States</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0027" id="link2HCH0027"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +Difficulty of restraining the liberty of the press—Particular reasons +which some nations have to cherish this liberty—The liberty of the press +a necessary consequence of the sovereignty of the people as it is understood in +America—Violent language of the periodical press in the United +States—Propensities of the periodical press—Illustrated by the +United States—Opinion of the Americans upon the repression of the abuse +of the liberty of the press by judicial prosecutions—Reasons for which +the press is less powerful in America than in France. +</p> + +<p> +Liberty Of The Press In The United States +</p> + +<p> +The influence of the liberty of the press does not affect political opinions +alone, but it extends to all the opinions of men, and it modifies customs as +well as laws. In another part of this work I shall attempt to determinate the +degree of influence which the liberty of the press has exercised upon civil +society in the United States, and to point out the direction which it has given +to the ideas, as well as the tone which it has imparted to the character and +the feelings, of the Anglo-Americans, but at present I purpose simply to +examine the effects produced by the liberty of the press in the political +world. +</p> + +<p> +I confess that I do not entertain that firm and complete attachment to the +liberty of the press which things that are supremely good in their very nature +are wont to excite in the mind; and I approve of it more from a recollection of +the evils it prevents than from a consideration of the advantages it ensures. +</p> + +<p> +If any one could point out an intermediate and yet a tenable position between +the complete independence and the entire subjection of the public expression of +opinion, I should perhaps be inclined to adopt it; but the difficulty is to +discover this position. If it is your intention to correct the abuses of +unlicensed printing and to restore the use of orderly language, you may in the +first instance try the offender by a jury; but if the jury acquits him, the +opinion which was that of a single individual becomes the opinion of the +country at large. Too much and too little has therefore hitherto been done. If +you proceed, you must bring the delinquent before a court of permanent judges. +But even here the cause must be heard before it can be decided; and the very +principles which no book would have ventured to avow are blazoned forth in the +pleadings, and what was obscurely hinted at in a single composition is then +repeated in a multitude of other publications. The language in which a thought +is embodied is the mere carcass of the thought, and not the idea itself; +tribunals may condemn the form, but the sense and spirit of the work is too +subtle for their authority. Too much has still been done to recede, too little +to attain your end; you must therefore proceed. If you establish a censorship +of the press, the tongue of the public speaker will still make itself heard, +and you have only increased the mischief. The powers of thought do not rely, +like the powers of physical strength, upon the number of their mechanical +agents, nor can a host of authors be reckoned like the troops which compose an +army; on the contrary, the authority of a principle is often increased by the +smallness of the number of men by whom it is expressed. The words of a +strong-minded man, which penetrate amidst the passions of a listening assembly, +have more power than the vociferations of a thousand orators; and if it be +allowed to speak freely in any public place, the consequence is the same as if +free speaking was allowed in every village. The liberty of discourse must +therefore be destroyed as well as the liberty of the press; this is the +necessary term of your efforts; but if your object was to repress the abuses of +liberty, they have brought you to the feet of a despot. You have been led from +the extreme of independence to the extreme of subjection without meeting with a +single tenable position for shelter or repose. +</p> + +<p> +There are certain nations which have peculiar reasons for cherishing the +liberty of the press, independently of the general motives which I have just +pointed out. For in certain countries which profess to enjoy the privileges of +freedom every individual agent of the Government may violate the laws with +impunity, since those whom he oppresses cannot prosecute him before the courts +of justice. In this case the liberty of the press is not merely a guarantee, +but it is the only guarantee, of their liberty and their security which the +citizens possess. If the rulers of these nations propose to abolish the +independence of the press, the people would be justified in saying: Give us the +right of prosecuting your offences before the ordinary tribunals, and perhaps +we may then waive our right of appeal to the tribunal of public opinion. +</p> + +<p> +But in the countries in which the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people +ostensibly prevails, the censorship of the press is not only dangerous, but it +is absurd. When the right of every citizen to co-operate in the government of +society is acknowledged, every citizen must be presumed to possess the power of +discriminating between the different opinions of his contemporaries, and of +appreciating the different facts from which inferences may be drawn. The +sovereignty of the people and the liberty of the press may therefore be looked +upon as correlative institutions; just as the censorship of the press and +universal suffrage are two things which are irreconcilably opposed, and which +cannot long be retained among the institutions of the same people. Not a single +individual of the twelve millions who inhabit the territory of the United +States has as yet dared to propose any restrictions to the liberty of the +press. The first newspaper over which I cast my eyes, upon my arrival in +America, contained the following article: +</p> + +<p> +In all this affair the language of Jackson has been that of a heartless despot, +solely occupied with the preservation of his own authority. Ambition is his +crime, and it will be his punishment too: intrigue is his native element, and +intrigue will confound his tricks, and will deprive him of his power: he +governs by means of corruption, and his immoral practices will redound to his +shame and confusion. His conduct in the political arena has been that of a +shameless and lawless gamester. He succeeded at the time, but the hour of +retribution approaches, and he will be obliged to disgorge his winnings, to +throw aside his false dice, and to end his days in some retirement, where he +may curse his madness at his leisure; for repentance is a virtue with which his +heart is likely to remain forever unacquainted. +</p> + +<p> +It is not uncommonly imagined in France that the virulence of the press +originates in the uncertain social condition, in the political excitement, and +the general sense of consequent evil which prevail in that country; and it is +therefore supposed that as soon as society has resumed a certain degree of +composure the press will abandon its present vehemence. I am inclined to think +that the above causes explain the reason of the extraordinary ascendency it has +acquired over the nation, but that they do not exercise much influence upon the +tone of its language. The periodical press appears to me to be actuated by +passions and propensities independent of the circumstances in which it is +placed, and the present position of America corroborates this opinion. +</p> + +<p> +America is perhaps, at this moment, the country of the whole world which +contains the fewest germs of revolution; but the press is not less destructive +in its principles than in France, and it displays the same violence without the +same reasons for indignation. In America, as in France, it constitutes a +singular power, so strangely composed of mingled good and evil that it is at +the same time indispensable to the existence of freedom, and nearly +incompatible with the maintenance of public order. Its power is certainly much +greater in France than in the United States; though nothing is more rare in the +latter country than to hear of a prosecution having been instituted against it. +The reason of this is perfectly simple: the Americans, having once admitted the +doctrine of the sovereignty of the people, apply it with perfect consistency. +It was never their intention to found a permanent state of things with elements +which undergo daily modifications; and there is consequently nothing criminal +in an attack upon the existing laws, provided it be not attended with a violent +infraction of them. They are moreover of opinion that courts of justice are +unable to check the abuses of the press; and that as the subtilty of human +language perpetually eludes the severity of judicial analysis, offences of this +nature are apt to escape the hand which attempts to apprehend them. They hold +that to act with efficacy upon the press it would be necessary to find a +tribunal, not only devoted to the existing order of things, but capable of +surmounting the influence of public opinion; a tribunal which should conduct +its proceedings without publicity, which should pronounce its decrees without +assigning its motives, and punish the intentions even more than the language of +an author. Whosoever should have the power of creating and maintaining a +tribunal of this kind would waste his time in prosecuting the liberty of the +press; for he would be the supreme master of the whole community, and he would +be as free to rid himself of the authors as of their writings. In this +question, therefore, there is no medium between servitude and extreme license; +in order to enjoy the inestimable benefits which the liberty of the press +ensures, it is necessary to submit to the inevitable evils which it engenders. +To expect to acquire the former and to escape the latter is to cherish one of +those illusions which commonly mislead nations in their times of sickness, +when, tired with faction and exhausted by effort, they attempt to combine +hostile opinions and contrary principles upon the same soil. +</p> + +<p> +The small influence of the American journals is attributable to several +reasons, amongst which are the following: +</p> + +<p> +The liberty of writing, like all other liberty, is most formidable when it is a +novelty; for a people which has never been accustomed to co-operate in the +conduct of State affairs places implicit confidence in the first tribune who +arouses its attention. The Anglo-Americans have enjoyed this liberty ever since +the foundation of the settlements; moreover, the press cannot create human +passions by its own power, however skillfully it may kindle them where they +exist. In America politics are discussed with animation and a varied activity, +but they rarely touch those deep passions which are excited whenever the +positive interest of a part of the community is impaired: but in the United +States the interests of the community are in a most prosperous condition. A +single glance upon a French and an American newspaper is sufficient to show the +difference which exists between the two nations on this head. In France the +space allotted to commercial advertisements is very limited, and the +intelligence is not considerable, but the most essential part of the journal is +that which contains the discussion of the politics of the day. In America +three-quarters of the enormous sheet which is set before the reader are filled +with advertisements, and the remainder is frequently occupied by political +intelligence or trivial anecdotes: it is only from time to time that one finds +a corner devoted to passionate discussions like those with which the +journalists of France are wont to indulge their readers. +</p> + +<p> +It has been demonstrated by observation, and discovered by the innate sagacity +of the pettiest as well as the greatest of despots, that the influence of a +power is increased in proportion as its direction is rendered more central. In +France the press combines a twofold centralization; almost all its power is +centred in the same spot, and vested in the same hands, for its organs are far +from numerous. The influence of a public press thus constituted, upon a +sceptical nation, must be unbounded. It is an enemy with which a Government may +sign an occasional truce, but which it is difficult to resist for any length of +time. +</p> + +<p> +Neither of these kinds of centralization exists in America. The United States +have no metropolis; the intelligence as well as the power of the country are +dispersed abroad, and instead of radiating from a point, they cross each other +in every direction; the Americans have established no central control over the +expression of opinion, any more than over the conduct of business. These are +circumstances which do not depend on human foresight; but it is owing to the +laws of the Union that there are no licenses to be granted to printers, no +securities demanded from editors as in France, and no stamp duty as in France +and formerly in England. The consequence of this is that nothing is easier than +to set up a newspaper, and a small number of readers suffices to defray the +expenses of the editor. +</p> + +<p> +The number of periodical and occasional publications which appears in the +United States actually surpasses belief. The most enlightened Americans +attribute the subordinate influence of the press to this excessive +dissemination; and it is adopted as an axiom of political science in that +country that the only way to neutralize the effect of public journals is to +multiply them indefinitely. I cannot conceive that a truth which is so +self-evident should not already have been more generally admitted in Europe; it +is comprehensible that the persons who hope to bring about revolutions by means +of the press should be desirous of confining its action to a few powerful +organs, but it is perfectly incredible that the partisans of the existing state +of things, and the natural supporters of the law, should attempt to diminish +the influence of the press by concentrating its authority. The Governments of +Europe seem to treat the press with the courtesy of the knights of old; they +are anxious to furnish it with the same central power which they have found to +be so trusty a weapon, in order to enhance the glory of their resistance to its +attacks. +</p> + +<p> +In America there is scarcely a hamlet which has not its own newspaper. It may +readily be imagined that neither discipline nor unity of design can be +communicated to so multifarious a host, and each one is consequently led to +fight under his own standard. All the political journals of the United States +are indeed arrayed on the side of the administration or against it; but they +attack and defend in a thousand different ways. They cannot succeed in forming +those great currents of opinion which overwhelm the most solid obstacles. This +division of the influence of the press produces a variety of other consequences +which are scarcely less remarkable. The facility with which journals can be +established induces a multitude of individuals to take a part in them; but as +the extent of competition precludes the possibility of considerable profit, the +most distinguished classes of society are rarely led to engage in these +undertakings. But such is the number of the public prints that, even if they +were a source of wealth, writers of ability could not be found to direct them +all. The journalists of the United States are usually placed in a very humble +position, with a scanty education and a vulgar turn of mind. The will of the +majority is the most general of laws, and it establishes certain habits which +form the characteristics of each peculiar class of society; thus it dictates +the etiquette practised at courts and the etiquette of the bar. The +characteristics of the French journalist consist in a violent, but frequently +an eloquent and lofty, manner of discussing the politics of the day; and the +exceptions to this habitual practice are only occasional. The characteristics +of the American journalist consist in an open and coarse appeal to the passions +of the populace; and he habitually abandons the principles of political science +to assail the characters of individuals, to track them into private life, and +disclose all their weaknesses and errors. +</p> + +<p> +Nothing can be more deplorable than this abuse of the powers of thought; I +shall have occasion to point out hereafter the influence of the newspapers upon +the taste and the morality of the American people, but my present subject +exclusively concerns the political world. It cannot be denied that the effects +of this extreme license of the press tend indirectly to the maintenance of +public order. The individuals who are already in the possession of a high +station in the esteem of their fellow-citizens are afraid to write in the +newspapers, and they are thus deprived of the most powerful instrument which +they can use to excite the passions of the multitude to their own advantage. *a +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ They only write in the papers when they choose to address the people in their +own name; as, for instance, when they are called upon to repel calumnious +imputations, and to correct a misstatement of facts.] +</p> + +<p> +The personal opinions of the editors have no kind of weight in the eyes of the +public: the only use of a journal is, that it imparts the knowledge of certain +facts, and it is only by altering or distorting those facts that a journalist +can contribute to the support of his own views. +</p> + +<p> +But although the press is limited to these resources, its influence in America +is immense. It is the power which impels the circulation of political life +through all the districts of that vast territory. Its eye is constantly open to +detect the secret springs of political designs, and to summon the leaders of +all parties to the bar of public opinion. It rallies the interests of the +community round certain principles, and it draws up the creed which factions +adopt; for it affords a means of intercourse between parties which hear, and +which address each other without ever having been in immediate contact. When a +great number of the organs of the press adopt the same line of conduct, their +influence becomes irresistible; and public opinion, when it is perpetually +assailed from the same side, eventually yields to the attack. In the United +States each separate journal exercises but little authority, but the power of +the periodical press is only second to that of the people. *b +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ See Appendix, P.] +</p> + +<p> +The opinions established in the United States under the empire of the liberty +of the press are frequently more firmly rooted than those which are formed +elsewhere under the sanction of a censor. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States the democracy perpetually raises fresh individuals to the +conduct of public affairs; and the measures of the administration are +consequently seldom regulated by the strict rules of consistency or of order. +But the general principles of the Government are more stable, and the opinions +most prevalent in society are generally more durable than in many other +countries. When once the Americans have taken up an idea, whether it be well or +ill founded, nothing is more difficult than to eradicate it from their minds. +The same tenacity of opinion has been observed in England, where, for the last +century, greater freedom of conscience and more invincible prejudices have +existed than in all the other countries of Europe. I attribute this consequence +to a cause which may at first sight appear to have a very opposite tendency, +namely, to the liberty of the press. The nations amongst which this liberty +exists are as apt to cling to their opinions from pride as from conviction. +They cherish them because they hold them to be just, and because they exercised +their own free-will in choosing them; and they maintain them not only because +they are true, but because they are their own. Several other reasons conduce to +the same end. +</p> + +<p> +It was remarked by a man of genius that “ignorance lies at the two ends +of knowledge.” Perhaps it would have been more correct to have said, that +absolute convictions are to be met with at the two extremities, and that doubt +lies in the middle; for the human intellect may be considered in three distinct +states, which frequently succeed one another. A man believes implicitly, +because he adopts a proposition without inquiry. He doubts as soon as he is +assailed by the objections which his inquiries may have aroused. But he +frequently succeeds in satisfying these doubts, and then he begins to believe +afresh: he no longer lays hold on a truth in its most shadowy and uncertain +form, but he sees it clearly before him, and he advances onwards by the light +it gives him. *c +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ It may, however, be doubted whether this rational and self-guiding conviction +arouses as much fervor or enthusiastic devotedness in men as their first +dogmatical belief.] +</p> + +<p> +When the liberty of the press acts upon men who are in the first of these three +states, it does not immediately disturb their habit of believing implicitly +without investigation, but it constantly modifies the objects of their +intuitive convictions. The human mind continues to discern but one point upon +the whole intellectual horizon, and that point is in continual motion. Such are +the symptoms of sudden revolutions, and of the misfortunes which are sure to +befall those generations which abruptly adopt the unconditional freedom of the +press. +</p> + +<p> +The circle of novel ideas is, however, soon terminated; the touch of experience +is upon them, and the doubt and mistrust which their uncertainty produces +become universal. We may rest assured that the majority of mankind will either +believe they know not wherefore, or will not know what to believe. Few are the +beings who can ever hope to attain to that state of rational and independent +conviction which true knowledge can beget in defiance of the attacks of doubt. +</p> + +<p> +It has been remarked that in times of great religious fervor men sometimes +change their religious opinions; whereas in times of general scepticism +everyone clings to his own persuasion. The same thing takes place in politics +under the liberty of the press. In countries where all the theories of social +science have been contested in their turn, the citizens who have adopted one of +them stick to it, not so much because they are assured of its excellence, as +because they are not convinced of the superiority of any other. In the present +age men are not very ready to die in defence of their opinions, but they are +rarely inclined to change them; and there are fewer martyrs as well as fewer +apostates. +</p> + +<p> +Another still more valid reason may yet be adduced: when no abstract opinions +are looked upon as certain, men cling to the mere propensities and external +interests of their position, which are naturally more tangible and more +permanent than any opinions in the world. +</p> + +<p> +It is not a question of easy solution whether aristocracy or democracy is most +fit to govern a country. But it is certain that democracy annoys one part of +the community, and that aristocracy oppresses another part. When the question +is reduced to the simple expression of the struggle between poverty and wealth, +the tendency of each side of the dispute becomes perfectly evident without +further controversy. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0028" id="link2HCH0028"></a> Chapter XII: Political +Associations In The United States</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0029" id="link2HCH0029"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +Daily use which the Anglo-Americans make of the right of +association—Three kinds of political associations—In what manner +the Americans apply the representative system to associations—Dangers +resulting to the State—Great Convention of 1831 relative to the +Tariff—Legislative character of this Convention—Why the unlimited +exercise of the right of association is less dangerous in the United States +than elsewhere—Why it may be looked upon as necessary—Utility of +associations in a democratic people. +</p> + +<p> +Political Associations In The United States +</p> + +<p> +In no country in the world has the principle of association been more +successfully used, or more unsparingly applied to a multitude of different +objects, than in America. Besides the permanent associations which are +established by law under the names of townships, cities, and counties, a vast +number of others are formed and maintained by the agency of private +individuals. +</p> + +<p> +The citizen of the United States is taught from his earliest infancy to rely +upon his own exertions in order to resist the evils and the difficulties of +life; he looks upon social authority with an eye of mistrust and anxiety, and +he only claims its assistance when he is quite unable to shift without it. This +habit may even be traced in the schools of the rising generation, where the +children in their games are wont to submit to rules which they have themselves +established, and to punish misdemeanors which they have themselves defined. The +same spirit pervades every act of social life. If a stoppage occurs in a +thoroughfare, and the circulation of the public is hindered, the neighbors +immediately constitute a deliberative body; and this extemporaneous assembly +gives rise to an executive power which remedies the inconvenience before +anybody has thought of recurring to an authority superior to that of the +persons immediately concerned. If the public pleasures are concerned, an +association is formed to provide for the splendor and the regularity of the +entertainment. Societies are formed to resist enemies which are exclusively of +a moral nature, and to diminish the vice of intemperance: in the United States +associations are established to promote public order, commerce, industry, +morality, and religion; for there is no end which the human will, seconded by +the collective exertions of individuals, despairs of attaining. +</p> + +<p> +I shall hereafter have occasion to show the effects of association upon the +course of society, and I must confine myself for the present to the political +world. When once the right of association is recognized, the citizens may +employ it in several different ways. +</p> + +<p> +An association consists simply in the public assent which a number of +individuals give to certain doctrines, and in the engagement which they +contract to promote the spread of those doctrines by their exertions. The right +of association with these views is very analogous to the liberty of unlicensed +writing; but societies thus formed possess more authority than the press. When +an opinion is represented by a society, it necessarily assumes a more exact and +explicit form. It numbers its partisans, and compromises their welfare in its +cause: they, on the other hand, become acquainted with each other, and their +zeal is increased by their number. An association unites the efforts of minds +which have a tendency to diverge in one single channel, and urges them +vigorously towards one single end which it points out. +</p> + +<p> +The second degree in the right of association is the power of meeting. When an +association is allowed to establish centres of action at certain important +points in the country, its activity is increased and its influence extended. +Men have the opportunity of seeing each other; means of execution are more +readily combined, and opinions are maintained with a degree of warmth and +energy which written language cannot approach. +</p> + +<p> +Lastly, in the exercise of the right of political association, there is a third +degree: the partisans of an opinion may unite in electoral bodies, and choose +delegates to represent them in a central assembly. This is, properly speaking, +the application of the representative system to a party. +</p> + +<p> +Thus, in the first instance, a society is formed between individuals professing +the same opinion, and the tie which keeps it together is of a purely +intellectual nature; in the second case, small assemblies are formed which only +represent a fraction of the party. Lastly, in the third case, they constitute a +separate nation in the midst of the nation, a government within the Government. +Their delegates, like the real delegates of the majority, represent the entire +collective force of their party; and they enjoy a certain degree of that +national dignity and great influence which belong to the chosen representatives +of the people. It is true that they have not the right of making the laws, but +they have the power of attacking those which are in being, and of drawing up +beforehand those which they may afterwards cause to be adopted. +</p> + +<p> +If, in a people which is imperfectly accustomed to the exercise of freedom, or +which is exposed to violent political passions, a deliberating minority, which +confines itself to the contemplation of future laws, be placed in juxtaposition +to the legislative majority, I cannot but believe that public tranquillity +incurs very great risks in that nation. There is doubtless a very wide +difference between proving that one law is in itself better than another and +proving that the former ought to be substituted for the latter. But the +imagination of the populace is very apt to overlook this difference, which is +so apparent to the minds of thinking men. It sometimes happens that a nation is +divided into two nearly equal parties, each of which affects to represent the +majority. If, in immediate contiguity to the directing power, another power be +established, which exercises almost as much moral authority as the former, it +is not to be believed that it will long be content to speak without acting; or +that it will always be restrained by the abstract consideration of the nature +of associations which are meant to direct but not to enforce opinions, to +suggest but not to make the laws. +</p> + +<p> +The more we consider the independence of the press in its principal +consequences, the more are we convinced that it is the chief and, so to speak, +the constitutive element of freedom in the modern world. A nation which is +determined to remain free is therefore right in demanding the unrestrained +exercise of this independence. But the unrestrained liberty of political +association cannot be entirely assimilated to the liberty of the press. The one +is at the same time less necessary and more dangerous than the other. A nation +may confine it within certain limits without forfeiting any part of its +self-control; and it may sometimes be obliged to do so in order to maintain its +own authority. +</p> + +<p> +In America the liberty of association for political purposes is unbounded. An +example will show in the clearest light to what an extent this privilege is +tolerated. +</p> + +<p> +The question of the tariff, or of free trade, produced a great manifestation of +party feeling in America; the tariff was not only a subject of debate as a +matter of opinion, but it exercised a favorable or a prejudicial influence upon +several very powerful interests of the States. The North attributed a great +portion of its prosperity, and the South all its sufferings, to this system; +insomuch that for a long time the tariff was the sole source of the political +animosities which agitated the Union. +</p> + +<p> +In 1831, when the dispute was raging with the utmost virulence, a private +citizen of Massachusetts proposed to all the enemies of the tariff, by means of +the public prints, to send delegates to Philadelphia in order to consult +together upon the means which were most fitted to promote freedom of trade. +This proposal circulated in a few days from Maine to New Orleans by the power +of the printing-press: the opponents of the tariff adopted it with enthusiasm; +meetings were formed on all sides, and delegates were named. The majority of +these individuals were well known, and some of them had earned a considerable +degree of celebrity. South Carolina alone, which afterwards took up arms in the +same cause, sent sixty-three delegates. On October 1, 1831, this assembly, +which according to the American custom had taken the name of a Convention, met +at Philadelphia; it consisted of more than two hundred members. Its debates +were public, and they at once assumed a legislative character; the extent of +the powers of Congress, the theories of free trade, and the different clauses +of the tariff, were discussed in turn. At the end of ten days’ +deliberation the Convention broke up, after having published an address to the +American people, in which it declared: +</p> + +<p> +I. That Congress had not the right of making a tariff, and that the existing +tariff was unconstitutional; +</p> + +<p> +II. That the prohibition of free trade was prejudicial to the interests of all +nations, and to that of the American people in particular. +</p> + +<p> +It must be acknowledged that the unrestrained liberty of political association +has not hitherto produced, in the United States, those fatal consequences which +might perhaps be expected from it elsewhere. The right of association was +imported from England, and it has always existed in America; so that the +exercise of this privilege is now amalgamated with the manners and customs of +the people. At the present time the liberty of association is become a +necessary guarantee against the tyranny of the majority. In the United States, +as soon as a party is become preponderant, all public authority passes under +its control; its private supporters occupy all the places, and have all the +force of the administration at their disposal. As the most distinguished +partisans of the other side of the question are unable to surmount the +obstacles which exclude them from power, they require some means of +establishing themselves upon their own basis, and of opposing the moral +authority of the minority to the physical power which domineers over it. Thus a +dangerous expedient is used to obviate a still more formidable danger. +</p> + +<p> +The omnipotence of the majority appears to me to present such extreme perils to +the American Republics that the dangerous measure which is used to repress it +seems to be more advantageous than prejudicial. And here I am about to advance +a proposition which may remind the reader of what I said before in speaking of +municipal freedom: There are no countries in which associations are more +needed, to prevent the despotism of faction or the arbitrary power of a prince, +than those which are democratically constituted. In aristocratic nations the +body of the nobles and the more opulent part of the community are in themselves +natural associations, which act as checks upon the abuses of power. In +countries in which these associations do not exist, if private individuals are +unable to create an artificial and a temporary substitute for them, I can +imagine no permanent protection against the most galling tyranny; and a great +people may be oppressed by a small faction, or by a single individual, with +impunity. +</p> + +<p> +The meeting of a great political Convention (for there are Conventions of all +kinds), which may frequently become a necessary measure, is always a serious +occurrence, even in America, and one which is never looked forward to, by the +judicious friends of the country, without alarm. This was very perceptible in +the Convention of 1831, at which the exertions of all the most distinguished +members of the Assembly tended to moderate its language, and to restrain the +subjects which it treated within certain limits. It is probable, in fact, that +the Convention of 1831 exercised a very great influence upon the minds of the +malcontents, and prepared them for the open revolt against the commercial laws +of the Union which took place in 1832. +</p> + +<p> +It cannot be denied that the unrestrained liberty of association for political +purposes is the privilege which a people is longest in learning how to +exercise. If it does not throw the nation into anarchy, it perpetually augments +the chances of that calamity. On one point, however, this perilous liberty +offers a security against dangers of another kind; in countries where +associations are free, secret societies are unknown. In America there are +numerous factions, but no conspiracies. +</p> + +<p> +Different ways in which the right of association is understood in Europe and in +the United States—Different use which is made of it. +</p> + +<p> +The most natural privilege of man, next to the right of acting for himself, is +that of combining his exertions with those of his fellow-creatures, and of +acting in common with them. I am therefore led to conclude that the right of +association is almost as inalienable as the right of personal liberty. No +legislator can attack it without impairing the very foundations of society. +Nevertheless, if the liberty of association is a fruitful source of advantages +and prosperity to some nations, it may be perverted or carried to excess by +others, and the element of life may be changed into an element of destruction. +A comparison of the different methods which associations pursue in those +countries in which they are managed with discretion, as well as in those where +liberty degenerates into license, may perhaps be thought useful both to +governments and to parties. +</p> + +<p> +The greater part of Europeans look upon an association as a weapon which is to +be hastily fashioned, and immediately tried in the conflict. A society is +formed for discussion, but the idea of impending action prevails in the minds +of those who constitute it: it is, in fact, an army; and the time given to +parley serves to reckon up the strength and to animate the courage of the host, +after which they direct their march against the enemy. Resources which lie +within the bounds of the law may suggest themselves to the persons who compose +it as means, but never as the only means, of success. +</p> + +<p> +Such, however, is not the manner in which the right of association is +understood in the United States. In America the citizens who form the minority +associate, in order, in the first place, to show their numerical strength, and +so to diminish the moral authority of the majority; and, in the second place, +to stimulate competition, and to discover those arguments which are most fitted +to act upon the majority; for they always entertain hopes of drawing over their +opponents to their own side, and of afterwards disposing of the supreme power +in their name. Political associations in the United States are therefore +peaceable in their intentions, and strictly legal in the means which they +employ; and they assert with perfect truth that they only aim at success by +lawful expedients. +</p> + +<p> +The difference which exists between the Americans and ourselves depends on +several causes. In Europe there are numerous parties so diametrically opposed +to the majority that they can never hope to acquire its support, and at the +same time they think that they are sufficiently strong in themselves to +struggle and to defend their cause. When a party of this kind forms an +association, its object is, not to conquer, but to fight. In America the +individuals who hold opinions very much opposed to those of the majority are no +sort of impediment to its power, and all other parties hope to win it over to +their own principles in the end. The exercise of the right of association +becomes dangerous in proportion to the impossibility which excludes great +parties from acquiring the majority. In a country like the United States, in +which the differences of opinion are mere differences of hue, the right of +association may remain unrestrained without evil consequences. The inexperience +of many of the European nations in the enjoyment of liberty leads them only to +look upon the liberty of association as a right of attacking the Government. +The first notion which presents itself to a party, as well as to an individual, +when it has acquired a consciousness of its own strength, is that of violence: +the notion of persuasion arises at a later period and is only derived from +experience. The English, who are divided into parties which differ most +essentially from each other, rarely abuse the right of association, because +they have long been accustomed to exercise it. In France the passion for war is +so intense that there is no undertaking so mad, or so injurious to the welfare +of the State, that a man does not consider himself honored in defending it, at +the risk of his life. +</p> + +<p> +But perhaps the most powerful of the causes which tend to mitigate the excesses +of political association in the United States is Universal Suffrage. In +countries in which universal suffrage exists the majority is never doubtful, +because neither party can pretend to represent that portion of the community +which has not voted. The associations which are formed are aware, as well as +the nation at large, that they do not represent the majority: this is, indeed, +a condition inseparable from their existence; for if they did represent the +preponderating power, they would change the law instead of soliciting its +reform. The consequence of this is that the moral influence of the Government +which they attack is very much increased, and their own power is very much +enfeebled. +</p> + +<p> +In Europe there are few associations which do not affect to represent the +majority, or which do not believe that they represent it. This conviction or +this pretension tends to augment their force amazingly, and contributes no less +to legalize their measures. Violence may seem to be excusable in defence of the +cause of oppressed right. Thus it is, in the vast labyrinth of human laws, that +extreme liberty sometimes corrects the abuses of license, and that extreme +democracy obviates the dangers of democratic government. In Europe, +associations consider themselves, in some degree, as the legislative and +executive councils of the people, which is unable to speak for itself. In +America, where they only represent a minority of the nation, they argue and +they petition. +</p> + +<p> +The means which the associations of Europe employ are in accordance with the +end which they propose to obtain. As the principal aim of these bodies is to +act, and not to debate, to fight rather than to persuade, they are naturally +led to adopt a form of organization which differs from the ordinary customs of +civil bodies, and which assumes the habits and the maxims of military life. +They centralize the direction of their resources as much as possible, and they +intrust the power of the whole party to a very small number of leaders. +</p> + +<p> +The members of these associations respond to a watchword, like soldiers on +duty; they profess the doctrine of passive obedience; say rather, that in +uniting together they at once abjure the exercise of their own judgment and +free will; and the tyrannical control which these societies exercise is often +far more insupportable than the authority possessed over society by the +Government which they attack. Their moral force is much diminished by these +excesses, and they lose the powerful interest which is always excited by a +struggle between oppressors and the oppressed. The man who in given cases +consents to obey his fellows with servility, and who submits his activity and +even his opinions to their control, can have no claim to rank as a free +citizen. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans have also established certain forms of government which are +applied to their associations, but these are invariably borrowed from the forms +of the civil administration. The independence of each individual is formally +recognized; the tendency of the members of the association points, as it does +in the body of the community, towards the same end, but they are not obliged to +follow the same track. No one abjures the exercise of his reason and his free +will; but every one exerts that reason and that will for the benefit of a +common undertaking. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0030" id="link2HCH0030"></a> Chapter XIII: Government Of +The Democracy In America—Part I</h2> + +<p> +I am well aware of the difficulties which attend this part of my subject, but +although every expression which I am about to make use of may clash, upon some +one point, with the feelings of the different parties which divide my country, +I shall speak my opinion with the most perfect openness. +</p> + +<p> +In Europe we are at a loss how to judge the true character and the more +permanent propensities of democracy, because in Europe two conflicting +principles exist, and we do not know what to attribute to the principles +themselves, and what to refer to the passions which they bring into collision. +Such, however, is not the case in America; there the people reigns without any +obstacle, and it has no perils to dread and no injuries to avenge. In America, +democracy is swayed by its own free propensities; its course is natural and its +activity is unrestrained; the United States consequently afford the most +favorable opportunity of studying its real character. And to no people can this +inquiry be more vitally interesting than to the French nation, which is blindly +driven onwards by a daily and irresistible impulse towards a state of things +which may prove either despotic or republican, but which will assuredly be +democratic. +</p> + +<p> +Universal Suffrage +</p> + +<p> +I have already observed that universal suffrage has been adopted in all the +States of the Union; it consequently occurs amongst different populations which +occupy very different positions in the scale of society. I have had +opportunities of observing its effects in different localities, and amongst +races of men who are nearly strangers to each other by their language, their +religion, and their manner of life; in Louisiana as well as in New England, in +Georgia and in Canada. I have remarked that Universal Suffrage is far from +producing in America either all the good or all the evil consequences which are +assigned to it in Europe, and that its effects differ very widely from those +which are usually attributed to it. +</p> + +<p> +Choice Of The People, And Instinctive Preferences Of The American Democracy +</p> + +<p> +In the United States the most able men are rarely placed at the head of +affairs—Reason of this peculiarity—The envy which prevails in the +lower orders of France against the higher classes is not a French, but a purely +democratic sentiment—For what reason the most distinguished men in +America frequently seclude themselves from public affairs. +</p> + +<p> +Many people in Europe are apt to believe without saying it, or to say without +believing it, that one of the great advantages of universal suffrage is, that +it entrusts the direction of public affairs to men who are worthy of the public +confidence. They admit that the people is unable to govern for itself, but they +aver that it is always sincerely disposed to promote the welfare of the State, +and that it instinctively designates those persons who are animated by the same +good wishes, and who are the most fit to wield the supreme authority. I confess +that the observations I made in America by no means coincide with these +opinions. On my arrival in the United States I was surprised to find so much +distinguished talent among the subjects, and so little among the heads of the +Government. It is a well-authenticated fact, that at the present day the most +able men in the United States are very rarely placed at the head of affairs; +and it must be acknowledged that such has been the result in proportion as +democracy has outstepped all its former limits. The race of American statesmen +has evidently dwindled most remarkably in the course of the last fifty years. +</p> + +<p> +Several causes may be assigned to this phenomenon. It is impossible, +notwithstanding the most strenuous exertions, to raise the intelligence of the +people above a certain level. Whatever may be the facilities of acquiring +information, whatever may be the profusion of easy methods and of cheap +science, the human mind can never be instructed and educated without devoting a +considerable space of time to those objects. +</p> + +<p> +The greater or the lesser possibility of subsisting without labor is therefore +the necessary boundary of intellectual improvement. This boundary is more +remote in some countries and more restricted in others; but it must exist +somewhere as long as the people is constrained to work in order to procure the +means of physical subsistence, that is to say, as long as it retains its +popular character. It is therefore quite as difficult to imagine a State in +which all the citizens should be very well informed as a State in which they +should all be wealthy; these two difficulties may be looked upon as +correlative. It may very readily be admitted that the mass of the citizens are +sincerely disposed to promote the welfare of their country; nay more, it may +even be allowed that the lower classes are less apt to be swayed by +considerations of personal interest than the higher orders: but it is always +more or less impossible for them to discern the best means of attaining the end +which they desire with sincerity. Long and patient observation, joined to a +multitude of different notions, is required to form a just estimate of the +character of a single individual; and can it be supposed that the vulgar have +the power of succeeding in an inquiry which misleads the penetration of genius +itself? The people has neither the time nor the means which are essential to +the prosecution of an investigation of this kind: its conclusions are hastily +formed from a superficial inspection of the more prominent features of a +question. Hence it often assents to the clamor of a mountebank who knows the +secret of stimulating its tastes, while its truest friends frequently fail in +their exertions. +</p> + +<p> +Moreover, the democracy is not only deficient in that soundness of judgment +which is necessary to select men really deserving of its confidence, but it has +neither the desire nor the inclination to find them out. It cannot be denied +that democratic institutions have a very strong tendency to promote the feeling +of envy in the human heart; not so much because they afford to every one the +means of rising to the level of any of his fellow-citizens, as because those +means perpetually disappoint the persons who employ them. Democratic +institutions awaken and foster a passion for equality which they can never +entirely satisfy. This complete equality eludes the grasp of the people at the +very moment at which it thinks to hold it fast, and “flies,” as +Pascal says, “with eternal flight”; the people is excited in the +pursuit of an advantage, which is more precious because it is not sufficiently +remote to be unknown, or sufficiently near to be enjoyed. The lower orders are +agitated by the chance of success, they are irritated by its uncertainty; and +they pass from the enthusiasm of pursuit to the exhaustion of ill-success, and +lastly to the acrimony of disappointment. Whatever transcends their own limits +appears to be an obstacle to their desires, and there is no kind of +superiority, however legitimate it may be, which is not irksome in their sight. +</p> + +<p> +It has been supposed that the secret instinct which leads the lower orders to +remove their superiors as much as possible from the direction of public affairs +is peculiar to France. This, however, is an error; the propensity to which I +allude is not inherent in any particular nation, but in democratic institutions +in general; and although it may have been heightened by peculiar political +circumstances, it owes its origin to a higher cause. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States the people is not disposed to hate the superior classes of +society; but it is not very favorably inclined towards them, and it carefully +excludes them from the exercise of authority. It does not entertain any dread +of distinguished talents, but it is rarely captivated by them; and it awards +its approbation very sparingly to such as have risen without the popular +support. +</p> + +<p> +Whilst the natural propensities of democracy induce the people to reject the +most distinguished citizens as its rulers, these individuals are no less apt to +retire from a political career in which it is almost impossible to retain their +independence, or to advance without degrading themselves. This opinion has been +very candidly set forth by Chancellor Kent, who says, in speaking with great +eulogiums of that part of the Constitution which empowers the Executive to +nominate the judges: “It is indeed probable that the men who are best +fitted to discharge the duties of this high office would have too much reserve +in their manners, and too much austerity in their principles, for them to be +returned by the majority at an election where universal suffrage is +adopted.” Such were the opinions which were printed without contradiction +in America in the year 1830! +</p> + +<p> +I hold it to be sufficiently demonstrated that universal suffrage is by no +means a guarantee of the wisdom of the popular choice, and that, whatever its +advantages may be, this is not one of them. +</p> + +<p> +Causes Which May Partly Correct These Tendencies Of The Democracy Contrary +effects produced on peoples as well as on individuals by great +dangers—Why so many distinguished men stood at the head of affairs in +America fifty years ago—Influence which the intelligence and the manners +of the people exercise upon its choice—Example of New +England—States of the Southwest—Influence of certain laws upon the +choice of the people—Election by an elected body—Its effects upon +the composition of the Senate. +</p> + +<p> +When a State is threatened by serious dangers, the people frequently succeeds +in selecting the citizens who are the most able to save it. It has been +observed that man rarely retains his customary level in presence of very +critical circumstances; he rises above or he sinks below his usual condition, +and the same thing occurs in nations at large. Extreme perils sometimes quench +the energy of a people instead of stimulating it; they excite without directing +its passions, and instead of clearing they confuse its powers of perception. +The Jews deluged the smoking ruins of their temple with the carnage of the +remnant of their host. But it is more common, both in the case of nations and +in that of individuals, to find extraordinary virtues arising from the very +imminence of the danger. Great characters are then thrown into relief, as +edifices which are concealed by the gloom of night are illuminated by the glare +of a conflagration. At those dangerous times genius no longer abstains from +presenting itself in the arena; and the people, alarmed by the perils of its +situation, buries its envious passions in a short oblivion. Great names may +then be drawn from the balloting-box. +</p> + +<p> +I have already observed that the American statesmen of the present day are very +inferior to those who stood at the head of affairs fifty years ago. This is as +much a consequence of the circumstances as of the laws of the country. When +America was struggling in the high cause of independence to throw off the yoke +of another country, and when it was about to usher a new nation into the world, +the spirits of its inhabitants were roused to the height which their great +efforts required. In this general excitement the most distinguished men were +ready to forestall the wants of the community, and the people clung to them for +support, and placed them at its head. But events of this magnitude are rare, +and it is from an inspection of the ordinary course of affairs that our +judgment must be formed. +</p> + +<p> +If passing occurrences sometimes act as checks upon the passions of democracy, +the intelligence and the manners of the community exercise an influence which +is not less powerful and far more permanent. This is extremely perceptible in +the United States. +</p> + +<p> +In New England the education and the liberties of the communities were +engendered by the moral and religious principles of their founders. Where +society has acquired a sufficient degree of stability to enable it to hold +certain maxims and to retain fixed habits, the lower orders are accustomed to +respect intellectual superiority and to submit to it without complaint, +although they set at naught all those privileges which wealth and birth have +introduced among mankind. The democracy in New England consequently makes a +more judicious choice than it does elsewhere. +</p> + +<p> +But as we descend towards the South, to those States in which the constitution +of society is more modern and less strong, where instruction is less general, +and where the principles of morality, of religion, and of liberty are less +happily combined, we perceive that the talents and the virtues of those who are +in authority become more and more rare. +</p> + +<p> +Lastly, when we arrive at the new South-western States, in which the +constitution of society dates but from yesterday, and presents an agglomeration +of adventurers and speculators, we are amazed at the persons who are invested +with public authority, and we are led to ask by what force, independent of the +legislation and of the men who direct it, the State can be protected, and +society be made to flourish. +</p> + +<p> +There are certain laws of a democratic nature which contribute, nevertheless, +to correct, in some measure, the dangerous tendencies of democracy. On entering +the House of Representatives of Washington one is struck by the vulgar demeanor +of that great assembly. The eye frequently does not discover a man of celebrity +within its walls. Its members are almost all obscure individuals whose names +present no associations to the mind: they are mostly village lawyers, men in +trade, or even persons belonging to the lower classes of society. In a country +in which education is very general, it is said that the representatives of the +people do not always know how to write correctly. +</p> + +<p> +At a few yards’ distance from this spot is the door of the Senate, which +contains within a small space a large proportion of the celebrated men of +America. Scarcely an individual is to be perceived in it who does not recall +the idea of an active and illustrious career: the Senate is composed of +eloquent advocates, distinguished generals, wise magistrates, and statesmen of +note, whose language would at all times do honor to the most remarkable +parliamentary debates of Europe. +</p> + +<p> +What then is the cause of this strange contrast, and why are the most able +citizens to be found in one assembly rather than in the other? Why is the +former body remarkable for its vulgarity and its poverty of talent, whilst the +latter seems to enjoy a monopoly of intelligence and of sound judgment? Both of +these assemblies emanate from the people; both of them are chosen by universal +suffrage; and no voice has hitherto been heard to assert in America that the +Senate is hostile to the interests of the people. From what cause, then, does +so startling a difference arise? The only reason which appears to me adequately +to account for it is, that the House of Representatives is elected by the +populace directly, and that the Senate is elected by elected bodies. The whole +body of the citizens names the legislature of each State, and the Federal +Constitution converts these legislatures into so many electoral bodies, which +return the members of the Senate. The senators are elected by an indirect +application of universal suffrage; for the legislatures which name them are not +aristocratic or privileged bodies which exercise the electoral franchise in +their own right; but they are chosen by the totality of the citizens; they are +generally elected every year, and new members may constantly be chosen who will +employ their electoral rights in conformity with the wishes of the public. But +this transmission of the popular authority through an assembly of chosen men +operates an important change in it, by refining its discretion and improving +the forms which it adopts. Men who are chosen in this manner accurately +represent the majority of the nation which governs them; but they represent the +elevated thoughts which are current in the community, the propensities which +prompt its nobler actions, rather than the petty passions which disturb or the +vices which disgrace it. +</p> + +<p> +The time may be already anticipated at which the American Republics will be +obliged to introduce the plan of election by an elected body more frequently +into their system of representation, or they will incur no small risk of +perishing miserably amongst the shoals of democracy. +</p> + +<p> +And here I have no scruple in confessing that I look upon this peculiar system +of election as the only means of bringing the exercise of political power to +the level of all classes of the people. Those thinkers who regard this +institution as the exclusive weapon of a party, and those who fear, on the +other hand, to make use of it, seem to me to fall into as great an error in the +one case as in the other. +</p> + +<p> +Influence Which The American Democracy Has Exercised On The Laws Relating To +Elections +</p> + +<p> +When elections are rare, they expose the State to a violent crisis—When +they are frequent, they keep up a degree of feverish excitement—The +Americans have preferred the second of these two evils—Mutability of the +laws—Opinions of Hamilton and Jefferson on this subject. +</p> + +<p> +When elections recur at long intervals the State is exposed to violent +agitation every time they take place. Parties exert themselves to the utmost in +order to gain a prize which is so rarely within their reach; and as the evil is +almost irremediable for the candidates who fail, the consequences of their +disappointed ambition may prove most disastrous; if, on the other hand, the +legal struggle can be repeated within a short space of time, the defeated +parties take patience. When elections occur frequently, their recurrence keeps +society in a perpetual state of feverish excitement, and imparts a continual +instability to public affairs. +</p> + +<p> +Thus, on the one hand the State is exposed to the perils of a revolution, on +the other to perpetual mutability; the former system threatens the very +existence of the Government, the latter is an obstacle to all steady and +consistent policy. The Americans have preferred the second of these evils to +the first; but they were led to this conclusion by their instinct much more +than by their reason; for a taste for variety is one of the characteristic +passions of democracy. An extraordinary mutability has, by this means, been +introduced into their legislation. Many of the Americans consider the +instability of their laws as a necessary consequence of a system whose general +results are beneficial. But no one in the United States affects to deny the +fact of this instability, or to contend that it is not a great evil. +</p> + +<p> +Hamilton, after having demonstrated the utility of a power which might prevent, +or which might at least impede, the promulgation of bad laws, adds: “It +might perhaps be said that the power of preventing bad laws includes that of +preventing good ones, and may be used to the one purpose as well as to the +other. But this objection will have little weight with those who can properly +estimate the mischiefs of that inconstancy and mutability in the laws which +form the greatest blemish in the character and genius of our +governments.” (Federalist, No. 73.) And again in No. 62 of the same work +he observes: “The facility and excess of law-making seem to be the +diseases to which our governments are most liable. . . . The mischievous +effects of the mutability in the public councils arising from a rapid +succession of new members would fill a volume: every new election in the States +is found to change one-half of the representatives. From this change of men +must proceed a change of opinions and of measures, which forfeits the respect +and confidence of other nations, poisons the blessings of liberty itself, and +diminishes the attachment and reverence of the people toward a political system +which betrays so many marks of infirmity.” +</p> + +<p> +Jefferson himself, the greatest Democrat whom the democracy of America has yet +produced, pointed out the same evils. “The instability of our +laws,” said he in a letter to Madison, “is really a very serious +inconvenience. I think that we ought to have obviated it by deciding that a +whole year should always be allowed to elapse between the bringing in of a bill +and the final passing of it. It should afterward be discussed and put to the +vote without the possibility of making any alteration in it; and if the +circumstances of the case required a more speedy decision, the question should +not be decided by a simple majority, but by a majority of at least two-thirds +of both houses.” +</p> + +<p> +Public Officers Under The Control Of The Democracy In America Simple exterior +of the American public officers—No official costume—All public +officers are remunerated—Political consequences of this system—No +public career exists in America—Result of this. +</p> + +<p> +Public officers in the United States are commingled with the crowd of citizens; +they have neither palaces, nor guards, nor ceremonial costumes. This simple +exterior of the persons in authority is connected not only with the +peculiarities of the American character, but with the fundamental principles of +that society. In the estimation of the democracy a government is not a benefit, +but a necessary evil. A certain degree of power must be granted to public +officers, for they would be of no use without it. But the ostensible semblance +of authority is by no means indispensable to the conduct of affairs, and it is +needlessly offensive to the susceptibility of the public. The public officers +themselves are well aware that they only enjoy the superiority over their +fellow-citizens which they derive from their authority upon condition of +putting themselves on a level with the whole community by their manners. A +public officer in the United States is uniformly civil, accessible to all the +world, attentive to all requests, and obliging in his replies. I was pleased by +these characteristics of a democratic government; and I was struck by the manly +independence of the citizens, who respect the office more than the officer, and +who are less attached to the emblems of authority than to the man who bears +them. +</p> + +<p> +I am inclined to believe that the influence which costumes really exercise, in +an age like that in which we live, has been a good deal exaggerated. I never +perceived that a public officer in America was the less respected whilst he was +in the discharge of his duties because his own merit was set off by no +adventitious signs. On the other hand, it is very doubtful whether a peculiar +dress contributes to the respect which public characters ought to have for +their own position, at least when they are not otherwise inclined to respect +it. When a magistrate (and in France such instances are not rare) indulges his +trivial wit at the expense of the prisoner, or derides the predicament in which +a culprit is placed, it would be well to deprive him of his robes of office, to +see whether he would recall some portion of the natural dignity of mankind when +he is reduced to the apparel of a private citizen. +</p> + +<p> +A democracy may, however, allow a certain show of magisterial pomp, and clothe +its officers in silks and gold, without seriously compromising its principles. +Privileges of this kind are transitory; they belong to the place, and are +distinct from the individual: but if public officers are not uniformly +remunerated by the State, the public charges must be entrusted to men of +opulence and independence, who constitute the basis of an aristocracy; and if +the people still retains its right of election, that election can only be made +from a certain class of citizens. When a democratic republic renders offices +which had formerly been remunerated gratuitous, it may safely be believed that +the State is advancing to monarchical institutions; and when a monarchy begins +to remunerate such officers as had hitherto been unpaid, it is a sure sign that +it is approaching toward a despotic or a republican form of government. The +substitution of paid for unpaid functionaries is of itself, in my opinion, +sufficient to constitute a serious revolution. +</p> + +<p> +I look upon the entire absence of gratuitous functionaries in America as one of +the most prominent signs of the absolute dominion which democracy exercises in +that country. All public services, of whatsoever nature they may be, are paid; +so that every one has not merely the right, but also the means of performing +them. Although, in democratic States, all the citizens are qualified to occupy +stations in the Government, all are not tempted to try for them. The number and +the capacities of the candidates are more apt to restrict the choice of +electors than the connections of the candidateship. +</p> + +<p> +In nations in which the principle of election extends to every place in the +State no political career can, properly speaking, be said to exist. Men are +promoted as if by chance to the rank which they enjoy, and they are by no means +sure of retaining it. The consequence is that in tranquil times public +functions offer but few lures to ambition. In the United States the persons who +engage in the perplexities of political life are individuals of very moderate +pretensions. The pursuit of wealth generally diverts men of great talents and +of great passions from the pursuit of power, and it very frequently happens +that a man does not undertake to direct the fortune of the State until he has +discovered his incompetence to conduct his own affairs. The vast number of very +ordinary men who occupy public stations is quite as attributable to these +causes as to the bad choice of the democracy. In the United States, I am not +sure that the people would return the men of superior abilities who might +solicit its support, but it is certain that men of this description do not come +forward. +</p> + +<p> +Arbitrary Power Of Magistrates Under The Rule Of The American Democracy +</p> + +<p> +For what reason the arbitrary power of Magistrates is greater in absolute +monarchies and in democratic republics than it is in limited +monarchies—Arbitrary power of the Magistrates in New England. +</p> + +<p> +In two different kinds of government the magistrates *a exercise a considerable +degree of arbitrary power; namely, under the absolute government of a single +individual, and under that of a democracy. This identical result proceeds from +causes which are nearly analogous. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ I here use the word magistrates in the widest sense in which it can be taken; +I apply it to all the officers to whom the execution of the laws is intrusted.] +</p> + +<p> +In despotic States the fortune of no citizen is secure; and public officers are +not more safe than private individuals. The sovereign, who has under his +control the lives, the property, and sometimes the honor of the men whom he +employs, does not scruple to allow them a great latitude of action, because he +is convinced that they will not use it to his prejudice. In despotic States the +sovereign is so attached to the exercise of his power, that he dislikes the +constraint even of his own regulations; and he is well pleased that his agents +should follow a somewhat fortuitous line of conduct, provided he be certain +that their actions will never counteract his desires. +</p> + +<p> +In democracies, as the majority has every year the right of depriving the +officers whom it has appointed of their power, it has no reason to fear any +abuse of their authority. As the people is always able to signify its wishes to +those who conduct the Government, it prefers leaving them to make their own +exertions to prescribing an invariable rule of conduct which would at once +fetter their activity and the popular authority. +</p> + +<p> +It may even be observed, on attentive consideration, that under the rule of a +democracy the arbitrary power of the magistrate must be still greater than in +despotic States. In the latter the sovereign has the power of punishing all the +faults with which he becomes acquainted, but it would be vain for him to hope +to become acquainted with all those which are committed. In the former the +sovereign power is not only supreme, but it is universally present. The +American functionaries are, in point of fact, much more independent in the +sphere of action which the law traces out for them than any public officer in +Europe. Very frequently the object which they are to accomplish is simply +pointed out to them, and the choice of the means is left to their own +discretion. +</p> + +<p> +In New England, for instance, the selectmen of each township are bound to draw +up the list of persons who are to serve on the jury; the only rule which is +laid down to guide them in their choice is that they are to select citizens +possessing the elective franchise and enjoying a fair reputation. *b In France +the lives and liberties of the subjects would be thought to be in danger if a +public officer of any kind was entrusted with so formidable a right. In New +England the same magistrates are empowered to post the names of habitual +drunkards in public-houses, and to prohibit the inhabitants of a town from +supplying them with liquor. *c A censorial power of this excessive kind would +be revolting to the population of the most absolute monarchies; here, however, +it is submitted to without difficulty. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ See the Act of February 27, 1813. “General Collection of the Laws of +Massachusetts,” vol. ii. p. 331. It should be added that the jurors are +afterwards drawn from these lists by lot.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ See Act of February 28, 1787. “General Collection of the Laws of +Massachusetts,” vol. i. p. 302.] +</p> + +<p> +Nowhere has so much been left by the law to the arbitrary determination of the +magistrate as in democratic republics, because this arbitrary power is +unattended by any alarming consequences. It may even be asserted that the +freedom of the magistrate increases as the elective franchise is extended, and +as the duration of the time of office is shortened. Hence arises the great +difficulty which attends the conversion of a democratic republic into a +monarchy. The magistrate ceases to be elective, but he retains the rights and +the habits of an elected officer, which lead directly to despotism. +</p> + +<p> +It is only in limited monarchies that the law, which prescribes the sphere in +which public officers are to act, superintends all their measures. The cause of +this may be easily detected. In limited monarchies the power is divided between +the King and the people, both of whom are interested in the stability of the +magistrate. The King does not venture to place the public officers under the +control of the people, lest they should be tempted to betray his interests; on +the other hand, the people fears lest the magistrates should serve to oppress +the liberties of the country, if they were entirely dependent upon the Crown; +they cannot therefore be said to depend on either one or the other. The same +cause which induces the king and the people to render public officers +independent suggests the necessity of such securities as may prevent their +independence from encroaching upon the authority of the former and the +liberties of the latter. They consequently agree as to the necessity of +restricting the functionary to a line of conduct laid down beforehand, and they +are interested in confining him by certain regulations which he cannot evade. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0031" id="link2HCH0031"></a> Chapter XIII: Government Of +The Democracy In America—Part II</h2> <h3>Instability Of The +Administration In The United States</h3> <p> +In America the public acts of a community frequently leave fewer traces than +the occurrences of a family—Newspapers the only historical +remains—Instability of the administration prejudicial to the art of +government. +</p> + +<p> +The authority which public men possess in America is so brief, and they are so +soon commingled with the ever-changing population of the country, that the acts +of a community frequently leave fewer traces than the occurrences of a private +family. The public administration is, so to speak, oral and traditionary. But +little is committed to writing, and that little is wafted away forever, like +the leaves of the Sibyl, by the smallest breeze. +</p> + +<p> +The only historical remains in the United States are the newspapers; but if a +number be wanting, the chain of time is broken, and the present is severed from +the past. I am convinced that in fifty years it will be more difficult to +collect authentic documents concerning the social condition of the Americans at +the present day than it is to find remains of the administration of France +during the Middle Ages; and if the United States were ever invaded by +barbarians, it would be necessary to have recourse to the history of other +nations in order to learn anything of the people which now inhabits them. +</p> + +<p> +The instability of the administration has penetrated into the habits of the +people: it even appears to suit the general taste, and no one cares for what +occurred before his time. No methodical system is pursued; no archives are +formed; and no documents are brought together when it would be very easy to do +so. Where they exist, little store is set upon them; and I have amongst my +papers several original public documents which were given to me in answer to +some of my inquiries. In America society seems to live from hand to mouth, like +an army in the field. Nevertheless, the art of administration may undoubtedly +be ranked as a science, and no sciences can be improved if the discoveries and +observations of successive generations are not connected together in the order +in which they occur. One man, in the short space of his life remarks a fact; +another conceives an idea; the former invents a means of execution, the latter +reduces a truth to a fixed proposition; and mankind gathers the fruits of +individual experience upon its way and gradually forms the sciences. But the +persons who conduct the administration in America can seldom afford any +instruction to each other; and when they assume the direction of society, they +simply possess those attainments which are most widely disseminated in the +community, and no experience peculiar to themselves. Democracy, carried to its +furthest limits, is therefore prejudicial to the art of government; and for +this reason it is better adapted to a people already versed in the conduct of +an administration than to a nation which is uninitiated in public affairs. +</p> + +<p> +This remark, indeed, is not exclusively applicable to the science of +administration. Although a democratic government is founded upon a very simple +and natural principle, it always presupposes the existence of a high degree of +culture and enlightenment in society. *d At the first glance it may be imagined +to belong to the earliest ages of the world; but maturer observation will +convince us that it could only come last in the succession of human history. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ It is needless to observe that I speak here of the democratic form of +government as applied to a people, not merely to a tribe.] +</p> + +<p> +Charges Levied By The State Under The Rule Of The American Democracy +</p> + +<p> +In all communities citizens divisible into three classes—Habits of each +of these classes in the direction of public finances—Why public +expenditure must tend to increase when the people governs—What renders +the extravagance of a democracy less to be feared in America—Public +expenditure under a democracy. +</p> + +<p> +Before we can affirm whether a democratic form of government is economical or +not, we must establish a suitable standard of comparison. The question would be +one of easy solution if we were to attempt to draw a parallel between a +democratic republic and an absolute monarchy. The public expenditure would be +found to be more considerable under the former than under the latter; such is +the case with all free States compared to those which are not so. It is certain +that despotism ruins individuals by preventing them from producing wealth, much +more than by depriving them of the wealth they have produced; it dries up the +source of riches, whilst it usually respects acquired property. Freedom, on the +contrary, engenders far more benefits than it destroys; and the nations which +are favored by free institutions invariably find that their resources increase +even more rapidly than their taxes. +</p> + +<p> +My present object is to compare free nations to each other, and to point out +the influence of democracy upon the finances of a State. +</p> + +<p> +Communities, as well as organic bodies, are subject to certain fixed rules in +their formation which they cannot evade. They are composed of certain elements +which are common to them at all times and under all circumstances. The people +may always be mentally divided into three distinct classes. The first of these +classes consists of the wealthy; the second, of those who are in easy +circumstances; and the third is composed of those who have little or no +property, and who subsist more especially by the work which they perform for +the two superior orders. The proportion of the individuals who are included in +these three divisions may vary according to the condition of society, but the +divisions themselves can never be obliterated. +</p> + +<p> +It is evident that each of these classes will exercise an influence peculiar to +its own propensities upon the administration of the finances of the State. If +the first of the three exclusively possesses the legislative power, it is +probable that it will not be sparing of the public funds, because the taxes +which are levied on a large fortune only tend to diminish the sum of +superfluous enjoyment, and are, in point of fact, but little felt. If the +second class has the power of making the laws, it will certainly not be lavish +of taxes, because nothing is so onerous as a large impost which is levied upon +a small income. The government of the middle classes appears to me to be the +most economical, though perhaps not the most enlightened, and certainly not the +most generous, of free governments. +</p> + +<p> +But let us now suppose that the legislative authority is vested in the lowest +orders: there are two striking reasons which show that the tendency of the +expenditure will be to increase, not to diminish. As the great majority of +those who create the laws are possessed of no property upon which taxes can be +imposed, all the money which is spent for the community appears to be spent to +their advantage, at no cost of their own; and those who are possessed of some +little property readily find means of regulating the taxes so that they are +burdensome to the wealthy and profitable to the poor, although the rich are +unable to take the same advantage when they are in possession of the +Government. +</p> + +<p> +In countries in which the poor *e should be exclusively invested with the power +of making the laws no great economy of public expenditure ought to be expected: +that expenditure will always be considerable; either because the taxes do not +weigh upon those who levy them, or because they are levied in such a manner as +not to weigh upon those classes. In other words, the government of the +democracy is the only one under which the power which lays on taxes escapes the +payment of them. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ The word poor is used here, and throughout the remainder of this chapter, in +a relative, not in an absolute sense. Poor men in America would often appear +rich in comparison with the poor of Europe; but they may with propriety by +styled poor in comparison with their more affluent countrymen.] +</p> + +<p> +It may be objected (but the argument has no real weight) that the true interest +of the people is indissolubly connected with that of the wealthier portion of +the community, since it cannot but suffer by the severe measures to which it +resorts. But is it not the true interest of kings to render their subjects +happy, and the true interest of nobles to admit recruits into their order on +suitable grounds? If remote advantages had power to prevail over the passions +and the exigencies of the moment, no such thing as a tyrannical sovereign or an +exclusive aristocracy could ever exist. +</p> + +<p> +Again, it may be objected that the poor are never invested with the sole power +of making the laws; but I reply, that wherever universal suffrage has been +established the majority of the community unquestionably exercises the +legislative authority; and if it be proved that the poor always constitute the +majority, it may be added, with perfect truth, that in the countries in which +they possess the elective franchise they possess the sole power of making laws. +But it is certain that in all the nations of the world the greater number has +always consisted of those persons who hold no property, or of those whose +property is insufficient to exempt them from the necessity of working in order +to procure an easy subsistence. Universal suffrage does therefore, in point of +fact, invest the poor with the government of society. +</p> + +<p> +The disastrous influence which popular authority may sometimes exercise upon +the finances of a State was very clearly seen in some of the democratic +republics of antiquity, in which the public treasure was exhausted in order to +relieve indigent citizens, or to supply the games and theatrical amusements of +the populace. It is true that the representative system was then very +imperfectly known, and that, at the present time, the influence of popular +passion is less felt in the conduct of public affairs; but it may be believed +that the delegate will in the end conform to the principles of his +constituents, and favor their propensities as much as their interests. +</p> + +<p> +The extravagance of democracy is, however, less to be dreaded in proportion as +the people acquires a share of property, because on the one hand the +contributions of the rich are then less needed, and, on the other, it is more +difficult to lay on taxes which do not affect the interests of the lower +classes. On this account universal suffrage would be less dangerous in France +than in England, because in the latter country the property on which taxes may +be levied is vested in fewer hands. America, where the great majority of the +citizens possess some fortune, is in a still more favorable position than +France. +</p> + +<p> +There are still further causes which may increase the sum of public expenditure +in democratic countries. When the aristocracy governs, the individuals who +conduct the affairs of State are exempted by their own station in society from +every kind of privation; they are contented with their position; power and +renown are the objects for which they strive; and, as they are placed far above +the obscurer throng of citizens, they do not always distinctly perceive how the +well-being of the mass of the people ought to redound to their own honor. They +are not indeed callous to the sufferings of the poor, but they cannot feel +those miseries as acutely as if they were themselves partakers of them. +Provided that the people appear to submit to its lot, the rulers are satisfied, +and they demand nothing further from the Government. An aristocracy is more +intent upon the means of maintaining its influence than upon the means of +improving its condition. +</p> + +<p> +When, on the contrary, the people is invested with the supreme authority, the +perpetual sense of their own miseries impels the rulers of society to seek for +perpetual ameliorations. A thousand different objects are subjected to +improvement; the most trivial details are sought out as susceptible of +amendment; and those changes which are accompanied with considerable expense +are more especially advocated, since the object is to render the condition of +the poor more tolerable, who cannot pay for themselves. +</p> + +<p> +Moreover, all democratic communities are agitated by an ill-defined excitement +and by a kind of feverish impatience, that engender a multitude of innovations, +almost all of which are attended with expense. +</p> + +<p> +In monarchies and aristocracies the natural taste which the rulers have for +power and for renown is stimulated by the promptings of ambition, and they are +frequently incited by these temptations to very costly undertakings. In +democracies, where the rulers labor under privations, they can only be courted +by such means as improve their well-being, and these improvements cannot take +place without a sacrifice of money. When a people begins to reflect upon its +situation, it discovers a multitude of wants to which it had not before been +subject, and to satisfy these exigencies recourse must be had to the coffers of +the State. Hence it arises that the public charges increase in proportion as +civilization spreads, and that imposts are augmented as knowledge pervades the +community. +</p> + +<p> +The last cause which frequently renders a democratic government dearer than any +other is, that a democracy does not always succeed in moderating its +expenditure, because it does not understand the art of being economical. As the +designs which it entertains are frequently changed, and the agents of those +designs are still more frequently removed, its undertakings are often ill +conducted or left unfinished: in the former case the State spends sums out of +all proportion to the end which it proposes to accomplish; in the second, the +expense itself is unprofitable. *f +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ The gross receipts of the Treasury of the United States in 1832 were about +$28,000,000; in 1870 they had risen to $411,000,000. The gross expenditure in +1832 was $30,000,000; in 1870, $309,000,000.] +</p> + +<p> +Tendencies Of The American Democracy As Regards The Salaries Of Public Officers +</p> + +<p> +In the democracies those who establish high salaries have no chance of +profiting by them—Tendency of the American democracy to increase the +salaries of subordinate officers and to lower those of the more important +functionaries—Reason of this—Comparative statement of the salaries +of public officers in the United States and in France. +</p> + +<p> +There is a powerful reason which usually induces democracies to economize upon +the salaries of public officers. As the number of citizens who dispense the +remuneration is extremely large in democratic countries, so the number of +persons who can hope to be benefited by the receipt of it is comparatively +small. In aristocratic countries, on the contrary, the individuals who fix high +salaries have almost always a vague hope of profiting by them. These +appointments may be looked upon as a capital which they create for their own +use, or at least as a resource for their children. +</p> + +<p> +It must, however, be allowed that a democratic State is most parsimonious +towards its principal agents. In America the secondary officers are much better +paid, and the dignitaries of the administration much worse, than they are +elsewhere. +</p> + +<p> +These opposite effects result from the same cause; the people fixes the +salaries of the public officers in both cases; and the scale of remuneration is +determined by the consideration of its own wants. It is held to be fair that +the servants of the public should be placed in the same easy circumstances as +the public itself; *g but when the question turns upon the salaries of the +great officers of State, this rule fails, and chance alone can guide the +popular decision. The poor have no adequate conception of the wants which the +higher classes of society may feel. The sum which is scanty to the rich appears +enormous to the poor man whose wants do not extend beyond the necessaries of +life; and in his estimation the Governor of a State, with his twelve or fifteen +hundred dollars a year, is a very fortunate and enviable being. *h If you +undertake to convince him that the representative of a great people ought to be +able to maintain some show of splendor in the eyes of foreign nations, he will +perhaps assent to your meaning; but when he reflects on his own humble +dwelling, and on the hard-earned produce of his wearisome toil, he remembers +all that he could do with a salary which you say is insufficient, and he is +startled or almost frightened at the sight of such uncommon wealth. Besides, +the secondary public officer is almost on a level with the people, whilst the +others are raised above it. The former may therefore excite his interest, but +the latter begins to arouse his envy. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ The easy circumstances in which secondary functionaries are placed in the +United States result also from another cause, which is independent of the +general tendencies of democracy; every kind of private business is very +lucrative, and the State would not be served at all if it did not pay its +servants. The country is in the position of a commercial undertaking, which is +obliged to sustain an expensive competition, notwithstanding its tastes for +economy.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ The State of Ohio, which contains a million of inhabitants, gives its +Governor a salary of only $1,200 a year.] +</p> + +<p> +This is very clearly seen in the United States, where the salaries seem to +decrease as the authority of those who receive them augments *i +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ To render this assertion perfectly evident, it will suffice to examine the +scale of salaries of the agents of the Federal Government. I have added the +salaries attached to the corresponding officers in France under the +constitutional monarchy to complete the comparison. +</p> + +<p> + United States<br /> + Treasury Department<br /> + Messenger ............................ $700<br /> + Clerk with lowest salary ............. 1,000<br /> + Clerk with highest salary ............ 1,600<br /> + Chief Clerk .......................... 2,000<br /> + Secretary of State ................... 6,000<br /> + The President ........................ 25,000<br /><br /> + + France<br /> + Ministere des Finances<br /> + Hussier ........................... 1,500 fr.<br /> + Clerk with lowest salary, 1,000 to 1,800 fr.<br /> + Clerk with highest salary 3,200 to 8,600 fr.<br /> + Secretaire-general ................20,000 fr.<br /> + The Minister ......................80,000 fr.<br /> + The King ......................12,000,000 fr.<br /> +</p> + +<p> +I have perhaps done wrong in selecting France as my standard of comparison. In +France the democratic tendencies of the nation exercise an ever-increasing +influence upon the Government, and the Chambers show a disposition to raise the +low salaries and to lower the principal ones. Thus, the Minister of Finance, +who received 160,000 fr. under the Empire, receives 80,000 fr. in 1835: the +Directeurs-generaux of Finance, who then received 50,000 fr. now receive only +20,000 fr. [This comparison is based on the state of things existing in France +and the United States in 1831. It has since materially altered in both +countries, but not so much as to impugn the truth of the author’s +observation.]] +</p> + +<p> +Under the rule of an aristocracy it frequently happens, on the contrary, that +whilst the high officers are receiving munificent salaries, the inferior ones +have not more than enough to procure the necessaries of life. The reason of +this fact is easily discoverable from causes very analogous to those to which I +have just alluded. If a democracy is unable to conceive the pleasures of the +rich or to witness them without envy, an aristocracy is slow to understand, or, +to speak more correctly, is unacquainted with, the privations of the poor. The +poor man is not (if we use the term aright) the fellow of the rich one; but he +is a being of another species. An aristocracy is therefore apt to care but +little for the fate of its subordinate agents; and their salaries are only +raised when they refuse to perform their service for too scanty a remuneration. +</p> + +<p> +It is the parsimonious conduct of democracy towards its principal officers +which has countenanced a supposition of far more economical propensities than +any which it really possesses. It is true that it scarcely allows the means of +honorable subsistence to the individuals who conduct its affairs; but enormous +sums are lavished to meet the exigencies or to facilitate the enjoyments of the +people. *j The money raised by taxation may be better employed, but it is not +saved. In general, democracy gives largely to the community, and very sparingly +to those who govern it. The reverse is the case in aristocratic countries, +where the money of the State is expended to the profit of the persons who are +at the head of affairs. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ See the American budgets for the cost of indigent citizens and gratuitous +instruction. In 1831 $250,000 were spent in the State of New York for the +maintenance of the poor, and at least $1,000,000 were devoted to gratuitous +instruction. (William’s “New York Annual Register,” 1832, pp. +205 and 243.) The State of New York contained only 1,900,000 inhabitants in the +year 1830, which is not more than double the amount of population in the +Department du Nord in France.] +</p> + +<p> +Difficulty of Distinguishing The Causes Which Contribute To The Economy Of The +American Government +</p> + +<p> +We are liable to frequent errors in the research of those facts which exercise +a serious influence upon the fate of mankind, since nothing is more difficult +than to appreciate their real value. One people is naturally inconsistent and +enthusiastic; another is sober and calculating; and these characteristics +originate in their physical constitution or in remote causes with which we are +unacquainted. +</p> + +<p> +These are nations which are fond of parade and the bustle of festivity, and +which do not regret the costly gaieties of an hour. Others, on the contrary, +are attached to more retiring pleasures, and seem almost ashamed of appearing +to be pleased. In some countries the highest value is set upon the beauty of +public edifices; in others the productions of art are treated with +indifference, and everything which is unproductive is looked down upon with +contempt. In some renown, in others money, is the ruling passion. +</p> + +<p> +Independently of the laws, all these causes concur to exercise a very powerful +influence upon the conduct of the finances of the State. If the Americans never +spend the money of the people in galas, it is not only because the imposition +of taxes is under the control of the people, but because the people takes no +delight in public rejoicings. If they repudiate all ornament from their +architecture, and set no store on any but the more practical and homely +advantages, it is not only because they live under democratic institutions, but +because they are a commercial nation. The habits of private life are continued +in public; and we ought carefully to distinguish that economy which depends +upon their institutions from that which is the natural result of their manners +and customs. +</p> + +<p> +Whether The Expenditure Of The United States Can Be Compared To That Of France +</p> + +<p> +Two points to be established in order to estimate the extent of the public +charges, viz., the national wealth and the rate of taxation—The wealth +and the charges of France not accurately known—Why the wealth and charges +of the Union cannot be accurately known—Researches of the author with a +view to discover the amount of taxation of Pennsylvania—General symptoms +which may serve to indicate the amount of the public charges in a given +nation—Result of this investigation for the Union. +</p> + +<p> +Many attempts have recently been made in France to compare the public +expenditure of that country with the expenditure of the United States; all +these attempts have, however, been unattended by success, and a few words will +suffice to show that they could not have had a satisfactory result. +</p> + +<p> +In order to estimate the amount of the public charges of a people two +preliminaries are indispensable: it is necessary, in the first place, to know +the wealth of that people; and in the second, to learn what portion of that +wealth is devoted to the expenditure of the State. To show the amount of +taxation without showing the resources which are destined to meet the demand, +is to undertake a futile labor; for it is not the expenditure, but the relation +of the expenditure to the revenue, which it is desirable to know. +</p> + +<p> +The same rate of taxation which may easily be supported by a wealthy +contributor will reduce a poor one to extreme misery. The wealth of nations is +composed of several distinct elements, of which population is the first, real +property the second, and personal property the third. The first of these three +elements may be discovered without difficulty. Amongst civilized nations it is +easy to obtain an accurate census of the inhabitants; but the two others cannot +be determined with so much facility. It is difficult to take an exact account +of all the lands in a country which are under cultivation, with their natural +or their acquired value; and it is still more impossible to estimate the entire +personal property which is at the disposal of a nation, and which eludes the +strictest analysis by the diversity and the number of shapes under which it may +occur. And, indeed, we find that the most ancient civilized nations of Europe, +including even those in which the administration is most central, have not +succeeded, as yet, in determining the exact condition of their wealth. +</p> + +<p> +In America the attempt has never been made; for how would such an investigation +be possible in a country where society has not yet settled into habits of +regularity and tranquillity; where the national Government is not assisted by a +multiple of agents whose exertions it can command and direct to one sole end; +and where statistics are not studied, because no one is able to collect the +necessary documents, or to find time to peruse them? Thus the primary elements +of the calculations which have been made in France cannot be obtained in the +Union; the relative wealth of the two countries is unknown; the property of the +former is not accurately determined, and no means exist of computing that of +the latter. +</p> + +<p> +I consent, therefore, for the sake of the discussion, to abandon this necessary +term of the comparison, and I confine myself to a computation of the actual +amount of taxation, without investigating the relation which subsists between +the taxation and the revenue. But the reader will perceive that my task has not +been facilitated by the limits which I here lay down for my researches. +</p> + +<p> +It cannot be doubted that the central administration of France, assisted by all +the public officers who are at its disposal, might determine with exactitude +the amount of the direct and indirect taxes levied upon the citizens. But this +investigation, which no private individual can undertake, has not hitherto been +completed by the French Government, or, at least, its results have not been +made public. We are acquainted with the sum total of the charges of the State; +we know the amount of the departmental expenditure; but the expenses of the +communal divisions have not been computed, and the amount of the public +expenses of France is consequently unknown. +</p> + +<p> +If we now turn to America, we shall perceive that the difficulties are +multiplied and enhanced. The Union publishes an exact return of the amount of +its expenditure; the budgets of the four and twenty States furnish similar +returns of their revenues; but the expenses incident to the affairs of the +counties and the townships are unknown. *k +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ The Americans, as we have seen, have four separate budgets, the Union, the +States, the Counties, and the Townships having each severally their own. During +my stay in America I made every endeavor to discover the amount of the public +expenditure in the townships and counties of the principal States of the Union, +and I readily obtained the budget of the larger townships, but I found it quite +impossible to procure that of the smaller ones. I possess, however, some +documents relating to county expenses, which, although incomplete, are still +curious. I have to thank Mr. Richards, Mayor of Philadelphia, for the budgets +of thirteen of the counties of Pennsylvania, viz., Lebanon, Centre, Franklin, +Fayette, Montgomery, Luzerne, Dauphin, Butler, Alleghany, Columbia, +Northampton, Northumberland, and Philadelphia, for the year 1830. Their +population at that time consisted of 495,207 inhabitants. On looking at the map +of Pennsylvania, it will be seen that these thirteen counties are scattered in +every direction, and so generally affected by the causes which usually +influence the condition of a country, that they may easily be supposed to +furnish a correct average of the financial state of the counties of +Pennsylvania in general; and thus, upon reckoning that the expenses of these +counties amounted in the year 1830 to about $361,650, or nearly 75 cents for +each inhabitant, and calculating that each of them contributed in the same year +about $2.55 towards the Union, and about 75 cents to the State of Pennsylvania, +it appears that they each contributed as their share of all the public expenses +(except those of the townships) the sum of $4.05. This calculation is doubly +incomplete, as it applies only to a single year and to one part of the public +charges; but it has at least the merit of not being conjectural.] +</p> + +<p> +The authority of the Federal government cannot oblige the provincial +governments to throw any light upon this point; and even if these governments +were inclined to afford their simultaneous co-operation, it may be doubted +whether they possess the means of procuring a satisfactory answer. +Independently of the natural difficulties of the task, the political +organization of the country would act as a hindrance to the success of their +efforts. The county and town magistrates are not appointed by the authorities +of the State, and they are not subjected to their control. It is therefore very +allowable to suppose that, if the State was desirous of obtaining the returns +which we require, its design would be counteracted by the neglect of those +subordinate officers whom it would be obliged to employ. *l It is, in point of +fact, useless to inquire what the Americans might do to forward this inquiry, +since it is certain that they have hitherto done nothing at all. There does not +exist a single individual at the present day, in America or in Europe, who can +inform us what each citizen of the Union annually contributes to the public +charges of the nation. *m [Footnote l: Those who have attempted to draw a +comparison between the expenses of France and America have at once perceived +that no such comparison could be drawn between the total expenditure of the two +countries; but they have endeavored to contrast detached portions of this +expenditure. It may readily be shown that this second system is not at all less +defective than the first. If I attempt to compare the French budget with the +budget of the Union, it must be remembered that the latter embraces much fewer +objects than then central Government of the former country, and that the +expenditure must consequently be much smaller. If I contrast the budgets of the +Departments with those of the States which constitute the Union, it must be +observed that, as the power and control exercised by the States is much greater +than that which is exercised by the Departments, their expenditure is also more +considerable. As for the budgets of the counties, nothing of the kind occurs in +the French system of finances; and it is, again, doubtful whether the +corresponding expenses should be referred to the budget of the State or to +those of the municipal divisions. Municipal expenses exist in both countries, +but they are not always analogous. In America the townships discharge a variety +of offices which are reserved in France to the Departments or to the State. It +may, moreover, be asked what is to be understood by the municipal expenses of +America. The organization of the municipal bodies or townships differs in the +several States. Are we to be guided by what occurs in New England or in +Georgia, in Pennsylvania or in the State of Illinois? A kind of analogy may +very readily be perceived between certain budgets in the two countries; but as +the elements of which they are composed always differ more or less, no fair +comparison can be instituted between them. [The same difficulty exists, perhaps +to a greater degree at the present time, when the taxation of America has +largely increased.—1874.]] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ Even if we knew the exact pecuniary contributions of every French and +American citizen to the coffers of the State, we should only come at a portion +of the truth. Governments do not only demand supplies of money, but they call +for personal services, which may be looked upon as equivalent to a given sum. +When a State raises an army, besides the pay of the troops, which is furnished +by the entire nation, each soldier must give up his time, the value of which +depends on the use he might make of it if he were not in the service. The same +remark applies to the militia; the citizen who is in the militia devotes a +certain portion of valuable time to the maintenance of the public peace, and he +does in reality surrender to the State those earnings which he is prevented +from gaining. Many other instances might be cited in addition to these. The +governments of France and of America both levy taxes of this kind, which weigh +upon the citizens; but who can estimate with accuracy their relative amount in +the two countries? +</p> + +<p> +This, however, is not the last of the difficulties which prevent us from +comparing the expenditure of the Union with that of France. The French +Government contracts certain obligations which do not exist in America, and +vice versa. The French Government pays the clergy; in America the voluntary +principle prevails. In America there is a legal provision for the poor; in +France they are abandoned to the charity of the public. The French public +officers are paid by a fixed salary; in America they are allowed certain +perquisites. In France contributions in kind take place on very few roads; in +America upon almost all the thoroughfares: in the former country the roads are +free to all travellers; in the latter turnpikes abound. All these differences +in the manner in which contributions are levied in the two countries enhance +the difficulty of comparing their expenditure; for there are certain expenses +which the citizens would not be subject to, or which would at any rate be much +less considerable, if the State did not take upon itself to act in the name of +the public.] +</p> + +<p> +Hence we must conclude that it is no less difficult to compare the social +expenditure than it is to estimate the relative wealth of France and America. I +will even add that it would be dangerous to attempt this comparison; for when +statistics are not based upon computations which are strictly accurate, they +mislead instead of guiding aright. The mind is easily imposed upon by the false +affectation of exactness, which prevails even in the misstatements of science, +and it adopts with confidence errors which are dressed in the forms of +mathematical truth. +</p> + +<p> +We abandon, therefore, our numerical investigation, with the hope of meeting +with data of another kind. In the absence of positive documents, we may form an +opinion as to the proportion which the taxation of a people bears to its real +prosperity, by observing whether its external appearance is flourishing; +whether, after having discharged the calls of the State, the poor man retains +the means of subsistence, and the rich the means of enjoyment; and whether both +classes are contented with their position, seeking, however, to ameliorate it +by perpetual exertions, so that industry is never in want of capital, nor +capital unemployed by industry. The observer who draws his inferences from +these signs will, undoubtedly, be led to the conclusion that the American of +the United States contributes a much smaller portion of his income to the State +than the citizen of France. Nor, indeed, can the result be otherwise. +</p> + +<p> +A portion of the French debt is the consequence of two successive invasions; +and the Union has no similar calamity to fear. A nation placed upon the +continent of Europe is obliged to maintain a large standing army; the isolated +position of the Union enables it to have only 6,000 soldiers. The French have a +fleet of 300 sail; the Americans have 52 vessels. *n How, then, can the +inhabitants of the Union be called upon to contribute as largely as the +inhabitants of France? No parallel can be drawn between the finances of two +countries so differently situated. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ See the details in the Budget of the French Minister of Marine; and for +America, the National Calendar of 1833, p. 228. [But the public debt of the +United States in 1870, caused by the Civil War, amounted to $2,480,672,427; +that of France was more than doubled by the extravagance of the Second Empire +and by the war of 1870.]] +</p> + +<p> +It is by examining what actually takes place in the Union, and not by comparing +the Union with France, that we may discover whether the American Government is +really economical. On casting my eyes over the different republics which form +the confederation, I perceive that their Governments lack perseverance in their +undertakings, and that they exercise no steady control over the men whom they +employ. Whence I naturally infer that they must often spend the money of the +people to no purpose, or consume more of it than is really necessary to their +undertakings. Great efforts are made, in accordance with the democratic origin +of society, to satisfy the exigencies of the lower orders, to open the career +of power to their endeavors, and to diffuse knowledge and comfort amongst them. +The poor are maintained, immense sums are annually devoted to public +instruction, all services whatsoever are remunerated, and the most subordinate +agents are liberally paid. If this kind of government appears to me to be +useful and rational, I am nevertheless constrained to admit that it is +expensive. +</p> + +<p> +Wherever the poor direct public affairs and dispose of the national resources, +it appears certain that, as they profit by the expenditure of the State, they +are apt to augment that expenditure. +</p> + +<p> +I conclude, therefore, without having recourse to inaccurate computations, and +without hazarding a comparison which might prove incorrect, that the democratic +government of the Americans is not a cheap government, as is sometimes +asserted; and I have no hesitation in predicting that, if the people of the +United States is ever involved in serious difficulties, its taxation will +speedily be increased to the rate of that which prevails in the greater part of +the aristocracies and the monarchies of Europe. *o +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ [That is precisely what has since occurred.]] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0032" id="link2HCH0032"></a> Chapter XIII: Government Of +The Democracy In America—Part III</h2> + +<p> +Corruption And Vices Of The Rulers In A Democracy, And Consequent Effects Upon +Public Morality +</p> + +<p> +In aristocracies rulers sometimes endeavor to corrupt the people—In +democracies rulers frequently show themselves to be corrupt—In the former +their vices are directly prejudicial to the morality of the people—In the +latter their indirect influence is still more pernicious. +</p> + +<p> +A distinction must be made, when the aristocratic and the democratic principles +mutually inveigh against each other, as tending to facilitate corruption. In +aristocratic governments the individuals who are placed at the head of affairs +are rich men, who are solely desirous of power. In democracies statesmen are +poor, and they have their fortunes to make. The consequence is that in +aristocratic States the rulers are rarely accessible to corruption, and have +very little craving for money; whilst the reverse is the case in democratic +nations. +</p> + +<p> +But in aristocracies, as those who are desirous of arriving at the head of +affairs are possessed of considerable wealth, and as the number of persons by +whose assistance they may rise is comparatively small, the government is, if I +may use the expression, put up to a sort of auction. In democracies, on the +contrary, those who are covetous of power are very seldom wealthy, and the +number of citizens who confer that power is extremely great. Perhaps in +democracies the number of men who might be bought is by no means smaller, but +buyers are rarely to be met with; and, besides, it would be necessary to buy so +many persons at once that the attempt is rendered nugatory. +</p> + +<p> +Many of the men who have been in the administration in France during the last +forty years have been accused of making their fortunes at the expense of the +State or of its allies; a reproach which was rarely addressed to the public +characters of the ancient monarchy. But in France the practice of bribing +electors is almost unknown, whilst it is notoriously and publicly carried on in +England. In the United States I never heard a man accused of spending his +wealth in corrupting the populace; but I have often heard the probity of public +officers questioned; still more frequently have I heard their success +attributed to low intrigues and immoral practices. +</p> + +<p> +If, then, the men who conduct the government of an aristocracy sometimes +endeavor to corrupt the people, the heads of a democracy are themselves +corrupt. In the former case the morality of the people is directly assailed; in +the latter an indirect influence is exercised upon the people which is still +more to be dreaded. +</p> + +<p> +As the rulers of democratic nations are almost always exposed to the suspicion +of dishonorable conduct, they in some measure lend the authority of the +Government to the base practices of which they are accused. They thus afford an +example which must prove discouraging to the struggles of virtuous +independence, and must foster the secret calculations of a vicious ambition. If +it be asserted that evil passions are displayed in all ranks of society, that +they ascend the throne by hereditary right, and that despicable characters are +to be met with at the head of aristocratic nations as well as in the sphere of +a democracy, this objection has but little weight in my estimation. The +corruption of men who have casually risen to power has a coarse and vulgar +infection in it which renders it contagious to the multitude. On the contrary, +there is a kind of aristocratic refinement and an air of grandeur in the +depravity of the great, which frequently prevent it from spreading abroad. +</p> + +<p> +The people can never penetrate into the perplexing labyrinth of court intrigue, +and it will always have difficulty in detecting the turpitude which lurks under +elegant manners, refined tastes, and graceful language. But to pillage the +public purse, and to vend the favors of the State, are arts which the meanest +villain may comprehend, and hope to practice in his turn. +</p> + +<p> +In reality it is far less prejudicial to witness the immorality of the great +than to witness that immorality which leads to greatness. In a democracy +private citizens see a man of their own rank in life, who rises from that +obscure position, and who becomes possessed of riches and of power in a few +years; the spectacle excites their surprise and their envy, and they are led to +inquire how the person who was yesterday their equal is to-day their ruler. To +attribute his rise to his talents or his virtues is unpleasant; for it is +tacitly to acknowledge that they are themselves less virtuous and less talented +than he was. They are therefore led (and not unfrequently their conjecture is a +correct one) to impute his success mainly to some one of his defects; and an +odious mixture is thus formed of the ideas of turpitude and power, unworthiness +and success, utility and dishonor. +</p> + +<p> +Efforts Of Which A Democracy Is Capable +</p> + +<p> +The Union has only had one struggle hitherto for its existence—Enthusiasm +at the commencement of the war—Indifference towards its +close—Difficulty of establishing military conscription or impressment of +seamen in America—Why a democratic people is less capable of sustained +effort than another. +</p> + +<p> +I here warn the reader that I speak of a government which implicitly follows +the real desires of a people, and not of a government which simply commands in +its name. Nothing is so irresistible as a tyrannical power commanding in the +name of the people, because, whilst it exercises that moral influence which +belongs to the decision of the majority, it acts at the same time with the +promptitude and the tenacity of a single man. +</p> + +<p> +It is difficult to say what degree of exertion a democratic government may be +capable of making a crisis in the history of the nation. But no great +democratic republic has hitherto existed in the world. To style the oligarchy +which ruled over France in 1793 by that name would be to offer an insult to the +republican form of government. The United States afford the first example of +the kind. +</p> + +<p> +The American Union has now subsisted for half a century, in the course of which +time its existence has only once been attacked, namely, during the War of +Independence. At the commencement of that long war, various occurrences took +place which betokened an extraordinary zeal for the service of the country. *p +But as the contest was prolonged, symptoms of private egotism began to show +themselves. No money was poured into the public treasury; few recruits could be +raised to join the army; the people wished to acquire independence, but was +very ill-disposed to undergo the privations by which alone it could be +obtained. “Tax laws,” says Hamilton in the “Federalist” +(No. 12), “have in vain been multiplied; new methods to enforce the +collection have in vain been tried; the public expectation has been uniformly +disappointed and the treasuries of the States have remained empty. The popular +system of administration inherent in the nature of popular government, +coinciding with the real scarcity of money incident to a languid and mutilated +state of trade, has hitherto defeated every experiment for extensive +collections, and has at length taught the different legislatures the folly of +attempting them.” +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ One of the most singular of these occurrences was the resolution which the +Americans took of temporarily abandoning the use of tea. Those who know that +men usually cling more to their habits than to their life will doubtless admire +this great though obscure sacrifice which was made by a whole people.] +</p> + +<p> +The United States have not had any serious war to carry on ever since that +period. In order, therefore, to appreciate the sacrifices which democratic +nations may impose upon themselves, we must wait until the American people is +obliged to put half its entire income at the disposal of the Government, as was +done by the English; or until it sends forth a twentieth part of its population +to the field of battle, as was done by France. *q +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ [The Civil War showed that when the necessity arose the American people, both +in the North and in the South, are capable of making the most enormous +sacrifices, both in money and in men.]] +</p> + +<p> +In America the use of conscription is unknown, and men are induced to enlist by +bounties. The notions and habits of the people of the United States are so +opposed to compulsory enlistment that I do not imagine it can ever be +sanctioned by the laws. What is termed the conscription in France is assuredly +the heaviest tax upon the population of that country; yet how could a great +continental war be carried on without it? The Americans have not adopted the +British impressment of seamen, and they have nothing which corresponds to the +French system of maritime conscription; the navy, as well as the merchant +service, is supplied by voluntary service. But it is not easy to conceive how a +people can sustain a great maritime war without having recourse to one or the +other of these two systems. Indeed, the Union, which has fought with some honor +upon the seas, has never possessed a very numerous fleet, and the equipment of +the small number of American vessels has always been excessively expensive. +</p> + +<p> +I have heard American statesmen confess that the Union will have great +difficulty in maintaining its rank on the seas without adopting the system of +impressment or of maritime conscription; but the difficulty is to induce the +people, which exercises the supreme authority, to submit to impressment or any +compulsory system. +</p> + +<p> +It is incontestable that in times of danger a free people displays far more +energy than one which is not so. But I incline to believe that this is more +especially the case in those free nations in which the democratic element +preponderates. Democracy appears to me to be much better adapted for the +peaceful conduct of society, or for an occasional effort of remarkable vigor, +than for the hardy and prolonged endurance of the storms which beset the +political existence of nations. The reason is very evident; it is enthusiasm +which prompts men to expose themselves to dangers and privations, but they will +not support them long without reflection. There is more calculation, even in +the impulses of bravery, than is generally attributed to them; and although the +first efforts are suggested by passion, perseverance is maintained by a +distinct regard of the purpose in view. A portion of what we value is exposed, +in order to save the remainder. +</p> + +<p> +But it is this distinct perception of the future, founded upon a sound judgment +and an enlightened experience, which is most frequently wanting in democracies. +The populace is more apt to feel than to reason; and if its present sufferings +are great, it is to be feared that the still greater sufferings attendant upon +defeat will be forgotten. +</p> + +<p> +Another cause tends to render the efforts of a democratic government less +persevering than those of an aristocracy. Not only are the lower classes less +awakened than the higher orders to the good or evil chances of the future, but +they are liable to suffer far more acutely from present privations. The noble +exposes his life, indeed, but the chance of glory is equal to the chance of +harm. If he sacrifices a large portion of his income to the State, he deprives +himself for a time of the pleasures of affluence; but to the poor man death is +embellished by no pomp or renown, and the imposts which are irksome to the rich +are fatal to him. +</p> + +<p> +This relative impotence of democratic republics is, perhaps, the greatest +obstacle to the foundation of a republic of this kind in Europe. In order that +such a State should subsist in one country of the Old World, it would be +necessary that similar institutions should be introduced into all the other +nations. +</p> + +<p> +I am of opinion that a democratic government tends in the end to increase the +real strength of society; but it can never combine, upon a single point and at +a given time, so much power as an aristocracy or a monarchy. If a democratic +country remained during a whole century subject to a republican government, it +would probably at the end of that period be more populous and more prosperous +than the neighboring despotic States. But it would have incurred the risk of +being conquered much oftener than they would in that lapse of years. +</p> + +<p> +Self-Control Of The American Democracy +</p> + +<p> +The American people acquiesces slowly, or frequently does not acquiesce, in +what is beneficial to its interests—The faults of the American democracy +are for the most part reparable. +</p> + +<p> +The difficulty which a democracy has in conquering the passions and in subduing +the exigencies of the moment, with a view to the future, is conspicuous in the +most trivial occurrences of the United States. The people, which is surrounded +by flatterers, has great difficulty in surmounting its inclinations, and +whenever it is solicited to undergo a privation or any kind of inconvenience, +even to attain an end which is sanctioned by its own rational conviction, it +almost always refuses to comply at first. The deference of the Americans to the +laws has been very justly applauded; but it must be added that in America the +legislation is made by the people and for the people. Consequently, in the +United States the law favors those classes which are most interested in evading +it elsewhere. It may therefore be supposed that an offensive law, which should +not be acknowledged to be one of immediate utility, would either not be enacted +or would not be obeyed. +</p> + +<p> +In America there is no law against fraudulent bankruptcies; not because they +are few, but because there are a great number of bankruptcies. The dread of +being prosecuted as a bankrupt acts with more intensity upon the mind of the +majority of the people than the fear of being involved in losses or ruin by the +failure of other parties, and a sort of guilty tolerance is extended by the +public conscience to an offence which everyone condemns in his individual +capacity. In the new States of the Southwest the citizens generally take +justice into their own hands, and murders are of very frequent occurrence. This +arises from the rude manners and the ignorance of the inhabitants of those +deserts, who do not perceive the utility of investing the law with adequate +force, and who prefer duels to prosecutions. +</p> + +<p> +Someone observed to me one day, in Philadelphia, that almost all crimes in +America are caused by the abuse of intoxicating liquors, which the lower +classes can procure in great abundance, from their excessive cheapness. +“How comes it,” said I, “that you do not put a duty upon +brandy?” “Our legislators,” rejoined my informant, +“have frequently thought of this expedient; but the task of putting it in +operation is a difficult one; a revolt might be apprehended, and the members +who should vote for a law of this kind would be sure of losing their +seats.” “Whence I am to infer,” replied I, “that the +drinking population constitutes the majority in your country, and that +temperance is somewhat unpopular.” +</p> + +<p> +When these things are pointed out to the American statesmen, they content +themselves with assuring you that time will operate the necessary change, and +that the experience of evil will teach the people its true interests. This is +frequently true, although a democracy is more liable to error than a monarch or +a body of nobles; the chances of its regaining the right path when once it has +acknowledged its mistake, are greater also; because it is rarely embarrassed by +internal interests, which conflict with those of the majority, and resist the +authority of reason. But a democracy can only obtain truth as the result of +experience, and many nations may forfeit their existence whilst they are +awaiting the consequences of their errors. +</p> + +<p> +The great privilege of the Americans does not simply consist in their being +more enlightened than other nations, but in their being able to repair the +faults they may commit. To which it must be added, that a democracy cannot +derive substantial benefit from past experience, unless it be arrived at a +certain pitch of knowledge and civilization. There are tribes and peoples whose +education has been so vicious, and whose character presents so strange a +mixture of passion, of ignorance, and of erroneous notions upon all subjects, +that they are unable to discern the causes of their own wretchedness, and they +fall a sacrifice to ills with which they are unacquainted. +</p> + +<p> +I have crossed vast tracts of country that were formerly inhabited by powerful +Indian nations which are now extinct; I have myself passed some time in the +midst of mutilated tribes, which witness the daily decline of their numerical +strength and of the glory of their independence; and I have heard these Indians +themselves anticipate the impending doom of their race. Every European can +perceive means which would rescue these unfortunate beings from inevitable +destruction. They alone are insensible to the expedient; they feel the woe +which year after year heaps upon their heads, but they will perish to a man +without accepting the remedy. It would be necessary to employ force to induce +them to submit to the protection and the constraint of civilization. +</p> + +<p> +The incessant revolutions which have convulsed the South American provinces for +the last quarter of a century have frequently been adverted to with +astonishment, and expectations have been expressed that those nations would +speedily return to their natural state. But can it be affirmed that the turmoil +of revolution is not actually the most natural state of the South American +Spaniards at the present time? In that country society is plunged into +difficulties from which all its efforts are insufficient to rescue it. The +inhabitants of that fair portion of the Western Hemisphere seem obstinately +bent on pursuing the work of inward havoc. If they fall into a momentary repose +from the effects of exhaustion, that repose prepares them for a fresh state of +frenzy. When I consider their condition, which alternates between misery and +crime, I should be inclined to believe that despotism itself would be a benefit +to them, if it were possible that the words despotism and benefit could ever be +united in my mind. +</p> + +<p> +Conduct Of Foreign Affairs By The American Democracy +</p> + +<p> +Direction given to the foreign policy of the United States by Washington and +Jefferson—Almost all the defects inherent in democratic institutions are +brought to light in the conduct of foreign affairs—Their advantages are +less perceptible. +</p> + +<p> +We have seen that the Federal Constitution entrusts the permanent direction of +the external interests of the nation to the President and the Senate, *r which +tends in some degree to detach the general foreign policy of the Union from the +control of the people. It cannot therefore be asserted with truth that the +external affairs of State are conducted by the democracy. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ “The President,” says the Constitution, Art. II, sect. 2, Section +2, “shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, +to make treaties, provided two-thirds of the senators present concur.” +The reader is reminded that the senators are returned for a term of six years, +and that they are chosen by the legislature of each State.] +</p> + +<p> +The policy of America owes its rise to Washington, and after him to Jefferson, +who established those principles which it observes at the present day. +Washington said in the admirable letter which he addressed to his +fellow-citizens, and which may be looked upon as his political bequest to the +country: “The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations +is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little +political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, +let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a +set of primary interests which to us have none, or a very remote relation. +Hence, she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are +essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us +to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her +politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or +enmities. Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a +different course. If we remain one people, under an efficient government, the +period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; +when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any +time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under +the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the +giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided +by justice, shall counsel. Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a +situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving +our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity +in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice? It +is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of +the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let +me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing +engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private +affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it; therefore, let +those engagements be observed in their genuine sense; but in my opinion it is +unnecessary, and would be unwise, to extend them. Taking care always to keep +ourselves, by suitable establishments, in a respectable defensive posture, we +may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.” +In a previous part of the same letter Washington makes the following admirable +and just remark: “The nation which indulges towards another an habitual +hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its +animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray +from its duty and its interest.” +</p> + +<p> +The political conduct of Washington was always guided by these maxims. He +succeeded in maintaining his country in a state of peace whilst all the other +nations of the globe were at war; and he laid it down as a fundamental +doctrine, that the true interest of the Americans consisted in a perfect +neutrality with regard to the internal dissensions of the European Powers. +</p> + +<p> +Jefferson went still further, and he introduced a maxim into the policy of the +Union, which affirms that “the Americans ought never to solicit any +privileges from foreign nations, in order not to be obliged to grant similar +privileges themselves.” +</p> + +<p> +These two principles, which were so plain and so just as to be adapted to the +capacity of the populace, have greatly simplified the foreign policy of the +United States. As the Union takes no part in the affairs of Europe, it has, +properly speaking, no foreign interests to discuss, since it has at present no +powerful neighbors on the American continent. The country is as much removed +from the passions of the Old World by its position as by the line of policy +which it has chosen, and it is neither called upon to repudiate nor to espouse +the conflicting interests of Europe; whilst the dissensions of the New World +are still concealed within the bosom of the future. +</p> + +<p> +The Union is free from all pre-existing obligations, and it is consequently +enabled to profit by the experience of the old nations of Europe, without being +obliged, as they are, to make the best of the past, and to adapt it to their +present circumstances; or to accept that immense inheritance which they derive +from their forefathers—an inheritance of glory mingled with calamities, +and of alliances conflicting with national antipathies. The foreign policy of +the United States is reduced by its very nature to await the chances of the +future history of the nation, and for the present it consists more in +abstaining from interference than in exerting its activity. +</p> + +<p> +It is therefore very difficult to ascertain, at present, what degree of +sagacity the American democracy will display in the conduct of the foreign +policy of the country; and upon this point its adversaries, as well as its +advocates, must suspend their judgment. As for myself I have no hesitation in +avowing my conviction, that it is most especially in the conduct of foreign +relations that democratic governments appear to me to be decidedly inferior to +governments carried on upon different principles. Experience, instruction, and +habit may almost always succeed in creating a species of practical discretion +in democracies, and that science of the daily occurrences of life which is +called good sense. Good sense may suffice to direct the ordinary course of +society; and amongst a people whose education has been provided for, the +advantages of democratic liberty in the internal affairs of the country may +more than compensate for the evils inherent in a democratic government. But +such is not always the case in the mutual relations of foreign nations. +</p> + +<p> +Foreign politics demand scarcely any of those qualities which a democracy +possesses; and they require, on the contrary, the perfect use of almost all +those faculties in which it is deficient. Democracy is favorable to the +increase of the internal resources of the State; it tends to diffuse a moderate +independence; it promotes the growth of public spirit, and fortifies the +respect which is entertained for law in all classes of society; and these are +advantages which only exercise an indirect influence over the relations which +one people bears to another. But a democracy is unable to regulate the details +of an important undertaking, to persevere in a design, and to work out its +execution in the presence of serious obstacles. It cannot combine its measures +with secrecy, and it will not await their consequences with patience. These are +qualities which more especially belong to an individual or to an aristocracy; +and they are precisely the means by which an individual people attains to a +predominant position. +</p> + +<p> +If, on the contrary, we observe the natural defects of aristocracy, we shall +find that their influence is comparatively innoxious in the direction of the +external affairs of a State. The capital fault of which aristocratic bodies may +be accused is that they are more apt to contrive their own advantage than that +of the mass of the people. In foreign politics it is rare for the interest of +the aristocracy to be in any way distinct from that of the people. +</p> + +<p> +The propensity which democracies have to obey the impulse of passion rather +than the suggestions of prudence, and to abandon a mature design for the +gratification of a momentary caprice, was very clearly seen in America on the +breaking out of the French Revolution. It was then as evident to the simplest +capacity as it is at the present time that the interest of the Americans +forbade them to take any part in the contest which was about to deluge Europe +with blood, but which could by no means injure the welfare of their own +country. Nevertheless the sympathies of the people declared themselves with so +much violence in behalf of France that nothing but the inflexible character of +Washington, and the immense popularity which he enjoyed, could have prevented +the Americans from declaring war against England. And even then, the exertions +which the austere reason of that great man made to repress the generous but +imprudent passions of his fellow-citizens, very nearly deprived him of the sole +recompense which he had ever claimed—that of his country’s love. +The majority then reprobated the line of policy which he adopted, and which has +since been unanimously approved by the nation. *s If the Constitution and the +favor of the public had not entrusted the direction of the foreign affairs of +the country to Washington, it is certain that the American nation would at that +time have taken the very measures which it now condemns. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +s <br /> +[ See the fifth volume of Marshall’s “Life of Washington.” In +a government constituted like that of the United States, he says, “it is +impossible for the chief magistrate, however firm he may be, to oppose for any +length of time the torrent of popular opinion; and the prevalent opinion of +that day seemed to incline to war. In fact, in the session of Congress held at +the time, it was frequently seen that Washington had lost the majority in the +House of Representatives.” The violence of the language used against him +in public was extreme, and in a political meeting they did not scruple to +compare him indirectly to the treacherous Arnold. “By the +opposition,” says Marshall, “the friends of the administration were +declared to be an aristocratic and corrupt faction, who, from a desire to +introduce monarchy, were hostile to France and under the influence of Britain; +that they were a paper nobility, whose extreme sensibility at every measure +which threatened the funds, induced a tame submission to injuries and insults, +which the interests and honor of the nation required them to resist.”] +</p> + +<p> +Almost all the nations which have ever exercised a powerful influence upon the +destinies of the world by conceiving, following up, and executing vast +designs—from the Romans to the English—have been governed by +aristocratic institutions. Nor will this be a subject of wonder when we +recollect that nothing in the world has so absolute a fixity of purpose as an +aristocracy. The mass of the people may be led astray by ignorance or passion; +the mind of a king may be biased, and his perseverance in his designs may be +shaken—besides which a king is not immortal—but an aristocratic +body is too numerous to be led astray by the blandishments of intrigue, and yet +not numerous enough to yield readily to the intoxicating influence of +unreflecting passion: it has the energy of a firm and enlightened individual, +added to the power which it derives from perpetuity. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0033" id="link2HCH0033"></a> Chapter XIV: Advantages +American Society Derive From Democracy—Part I</h2> + +<p> +What The Real Advantages Are Which American Society Derives From The Government +Of The Democracy +</p> + +<p> +Before I enter upon the subject of the present chapter I am induced to remind +the reader of what I have more than once adverted to in the course of this +book. The political institutions of the United States appear to me to be one of +the forms of government which a democracy may adopt; but I do not regard the +American Constitution as the best, or as the only one, which a democratic +people may establish. In showing the advantages which the Americans derive from +the government of democracy, I am therefore very far from meaning, or from +believing, that similar advantages can only be obtained from the same laws. +</p> + +<p> +General Tendency Of The Laws Under The Rule Of The American Democracy, And +Habits Of Those Who Apply Them +</p> + +<p> +Defects of a democratic government easy to be discovered—Its advantages +only to be discerned by long observation—Democracy in America often +inexpert, but the general tendency of the laws advantageous—In the +American democracy public officers have no permanent interests distinct from +those of the majority—Result of this state of things. +</p> + +<p> +The defects and the weaknesses of a democratic government may very readily be +discovered; they are demonstrated by the most flagrant instances, whilst its +beneficial influence is less perceptibly exercised. A single glance suffices to +detect its evil consequences, but its good qualities can only be discerned by +long observation. The laws of the American democracy are frequently defective +or incomplete; they sometimes attack vested rights, or give a sanction to +others which are dangerous to the community; but even if they were good, the +frequent changes which they undergo would be an evil. How comes it, then, that +the American republics prosper and maintain their position? +</p> + +<p> +In the consideration of laws a distinction must be carefully observed between +the end at which they aim and the means by which they are directed to that end, +between their absolute and their relative excellence. If it be the intention of +the legislator to favor the interests of the minority at the expense of the +majority, and if the measures he takes are so combined as to accomplish the +object he has in view with the least possible expense of time and exertion, the +law may be well drawn up, although its purpose be bad; and the more efficacious +it is, the greater is the mischief which it causes. +</p> + +<p> +Democratic laws generally tend to promote the welfare of the greatest possible +number; for they emanate from the majority of the citizens, who are subject to +error, but who cannot have an interest opposed to their own advantage. The laws +of an aristocracy tend, on the contrary, to concentrate wealth and power in the +hands of the minority, because an aristocracy, by its very nature, constitutes +a minority. It may therefore be asserted, as a general proposition, that the +purpose of a democracy in the conduct of its legislation is useful to a greater +number of citizens than that of an aristocracy. This is, however, the sum total +of its advantages. +</p> + +<p> +Aristocracies are infinitely more expert in the science of legislation than +democracies ever can be. They are possessed of a self-control which protects +them from the errors of temporary excitement, and they form lasting designs +which they mature with the assistance of favorable opportunities. Aristocratic +government proceeds with the dexterity of art; it understands how to make the +collective force of all its laws converge at the same time to a given point. +Such is not the case with democracies, whose laws are almost always ineffective +or inopportune. The means of democracy are therefore more imperfect than those +of aristocracy, and the measures which it unwittingly adopts are frequently +opposed to its own cause; but the object it has in view is more useful. +</p> + +<p> +Let us now imagine a community so organized by nature, or by its constitution, +that it can support the transitory action of bad laws, and that it can await, +without destruction, the general tendency of the legislation: we shall then be +able to conceive that a democratic government, notwithstanding its defects, +will be most fitted to conduce to the prosperity of this community. This is +precisely what has occurred in the United States; and I repeat, what I have +before remarked, that the great advantage of the Americans consists in their +being able to commit faults which they may afterward repair. +</p> + +<p> +An analogous observation may be made respecting public officers. It is easy to +perceive that the American democracy frequently errs in the choice of the +individuals to whom it entrusts the power of the administration; but it is more +difficult to say why the State prospers under their rule. In the first place it +is to be remarked, that if in a democratic State the governors have less +honesty and less capacity than elsewhere, the governed, on the other hand, are +more enlightened and more attentive to their interests. As the people in +democracies is more incessantly vigilant in its affairs and more jealous of its +rights, it prevents its representatives from abandoning that general line of +conduct which its own interest prescribes. In the second place, it must be +remembered that if the democratic magistrate is more apt to misuse his power, +he possesses it for a shorter period of time. But there is yet another reason +which is still more general and conclusive. It is no doubt of importance to the +welfare of nations that they should be governed by men of talents and virtue; +but it is perhaps still more important that the interests of those men should +not differ from the interests of the community at large; for, if such were the +case, virtues of a high order might become useless, and talents might be turned +to a bad account. I say that it is important that the interests of the persons +in authority should not conflict with or oppose the interests of the community +at large; but I do not insist upon their having the same interests as the whole +population, because I am not aware that such a state of things ever existed in +any country. +</p> + +<p> +No political form has hitherto been discovered which is equally favorable to +the prosperity and the development of all the classes into which society is +divided. These classes continue to form, as it were, a certain number of +distinct nations in the same nation; and experience has shown that it is no +less dangerous to place the fate of these classes exclusively in the hands of +any one of them than it is to make one people the arbiter of the destiny of +another. When the rich alone govern, the interest of the poor is always +endangered; and when the poor make the laws, that of the rich incurs very +serious risks. The advantage of democracy does not consist, therefore, as has +sometimes been asserted, in favoring the prosperity of all, but simply in +contributing to the well-being of the greatest possible number. +</p> + +<p> +The men who are entrusted with the direction of public affairs in the United +States are frequently inferior, both in point of capacity and of morality, to +those whom aristocratic institutions would raise to power. But their interest +is identified and confounded with that of the majority of their +fellow-citizens. They may frequently be faithless and frequently mistaken, but +they will never systematically adopt a line of conduct opposed to the will of +the majority; and it is impossible that they should give a dangerous or an +exclusive tendency to the government. +</p> + +<p> +The mal-administration of a democratic magistrate is a mere isolated fact, +which only occurs during the short period for which he is elected. Corruption +and incapacity do not act as common interests, which may connect men +permanently with one another. A corrupt or an incapable magistrate will not +concert his measures with another magistrate, simply because that individual is +as corrupt and as incapable as himself; and these two men will never unite +their endeavors to promote the corruption and inaptitude of their remote +posterity. The ambition and the manoeuvres of the one will serve, on the +contrary, to unmask the other. The vices of a magistrate, in democratic states, +are usually peculiar to his own person. +</p> + +<p> +But under aristocratic governments public men are swayed by the interest of +their order, which, if it is sometimes confounded with the interests of the +majority, is very frequently distinct from them. This interest is the common +and lasting bond which unites them together; it induces them to coalesce, and +to combine their efforts in order to attain an end which does not always ensure +the greatest happiness of the greatest number; and it serves not only to +connect the persons in authority, but to unite them to a considerable portion +of the community, since a numerous body of citizens belongs to the aristocracy, +without being invested with official functions. The aristocratic magistrate is +therefore constantly supported by a portion of the community, as well as by the +Government of which he is a member. +</p> + +<p> +The common purpose which connects the interest of the magistrates in +aristocracies with that of a portion of their contemporaries identifies it with +that of future generations; their influence belongs to the future as much as to +the present. The aristocratic magistrate is urged at the same time toward the +same point by the passions of the community, by his own, and I may almost add +by those of his posterity. Is it, then, wonderful that he does not resist such +repeated impulses? And indeed aristocracies are often carried away by the +spirit of their order without being corrupted by it; and they unconsciously +fashion society to their own ends, and prepare it for their own descendants. +</p> + +<p> +The English aristocracy is perhaps the most liberal which ever existed, and no +body of men has ever, uninterruptedly, furnished so many honorable and +enlightened individuals to the government of a country. It cannot, however, +escape observation that in the legislation of England the good of the poor has +been sacrificed to the advantage of the rich, and the rights of the majority to +the privileges of the few. The consequence is, that England, at the present +day, combines the extremes of fortune in the bosom of her society, and her +perils and calamities are almost equal to her power and her renown. *a +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ [The legislation of England for the forty years is certainly not fairly open +to this criticism, which was written before the Reform Bill of 1832, and +accordingly Great Britain has thus far escaped and surmounted the perils and +calamities to which she seemed to be exposed.]] +</p> + +<p> +In the United States, where the public officers have no interests to promote +connected with their caste, the general and constant influence of the +Government is beneficial, although the individuals who conduct it are +frequently unskilful and sometimes contemptible. There is indeed a secret +tendency in democratic institutions to render the exertions of the citizens +subservient to the prosperity of the community, notwithstanding their private +vices and mistakes; whilst in aristocratic institutions there is a secret +propensity which, notwithstanding the talents and the virtues of those who +conduct the government, leads them to contribute to the evils which oppress +their fellow-creatures. In aristocratic governments public men may frequently +do injuries which they do not intend, and in democratic states they produce +advantages which they never thought of. +</p> + +<p> +Public Spirit In The United States +</p> + +<p> +Patriotism of instinct—Patriotism of reflection—Their different +characteristics—Nations ought to strive to acquire the second when the +first has disappeared—Efforts of the Americans to it—Interest of +the individual intimately connected with that of the country. +</p> + +<p> +There is one sort of patriotic attachment which principally arises from that +instinctive, disinterested, and undefinable feeling which connects the +affections of man with his birthplace. This natural fondness is united to a +taste for ancient customs, and to a reverence for ancestral traditions of the +past; those who cherish it love their country as they love the mansions of +their fathers. They enjoy the tranquillity which it affords them; they cling to +the peaceful habits which they have contracted within its bosom; they are +attached to the reminiscences which it awakens, and they are even pleased by +the state of obedience in which they are placed. This patriotism is sometimes +stimulated by religious enthusiasm, and then it is capable of making the most +prodigious efforts. It is in itself a kind of religion; it does not reason, but +it acts from the impulse of faith and of sentiment. By some nations the monarch +has been regarded as a personification of the country; and the fervor of +patriotism being converted into the fervor of loyalty, they took a sympathetic +pride in his conquests, and gloried in his power. At one time, under the +ancient monarchy, the French felt a sort of satisfaction in the sense of their +dependence upon the arbitrary pleasure of their king, and they were wont to say +with pride, “We are the subjects of the most powerful king in the +world.” +</p> + +<p> +But, like all instinctive passions, this kind of patriotism is more apt to +prompt transient exertion than to supply the motives of continuous endeavor. It +may save the State in critical circumstances, but it will not unfrequently +allow the nation to decline in the midst of peace. Whilst the manners of a +people are simple and its faith unshaken, whilst society is steadily based upon +traditional institutions whose legitimacy has never been contested, this +instinctive patriotism is wont to endure. +</p> + +<p> +But there is another species of attachment to a country which is more rational +than the one we have been describing. It is perhaps less generous and less +ardent, but it is more fruitful and more lasting; it is coeval with the spread +of knowledge, it is nurtured by the laws, it grows by the exercise of civil +rights, and, in the end, it is confounded with the personal interest of the +citizen. A man comprehends the influence which the prosperity of his country +has upon his own welfare; he is aware that the laws authorize him to contribute +his assistance to that prosperity, and he labors to promote it as a portion of +his interest in the first place, and as a portion of his right in the second. +</p> + +<p> +But epochs sometimes occur, in the course of the existence of a nation, at +which the ancient customs of a people are changed, public morality destroyed, +religious belief disturbed, and the spell of tradition broken, whilst the +diffusion of knowledge is yet imperfect, and the civil rights of the community +are ill secured, or confined within very narrow limits. The country then +assumes a dim and dubious shape in the eyes of the citizens; they no longer +behold it in the soil which they inhabit, for that soil is to them a dull +inanimate clod; nor in the usages of their forefathers, which they have been +taught to look upon as a debasing yoke; nor in religion, for of that they +doubt; nor in the laws, which do not originate in their own authority; nor in +the legislator, whom they fear and despise. The country is lost to their +senses, they can neither discover it under its own nor under borrowed features, +and they entrench themselves within the dull precincts of a narrow egotism. +They are emancipated from prejudice without having acknowledged the empire of +reason; they are neither animated by the instinctive patriotism of monarchical +subjects nor by the thinking patriotism of republican citizens; but they have +stopped halfway between the two, in the midst of confusion and of distress. +</p> + +<p> +In this predicament, to retreat is impossible; for a people cannot restore the +vivacity of its earlier times, any more than a man can return to the innocence +and the bloom of childhood; such things may be regretted, but they cannot be +renewed. The only thing, then, which remains to be done is to proceed, and to +accelerate the union of private with public interests, since the period of +disinterested patriotism is gone by forever. +</p> + +<p> +I am certainly very far from averring that, in order to obtain this result, the +exercise of political rights should be immediately granted to all the members +of the community. But I maintain that the most powerful, and perhaps the only, +means of interesting men in the welfare of their country which we still possess +is to make them partakers in the Government. At the present time civic zeal +seems to me to be inseparable from the exercise of political rights; and I hold +that the number of citizens will be found to augment or to decrease in Europe +in proportion as those rights are extended. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States the inhabitants were thrown but as yesterday upon the soil +which they now occupy, and they brought neither customs nor traditions with +them there; they meet each other for the first time with no previous +acquaintance; in short, the instinctive love of their country can scarcely +exist in their minds; but everyone takes as zealous an interest in the affairs +of his township, his county, and of the whole State, as if they were his own, +because everyone, in his sphere, takes an active part in the government of +society. +</p> + +<p> +The lower orders in the United States are alive to the perception of the +influence exercised by the general prosperity upon their own welfare; and +simple as this observation is, it is one which is but too rarely made by the +people. But in America the people regards this prosperity as the result of its +own exertions; the citizen looks upon the fortune of the public as his private +interest, and he co-operates in its success, not so much from a sense of pride +or of duty, as from what I shall venture to term cupidity. +</p> + +<p> +It is unnecessary to study the institutions and the history of the Americans in +order to discover the truth of this remark, for their manners render it +sufficiently evident. As the American participates in all that is done in his +country, he thinks himself obliged to defend whatever may be censured; for it +is not only his country which is attacked upon these occasions, but it is +himself. The consequence is, that his national pride resorts to a thousand +artifices, and to all the petty tricks of individual vanity. +</p> + +<p> +Nothing is more embarrassing in the ordinary intercourse of life than this +irritable patriotism of the Americans. A stranger may be very well inclined to +praise many of the institutions of their country, but he begs permission to +blame some of the peculiarities which he observes—a permission which is, +however, inexorably refused. America is therefore a free country, in which, +lest anybody should be hurt by your remarks, you are not allowed to speak +freely of private individuals, or of the State, of the citizens or of the +authorities, of public or of private undertakings, or, in short, of anything at +all, except it be of the climate and the soil; and even then Americans will be +found ready to defend either the one or the other, as if they had been +contrived by the inhabitants of the country. +</p> + +<p> +In our times option must be made between the patriotism of all and the +government of a few; for the force and activity which the first confers are +irreconcilable with the guarantees of tranquillity which the second furnishes. +</p> + +<p> +Notion Of Rights In The United States +</p> + +<p> +No great people without a notion of rights—How the notion of rights can +be given to people—Respect of rights in the United States—Whence it +arises. +</p> + +<p> +After the idea of virtue, I know no higher principle than that of right; or, to +speak more accurately, these two ideas are commingled in one. The idea of right +is simply that of virtue introduced into the political world. It is the idea of +right which enabled men to define anarchy and tyranny; and which taught them to +remain independent without arrogance, as well as to obey without servility. The +man who submits to violence is debased by his compliance; but when he obeys the +mandate of one who possesses that right of authority which he acknowledges in a +fellow-creature, he rises in some measure above the person who delivers the +command. There are no great men without virtue, and there are no great +nations—it may almost be added that there would be no +society—without the notion of rights; for what is the condition of a mass +of rational and intelligent beings who are only united together by the bond of +force? +</p> + +<p> +I am persuaded that the only means which we possess at the present time of +inculcating the notion of rights, and of rendering it, as it were, palpable to +the senses, is to invest all the members of the community with the peaceful +exercise of certain rights: this is very clearly seen in children, who are men +without the strength and the experience of manhood. When a child begins to move +in the midst of the objects which surround him, he is instinctively led to turn +everything which he can lay his hands upon to his own purposes; he has no +notion of the property of others; but as he gradually learns the value of +things, and begins to perceive that he may in his turn be deprived of his +possessions, he becomes more circumspect, and he observes those rights in +others which he wishes to have respected in himself. The principle which the +child derives from the possession of his toys is taught to the man by the +objects which he may call his own. In America those complaints against property +in general which are so frequent in Europe are never heard, because in America +there are no paupers; and as everyone has property of his own to defend, +everyone recognizes the principle upon which he holds it. +</p> + +<p> +The same thing occurs in the political world. In America the lowest classes +have conceived a very high notion of political rights, because they exercise +those rights; and they refrain from attacking those of other people, in order +to ensure their own from attack. Whilst in Europe the same classes sometimes +recalcitrate even against the supreme power, the American submits without a +murmur to the authority of the pettiest magistrate. +</p> + +<p> +This truth is exemplified by the most trivial details of national +peculiarities. In France very few pleasures are exclusively reserved for the +higher classes; the poor are admitted wherever the rich are received, and they +consequently behave with propriety, and respect whatever contributes to the +enjoyments in which they themselves participate. In England, where wealth has a +monopoly of amusement as well as of power, complaints are made that whenever +the poor happen to steal into the enclosures which are reserved for the +pleasures of the rich, they commit acts of wanton mischief: can this be +wondered at, since care has been taken that they should have nothing to lose? +*b +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ [This, too, has been amended by much larger provisions for the amusements of +the people in public parks, gardens, museums, etc.; and the conduct of the +people in these places of amusement has improved in the same proportion.]] +</p> + +<p> +The government of democracy brings the notion of political rights to the level +of the humblest citizens, just as the dissemination of wealth brings the notion +of property within the reach of all the members of the community; and I confess +that, to my mind, this is one of its greatest advantages. I do not assert that +it is easy to teach men to exercise political rights; but I maintain that, when +it is possible, the effects which result from it are highly important; and I +add that, if there ever was a time at which such an attempt ought to be made, +that time is our own. It is clear that the influence of religious belief is +shaken, and that the notion of divine rights is declining; it is evident that +public morality is vitiated, and the notion of moral rights is also +disappearing: these are general symptoms of the substitution of argument for +faith, and of calculation for the impulses of sentiment. If, in the midst of +this general disruption, you do not succeed in connecting the notion of rights +with that of personal interest, which is the only immutable point in the human +heart, what means will you have of governing the world except by fear? When I +am told that, since the laws are weak and the populace is wild, since passions +are excited and the authority of virtue is paralyzed, no measures must be taken +to increase the rights of the democracy, I reply, that it is for these very +reasons that some measures of the kind must be taken; and I am persuaded that +governments are still more interested in taking them than society at large, +because governments are liable to be destroyed and society cannot perish. +</p> + +<p> +I am not, however, inclined to exaggerate the example which America furnishes. +In those States the people are invested with political rights at a time when +they could scarcely be abused, for the citizens were few in number and simple +in their manners. As they have increased, the Americans have not augmented the +power of the democracy, but they have, if I may use the expression, extended +its dominions. It cannot be doubted that the moment at which political rights +are granted to a people that had before been without them is a very critical, +though it be a necessary one. A child may kill before he is aware of the value +of life; and he may deprive another person of his property before he is aware +that his own may be taken away from him. The lower orders, when first they are +invested with political rights, stand, in relation to those rights, in the same +position as the child does to the whole of nature, and the celebrated adage may +then be applied to them, Homo puer robustus. This truth may even be perceived +in America. The States in which the citizens have enjoyed their rights longest +are those in which they make the best use of them. +</p> + +<p> +It cannot be repeated too often that nothing is more fertile in prodigies than +the art of being free; but there is nothing more arduous than the +apprenticeship of liberty. Such is not the case with despotic institutions: +despotism often promises to make amends for a thousand previous ills; it +supports the right, it protects the oppressed, and it maintains public order. +The nation is lulled by the temporary prosperity which accrues to it, until it +is roused to a sense of its own misery. Liberty, on the contrary, is generally +established in the midst of agitation, it is perfected by civil discord, and +its benefits cannot be appreciated until it is already old. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0034" id="link2HCH0034"></a> Chapter XIV: Advantages +American Society Derive From Democracy—Part II</h2> <h3>Respect For The +Law In The United States</h3> <p> +Respect of the Americans for the law—Parental affection which they +entertain for it—Personal interest of everyone to increase the authority +of the law. +</p> + +<p> +It is not always feasible to consult the whole people, either directly or +indirectly, in the formation of the law; but it cannot be denied that, when +such a measure is possible the authority of the law is very much augmented. +This popular origin, which impairs the excellence and the wisdom of +legislation, contributes prodigiously to increase its power. There is an +amazing strength in the expression of the determination of a whole people, and +when it declares itself the imagination of those who are most inclined to +contest it is overawed by its authority. The truth of this fact is very well +known by parties, and they consequently strive to make out a majority whenever +they can. If they have not the greater number of voters on their side, they +assert that the true majority abstained from voting; and if they are foiled +even there, they have recourse to the body of those persons who had no votes to +give. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States, except slaves, servants, and paupers in the receipt of +relief from the townships, there is no class of persons who do not exercise the +elective franchise, and who do not indirectly contribute to make the laws. +Those who design to attack the laws must consequently either modify the opinion +of the nation or trample upon its decision. +</p> + +<p> +A second reason, which is still more weighty, may be further adduced; in the +United States everyone is personally interested in enforcing the obedience of +the whole community to the law; for as the minority may shortly rally the +majority to its principles, it is interested in professing that respect for the +decrees of the legislator which it may soon have occasion to claim for its own. +However irksome an enactment may be, the citizen of the United States complies +with it, not only because it is the work of the majority, but because it +originates in his own authority, and he regards it as a contract to which he is +himself a party. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States, then, that numerous and turbulent multitude does not +exist which always looks upon the law as its natural enemy, and accordingly +surveys it with fear and with fear and with distrust. It is impossible, on the +other hand, not to perceive that all classes display the utmost reliance upon +the legislation of their country, and that they are attached to it by a kind of +parental affection. +</p> + +<p> +I am wrong, however, in saying all classes; for as in America the European +scale of authority is inverted, the wealthy are there placed in a position +analogous to that of the poor in the Old World, and it is the opulent classes +which frequently look upon the law with suspicion. I have already observed that +the advantage of democracy is not, as has been sometimes asserted, that it +protects the interests of the whole community, but simply that it protects +those of the majority. In the United States, where the poor rule, the rich have +always some reason to dread the abuses of their power. This natural anxiety of +the rich may produce a sullen dissatisfaction, but society is not disturbed by +it; for the same reason which induces the rich to withhold their confidence in +the legislative authority makes them obey its mandates; their wealth, which +prevents them from making the law, prevents them from withstanding it. Amongst +civilized nations revolts are rarely excited, except by such persons as have +nothing to lose by them; and if the laws of a democracy are not always worthy +of respect, at least they always obtain it; for those who usually infringe the +laws have no excuse for not complying with the enactments they have themselves +made, and by which they are themselves benefited, whilst the citizens whose +interests might be promoted by the infraction of them are induced, by their +character and their stations, to submit to the decisions of the legislature, +whatever they may be. Besides which, the people in America obeys the law not +only because it emanates from the popular authority, but because that authority +may modify it in any points which may prove vexatory; a law is observed because +it is a self-imposed evil in the first place, and an evil of transient duration +in the second. +</p> + +<p> +Activity Which Pervades All The Branches Of The Body Politic In The United +States; Influence Which It Exercises Upon Society +</p> + +<p> +More difficult to conceive the political activity which pervades the United +States than the freedom and equality which reign there—The great activity +which perpetually agitates the legislative bodies is only an episode to the +general activity—Difficult for an American to confine himself to his own +business—Political agitation extends to all social +intercourse—Commercial activity of the Americans partly attributable to +this cause—Indirect advantages which society derives from a democratic +government. +</p> + +<p> +On passing from a country in which free institutions are established to one +where they do not exist, the traveller is struck by the change; in the former +all is bustle and activity, in the latter everything is calm and motionless. In +the one, amelioration and progress are the general topics of inquiry; in the +other, it seems as if the community only aspired to repose in the enjoyment of +the advantages which it has acquired. Nevertheless, the country which exerts +itself so strenuously to promote its welfare is generally more wealthy and more +prosperous than that which appears to be so contented with its lot; and when we +compare them together, we can scarcely conceive how so many new wants are daily +felt in the former, whilst so few seem to occur in the latter. +</p> + +<p> +If this remark is applicable to those free countries in which monarchical and +aristocratic institutions subsist, it is still more striking with regard to +democratic republics. In these States it is not only a portion of the people +which is busied with the amelioration of its social condition, but the whole +community is engaged in the task; and it is not the exigencies and the +convenience of a single class for which a provision is to be made, but the +exigencies and the convenience of all ranks of life. +</p> + +<p> +It is not impossible to conceive the surpassing liberty which the Americans +enjoy; some idea may likewise be formed of the extreme equality which subsists +amongst them, but the political activity which pervades the United States must +be seen in order to be understood. No sooner do you set foot upon the American +soil than you are stunned by a kind of tumult; a confused clamor is heard on +every side; and a thousand simultaneous voices demand the immediate +satisfaction of their social wants. Everything is in motion around you; here, +the people of one quarter of a town are met to decide upon the building of a +church; there, the election of a representative is going on; a little further +the delegates of a district are posting to the town in order to consult upon +some local improvements; or in another place the laborers of a village quit +their ploughs to deliberate upon the project of a road or a public school. +Meetings are called for the sole purpose of declaring their disapprobation of +the line of conduct pursued by the Government; whilst in other assemblies the +citizens salute the authorities of the day as the fathers of their country. +Societies are formed which regard drunkenness as the principal cause of the +evils under which the State labors, and which solemnly bind themselves to give +a constant example of temperance. *c +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ At the time of my stay in the United States the temperance societies already +consisted of more than 270,000 members, and their effect had been to diminish +the consumption of fermented liquors by 500,000 gallons per annum in the State +of Pennsylvania alone.] +</p> + +<p> +The great political agitation of the American legislative bodies, which is the +only kind of excitement that attracts the attention of foreign countries, is a +mere episode or a sort of continuation of that universal movement which +originates in the lowest classes of the people and extends successively to all +the ranks of society. It is impossible to spend more efforts in the pursuit of +enjoyment. +</p> + +<p> +The cares of political life engross a most prominent place in the occupation of +a citizen in the United States, and almost the only pleasure of which an +American has any idea is to take a part in the Government, and to discuss the +part he has taken. This feeling pervades the most trifling habits of life; even +the women frequently attend public meetings and listen to political harangues +as a recreation after their household labors. Debating clubs are to a certain +extent a substitute for theatrical entertainments: an American cannot converse, +but he can discuss; and when he attempts to talk he falls into a dissertation. +He speaks to you as if he was addressing a meeting; and if he should chance to +warm in the course of the discussion, he will infallibly say, +“Gentlemen,” to the person with whom he is conversing. +</p> + +<p> +In some countries the inhabitants display a certain repugnance to avail +themselves of the political privileges with which the law invests them; it +would seem that they set too high a value upon their time to spend it on the +interests of the community; and they prefer to withdraw within the exact limits +of a wholesome egotism, marked out by four sunk fences and a quickset hedge. +But if an American were condemned to confine his activity to his own affairs, +he would be robbed of one half of his existence; he would feel an immense void +in the life which he is accustomed to lead, and his wretchedness would be +unbearable. *d I am persuaded that, if ever a despotic government is +established in America, it will find it more difficult to surmount the habits +which free institutions have engendered than to conquer the attachment of the +citizens to freedom. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ The same remark was made at Rome under the first Caesars. Montesquieu +somewhere alludes to the excessive despondency of certain Roman citizens who, +after the excitement of political life, were all at once flung back into the +stagnation of private life.] +</p> + +<p> +This ceaseless agitation which democratic government has introduced into the +political world influences all social intercourse. I am not sure that upon the +whole this is not the greatest advantage of democracy. And I am much less +inclined to applaud it for what it does than for what it causes to be done. It +is incontestable that the people frequently conducts public business very ill; +but it is impossible that the lower orders should take a part in public +business without extending the circle of their ideas, and without quitting the +ordinary routine of their mental acquirements. The humblest individual who is +called upon to co-operate in the government of society acquires a certain +degree of self-respect; and as he possesses authority, he can command the +services of minds much more enlightened than his own. He is canvassed by a +multitude of applicants, who seek to deceive him in a thousand different ways, +but who instruct him by their deceit. He takes a part in political undertakings +which did not originate in his own conception, but which give him a taste for +undertakings of the kind. New ameliorations are daily pointed out in the +property which he holds in common with others, and this gives him the desire of +improving that property which is more peculiarly his own. He is perhaps neither +happier nor better than those who came before him, but he is better informed +and more active. I have no doubt that the democratic institutions of the United +States, joined to the physical constitution of the country, are the cause (not +the direct, as is so often asserted, but the indirect cause) of the prodigious +commercial activity of the inhabitants. It is not engendered by the laws, but +the people learns how to promote it by the experience derived from legislation. +</p> + +<p> +When the opponents of democracy assert that a single individual performs the +duties which he undertakes much better than the government of the community, it +appears to me that they are perfectly right. The government of an individual, +supposing an equality of instruction on either side, is more consistent, more +persevering, and more accurate than that of a multitude, and it is much better +qualified judiciously to discriminate the characters of the men it employs. If +any deny what I advance, they have certainly never seen a democratic +government, or have formed their opinion upon very partial evidence. It is true +that even when local circumstances and the disposition of the people allow +democratic institutions to subsist, they never display a regular and methodical +system of government. Democratic liberty is far from accomplishing all the +projects it undertakes, with the skill of an adroit despotism. It frequently +abandons them before they have borne their fruits, or risks them when the +consequences may prove dangerous; but in the end it produces more than any +absolute government, and if it do fewer things well, it does a greater number +of things. Under its sway the transactions of the public administration are not +nearly so important as what is done by private exertion. Democracy does not +confer the most skilful kind of government upon the people, but it produces +that which the most skilful governments are frequently unable to awaken, +namely, an all-pervading and restless activity, a superabundant force, and an +energy which is inseparable from it, and which may, under favorable +circumstances, beget the most amazing benefits. These are the true advantages +of democracy. +</p> + +<p> +In the present age, when the destinies of Christendom seem to be in suspense, +some hasten to assail democracy as its foe whilst it is yet in its early +growth; and others are ready with their vows of adoration for this new deity +which is springing forth from chaos: but both parties are very imperfectly +acquainted with the object of their hatred or of their desires; they strike in +the dark, and distribute their blows by mere chance. +</p> + +<p> +We must first understand what the purport of society and the aim of government +is held to be. If it be your intention to confer a certain elevation upon the +human mind, and to teach it to regard the things of this world with generous +feelings, to inspire men with a scorn of mere temporal advantage, to give birth +to living convictions, and to keep alive the spirit of honorable devotedness; +if you hold it to be a good thing to refine the habits, to embellish the +manners, to cultivate the arts of a nation, and to promote the love of poetry, +of beauty, and of renown; if you would constitute a people not unfitted to act +with power upon all other nations, nor unprepared for those high enterprises +which, whatever be the result of its efforts, will leave a name forever famous +in time—if you believe such to be the principal object of society, you +must avoid the government of democracy, which would be a very uncertain guide +to the end you have in view. +</p> + +<p> +But if you hold it to be expedient to divert the moral and intellectual +activity of man to the production of comfort, and to the acquirement of the +necessaries of life; if a clear understanding be more profitable to man than +genius; if your object be not to stimulate the virtues of heroism, but to +create habits of peace; if you had rather witness vices than crimes and are +content to meet with fewer noble deeds, provided offences be diminished in the +same proportion; if, instead of living in the midst of a brilliant state of +society, you are contented to have prosperity around you; if, in short, you are +of opinion that the principal object of a Government is not to confer the +greatest possible share of power and of glory upon the body of the nation, but +to ensure the greatest degree of enjoyment and the least degree of misery to +each of the individuals who compose it—if such be your desires, you can +have no surer means of satisfying them than by equalizing the conditions of +men, and establishing democratic institutions. +</p> + +<p> +But if the time be passed at which such a choice was possible, and if some +superhuman power impel us towards one or the other of these two governments +without consulting our wishes, let us at least endeavor to make the best of +that which is allotted to us; and let us so inquire into its good and its evil +propensities as to be able to foster the former and repress the latter to the +utmost. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0035" id="link2HCH0035"></a> Chapter XV: Unlimited Power +Of Majority, And Its Consequences—Part I</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0036" id="link2HCH0036"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +Natural strength of the majority in democracies—Most of the American +Constitutions have increased this strength by artificial means—How this +has been done—Pledged delegates—Moral power of the +majority—Opinion as to its infallibility—Respect for its rights, +how augmented in the United States. +</p> + +<p> +Unlimited Power Of The Majority In The United States, And Its Consequences +</p> + +<p> +The very essence of democratic government consists in the absolute sovereignty +of the majority; for there is nothing in democratic States which is capable of +resisting it. Most of the American Constitutions have sought to increase this +natural strength of the majority by artificial means. *a +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ We observed, in examining the Federal Constitution, that the efforts of the +legislators of the Union had been diametrically opposed to the present +tendency. The consequence has been that the Federal Government is more +independent in its sphere than that of the States. But the Federal Government +scarcely ever interferes in any but external affairs; and the governments of +the State are in the governments of the States are in reality the authorities +which direct society in America.] +</p> + +<p> +The legislature is, of all political institutions, the one which is most easily +swayed by the wishes of the majority. The Americans determined that the members +of the legislature should be elected by the people immediately, and for a very +brief term, in order to subject them, not only to the general convictions, but +even to the daily passion, of their constituents. The members of both houses +are taken from the same class in society, and are nominated in the same manner; +so that the modifications of the legislative bodies are almost as rapid and +quite as irresistible as those of a single assembly. It is to a legislature +thus constituted that almost all the authority of the government has been +entrusted. +</p> + +<p> +But whilst the law increased the strength of those authorities which of +themselves were strong, it enfeebled more and more those which were naturally +weak. It deprived the representatives of the executive of all stability and +independence, and by subjecting them completely to the caprices of the +legislature, it robbed them of the slender influence which the nature of a +democratic government might have allowed them to retain. In several States the +judicial power was also submitted to the elective discretion of the majority, +and in all of them its existence was made to depend on the pleasure of the +legislative authority, since the representatives were empowered annually to +regulate the stipend of the judges. +</p> + +<p> +Custom, however, has done even more than law. A proceeding which will in the +end set all the guarantees of representative government at naught is becoming +more and more general in the United States; it frequently happens that the +electors, who choose a delegate, point out a certain line of conduct to him, +and impose upon him a certain number of positive obligations which he is +pledged to fulfil. With the exception of the tumult, this comes to the same +thing as if the majority of the populace held its deliberations in the +market-place. +</p> + +<p> +Several other circumstances concur in rendering the power of the majority in +America not only preponderant, but irresistible. The moral authority of the +majority is partly based upon the notion that there is more intelligence and +more wisdom in a great number of men collected together than in a single +individual, and that the quantity of legislators is more important than their +quality. The theory of equality is in fact applied to the intellect of man: and +human pride is thus assailed in its last retreat by a doctrine which the +minority hesitate to admit, and in which they very slowly concur. Like all +other powers, and perhaps more than all other powers, the authority of the many +requires the sanction of time; at first it enforces obedience by constraint, +but its laws are not respected until they have long been maintained. +</p> + +<p> +The right of governing society, which the majority supposes itself to derive +from its superior intelligence, was introduced into the United States by the +first settlers, and this idea, which would be sufficient of itself to create a +free nation, has now been amalgamated with the manners of the people and the +minor incidents of social intercourse. +</p> + +<p> +The French, under the old monarchy, held it for a maxim (which is still a +fundamental principle of the English Constitution) that the King could do no +wrong; and if he did do wrong, the blame was imputed to his advisers. This +notion was highly favorable to habits of obedience, and it enabled the subject +to complain of the law without ceasing to love and honor the lawgiver. The +Americans entertain the same opinion with respect to the majority. +</p> + +<p> +The moral power of the majority is founded upon yet another principle, which +is, that the interests of the many are to be preferred to those of the few. It +will readily be perceived that the respect here professed for the rights of the +majority must naturally increase or diminish according to the state of parties. +When a nation is divided into several irreconcilable factions, the privilege of +the majority is often overlooked, because it is intolerable to comply with its +demands. +</p> + +<p> +If there existed in America a class of citizens whom the legislating majority +sought to deprive of exclusive privileges which they had possessed for ages, +and to bring down from an elevated station to the level of the ranks of the +multitude, it is probable that the minority would be less ready to comply with +its laws. But as the United States were colonized by men holding equal rank +amongst themselves, there is as yet no natural or permanent source of +dissension between the interests of its different inhabitants. +</p> + +<p> +There are certain communities in which the persons who constitute the minority +can never hope to draw over the majority to their side, because they must then +give up the very point which is at issue between them. Thus, an aristocracy can +never become a majority whilst it retains its exclusive privileges, and it +cannot cede its privileges without ceasing to be an aristocracy. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States political questions cannot be taken up in so general and +absolute a manner, and all parties are willing to recognize the right of the +majority, because they all hope to turn those rights to their own advantage at +some future time. The majority therefore in that country exercises a prodigious +actual authority, and a moral influence which is scarcely less preponderant; no +obstacles exist which can impede or so much as retard its progress, or which +can induce it to heed the complaints of those whom it crushes upon its path. +This state of things is fatal in itself and dangerous for the future. +</p> + +<p> +How The Unlimited Power Of The Majority Increases In America The Instability Of +Legislation And Administration Inherent In Democracy The Americans increase the +mutability of the laws which is inherent in democracy by changing the +legislature every year, and by investing it with unbounded authority—The +same effect is produced upon the administration—In America social +amelioration is conducted more energetically but less perseveringly than in +Europe. +</p> + +<p> +I have already spoken of the natural defects of democratic institutions, and +they all of them increase at the exact ratio of the power of the majority. To +begin with the most evident of them all; the mutability of the laws is an evil +inherent in democratic government, because it is natural to democracies to +raise men to power in very rapid succession. But this evil is more or less +sensible in proportion to the authority and the means of action which the +legislature possesses. +</p> + +<p> +In America the authority exercised by the legislative bodies is supreme; +nothing prevents them from accomplishing their wishes with celerity, and with +irresistible power, whilst they are supplied by new representatives every year. +That is to say, the circumstances which contribute most powerfully to +democratic instability, and which admit of the free application of caprice to +every object in the State, are here in full operation. In conformity with this +principle, America is, at the present day, the country in the world where laws +last the shortest time. Almost all the American constitutions have been amended +within the course of thirty years: there is therefore not a single American +State which has not modified the principles of its legislation in that lapse of +time. As for the laws themselves, a single glance upon the archives of the +different States of the Union suffices to convince one that in America the +activity of the legislator never slackens. Not that the American democracy is +naturally less stable than any other, but that it is allowed to follow its +capricious propensities in the formation of the laws. *b +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ The legislative acts promulgated by the State of Massachusetts alone, from +the year 1780 to the present time, already fill three stout volumes; and it +must not be forgotten that the collection to which I allude was published in +1823, when many old laws which had fallen into disuse were omitted. The State +of Massachusetts, which is not more populous than a department of France, may +be considered as the most stable, the most consistent, and the most sagacious +in its undertakings of the whole Union.] +</p> + +<p> +The omnipotence of the majority, and the rapid as well as absolute manner in +which its decisions are executed in the United States, has not only the effect +of rendering the law unstable, but it exercises the same influence upon the +execution of the law and the conduct of the public administration. As the +majority is the only power which it is important to court, all its projects are +taken up with the greatest ardor, but no sooner is its attention distracted +than all this ardor ceases; whilst in the free States of Europe the +administration is at once independent and secure, so that the projects of the +legislature are put into execution, although its immediate attention may be +directed to other objects. +</p> + +<p> +In America certain ameliorations are undertaken with much more zeal and +activity than elsewhere; in Europe the same ends are promoted by much less +social effort, more continuously applied. +</p> + +<p> +Some years ago several pious individuals undertook to ameliorate the condition +of the prisons. The public was excited by the statements which they put +forward, and the regeneration of criminals became a very popular undertaking. +New prisons were built, and for the first time the idea of reforming as well as +of punishing the delinquent formed a part of prison discipline. But this happy +alteration, in which the public had taken so hearty an interest, and which the +exertions of the citizens had irresistibly accelerated, could not be completed +in a moment. Whilst the new penitentiaries were being erected (and it was the +pleasure of the majority that they should be terminated with all possible +celerity), the old prisons existed, which still contained a great number of +offenders. These jails became more unwholesome and more corrupt in proportion +as the new establishments were beautified and improved, forming a contrast +which may readily be understood. The majority was so eagerly employed in +founding the new prisons that those which already existed were forgotten; and +as the general attention was diverted to a novel object, the care which had +hitherto been bestowed upon the others ceased. The salutary regulations of +discipline were first relaxed, and afterwards broken; so that in the immediate +neighborhood of a prison which bore witness to the mild and enlightened spirit +of our time, dungeons might be met with which reminded the visitor of the +barbarity of the Middle Ages. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0037" id="link2HCH0037"></a> Chapter XV: Unlimited Power +Of Majority, And Its Consequences—Part II</h2> <h3>Tyranny Of The +Majority</h3> <p> +How the principle of the sovereignty of the people is to be +understood—Impossibility of conceiving a mixed government—The +sovereign power must centre somewhere—Precautions to be taken to control +its action—These precautions have not been taken in the United +States—Consequences. +</p> + +<p> +I hold it to be an impious and an execrable maxim that, politically speaking, a +people has a right to do whatsoever it pleases, and yet I have asserted that +all authority originates in the will of the majority. Am I then, in +contradiction with myself? +</p> + +<p> +A general law—which bears the name of Justice—has been made and +sanctioned, not only by a majority of this or that people, but by a majority of +mankind. The rights of every people are consequently confined within the limits +of what is just. A nation may be considered in the light of a jury which is +empowered to represent society at large, and to apply the great and general law +of justice. Ought such a jury, which represents society, to have more power +than the society in which the laws it applies originate? +</p> + +<p> +When I refuse to obey an unjust law, I do not contest the right which the +majority has of commanding, but I simply appeal from the sovereignty of the +people to the sovereignty of mankind. It has been asserted that a people can +never entirely outstep the boundaries of justice and of reason in those affairs +which are more peculiarly its own, and that consequently, full power may +fearlessly be given to the majority by which it is represented. But this +language is that of a slave. +</p> + +<p> +A majority taken collectively may be regarded as a being whose opinions, and +most frequently whose interests, are opposed to those of another being, which +is styled a minority. If it be admitted that a man, possessing absolute power, +may misuse that power by wronging his adversaries, why should a majority not be +liable to the same reproach? Men are not apt to change their characters by +agglomeration; nor does their patience in the presence of obstacles increase +with the consciousness of their strength. *c And for these reasons I can never +willingly invest any number of my fellow-creatures with that unlimited +authority which I should refuse to any one of them. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ No one will assert that a people cannot forcibly wrong another people; but +parties may be looked upon as lesser nations within a greater one, and they are +aliens to each other: if, therefore, it be admitted that a nation can act +tyrannically towards another nation, it cannot be denied that a party may do +the same towards another party.] +</p> + +<p> +I do not think that it is possible to combine several principles in the same +government, so as at the same time to maintain freedom, and really to oppose +them to one another. The form of government which is usually termed mixed has +always appeared to me to be a mere chimera. Accurately speaking there is no +such thing as a mixed government (with the meaning usually given to that word), +because in all communities some one principle of action may be discovered which +preponderates over the others. England in the last century, which has been more +especially cited as an example of this form of Government, was in point of fact +an essentially aristocratic State, although it comprised very powerful elements +of democracy; for the laws and customs of the country were such that the +aristocracy could not but preponderate in the end, and subject the direction of +public affairs to its own will. The error arose from too much attention being +paid to the actual struggle which was going on between the nobles and the +people, without considering the probable issue of the contest, which was in +reality the important point. When a community really has a mixed government, +that is to say, when it is equally divided between two adverse principles, it +must either pass through a revolution or fall into complete dissolution. +</p> + +<p> +I am therefore of opinion that some one social power must always be made to +predominate over the others; but I think that liberty is endangered when this +power is checked by no obstacles which may retard its course, and force it to +moderate its own vehemence. +</p> + +<p> +Unlimited power is in itself a bad and dangerous thing; human beings are not +competent to exercise it with discretion, and God alone can be omnipotent, +because His wisdom and His justice are always equal to His power. But no power +upon earth is so worthy of honor for itself, or of reverential obedience to the +rights which it represents, that I would consent to admit its uncontrolled and +all-predominant authority. When I see that the right and the means of absolute +command are conferred on a people or upon a king, upon an aristocracy or a +democracy, a monarchy or a republic, I recognize the germ of tyranny, and I +journey onward to a land of more hopeful institutions. +</p> + +<p> +In my opinion the main evil of the present democratic institutions of the +United States does not arise, as is often asserted in Europe, from their +weakness, but from their overpowering strength; and I am not so much alarmed at +the excessive liberty which reigns in that country as at the very inadequate +securities which exist against tyranny. +</p> + +<p> +When an individual or a party is wronged in the United States, to whom can he +apply for redress? If to public opinion, public opinion constitutes the +majority; if to the legislature, it represents the majority, and implicitly +obeys its injunctions; if to the executive power, it is appointed by the +majority, and remains a passive tool in its hands; the public troops consist of +the majority under arms; the jury is the majority invested with the right of +hearing judicial cases; and in certain States even the judges are elected by +the majority. However iniquitous or absurd the evil of which you complain may +be, you must submit to it as well as you can. *d +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ A striking instance of the excesses which may be occasioned by the despotism +of the majority occurred at Baltimore in the year 1812. At that time the war +was very popular in Baltimore. A journal which had taken the other side of the +question excited the indignation of the inhabitants by its opposition. The +populace assembled, broke the printing-presses, and attacked the houses of the +newspaper editors. The militia was called out, but no one obeyed the call; and +the only means of saving the poor wretches who were threatened by the frenzy of +the mob was to throw them into prison as common malefactors. But even this +precaution was ineffectual; the mob collected again during the night, the +magistrates again made a vain attempt to call out the militia, the prison was +forced, one of the newspaper editors was killed upon the spot, and the others +were left for dead; the guilty parties were acquitted by the jury when they +were brought to trial. +</p> + +<p> +I said one day to an inhabitant of Pennsylvania, “Be so good as to +explain to me how it happens that in a State founded by Quakers, and celebrated +for its toleration, freed blacks are not allowed to exercise civil rights. They +pay the taxes; is it not fair that they should have a vote?” +</p> + +<p> +“You insult us,” replied my informant, “if you imagine that +our legislators could have committed so gross an act of injustice and +intolerance.” +</p> + +<p> +“What! then the blacks possess the right of voting in this county?” +</p> + +<p> +“Without the smallest doubt.” +</p> + +<p> +“How comes it, then, that at the polling-booth this morning I did not +perceive a single negro in the whole meeting?” +</p> + +<p> +“This is not the fault of the law: the negroes have an undisputed right +of voting, but they voluntarily abstain from making their appearance.” +</p> + +<p> +“A very pretty piece of modesty on their parts!” rejoined I. +</p> + +<p> +“Why, the truth is, that they are not disinclined to vote, but they are +afraid of being maltreated; in this country the law is sometimes unable to +maintain its authority without the support of the majority. But in this case +the majority entertains very strong prejudices against the blacks, and the +magistrates are unable to protect them in the exercise of their legal +privileges.” +</p> + +<p> +“What! then the majority claims the right not only of making the laws, +but of breaking the laws it has made?”] +</p> + +<p> +If, on the other hand, a legislative power could be so constituted as to +represent the majority without necessarily being the slave of its passions; an +executive, so as to retain a certain degree of uncontrolled authority; and a +judiciary, so as to remain independent of the two other powers; a government +would be formed which would still be democratic without incurring any risk of +tyrannical abuse. +</p> + +<p> +I do not say that tyrannical abuses frequently occur in America at the present +day, but I maintain that no sure barrier is established against them, and that +the causes which mitigate the government are to be found in the circumstances +and the manners of the country more than in its laws. +</p> + +<p> +Effects Of The Unlimited Power Of The Majority Upon The Arbitrary Authority Of +The American Public Officers +</p> + +<p> +Liberty left by the American laws to public officers within a certain +sphere—Their power. +</p> + +<p> +A distinction must be drawn between tyranny and arbitrary power. Tyranny may be +exercised by means of the law, and in that case it is not arbitrary; arbitrary +power may be exercised for the good of the community at large, in which case it +is not tyrannical. Tyranny usually employs arbitrary means, but, if necessary, +it can rule without them. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States the unbounded power of the majority, which is favorable to +the legal despotism of the legislature, is likewise favorable to the arbitrary +authority of the magistrate. The majority has an entire control over the law +when it is made and when it is executed; and as it possesses an equal authority +over those who are in power and the community at large, it considers public +officers as its passive agents, and readily confides the task of serving its +designs to their vigilance. The details of their office and the privileges +which they are to enjoy are rarely defined beforehand; but the majority treats +them as a master does his servants when they are always at work in his sight, +and he has the power of directing or reprimanding them at every instant. +</p> + +<p> +In general the American functionaries are far more independent than the French +civil officers within the sphere which is prescribed to them. Sometimes, even, +they are allowed by the popular authority to exceed those bounds; and as they +are protected by the opinion, and backed by the co-operation, of the majority, +they venture upon such manifestations of their power as astonish a European. By +this means habits are formed in the heart of a free country which may some day +prove fatal to its liberties. +</p> + +<p> +Power Exercised By The Majority In America Upon Opinion +</p> + +<p> +In America, when the majority has once irrevocably decided a question, all +discussion ceases—Reason of this—Moral power exercised by the +majority upon opinion—Democratic republics have deprived despotism of its +physical instruments—Their despotism sways the minds of men. +</p> + +<p> +It is in the examination of the display of public opinion in the United States +that we clearly perceive how far the power of the majority surpasses all the +powers with which we are acquainted in Europe. Intellectual principles exercise +an influence which is so invisible, and often so inappreciable, that they +baffle the toils of oppression. At the present time the most absolute monarchs +in Europe are unable to prevent certain notions, which are opposed to their +authority, from circulating in secret throughout their dominions, and even in +their courts. Such is not the case in America; as long as the majority is still +undecided, discussion is carried on; but as soon as its decision is irrevocably +pronounced, a submissive silence is observed, and the friends, as well as the +opponents, of the measure unite in assenting to its propriety. The reason of +this is perfectly clear: no monarch is so absolute as to combine all the powers +of society in his own hands, and to conquer all opposition with the energy of a +majority which is invested with the right of making and of executing the laws. +</p> + +<p> +The authority of a king is purely physical, and it controls the actions of the +subject without subduing his private will; but the majority possesses a power +which is physical and moral at the same time; it acts upon the will as well as +upon the actions of men, and it represses not only all contest, but all +controversy. I know no country in which there is so little true independence of +mind and freedom of discussion as in America. In any constitutional state in +Europe every sort of religious and political theory may be advocated and +propagated abroad; for there is no country in Europe so subdued by any single +authority as not to contain citizens who are ready to protect the man who +raises his voice in the cause of truth from the consequences of his hardihood. +If he is unfortunate enough to live under an absolute government, the people is +upon his side; if he inhabits a free country, he may find a shelter behind the +authority of the throne, if he require one. The aristocratic part of society +supports him in some countries, and the democracy in others. But in a nation +where democratic institutions exist, organized like those of the United States, +there is but one sole authority, one single element of strength and of success, +with nothing beyond it. +</p> + +<p> +In America the majority raises very formidable barriers to the liberty of +opinion: within these barriers an author may write whatever he pleases, but he +will repent it if he ever step beyond them. Not that he is exposed to the +terrors of an auto-da-fe, but he is tormented by the slights and persecutions +of daily obloquy. His political career is closed forever, since he has offended +the only authority which is able to promote his success. Every sort of +compensation, even that of celebrity, is refused to him. Before he published +his opinions he imagined that he held them in common with many others; but no +sooner has he declared them openly than he is loudly censured by his +overbearing opponents, whilst those who think without having the courage to +speak, like him, abandon him in silence. He yields at length, oppressed by the +daily efforts he has been making, and he subsides into silence, as if he was +tormented by remorse for having spoken the truth. +</p> + +<p> +Fetters and headsmen were the coarse instruments which tyranny formerly +employed; but the civilization of our age has refined the arts of despotism +which seemed, however, to have been sufficiently perfected before. The excesses +of monarchical power had devised a variety of physical means of oppression: the +democratic republics of the present day have rendered it as entirely an affair +of the mind as that will which it is intended to coerce. Under the absolute +sway of an individual despot the body was attacked in order to subdue the soul, +and the soul escaped the blows which were directed against it and rose superior +to the attempt; but such is not the course adopted by tyranny in democratic +republics; there the body is left free, and the soul is enslaved. The sovereign +can no longer say, “You shall think as I do on pain of death;” but +he says, “You are free to think differently from me, and to retain your +life, your property, and all that you possess; but if such be your +determination, you are henceforth an alien among your people. You may retain +your civil rights, but they will be useless to you, for you will never be +chosen by your fellow-citizens if you solicit their suffrages, and they will +affect to scorn you if you solicit their esteem. You will remain among men, but +you will be deprived of the rights of mankind. Your fellow-creatures will shun +you like an impure being, and those who are most persuaded of your innocence +will abandon you too, lest they should be shunned in their turn. Go in peace! I +have given you your life, but it is an existence in comparably worse than +death.” +</p> + +<p> +Monarchical institutions have thrown an odium upon despotism; let us beware +lest democratic republics should restore oppression, and should render it less +odious and less degrading in the eyes of the many, by making it still more +onerous to the few. +</p> + +<p> +Works have been published in the proudest nations of the Old World expressly +intended to censure the vices and deride the follies of the times; Labruyere +inhabited the palace of Louis XIV when he composed his chapter upon the Great, +and Moliere criticised the courtiers in the very pieces which were acted before +the Court. But the ruling power in the United States is not to be made game of; +the smallest reproach irritates its sensibility, and the slightest joke which +has any foundation in truth renders it indignant; from the style of its +language to the more solid virtues of its character, everything must be made +the subject of encomium. No writer, whatever be his eminence, can escape from +this tribute of adulation to his fellow-citizens. The majority lives in the +perpetual practice of self-applause, and there are certain truths which the +Americans can only learn from strangers or from experience. +</p> + +<p> +If great writers have not at present existed in America, the reason is very +simply given in these facts; there can be no literary genius without freedom of +opinion, and freedom of opinion does not exist in America. The Inquisition has +never been able to prevent a vast number of anti-religious books from +circulating in Spain. The empire of the majority succeeds much better in the +United States, since it actually removes the wish of publishing them. +Unbelievers are to be met with in America, but, to say the truth, there is no +public organ of infidelity. Attempts have been made by some governments to +protect the morality of nations by prohibiting licentious books. In the United +States no one is punished for this sort of works, but no one is induced to +write them; not because all the citizens are immaculate in their manners, but +because the majority of the community is decent and orderly. +</p> + +<p> +In these cases the advantages derived from the exercise of this power are +unquestionable, and I am simply discussing the nature of the power itself. This +irresistible authority is a constant fact, and its judicious exercise is an +accidental occurrence. +</p> + +<p> +Effects Of The Tyranny Of The Majority Upon The National Character Of The +Americans +</p> + +<p> +Effects of the tyranny of the majority more sensibly felt hitherto in the +manners than in the conduct of society—They check the development of +leading characters—Democratic republics organized like the United States +bring the practice of courting favor within the reach of the many—Proofs +of this spirit in the United States—Why there is more patriotism in the +people than in those who govern in its name. +</p> + +<p> +The tendencies which I have just alluded to are as yet very slightly +perceptible in political society, but they already begin to exercise an +unfavorable influence upon the national character of the Americans. I am +inclined to attribute the singular paucity of distinguished political +characters to the ever-increasing activity of the despotism of the majority in +the United States. When the American Revolution broke out they arose in great +numbers, for public opinion then served, not to tyrannize over, but to direct +the exertions of individuals. Those celebrated men took a full part in the +general agitation of mind common at that period, and they attained a high +degree of personal fame, which was reflected back upon the nation, but which +was by no means borrowed from it. +</p> + +<p> +In absolute governments the great nobles who are nearest to the throne flatter +the passions of the sovereign, and voluntarily truckle to his caprices. But the +mass of the nation does not degrade itself by servitude: it often submits from +weakness, from habit, or from ignorance, and sometimes from loyalty. Some +nations have been known to sacrifice their own desires to those of the +sovereign with pleasure and with pride, thus exhibiting a sort of independence +in the very act of submission. These peoples are miserable, but they are not +degraded. There is a great difference between doing what one does not approve +and feigning to approve what one does; the one is the necessary case of a weak +person, the other befits the temper of a lackey. +</p> + +<p> +In free countries, where everyone is more or less called upon to give his +opinion in the affairs of state; in democratic republics, where public life is +incessantly commingled with domestic affairs, where the sovereign authority is +accessible on every side, and where its attention can almost always be +attracted by vociferation, more persons are to be met with who speculate upon +its foibles and live at the cost of its passions than in absolute monarchies. +Not because men are naturally worse in these States than elsewhere, but the +temptation is stronger, and of easier access at the same time. The result is a +far more extensive debasement of the characters of citizens. +</p> + +<p> +Democratic republics extend the practice of currying favor with the many, and +they introduce it into a greater number of classes at once: this is one of the +most serious reproaches that can be addressed to them. In democratic States +organized on the principles of the American republics, this is more especially +the case, where the authority of the majority is so absolute and so +irresistible that a man must give up his rights as a citizen, and almost abjure +his quality as a human being, if te intends to stray from the track which it +lays down. +</p> + +<p> +In that immense crowd which throngs the avenues to power in the United States I +found very few men who displayed any of that manly candor and that masculine +independence of opinion which frequently distinguished the Americans in former +times, and which constitutes the leading feature in distinguished characters, +wheresoever they may be found. It seems, at first sight, as if all the minds of +the Americans were formed upon one model, so accurately do they correspond in +their manner of judging. A stranger does, indeed, sometimes meet with Americans +who dissent from these rigorous formularies; with men who deplore the defects +of the laws, the mutability and the ignorance of democracy; who even go so far +as to observe the evil tendencies which impair the national character, and to +point out such remedies as it might be possible to apply; but no one is there +to hear these things besides yourself, and you, to whom these secret +reflections are confided, are a stranger and a bird of passage. They are very +ready to communicate truths which are useless to you, but they continue to hold +a different language in public. +</p> + +<p> +If ever these lines are read in America, I am well assured of two things: in +the first place, that all who peruse them will raise their voices to condemn +me; and in the second place, that very many of them will acquit me at the +bottom of their conscience. +</p> + +<p> +I have heard of patriotism in the United States, and it is a virtue which may +be found among the people, but never among the leaders of the people. This may +be explained by analogy; despotism debases the oppressed much more than the +oppressor: in absolute monarchies the king has often great virtues, but the +courtiers are invariably servile. It is true that the American courtiers do not +say “Sire,” or “Your Majesty”—a distinction +without a difference. They are forever talking of the natural intelligence of +the populace they serve; they do not debate the question as to which of the +virtues of their master is pre-eminently worthy of admiration, for they assure +him that he possesses all the virtues under heaven without having acquired +them, or without caring to acquire them; they do not give him their daughters +and their wives to be raised at his pleasure to the rank of his concubines, +but, by sacrificing their opinions, they prostitute themselves. Moralists and +philosophers in America are not obliged to conceal their opinions under the +veil of allegory; but, before they venture upon a harsh truth, they say, +“We are aware that the people which we are addressing is too superior to +all the weaknesses of human nature to lose the command of its temper for an +instant; and we should not hold this language if we were not speaking to men +whom their virtues and their intelligence render more worthy of freedom than +all the rest of the world.” It would have been impossible for the +sycophants of Louis XIV to flatter more dexterously. For my part, I am +persuaded that in all governments, whatever their nature may be, servility will +cower to force, and adulation will cling to power. The only means of preventing +men from degrading themselves is to invest no one with that unlimited authority +which is the surest method of debasing them. +</p> + +<p> +The Greatest Dangers Of The American Republics Proceed From The Unlimited Power +Of The Majority +</p> + +<p> +Democratic republics liable to perish from a misuse of their power, and not by +impotence—The Governments of the American republics are more centralized +and more energetic than those of the monarchies of Europe—Dangers +resulting from this—Opinions of Hamilton and Jefferson upon this point. +</p> + +<p> +Governments usually fall a sacrifice to impotence or to tyranny. In the former +case their power escapes from them; it is wrested from their grasp in the +latter. Many observers, who have witnessed the anarchy of democratic States, +have imagined that the government of those States was naturally weak and +impotent. The truth is, that when once hostilities are begun between parties, +the government loses its control over society. But I do not think that a +democratic power is naturally without force or without resources: say, rather, +that it is almost always by the abuse of its force and the misemployment of its +resources that a democratic government fails. Anarchy is almost always produced +by its tyranny or its mistakes, but not by its want of strength. +</p> + +<p> +It is important not to confound stability with force, or the greatness of a +thing with its duration. In democratic republics, the power which directs *e +society is not stable; for it often changes hands and assumes a new direction. +But whichever way it turns, its force is almost irresistible. The Governments +of the American republics appear to me to be as much centralized as those of +the absolute monarchies of Europe, and more energetic than they are. I do not, +therefore, imagine that they will perish from weakness. *f +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ This power may be centred in an assembly, in which case it will be strong +without being stable; or it may be centred in an individual, in which case it +will be less strong, but more stable.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ I presume that it is scarcely necessary to remind the reader here, as well as +throughout the remainder of this chapter, that I am speaking, not of the +Federal Government, but of the several governments of each State, which the +majority controls at its pleasure.] +</p> + +<p> +If ever the free institutions of America are destroyed, that event may be +attributed to the unlimited authority of the majority, which may at some future +time urge the minorities to desperation, and oblige them to have recourse to +physical force. Anarchy will then be the result, but it will have been brought +about by despotism. +</p> + +<p> +Mr. Hamilton expresses the same opinion in the “Federalist,” No. +51. “It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the +society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the +society against the injustice of the other part. Justice is the end of +government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been, and ever will be, +pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit. In a +society, under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and +oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of +nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the +stronger: and as in the latter state even the stronger individuals are prompted +by the uncertainty of their condition to submit to a government which may +protect the weak as well as themselves, so in the former state will the more +powerful factions be gradually induced by a like motive to wish for a +government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well as the more +powerful. It can be little doubted that, if the State of Rhode Island was +separated from the Confederacy and left to itself, the insecurity of right +under the popular form of government within such narrow limits would be +displayed by such reiterated oppressions of the factious majorities, that some +power altogether independent of the people would soon be called for by the +voice of the very factions whose misrule had proved the necessity of it.” +</p> + +<p> +Jefferson has also thus expressed himself in a letter to Madison: *g “The +executive power in our Government is not the only, perhaps not even the +principal, object of my solicitude. The tyranny of the Legislature is really +the danger most to be feared, and will continue to be so for many years to +come. The tyranny of the executive power will come in its turn, but at a more +distant period.” I am glad to cite the opinion of Jefferson upon this +subject rather than that of another, because I consider him to be the most +powerful advocate democracy has ever sent forth. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ March 15, 1789.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0038" id="link2HCH0038"></a> Chapter XVI: Causes +Mitigating Tyranny In The United States—Part I</h2> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0039" id="link2HCH0039"></a> Chapter Summary</h2> + +<p> +The national majority does not pretend to conduct all business—Is obliged +to employ the town and county magistrates to execute its supreme decisions. +</p> + +<p> +I have already pointed out the distinction which is to be made between a +centralized government and a centralized administration. The former exists in +America, but the latter is nearly unknown there. If the directing power of the +American communities had both these instruments of government at its disposal, +and united the habit of executing its own commands to the right of commanding; +if, after having established the general principles of government, it descended +to the details of public business; and if, having regulated the great interests +of the country, it could penetrate into the privacy of individual interests, +freedom would soon be banished from the New World. +</p> + +<p> +But in the United States the majority, which so frequently displays the tastes +and the propensities of a despot, is still destitute of the more perfect +instruments of tyranny. In the American republics the activity of the central +Government has never as yet been extended beyond a limited number of objects +sufficiently prominent to call forth its attention. The secondary affairs of +society have never been regulated by its authority, and nothing has hitherto +betrayed its desire of interfering in them. The majority is become more and +more absolute, but it has not increased the prerogatives of the central +government; those great prerogatives have been confined to a certain sphere; +and although the despotism of the majority may be galling upon one point, it +cannot be said to extend to all. However the predominant party in the nation +may be carried away by its passions, however ardent it may be in the pursuit of +its projects, it cannot oblige all the citizens to comply with its desires in +the same manner and at the same time throughout the country. When the central +Government which represents that majority has issued a decree, it must entrust +the execution of its will to agents, over whom it frequently has no control, +and whom it cannot perpetually direct. The townships, municipal bodies, and +counties may therefore be looked upon as concealed break-waters, which check or +part the tide of popular excitement. If an oppressive law were passed, the +liberties of the people would still be protected by the means by which that law +would be put in execution: the majority cannot descend to the details and (as I +will venture to style them) the puerilities of administrative tyranny. Nor does +the people entertain that full consciousness of its authority which would +prompt it to interfere in these matters; it knows the extent of its natural +powers, but it is unacquainted with the increased resources which the art of +government might furnish. +</p> + +<p> +This point deserves attention, for if a democratic republic similar to that of +the United States were ever founded in a country where the power of a single +individual had previously subsisted, and the effects of a centralized +administration had sunk deep into the habits and the laws of the people, I do +not hesitate to assert, that in that country a more insufferable despotism +would prevail than any which now exists in the monarchical States of Europe, or +indeed than any which could be found on this side of the confines of Asia. +</p> + +<p> +The Profession Of The Law In The United States Serves To Counterpoise The +Democracy +</p> + +<p> +Utility of discriminating the natural propensities of the members of the legal +profession—These men called upon to act a prominent part in future +society—In what manner the peculiar pursuits of lawyers give an +aristocratic turn to their ideas—Accidental causes which may check this +tendency—Ease with which the aristocracy coalesces with legal +men—Use of lawyers to a despot—The profession of the law +constitutes the only aristocratic element with which the natural elements of +democracy will combine—Peculiar causes which tend to give an aristocratic +turn of mind to the English and American lawyers—The aristocracy of +America is on the bench and at the bar—Influence of lawyers upon American +society—Their peculiar magisterial habits affect the legislature, the +administration, and even the people. +</p> + +<p> +In visiting the Americans and in studying their laws we perceive that the +authority they have entrusted to members of the legal profession, and the +influence which these individuals exercise in the Government, is the most +powerful existing security against the excesses of democracy. This effect seems +to me to result from a general cause which it is useful to investigate, since +it may produce analogous consequences elsewhere. +</p> + +<p> +The members of the legal profession have taken an important part in all the +vicissitudes of political society in Europe during the last five hundred years. +At one time they have been the instruments of those who were invested with +political authority, and at another they have succeeded in converting political +authorities into their instrument. In the Middle Ages they afforded a powerful +support to the Crown, and since that period they have exerted themselves to the +utmost to limit the royal prerogative. In England they have contracted a close +alliance with the aristocracy; in France they have proved to be the most +dangerous enemies of that class. It is my object to inquire whether, under all +these circumstances, the members of the legal profession have been swayed by +sudden and momentary impulses; or whether they have been impelled by principles +which are inherent in their pursuits, and which will always recur in history. I +am incited to this investigation by reflecting that this particular class of +men will most likely play a prominent part in that order of things to which the +events of our time are giving birth. +</p> + +<p> +Men who have more especially devoted themselves to legal pursuits derive from +those occupations certain habits of order, a taste for formalities, and a kind +of instinctive regard for the regular connection of ideas, which naturally +render them very hostile to the revolutionary spirit and the unreflecting +passions of the multitude. +</p> + +<p> +The special information which lawyers derive from their studies ensures them a +separate station in society, and they constitute a sort of privileged body in +the scale of intelligence. This notion of their superiority perpetually recurs +to them in the practice of their profession: they are the masters of a science +which is necessary, but which is not very generally known; they serve as +arbiters between the citizens; and the habit of directing the blind passions of +parties in litigation to their purpose inspires them with a certain contempt +for the judgment of the multitude. To this it may be added that they naturally +constitute a body, not by any previous understanding, or by an agreement which +directs them to a common end; but the analogy of their studies and the +uniformity of their proceedings connect their minds together, as much as a +common interest could combine their endeavors. +</p> + +<p> +A portion of the tastes and of the habits of the aristocracy may consequently +be discovered in the characters of men in the profession of the law. They +participate in the same instinctive love of order and of formalities; and they +entertain the same repugnance to the actions of the multitude, and the same +secret contempt of the government of the people. I do not mean to say that the +natural propensities of lawyers are sufficiently strong to sway them +irresistibly; for they, like most other men, are governed by their private +interests and the advantages of the moment. +</p> + +<p> +In a state of society in which the members of the legal profession are +prevented from holding that rank in the political world which they enjoy in +private life, we may rest assured that they will be the foremost agents of +revolution. But it must then be inquired whether the cause which induces them +to innovate and to destroy is accidental, or whether it belongs to some lasting +purpose which they entertain. It is true that lawyers mainly contributed to the +overthrow of the French monarchy in 1789; but it remains to be seen whether +they acted thus because they had studied the laws, or because they were +prohibited from co-operating in the work of legislation. +</p> + +<p> +Five hundred years ago the English nobles headed the people, and spoke in its +name; at the present time the aristocracy supports the throne, and defends the +royal prerogative. But aristocracy has, notwithstanding this, its peculiar +instincts and propensities. We must be careful not to confound isolated members +of a body with the body itself. In all free governments, of whatsoever form +they may be, members of the legal profession will be found at the head of all +parties. The same remark is also applicable to the aristocracy; for almost all +the democratic convulsions which have agitated the world have been directed by +nobles. +</p> + +<p> +A privileged body can never satisfy the ambition of all its members; it has +always more talents and more passions to content and to employ than it can find +places; so that a considerable number of individuals are usually to be met with +who are inclined to attack those very privileges which they find it impossible +to turn to their own account. +</p> + +<p> +I do not, then, assert that all the members of the legal profession are at all +times the friends of order and the opponents of innovation, but merely that +most of them usually are so. In a community in which lawyers are allowed to +occupy, without opposition, that high station which naturally belongs to them, +their general spirit will be eminently conservative and anti-democratic. When +an aristocracy excludes the leaders of that profession from its ranks, it +excites enemies which are the more formidable to its security as they are +independent of the nobility by their industrious pursuits; and they feel +themselves to be its equal in point of intelligence, although they enjoy less +opulence and less power. But whenever an aristocracy consents to impart some of +its privileges to these same individuals, the two classes coalesce very +readily, and assume, as it were, the consistency of a single order of family +interests. +</p> + +<p> +I am, in like manner, inclined to believe that a monarch will always be able to +convert legal practitioners into the most serviceable instruments of his +authority. There is a far greater affinity between this class of individuals +and the executive power than there is between them and the people; just as +there is a greater natural affinity between the nobles and the monarch than +between the nobles and the people, although the higher orders of society have +occasionally resisted the prerogative of the Crown in concert with the lower +classes. +</p> + +<p> +Lawyers are attached to public order beyond every other consideration, and the +best security of public order is authority. It must not be forgotten that, if +they prize the free institutions of their country much, they nevertheless value +the legality of those institutions far more: they are less afraid of tyranny +than of arbitrary power; and provided that the legislature take upon itself to +deprive men of their independence, they are not dissatisfied. +</p> + +<p> +I am therefore convinced that the prince who, in presence of an encroaching +democracy, should endeavor to impair the judicial authority in his dominions, +and to diminish the political influence of lawyers, would commit a great +mistake. He would let slip the substance of authority to grasp at the shadow. +He would act more wisely in introducing men connected with the law into the +government; and if he entrusted them with the conduct of a despotic power, +bearing some marks of violence, that power would most likely assume the +external features of justice and of legality in their hands. +</p> + +<p> +The government of democracy is favorable to the political power of lawyers; for +when the wealthy, the noble, and the prince are excluded from the government, +they are sure to occupy the highest stations, in their own right, as it were, +since they are the only men of information and sagacity, beyond the sphere of +the people, who can be the object of the popular choice. If, then, they are led +by their tastes to combine with the aristocracy and to support the Crown, they +are naturally brought into contact with the people by their interests. They +like the government of democracy, without participating in its propensities and +without imitating its weaknesses; whence they derive a twofold authority, from +it and over it. The people in democratic states does not mistrust the members +of the legal profession, because it is well known that they are interested in +serving the popular cause; and it listens to them without irritation, because +it does not attribute to them any sinister designs. The object of lawyers is +not, indeed, to overthrow the institutions of democracy, but they constantly +endeavor to give it an impulse which diverts it from its real tendency, by +means which are foreign to its nature. Lawyers belong to the people by birth +and interest, to the aristocracy by habit and by taste, and they may be looked +upon as the natural bond and connecting link of the two great classes of +society. +</p> + +<p> +The profession of the law is the only aristocratic element which can be +amalgamated without violence with the natural elements of democracy, and which +can be advantageously and permanently combined with them. I am not unacquainted +with the defects which are inherent in the character of that body of men; but +without this admixture of lawyer-like sobriety with the democratic principle, I +question whether democratic institutions could long be maintained, and I cannot +believe that a republic could subsist at the present time if the influence of +lawyers in public business did not increase in proportion to the power of the +people. +</p> + +<p> +This aristocratic character, which I hold to be common to the legal profession, +is much more distinctly marked in the United States and in England than in any +other country. This proceeds not only from the legal studies of the English and +American lawyers, but from the nature of the legislation, and the position +which those persons occupy in the two countries. The English and the Americans +have retained the law of precedents; that is to say, they continue to found +their legal opinions and the decisions of their courts upon the opinions and +the decisions of their forefathers. In the mind of an English or American +lawyer a taste and a reverence for what is old is almost always united to a +love of regular and lawful proceedings. +</p> + +<p> +This predisposition has another effect upon the character of the legal +profession and upon the general course of society. The English and American +lawyers investigate what has been done; the French advocate inquires what +should have been done; the former produce precedents, the latter reasons. A +French observer is surprised to hear how often an English or an American lawyer +quotes the opinions of others, and how little he alludes to his own; whilst the +reverse occurs in France. There the most trifling litigation is never conducted +without the introduction of an entire system of ideas peculiar to the counsel +employed; and the fundamental principles of law are discussed in order to +obtain a perch of land by the decision of the court. This abnegation of his own +opinion, and this implicit deference to the opinion of his forefathers, which +are common to the English and American lawyer, this subjection of thought which +he is obliged to profess, necessarily give him more timid habits and more +sluggish inclinations in England and America than in France. +</p> + +<p> +The French codes are often difficult of comprehension, but they can be read by +every one; nothing, on the other hand, can be more impenetrable to the +uninitiated than a legislation founded upon precedents. The indispensable want +of legal assistance which is felt in England and in the United States, and the +high opinion which is generally entertained of the ability of the legal +profession, tend to separate it more and more from the people, and to place it +in a distinct class. The French lawyer is simply a man extensively acquainted +with the statutes of his country; but the English or American lawyer resembles +the hierophants of Egypt, for, like them, he is the sole interpreter of an +occult science. +</p> + +<p> +The station which lawyers occupy in England and America exercises no less an +influence upon their habits and their opinions. The English aristocracy, which +has taken care to attract to its sphere whatever is at all analogous to itself, +has conferred a high degree of importance and of authority upon the members of +the legal profession. In English society lawyers do not occupy the first rank, +but they are contented with the station assigned to them; they constitute, as +it were, the younger branch of the English aristocracy, and they are attached +to their elder brothers, although they do not enjoy all their privileges. The +English lawyers consequently mingle the taste and the ideas of the aristocratic +circles in which they move with the aristocratic interests of their profession. +</p> + +<p> +And indeed the lawyer-like character which I am endeavoring to depict is most +distinctly to be met with in England: there laws are esteemed not so much +because they are good as because they are old; and if it be necessary to modify +them in any respect, or to adapt them the changes which time operates in +society, recourse is had to the most inconceivable contrivances in order to +uphold the traditionary fabric, and to maintain that nothing has been done +which does not square with the intentions and complete the labors of former +generations. The very individuals who conduct these changes disclaim all +intention of innovation, and they had rather resort to absurd expedients than +plead guilty to so great a crime. This spirit appertains more especially to the +English lawyers; they seem indifferent to the real meaning of what they treat, +and they direct all their attention to the letter, seeming inclined to infringe +the rules of common sense and of humanity rather than to swerve one title from +the law. The English legislation may be compared to the stock of an old tree, +upon which lawyers have engrafted the most various shoots, with the hope that, +although their fruits may differ, their foliage at least will be confounded +with the venerable trunk which supports them all. +</p> + +<p> +In America there are no nobles or men of letters, and the people is apt to +mistrust the wealthy; lawyers consequently form the highest political class, +and the most cultivated circle of society. They have therefore nothing to gain +by innovation, which adds a conservative interest to their natural taste for +public order. If I were asked where I place the American aristocracy, I should +reply without hesitation that it is not composed of the rich, who are united +together by no common tie, but that it occupies the judicial bench and the bar. +</p> + +<p> +The more we reflect upon all that occurs in the United States the more shall we +be persuaded that the lawyers as a body form the most powerful, if not the +only, counterpoise to the democratic element. In that country we perceive how +eminently the legal profession is qualified by its powers, and even by its +defects, to neutralize the vices which are inherent in popular government. When +the American people is intoxicated by passion, or carried away by the +impetuosity of its ideas, it is checked and stopped by the almost invisible +influence of its legal counsellors, who secretly oppose their aristocratic +propensities to its democratic instincts, their superstitious attachment to +what is antique to its love of novelty, their narrow views to its immense +designs, and their habitual procrastination to its ardent impatience. +</p> + +<p> +The courts of justice are the most visible organs by which the legal profession +is enabled to control the democracy. The judge is a lawyer, who, independently +of the taste for regularity and order which he has contracted in the study of +legislation, derives an additional love of stability from his own inalienable +functions. His legal attainments have already raised him to a distinguished +rank amongst his fellow-citizens; his political power completes the distinction +of his station, and gives him the inclinations natural to privileged classes. +</p> + +<p> +Armed with the power of declaring the laws to be unconstitutional, *a the +American magistrate perpetually interferes in political affairs. He cannot +force the people to make laws, but at least he can oblige it not to disobey its +own enactments; or to act inconsistently with its own principles. I am aware +that a secret tendency to diminish the judicial power exists in the United +States, and by most of the constitutions of the several States the Government +can, upon the demand of the two houses of the legislature, remove the judges +from their station. By some other constitutions the members of the tribunals +are elected, and they are even subjected to frequent re-elections. I venture to +predict that these innovations will sooner or later be attended with fatal +consequences, and that it will be found out at some future period that the +attack which is made upon the judicial power has affected the democratic +republic itself. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ See chapter VI. on the “Judicial Power in the United States.”] +</p> + +<p> +It must not, however, be supposed that the legal spirit of which I have been +speaking has been confined, in the United States, to the courts of justice; it +extends far beyond them. As the lawyers constitute the only enlightened class +which the people does not mistrust, they are naturally called upon to occupy +most of the public stations. They fill the legislative assemblies, and they +conduct the administration; they consequently exercise a powerful influence +upon the formation of the law, and upon its execution. The lawyers are, +however, obliged to yield to the current of public opinion, which is too strong +for them to resist it, but it is easy to find indications of what their conduct +would be if they were free to act as they chose. The Americans, who have made +such copious innovations in their political legislation, have introduced very +sparing alterations in their civil laws, and that with great difficulty, +although those laws are frequently repugnant to their social condition. The +reason of this is, that in matters of civil law the majority is obliged to +defer to the authority of the legal profession, and that the American lawyers +are disinclined to innovate when they are left to their own choice. +</p> + +<p> +It is curious for a Frenchman, accustomed to a very different state of things, +to hear the perpetual complaints which are made in the United States against +the stationary propensities of legal men, and their prejudices in favor of +existing institutions. +</p> + +<p> +The influence of the legal habits which are common in America extends beyond +the limits I have just pointed out. Scarcely any question arises in the United +States which does not become, sooner or later, a subject of judicial debate; +hence all parties are obliged to borrow the ideas, and even the language, usual +in judicial proceedings in their daily controversies. As most public men are, +or have been, legal practitioners, they introduce the customs and +technicalities of their profession into the affairs of the country. The jury +extends this habitude to all classes. The language of the law thus becomes, in +some measure, a vulgar tongue; the spirit of the law, which is produced in the +schools and courts of justice, gradually penetrates beyond their walls into the +bosom of society, where it descends to the lowest classes, so that the whole +people contracts the habits and the tastes of the magistrate. The lawyers of +the United States form a party which is but little feared and scarcely +perceived, which has no badge peculiar to itself, which adapts itself with +great flexibility to the exigencies of the time, and accommodates itself to all +the movements of the social body; but this party extends over the whole +community, and it penetrates into all classes of society; it acts upon the +country imperceptibly, but it finally fashions it to suit its purposes. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0040" id="link2HCH0040"></a> Chapter XVI: Causes +Mitigating Tyranny In The United States—Part II</h2> <h3>Trial By Jury In +The United States Considered As A Political Institution</h3> <p> +Trial by jury, which is one of the instruments of the sovereignty of the +people, deserves to be compared with the other laws which establish that +sovereignty—Composition of the jury in the United States—Effect of +trial by jury upon the national character—It educates the people—It +tends to establish the authority of the magistrates and to extend a knowledge +of law among the people. +</p> + +<p> +Since I have been led by my subject to recur to the administration of justice +in the United States, I will not pass over this point without adverting to the +institution of the jury. Trial by jury may be considered in two separate points +of view, as a judicial and as a political institution. If it entered into my +present purpose to inquire how far trial by jury (more especially in civil +cases) contributes to insure the best administration of justice, I admit that +its utility might be contested. As the jury was first introduced at a time when +society was in an uncivilized state, and when courts of justice were merely +called upon to decide on the evidence of facts, it is not an easy task to adapt +it to the wants of a highly civilized community when the mutual relations of +men are multiplied to a surprising extent, and have assumed the enlightened and +intellectual character of the age. *b +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ The investigation of trial by jury as a judicial institution, and the +appreciation of its effects in the United States, together with the advantages +the Americans have derived from it, would suffice to form a book, and a book +upon a very useful and curious subject. The State of Louisiana would in +particular afford the curious phenomenon of a French and English legislation, +as well as a French and English population, which are gradually combining with +each other. See the “Digeste des Lois de la Louisiane,” in two +volumes; and the “Traite sur les Regles des Actions civiles,” +printed in French and English at New Orleans in 1830.] +</p> + +<p> +My present object is to consider the jury as a political institution, and any +other course would divert me from my subject. Of trial by jury, considered as a +judicial institution, I shall here say but very few words. When the English +adopted trial by jury they were a semi-barbarous people; they are become, in +course of time, one of the most enlightened nations of the earth; and their +attachment to this institution seems to have increased with their increasing +cultivation. They soon spread beyond their insular boundaries to every corner +of the habitable globe; some have formed colonies, others independent states; +the mother-country has maintained its monarchical constitution; many of its +offspring have founded powerful republics; but wherever the English have been +they have boasted of the privilege of trial by jury. *c They have established +it, or hastened to re-establish it, in all their settlements. A judicial +institution which obtains the suffrages of a great people for so long a series +of ages, which is zealously renewed at every epoch of civilization, in all the +climates of the earth and under every form of human government, cannot be +contrary to the spirit of justice. *d +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ All the English and American jurists are unanimous upon this head. Mr. Story, +judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, speaks, in his “Treatise +on the Federal Constitution,” of the advantages of trial by jury in civil +cases:—“The inestimable privilege of a trial by jury in civil +cases—a privilege scarcely inferior to that in criminal cases, which is +counted by all persons to be essential to political and civil liberty. . . +.” (Story, book iii., chap. xxxviii.)] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ If it were our province to point out the utility of the jury as a judicial +institution in this place, much might be said, and the following arguments +might be brought forward amongst others:— +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +By introducing the jury into the business of the courts you are enabled to +diminish the number of judges, which is a very great advantage. When judges are +very numerous, death is perpetually thinning the ranks of the judicial +functionaries, and laying places vacant for newcomers. The ambition of the +magistrates is therefore continually excited, and they are naturally made +dependent upon the will of the majority, or the individual who fills up the +vacant appointments; the officers of the court then rise like the officers of +an army. This state of things is entirely contrary to the sound administration +of justice, and to the intentions of the legislator. The office of a judge is +made inalienable in order that he may remain independent: but of what advantage +is it that his independence should be protected if he be tempted to sacrifice +it of his own accord? When judges are very numerous many of them must +necessarily be incapable of performing their important duties, for a great +magistrate is a man of no common powers; and I am inclined to believe that a +half-enlightened tribunal is the worst of all instruments for attaining those +objects which it is the purpose of courts of justice to accomplish. For my own +part, I had rather submit the decision of a case to ignorant jurors directed by +a skilful judge than to judges a majority of whom are imperfectly acquainted +with jurisprudence and with the laws.] +</p> + +<p> +I turn, however, from this part of the subject. To look upon the jury as a mere +judicial institution is to confine our attention to a very narrow view of it; +for however great its influence may be upon the decisions of the law courts, +that influence is very subordinate to the powerful effects which it produces on +the destinies of the community at large. The jury is above all a political +institution, and it must be regarded in this light in order to be duly +appreciated. +</p> + +<p> +By the jury I mean a certain number of citizens chosen indiscriminately, and +invested with a temporary right of judging. Trial by jury, as applied to the +repression of crime, appears to me to introduce an eminently republican element +into the government upon the following grounds:— +</p> + +<p> +The institution of the jury may be aristocratic or democratic, according to the +class of society from which the jurors are selected; but it always preserves +its republican character, inasmuch as it places the real direction of society +in the hands of the governed, or of a portion of the governed, instead of +leaving it under the authority of the Government. Force is never more than a +transient element of success; and after force comes the notion of right. A +government which should only be able to crush its enemies upon a field of +battle would very soon be destroyed. The true sanction of political laws is to +be found in penal legislation, and if that sanction be wanting the law will +sooner or later lose its cogency. He who punishes infractions of the law is +therefore the real master of society. Now the institution of the jury raises +the people itself, or at least a class of citizens, to the bench of judicial +authority. The institution of the jury consequently invests the people, or that +class of citizens, with the direction of society. *e +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ An important remark must, however, be made. Trial by jury does unquestionably +invest the people with a general control over the actions of citizens, but it +does not furnish means of exercising this control in all cases, or with an +absolute authority. When an absolute monarch has the right of trying offences +by his representatives, the fate of the prisoner is, as it were, decided +beforehand. But even if the people were predisposed to convict, the composition +and the non-responsibility of the jury would still afford some chances +favorable to the protection of innocence.] +</p> + +<p> +In England the jury is returned from the aristocratic portion of the nation; *f +the aristocracy makes the laws, applies the laws, and punishes all infractions +of the laws; everything is established upon a consistent footing, and England +may with truth be said to constitute an aristocratic republic. In the United +States the same system is applied to the whole people. Every American citizen +is qualified to be an elector, a juror, and is eligible to office. *g The +system of the jury, as it is understood in America, appears to me to be as +direct and as extreme a consequence of the sovereignty of the people as +universal suffrage. These institutions are two instruments of equal power, +which contribute to the supremacy of the majority. All the sovereigns who have +chosen to govern by their own authority, and to direct society instead of +obeying its directions, have destroyed or enfeebled the institution of the +jury. The monarchs of the House of Tudor sent to prison jurors who refused to +convict, and Napoleon caused them to be returned by his agents. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ [This may be true to some extent of special juries, but not of common juries. +The author seems not to have been aware that the qualifications of jurors in +England vary exceedingly.]] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ See Appendix, Q.] +</p> + +<p> +However clear most of these truths may seem to be, they do not command +universal assent, and in France, at least, the institution of trial by jury is +still very imperfectly understood. If the question arises as to the proper +qualification of jurors, it is confined to a discussion of the intelligence and +knowledge of the citizens who may be returned, as if the jury was merely a +judicial institution. This appears to me to be the least part of the subject. +The jury is pre-eminently a political institution; it must be regarded as one +form of the sovereignty of the people; when that sovereignty is repudiated, it +must be rejected, or it must be adapted to the laws by which that sovereignty +is established. The jury is that portion of the nation to which the execution +of the laws is entrusted, as the Houses of Parliament constitute that part of +the nation which makes the laws; and in order that society may be governed with +consistency and uniformity, the list of citizens qualified to serve on juries +must increase and diminish with the list of electors. This I hold to be the +point of view most worthy of the attention of the legislator, and all that +remains is merely accessory. +</p> + +<p> +I am so entirely convinced that the jury is pre-eminently a political +institution that I still consider it in this light when it is applied in civil +causes. Laws are always unstable unless they are founded upon the manners of a +nation; manners are the only durable and resisting power in a people. When the +jury is reserved for criminal offences, the people only witnesses its +occasional action in certain particular cases; the ordinary course of life goes +on without its interference, and it is considered as an instrument, but not as +the only instrument, of obtaining justice. This is true a fortiori when the +jury is only applied to certain criminal causes. +</p> + +<p> +When, on the contrary, the influence of the jury is extended to civil causes, +its application is constantly palpable; it affects all the interests of the +community; everyone co-operates in its work: it thus penetrates into all the +usages of life, it fashions the human mind to its peculiar forms, and is +gradually associated with the idea of justice itself. +</p> + +<p> +The institution of the jury, if confined to criminal causes, is always in +danger, but when once it is introduced into civil proceedings it defies the +aggressions of time and of man. If it had been as easy to remove the jury from +the manners as from the laws of England, it would have perished under Henry +VIII, and Elizabeth, and the civil jury did in reality, at that period, save +the liberties of the country. In whatever manner the jury be applied, it cannot +fail to exercise a powerful influence upon the national character; but this +influence is prodigiously increased when it is introduced into civil causes. +The jury, and more especially the jury in civil cases, serves to communicate +the spirit of the judges to the minds of all the citizens; and this spirit, +with the habits which attend it, is the soundest preparation for free +institutions. It imbues all classes with a respect for the thing judged, and +with the notion of right. If these two elements be removed, the love of +independence is reduced to a mere destructive passion. It teaches men to +practice equity, every man learns to judge his neighbor as he would himself be +judged; and this is especially true of the jury in civil causes, for, whilst +the number of persons who have reason to apprehend a criminal prosecution is +small, every one is liable to have a civil action brought against him. The jury +teaches every man not to recoil before the responsibility of his own actions, +and impresses him with that manly confidence without which political virtue +cannot exist. It invests each citizen with a kind of magistracy, it makes them +all feel the duties which they are bound to discharge towards society, and the +part which they take in the Government. By obliging men to turn their attention +to affairs which are not exclusively their own, it rubs off that individual +egotism which is the rust of society. +</p> + +<p> +The jury contributes most powerfully to form the judgement and to increase the +natural intelligence of a people, and this is, in my opinion, its greatest +advantage. It may be regarded as a gratuitous public school ever open, in which +every juror learns to exercise his rights, enters into daily communication with +the most learned and enlightened members of the upper classes, and becomes +practically acquainted with the laws of his country, which are brought within +the reach of his capacity by the efforts of the bar, the advice of the judge, +and even by the passions of the parties. I think that the practical +intelligence and political good sense of the Americans are mainly attributable +to the long use which they have made of the jury in civil causes. I do not know +whether the jury is useful to those who are in litigation; but I am certain it +is highly beneficial to those who decide the litigation; and I look upon it as +one of the most efficacious means for the education of the people which society +can employ. +</p> + +<p> +What I have hitherto said applies to all nations, but the remark I am now about +to make is peculiar to the Americans and to democratic peoples. I have already +observed that in democracies the members of the legal profession and the +magistrates constitute the only aristocratic body which can check the +irregularities of the people. This aristocracy is invested with no physical +power, but it exercises its conservative influence upon the minds of men, and +the most abundant source of its authority is the institution of the civil jury. +In criminal causes, when society is armed against a single individual, the jury +is apt to look upon the judge as the passive instrument of social power, and to +mistrust his advice. Moreover, criminal causes are entirely founded upon the +evidence of facts which common sense can readily appreciate; upon this ground +the judge and the jury are equal. Such, however, is not the case in civil +causes; then the judge appears as a disinterested arbiter between the +conflicting passions of the parties. The jurors look up to him with confidence +and listen to him with respect, for in this instance their intelligence is +completely under the control of his learning. It is the judge who sums up the +various arguments with which their memory has been wearied out, and who guides +them through the devious course of the proceedings; he points their attention +to the exact question of fact which they are called upon to solve, and he puts +the answer to the question of law into their mouths. His influence upon their +verdict is almost unlimited. +</p> + +<p> +If I am called upon to explain why I am but little moved by the arguments +derived from the ignorance of jurors in civil causes, I reply, that in these +proceedings, whenever the question to be solved is not a mere question of fact, +the jury has only the semblance of a judicial body. The jury sanctions the +decision of the judge, they by the authority of society which they represent, +and he by that of reason and of law. *h +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ See Appendix, R.] +</p> + +<p> +In England and in America the judges exercise an influence upon criminal trials +which the French judges have never possessed. The reason of this difference may +easily be discovered; the English and American magistrates establish their +authority in civil causes, and only transfer it afterwards to tribunals of +another kind, where that authority was not acquired. In some cases (and they +are frequently the most important ones) the American judges have the right of +deciding causes alone. *i Upon these occasions they are accidentally placed in +the position which the French judges habitually occupy, but they are invested +with far more power than the latter; they are still surrounded by the +reminiscence of the jury, and their judgment has almost as much authority as +the voice of the community at large, represented by that institution. Their +influence extends beyond the limits of the courts; in the recreations of +private life as well as in the turmoil of public business, abroad and in the +legislative assemblies, the American judge is constantly surrounded by men who +are accustomed to regard his intelligence as superior to their own, and after +having exercised his power in the decision of causes, he continues to influence +the habits of thought and the characters of the individuals who took a part in +his judgment. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ The Federal judges decide upon their own authority almost all the questions +most important to the country.] +</p> + +<p> +The jury, then, which seems to restrict the rights of magistracy, does in +reality consolidate its power, and in no country are the judges so powerful as +there, where the people partakes their privileges. It is more especially by +means of the jury in civil causes that the American magistrates imbue all +classes of society with the spirit of their profession. Thus the jury, which is +the most energetic means of making the people rule, is also the most +efficacious means of teaching it to rule well. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0041" id="link2HCH0041"></a> Chapter XVII: Principal +Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part I</h2> + +<p> +Principal Causes Which Tend To Maintain The Democratic Republic In The United +States +</p> + +<p> +A democratic republic subsists in the United States, and the principal object +of this book has been to account for the fact of its existence. Several of the +causes which contribute to maintain the institutions of America have been +involuntarily passed by or only hinted at as I was borne along by my subject. +Others I have been unable to discuss, and those on which I have dwelt most are, +as it were, buried in the details of the former parts of this work. I think, +therefore, that before I proceed to speak of the future, I cannot do better +than collect within a small compass the reasons which best explain the present. +In this retrospective chapter I shall be succinct, for I shall take care to +remind the reader very summarily of what he already knows; and I shall only +select the most prominent of those facts which I have not yet pointed out. +</p> + +<p> +All the causes which contribute to the maintenance of the democratic republic +in the United States are reducible to three heads:— +</p> + +<p> +I. The peculiar and accidental situation in which Providence has placed the +Americans. +</p> + +<p> +II. The laws. +</p> + +<p> +III. The manners and customs of the people. +</p> + +<p> +Accidental Or Providential Causes Which Contribute To The Maintenance Of The +Democratic Republic In The United States The Union has no neighbors—No +metropolis—The Americans have had the chances of birth in their +favor—America an empty country—How this circumstance contributes +powerfully to the maintenance of the democratic republic in America—How +the American wilds are peopled—Avidity of the Anglo-Americans in taking +possession of the solitudes of the New World—Influence of physical +prosperity upon the political opinions of the Americans. +</p> + +<p> +A thousand circumstances, independent of the will of man, concur to facilitate +the maintenance of a democratic republic in the United States. Some of these +peculiarities are known, the others may easily be pointed out; but I shall +confine myself to the most prominent amongst them. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans have no neighbors, and consequently they have no great wars, or +financial crises, or inroads, or conquest to dread; they require neither great +taxes, nor great armies, nor great generals; and they have nothing to fear from +a scourge which is more formidable to republics than all these evils combined, +namely, military glory. It is impossible to deny the inconceivable influence +which military glory exercises upon the spirit of a nation. General Jackson, +whom the Americans have twice elected to the head of their Government, is a man +of a violent temper and mediocre talents; no one circumstance in the whole +course of his career ever proved that he is qualified to govern a free people, +and indeed the majority of the enlightened classes of the Union has always been +opposed to him. But he was raised to the Presidency, and has been maintained in +that lofty station, solely by the recollection of a victory which he gained +twenty years ago under the walls of New Orleans, a victory which was, however, +a very ordinary achievement, and which could only be remembered in a country +where battles are rare. Now the people which is thus carried away by the +illusions of glory is unquestionably the most cold and calculating, the most +unmilitary (if I may use the expression), and the most prosaic of all the +peoples of the earth. +</p> + +<p> +America has no great capital *a city, whose influence is directly or indirectly +felt over the whole extent of the country, which I hold to be one of the first +causes of the maintenance of republican institutions in the United States. In +cities men cannot be prevented from concerting together, and from awakening a +mutual excitement which prompts sudden and passionate resolutions. Cities may +be looked upon as large assemblies, of which all the inhabitants are members; +their populace exercises a prodigious influence upon the magistrates, and +frequently executes its own wishes without their intervention. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ The United States have no metropolis, but they already contain several very +large cities. Philadelphia reckoned 161,000 inhabitants and New York 202,000 in +the year 1830. The lower orders which inhabit these cities constitute a rabble +even more formidable than the populace of European towns. They consist of freed +blacks in the first place, who are condemned by the laws and by public opinion +to a hereditary state of misery and degradation. They also contain a multitude +of Europeans who have been driven to the shores of the New World by their +misfortunes or their misconduct; and these men inoculate the United States with +all our vices, without bringing with them any of those interests which +counteract their baneful influence. As inhabitants of a country where they have +no civil rights, they are ready to turn all the passions which agitate the +community to their own advantage; thus, within the last few months serious +riots have broken out in Philadelphia and in New York. Disturbances of this +kind are unknown in the rest of the country, which is nowise alarmed by them, +because the population of the cities has hitherto exercised neither power nor +influence over the rural districts. Nevertheless, I look upon the size of +certain American cities, and especially on the nature of their population, as a +real danger which threatens the future security of the democratic republics of +the New World; and I venture to predict that they will perish from this +circumstance unless the government succeeds in creating an armed force, which, +whilst it remains under the control of the majority of the nation, will be +independent of the town population, and able to repress its excesses. +</p> + +<p> +[The population of the city of New York had risen, in 1870, to 942,292, and +that of Philadelphia to 674,022. Brooklyn, which may be said to form part of +New York city, has a population of 396,099, in addition to that of New York. +The frequent disturbances in the great cities of America, and the excessive +corruption of their local governments—over which there is no effectual +control—are amongst the greatest evils and dangers of the country.]] +</p> + +<p> +To subject the provinces to the metropolis is therefore not only to place the +destiny of the empire in the hands of a portion of the community, which may be +reprobated as unjust, but to place it in the hands of a populace acting under +its own impulses, which must be avoided as dangerous. The preponderance of +capital cities is therefore a serious blow upon the representative system, and +it exposes modern republics to the same defect as the republics of antiquity, +which all perished from not having been acquainted with that form of +government. +</p> + +<p> +It would be easy for me to adduce a great number of secondary causes which have +contributed to establish, and which concur to maintain, the democratic republic +of the United States. But I discern two principal circumstances amongst these +favorable elements, which I hasten to point out. I have already observed that +the origin of the American settlements may be looked upon as the first and most +efficacious cause to which the present prosperity of the United States may be +attributed. The Americans had the chances of birth in their favor, and their +forefathers imported that equality of conditions into the country whence the +democratic republic has very naturally taken its rise. Nor was this all they +did; for besides this republican condition of society, the early settler +bequeathed to their descendants those customs, manners, and opinions which +contribute most to the success of a republican form of government. When I +reflect upon the consequences of this primary circumstance, methinks I see the +destiny of America embodied in the first Puritan who landed on those shores, +just as the human race was represented by the first man. +</p> + +<p> +The chief circumstance which has favored the establishment and the maintenance +of a democratic republic in the United States is the nature of the territory +which the American inhabit. Their ancestors gave them the love of equality and +of freedom, but God himself gave them the means of remaining equal and free, by +placing them upon a boundless continent, which is open to their exertions. +General prosperity is favorable to the stability of all governments, but more +particularly of a democratic constitution, which depends upon the dispositions +of the majority, and more particularly of that portion of the community which +is most exposed to feel the pressure of want. When the people rules, it must be +rendered happy, or it will overturn the State, and misery is apt to stimulate +it to those excesses to which ambition rouses kings. The physical causes, +independent of the laws, which contribute to promote general prosperity, are +more numerous in America than they have ever been in any other country in the +world, at any other period of history. In the United States not only is +legislation democratic, but nature herself favors the cause of the people. +</p> + +<p> +In what part of human tradition can be found anything at all similar to that +which is occurring under our eyes in North America? The celebrated communities +of antiquity were all founded in the midst of hostile nations, which they were +obliged to subjugate before they could flourish in their place. Even the +moderns have found, in some parts of South America, vast regions inhabited by a +people of inferior civilization, but which occupied and cultivated the soil. To +found their new states it was necessary to extirpate or to subdue a numerous +population, until civilization has been made to blush for their success. But +North America was only inhabited by wandering tribes, who took no thought of +the natural riches of the soil, and that vast country was still, properly +speaking, an empty continent, a desert land awaiting its inhabitants. +</p> + +<p> +Everything is extraordinary in America, the social condition of the +inhabitants, as well as the laws; but the soil upon which these institutions +are founded is more extraordinary than all the rest. When man was first placed +upon the earth by the Creator, the earth was inexhaustible in its youth, but +man was weak and ignorant; and when he had learned to explore the treasures +which it contained, hosts of his fellow creatures covered its surface, and he +was obliged to earn an asylum for repose and for freedom by the sword. At that +same period North America was discovered, as if it had been kept in reserve by +the Deity, and had just risen from beneath the waters of the deluge. +</p> + +<p> +That continent still presents, as it did in the primeval time, rivers which +rise from never-failing sources, green and moist solitudes, and fields which +the ploughshare of the husbandman has never turned. In this state it is offered +to man, not in the barbarous and isolated condition of the early ages, but to a +being who is already in possession of the most potent secrets of the natural +world, who is united to his fellow-men, and instructed by the experience of +fifty centuries. At this very time thirteen millions of civilized Europeans are +peaceably spreading over those fertile plains, with whose resources and whose +extent they are not yet themselves accurately acquainted. Three or four +thousand soldiers drive the wandering races of the aborigines before them; +these are followed by the pioneers, who pierce the woods, scare off the beasts +of prey, explore the courses of the inland streams, and make ready the +triumphal procession of civilization across the waste. +</p> + +<p> +The favorable influence of the temporal prosperity of America upon the +institutions of that country has been so often described by others, and +adverted to by myself, that I shall not enlarge upon it beyond the addition of +a few facts. An erroneous notion is generally entertained that the deserts of +America are peopled by European emigrants, who annually disembark upon the +coasts of the New World, whilst the American population increases and +multiplies upon the soil which its forefathers tilled. The European settler, +however, usually arrives in the United States without friends, and sometimes +without resources; in order to subsist he is obliged to work for hire, and he +rarely proceeds beyond that belt of industrious population which adjoins the +ocean. The desert cannot be explored without capital or credit; and the body +must be accustomed to the rigors of a new climate before it can be exposed to +the chances of forest life. It is the Americans themselves who daily quit the +spots which gave them birth to acquire extensive domains in a remote country. +Thus the European leaves his cottage for the trans-Atlantic shores; and the +American, who is born on that very coast, plunges in his turn into the wilds of +Central America. This double emigration is incessant; it begins in the remotest +parts of Europe, it crosses the Atlantic Ocean, and it advances over the +solitudes of the New World. Millions of men are marching at once towards the +same horizon; their language, their religion, their manners differ, their +object is the same. The gifts of fortune are promised in the West, and to the +West they bend their course. *b +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ [The number of foreign immigrants into the United States in the last fifty +years (from 1820 to 1871) is stated to be 7,556,007. Of these, 4,104,553 spoke +English—that is, they came from Great Britain, Ireland, or the British +colonies; 2,643,069 came from Germany or northern Europe; and about half a +million from the south of Europe.]] +</p> + +<p> +No event can be compared with this continuous removal of the human race, except +perhaps those irruptions which preceded the fall of the Roman Empire. Then, as +well as now, generations of men were impelled forwards in the same direction to +meet and struggle on the same spot; but the designs of Providence were not the +same; then, every newcomer was the harbinger of destruction and of death; now, +every adventurer brings with him the elements of prosperity and of life. The +future still conceals from us the ulterior consequences of this emigration of +the Americans towards the West; but we can readily apprehend its more immediate +results. As a portion of the inhabitants annually leave the States in which +they were born, the population of these States increases very slowly, although +they have long been established: thus in Connecticut, which only contains +fifty-nine inhabitants to the square mile, the population has not increased by +more than one-quarter in forty years, whilst that of England has been augmented +by one-third in the lapse of the same period. The European emigrant always +lands, therefore, in a country which is but half full, and where hands are in +request: he becomes a workman in easy circumstances; his son goes to seek his +fortune in unpeopled regions, and he becomes a rich landowner. The former +amasses the capital which the latter invests, and the stranger as well as the +native is unacquainted with want. +</p> + +<p> +The laws of the United States are extremely favorable to the division of +property; but a cause which is more powerful than the laws prevents property +from being divided to excess. *c This is very perceptible in the States which +are beginning to be thickly peopled; Massachusetts is the most populous part of +the Union, but it contains only eighty inhabitants to the square mile, which is +must less than in France, where 162 are reckoned to the same extent of country. +But in Massachusetts estates are very rarely divided; the eldest son takes the +land, and the others go to seek their fortune in the desert. The law has +abolished the rights of primogeniture, but circumstances have concurred to +re-establish it under a form of which none can complain, and by which no just +rights are impaired. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ In New England the estates are exceedingly small, but they are rarely +subjected to further division.] +</p> + +<p> +A single fact will suffice to show the prodigious number of individuals who +leave New England, in this manner, to settle themselves in the wilds. We were +assured in 1830 that thirty-six of the members of Congress were born in the +little State of Connecticut. The population of Connecticut, which constitutes +only one forty-third part of that of the United States, thus furnished +one-eighth of the whole body of representatives. The States of Connecticut, +however, only sends five delegates to Congress; and the thirty-one others sit +for the new Western States. If these thirty-one individuals had remained in +Connecticut, it is probable that instead of becoming rich landowners they would +have remained humble laborers, that they would have lived in obscurity without +being able to rise into public life, and that, far from becoming useful members +of the legislature, they might have been unruly citizens. +</p> + +<p> +These reflections do not escape the observation of the Americans any more than +of ourselves. “It cannot be doubted,” says Chancellor Kent in his +“Treatise on American Law,” “that the division of landed +estates must produce great evils when it is carried to such excess as that each +parcel of land is insufficient to support a family; but these disadvantages +have never been felt in the United States, and many generations must elapse +before they can be felt. The extent of our inhabited territory, the abundance +of adjacent land, and the continual stream of emigration flowing from the +shores of the Atlantic towards the interior of the country, suffice as yet, and +will long suffice, to prevent the parcelling out of estates.” +</p> + +<p> +It is difficult to describe the rapacity with which the American rushes forward +to secure the immense booty which fortune proffers to him. In the pursuit he +fearlessly braves the arrow of the Indian and the distempers of the forest; he +is unimpressed by the silence of the woods; the approach of beasts of prey does +not disturb him; for he is goaded onwards by a passion more intense than the +love of life. Before him lies a boundless continent, and he urges onwards as if +time pressed, and he was afraid of finding no room for his exertions. I have +spoken of the emigration from the older States, but how shall I describe that +which takes place from the more recent ones? Fifty years have scarcely elapsed +since that of Ohio was founded; the greater part of its inhabitants were not +born within its confines; its capital has only been built thirty years, and its +territory is still covered by an immense extent of uncultivated fields; +nevertheless the population of Ohio is already proceeding westward, and most of +the settlers who descend to the fertile savannahs of Illinois are citizens of +Ohio. These men left their first country to improve their condition; they quit +their resting-place to ameliorate it still more; fortune awaits them +everywhere, but happiness they cannot attain. The desire of prosperity is +become an ardent and restless passion in their minds which grows by what it +gains. They early broke the ties which bound them to their natal earth, and +they have contracted no fresh ones on their way. Emigration was at first +necessary to them as a means of subsistence; and it soon becomes a sort of game +of chance, which they pursue for the emotions it excites as much as for the +gain it procures. +</p> + +<p> +Sometimes the progress of man is so rapid that the desert reappears behind him. +The woods stoop to give him a passage, and spring up again when he has passed. +It is not uncommon in crossing the new States of the West to meet with deserted +dwellings in the midst of the wilds; the traveller frequently discovers the +vestiges of a log house in the most solitary retreats, which bear witness to +the power, and no less to the inconstancy of man. In these abandoned fields, +and over these ruins of a day, the primeval forest soon scatters a fresh +vegetation, the beasts resume the haunts which were once their own, and Nature +covers the traces of man’s path with branches and with flowers, which +obliterate his evanescent track. +</p> + +<p> +I remember that, in crossing one of the woodland districts which still cover +the State of New York, I reached the shores of a lake embosomed in forests +coeval with the world. A small island, covered with woods whose thick foliage +concealed its banks, rose from the centre of the waters. Upon the shores of the +lake no object attested the presence of man except a column of smoke which +might be seen on the horizon rising from the tops of the trees to the clouds, +and seeming to hang from heaven rather than to be mounting to the sky. An +Indian shallop was hauled up on the sand, which tempted me to visit the islet +that had first attracted my attention, and in a few minutes I set foot upon its +banks. The whole island formed one of those delicious solitudes of the New +World which almost lead civilized man to regret the haunts of the savage. A +luxuriant vegetation bore witness to the incomparable fruitfulness of the soil. +The deep silence which is common to the wilds of North America was only broken +by the hoarse cooing of the wood-pigeon, and the tapping of the woodpecker upon +the bark of trees. I was far from supposing that this spot had ever been +inhabited, so completely did Nature seem to be left to her own caprices; but +when I reached the centre of the isle I thought that I discovered some traces +of man. I then proceeded to examine the surrounding objects with care, and I +soon perceived that a European had undoubtedly been led to seek a refuge in +this retreat. Yet what changes had taken place in the scene of his labors! The +logs which he had hastily hewn to build himself a shed had sprouted afresh; the +very props were intertwined with living verdure, and his cabin was transformed +into a bower. In the midst of these shrubs a few stones were to be seen, +blackened with fire and sprinkled with thin ashes; here the hearth had no doubt +been, and the chimney in falling had covered it with rubbish. I stood for some +time in silent admiration of the exuberance of Nature and the littleness of +man: and when I was obliged to leave that enchanting solitude, I exclaimed with +melancholy, “Are ruins, then, already here?” +</p> + +<p> +In Europe we are wont to look upon a restless disposition, an unbounded desire +of riches, and an excessive love of independence, as propensities very +formidable to society. Yet these are the very elements which ensure a long and +peaceful duration to the republics of America. Without these unquiet passions +the population would collect in certain spots, and would soon be subject to +wants like those of the Old World, which it is difficult to satisfy; for such +is the present good fortune of the New World, that the vices of its inhabitants +are scarcely less favorable to society than their virtues. These circumstances +exercise a great influence on the estimation in which human actions are held in +the two hemispheres. The Americans frequently term what we should call cupidity +a laudable industry; and they blame as faint-heartedness what we consider to be +the virtue of moderate desires. +</p> + +<p> +In France, simple tastes, orderly manners, domestic affections, and the +attachments which men feel to the place of their birth, are looked upon as +great guarantees of the tranquillity and happiness of the State. But in America +nothing seems to be more prejudicial to society than these virtues. The French +Canadians, who have faithfully preserved the traditions of their pristine +manners, are already embarrassed for room upon their small territory; and this +little community, which has so recently begun to exist, will shortly be a prey +to the calamities incident to old nations. In Canada, the most enlightened, +patriotic, and humane inhabitants make extraordinary efforts to render the +people dissatisfied with those simple enjoyments which still content it. There, +the seductions of wealth are vaunted with as much zeal as the charms of an +honest but limited income in the Old World, and more exertions are made to +excite the passions of the citizens there than to calm them elsewhere. If we +listen to their eulogies, we shall hear that nothing is more praiseworthy than +to exchange the pure and homely pleasures which even the poor man tastes in his +own country for the dull delights of prosperity under a foreign sky; to leave +the patrimonial hearth and the turf beneath which his forefathers sleep; in +short, to abandon the living and the dead in quest of fortune. +</p> + +<p> +At the present time America presents a field for human effort far more +extensive than any sum of labor which can be applied to work it. In America too +much knowledge cannot be diffused; for all knowledge, whilst it may serve him +who possesses it, turns also to the advantage of those who are without it. New +wants are not to be feared, since they can be satisfied without difficulty; the +growth of human passions need not be dreaded, since all passions may find an +easy and a legitimate object; nor can men be put in possession of too much +freedom, since they are scarcely ever tempted to misuse their liberties. +</p> + +<p> +The American republics of the present day are like companies of adventurers +formed to explore in common the waste lands of the New World, and busied in a +flourishing trade. The passions which agitate the Americans most deeply are not +their political but their commercial passions; or, to speak more correctly, +they introduce the habits they contract in business into their political life. +They love order, without which affairs do not prosper; and they set an especial +value upon a regular conduct, which is the foundation of a solid business; they +prefer the good sense which amasses large fortunes to that enterprising spirit +which frequently dissipates them; general ideas alarm their minds, which are +accustomed to positive calculations, and they hold practice in more honor than +theory. +</p> + +<p> +It is in America that one learns to understand the influence which physical +prosperity exercises over political actions, and even over opinions which ought +to acknowledge no sway but that of reason; and it is more especially amongst +strangers that this truth is perceptible. Most of the European emigrants to the +New World carry with them that wild love of independence and of change which +our calamities are so apt to engender. I sometimes met with Europeans in the +United States who had been obliged to leave their own country on account of +their political opinions. They all astonished me by the language they held, but +one of them surprised me more than all the rest. As I was crossing one of the +most remote districts of Pennsylvania I was benighted, and obliged to beg for +hospitality at the gate of a wealthy planter, who was a Frenchman by birth. He +bade me sit down beside his fire, and we began to talk with that freedom which +befits persons who meet in the backwoods, two thousand leagues from their +native country. I was aware that my host had been a great leveller and an +ardent demagogue forty years ago, and that his name was not unknown to fame. I +was, therefore, not a little surprised to hear him discuss the rights of +property as an economist or a landowner might have done: he spoke of the +necessary gradations which fortune establishes among men, of obedience to +established laws, of the influence of good morals in commonwealths, and of the +support which religious opinions give to order and to freedom; he even went to +far as to quote an evangelical authority in corroboration of one of his +political tenets. +</p> + +<p> +I listened, and marvelled at the feebleness of human reason. A proposition is +true or false, but no art can prove it to be one or the other, in the midst of +the uncertainties of science and the conflicting lessons of experience, until a +new incident disperses the clouds of doubt; I was poor, I become rich, and I am +not to expect that prosperity will act upon my conduct, and leave my judgment +free; my opinions change with my fortune, and the happy circumstances which I +turn to my advantage furnish me with that decisive argument which was before +wanting. The influence of prosperity acts still more freely upon the American +than upon strangers. The American has always seen the connection of public +order and public prosperity, intimately united as they are, go on before his +eyes; he does not conceive that one can subsist without the other; he has +therefore nothing to forget; nor has he, like so many Europeans, to unlearn the +lessons of his early education. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0042" id="link2HCH0042"></a> Chapter XVII: Principal +Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part II</h2> + +<p> +Influence Of The Laws Upon The Maintenance Of The Democratic Republic In The +United States +</p> + +<p> +Three principal causes of the maintenance of the democratic +republic—Federal Constitutions—Municipal +institutions—Judicial power. +</p> + +<p> +The principal aim of this book has been to make known the laws of the United +States; if this purpose has been accomplished, the reader is already enabled to +judge for himself which are the laws that really tend to maintain the +democratic republic, and which endanger its existence. If I have not succeeded +in explaining this in the whole course of my work, I cannot hope to do so +within the limits of a single chapter. It is not my intention to retrace the +path I have already pursued, and a very few lines will suffice to recapitulate +what I have previously explained. +</p> + +<p> +Three circumstances seem to me to contribute most powerfully to the maintenance +of the democratic republic in the United States. +</p> + +<p> +The first is that Federal form of Government which the Americans have adopted, +and which enables the Union to combine the power of a great empire with the +security of a small State. +</p> + +<p> +The second consists in those municipal institutions which limit the despotism +of the majority, and at the same time impart a taste for freedom and a +knowledge of the art of being free to the people. +</p> + +<p> +The third is to be met with in the constitution of the judicial power. I have +shown in what manner the courts of justice serve to repress the excesses of +democracy, and how they check and direct the impulses of the majority without +stopping its activity. +</p> + +<p> +Influence Of Manners Upon The Maintenance Of The Democratic Republic In The +United States +</p> + +<p> +I have previously remarked that the manners of the people may be considered as +one of the general causes to which the maintenance of a democratic republic in +the United States is attributable. I here used the word manners with the +meaning which the ancients attached to the word mores, for I apply it not only +to manners in their proper sense of what constitutes the character of social +intercourse, but I extend it to the various notions and opinions current among +men, and to the mass of those ideas which constitute their character of mind. I +comprise, therefore, under this term the whole moral and intellectual condition +of a people. My intention is not to draw a picture of American manners, but +simply to point out such features of them as are favorable to the maintenance +of political institutions. +</p> + +<p> +Religion Considered As A Political Institution, Which Powerfully Contributes To +The Maintenance Of The Democratic Republic Amongst The Americans +</p> + +<p> +North America peopled by men who professed a democratic and republican +Christianity—Arrival of the Catholics—For what reason the Catholics +form the most democratic and the most republican class at the present time. +</p> + +<p> +Every religion is to be found in juxtaposition to a political opinion which is +connected with it by affinity. If the human mind be left to follow its own +bent, it will regulate the temporal and spiritual institutions of society upon +one uniform principle; and man will endeavor, if I may use the expression, to +harmonize the state in which he lives upon earth with the state which he +believes to await him in heaven. The greatest part of British America was +peopled by men who, after having shaken off the authority of the Pope, +acknowledged no other religious supremacy; they brought with them into the New +World a form of Christianity which I cannot better describe than by styling it +a democratic and republican religion. This sect contributed powerfully to the +establishment of a democracy and a republic, and from the earliest settlement +of the emigrants politics and religion contracted an alliance which has never +been dissolved. +</p> + +<p> +About fifty years ago Ireland began to pour a Catholic population into the +United States; on the other hand, the Catholics of America made proselytes, and +at the present moment more than a million of Christians professing the truths +of the Church of Rome are to be met with in the Union. *d The Catholics are +faithful to the observances of their religion; they are fervent and zealous in +the support and belief of their doctrines. Nevertheless they constitute the +most republican and the most democratic class of citizens which exists in the +United States; and although this fact may surprise the observer at first, the +causes by which it is occasioned may easily be discovered upon reflection. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ [It is difficult to ascertain with accuracy the amount of the Roman Catholic +population of the United States, but in 1868 an able writer in the +“Edinburgh Review” (vol. cxxvii. p. 521) affirmed that the whole +Catholic population of the United States was then about 4,000,000, divided into +43 dioceses, with 3,795 churches, under the care of 45 bishops and 2,317 +clergymen. But this rapid increase is mainly supported by immigration from the +Catholic countries of Europe.]] +</p> + +<p> +I think that the Catholic religion has erroneously been looked upon as the +natural enemy of democracy. Amongst the various sects of Christians, +Catholicism seems to me, on the contrary, to be one of those which are most +favorable to the equality of conditions. In the Catholic Church, the religious +community is composed of only two elements, the priest and the people. The +priest alone rises above the rank of his flock, and all below him are equal. +</p> + +<p> +On doctrinal points the Catholic faith places all human capacities upon the +same level; it subjects the wise and ignorant, the man of genius and the vulgar +crowd, to the details of the same creed; it imposes the same observances upon +the rich and needy, it inflicts the same austerities upon the strong and the +weak, it listens to no compromise with mortal man, but, reducing all the human +race to the same standard, it confounds all the distinctions of society at the +foot of the same altar, even as they are confounded in the sight of God. If +Catholicism predisposes the faithful to obedience, it certainly does not +prepare them for inequality; but the contrary may be said of Protestantism, +which generally tends to make men independent, more than to render them equal. +</p> + +<p> +Catholicism is like an absolute monarchy; if the sovereign be removed, all the +other classes of society are more equal than they are in republics. It has not +unfrequently occurred that the Catholic priest has left the service of the +altar to mix with the governing powers of society, and to take his place +amongst the civil gradations of men. This religious influence has sometimes +been used to secure the interests of that political state of things to which he +belonged. At other times Catholics have taken the side of aristocracy from a +spirit of religion. +</p> + +<p> +But no sooner is the priesthood entirely separated from the government, as is +the case in the United States, than is found that no class of men are more +naturally disposed than the Catholics to transfuse the doctrine of the equality +of conditions into the political world. If, then, the Catholic citizens of the +United States are not forcibly led by the nature of their tenets to adopt +democratic and republican principles, at least they are not necessarily opposed +to them; and their social position, as well as their limited number, obliges +them to adopt these opinions. Most of the Catholics are poor, and they have no +chance of taking a part in the government unless it be open to all the +citizens. They constitute a minority, and all rights must be respected in order +to insure to them the free exercise of their own privileges. These two causes +induce them, unconsciously, to adopt political doctrines, which they would +perhaps support with less zeal if they were rich and preponderant. +</p> + +<p> +The Catholic clergy of the United States has never attempted to oppose this +political tendency, but it seeks rather to justify its results. The priests in +America have divided the intellectual world into two parts: in the one they +place the doctrines of revealed religion, which command their assent; in the +other they leave those truths which they believe to have been freely left open +to the researches of political inquiry. Thus the Catholics of the United States +are at the same time the most faithful believers and the most zealous citizens. +</p> + +<p> +It may be asserted that in the United States no religious doctrine displays the +slightest hostility to democratic and republican institutions. The clergy of +all the different sects hold the same language, their opinions are consonant to +the laws, and the human intellect flows onwards in one sole current. +</p> + +<p> +I happened to be staying in one of the largest towns in the Union, when I was +invited to attend a public meeting which had been called for the purpose of +assisting the Poles, and of sending them supplies of arms and money. I found +two or three thousand persons collected in a vast hall which had been prepared +to receive them. In a short time a priest in his ecclesiastical robes advanced +to the front of the hustings: the spectators rose, and stood uncovered, whilst +he spoke in the following terms:— +</p> + +<p> +“Almighty God! the God of Armies! Thou who didst strengthen the hearts +and guide the arms of our fathers when they were fighting for the sacred rights +of national independence; Thou who didst make them triumph over a hateful +oppression, and hast granted to our people the benefits of liberty and peace; +Turn, O Lord, a favorable eye upon the other hemisphere; pitifully look down +upon that heroic nation which is even now struggling as we did in the former +time, and for the same rights which we defended with our blood. Thou, who didst +create Man in the likeness of the same image, let not tyranny mar Thy work, and +establish inequality upon the earth. Almighty God! do Thou watch over the +destiny of the Poles, and render them worthy to be free. May Thy wisdom direct +their councils, and may Thy strength sustain their arms! Shed forth Thy terror +over their enemies, scatter the powers which take counsel against them; and +vouchsafe that the injustice which the world has witnessed for fifty years, be +not consummated in our time. O Lord, who holdest alike the hearts of nations +and of men in Thy powerful hand; raise up allies to the sacred cause of right; +arouse the French nation from the apathy in which its rulers retain it, that it +go forth again to fight for the liberties of the world. +</p> + +<p> +“Lord, turn not Thou Thy face from us, and grant that we may always be +the most religious as well as the freest people of the earth. Almighty God, +hear our supplications this day. Save the Poles, we beseech Thee, in the name +of Thy well-beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who died upon the cross for the +salvation of men. Amen.” +</p> + +<p> +The whole meeting responded “Amen!” with devotion. +</p> + +<p> +Indirect Influence Of Religious Opinions Upon Political Society In The United +States +</p> + +<p> +Christian morality common to all sects—Influence of religion upon the +manners of the Americans—Respect for the marriage tie—In what +manner religion confines the imagination of the Americans within certain +limits, and checks the passion of innovation—Opinion of the Americans on +the political utility of religion—Their exertions to extend and secure +its predominance. +</p> + +<p> +I have just shown what the direct influence of religion upon politics is in the +United States, but its indirect influence appears to me to be still more +considerable, and it never instructs the Americans more fully in the art of +being free than when it says nothing of freedom. +</p> + +<p> +The sects which exist in the United States are innumerable. They all differ in +respect to the worship which is due from man to his Creator, but they all agree +in respect to the duties which are due from man to man. Each sect adores the +Deity in its own peculiar manner, but all the sects preach the same moral law +in the name of God. If it be of the highest importance to man, as an +individual, that his religion should be true, the case of society is not the +same. Society has no future life to hope for or to fear; and provided the +citizens profess a religion, the peculiar tenets of that religion are of very +little importance to its interests. Moreover, almost all the sects of the +United States are comprised within the great unity of Christianity, and +Christian morality is everywhere the same. +</p> + +<p> +It may be believed without unfairness that a certain number of Americans pursue +a peculiar form of worship, from habit more than from conviction. In the United +States the sovereign authority is religious, and consequently hypocrisy must be +common; but there is no country in the whole world in which the Christian +religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America; and +there can be no greater proof of its utility, and of its conformity to human +nature, than that its influence is most powerfully felt over the most +enlightened and free nation of the earth. +</p> + +<p> +I have remarked that the members of the American clergy in general, without +even excepting those who do not admit religious liberty, are all in favor of +civil freedom; but they do not support any particular political system. They +keep aloof from parties and from public affairs. In the United States religion +exercises but little influence upon the laws and upon the details of public +opinion, but it directs the manners of the community, and by regulating +domestic life it regulates the State. +</p> + +<p> +I do not question that the great austerity of manners which is observable in +the United States, arises, in the first instance, from religious faith. +Religion is often unable to restrain man from the numberless temptations of +fortune; nor can it check that passion for gain which every incident of his +life contributes to arouse, but its influence over the mind of woman is +supreme, and women are the protectors of morals. There is certainly no country +in the world where the tie of marriage is so much respected as in America, or +where conjugal happiness is more highly or worthily appreciated. In Europe +almost all the disturbances of society arise from the irregularities of +domestic life. To despise the natural bonds and legitimate pleasures of home, +is to contract a taste for excesses, a restlessness of heart, and the evil of +fluctuating desires. Agitated by the tumultuous passions which frequently +disturb his dwelling, the European is galled by the obedience which the +legislative powers of the State exact. But when the American retires from the +turmoil of public life to the bosom of his family, he finds in it the image of +order and of peace. There his pleasures are simple and natural, his joys are +innocent and calm; and as he finds that an orderly life is the surest path to +happiness, he accustoms himself without difficulty to moderate his opinions as +well as his tastes. Whilst the European endeavors to forget his domestic +troubles by agitating society, the American derives from his own home that love +of order which he afterwards carries with him into public affairs. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States the influence of religion is not confined to the manners, +but it extends to the intelligence of the people. Amongst the Anglo-Americans, +there are some who profess the doctrines of Christianity from a sincere belief +in them, and others who do the same because they are afraid to be suspected of +unbelief. Christianity, therefore, reigns without any obstacle, by universal +consent; the consequence is, as I have before observed, that every principle of +the moral world is fixed and determinate, although the political world is +abandoned to the debates and the experiments of men. Thus the human mind is +never left to wander across a boundless field; and, whatever may be its +pretensions, it is checked from time to time by barriers which it cannot +surmount. Before it can perpetrate innovation, certain primal and immutable +principles are laid down, and the boldest conceptions of human device are +subjected to certain forms which retard and stop their completion. +</p> + +<p> +The imagination of the Americans, even in its greatest flights, is circumspect +and undecided; its impulses are checked, and its works unfinished. These habits +of restraint recur in political society, and are singularly favorable both to +the tranquillity of the people and to the durability of the institutions it has +established. Nature and circumstances concurred to make the inhabitants of the +United States bold men, as is sufficiently attested by the enterprising spirit +with which they seek for fortune. If the mind of the Americans were free from +all trammels, they would very shortly become the most daring innovators and the +most implacable disputants in the world. But the revolutionists of America are +obliged to profess an ostensible respect for Christian morality and equity, +which does not easily permit them to violate the laws that oppose their +designs; nor would they find it easy to surmount the scruples of their +partisans, even if they were able to get over their own. Hitherto no one in the +United States has dared to advance the maxim, that everything is permissible +with a view to the interests of society; an impious adage which seems to have +been invented in an age of freedom to shelter all the tyrants of future ages. +Thus whilst the law permits the Americans to do what they please, religion +prevents them from conceiving, and forbids them to commit, what is rash or +unjust. +</p> + +<p> +Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it +must nevertheless be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of +that country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the +use of free institutions. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the +inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief. I do +not know whether all the Americans have a sincere faith in their religion, for +who can search the human heart? but I am certain that they hold it to be +indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions. This opinion is +not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole +nation, and to every rank of society. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States, if a political character attacks a sect, this may not +prevent even the partisans of that very sect from supporting him; but if he +attacks all the sects together, everyone abandons him, and he remains alone. +</p> + +<p> +Whilst I was in America, a witness, who happened to be called at the assizes of +the county of Chester (State of New York), declared that he did not believe in +the existence of God, or in the immortality of the soul. The judge refused to +admit his evidence, on the ground that the witness had destroyed beforehand all +the confidence of the Court in what he was about to say. *e The newspapers +related the fact without any further comment. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ The New York “Spectator” of August 23, 1831, relates the fact in +the following terms:—“The Court of Common Pleas of Chester county +(New York) a few days since rejected a witness who declared his disbelief in +the existence of God. The presiding judge remarked that he had not before been +aware that there was a man living who did not believe in the existence of God; +that this belief constituted the sanction of all testimony in a court of +justice, and that he knew of no cause in a Christian country where a witness +had been permitted to testify without such belief.”] +</p> + +<p> +The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately +in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the +other; and with them this conviction does not spring from that barren +traditionary faith which seems to vegetate in the soul rather than to live. +</p> + +<p> +I have known of societies formed by the Americans to send out ministers of the +Gospel into the new Western States to found schools and churches there, lest +religion should be suffered to die away in those remote settlements, and the +rising States be less fitted to enjoy free institutions than the people from +which they emanated. I met with wealthy New Englanders who abandoned the +country in which they were born in order to lay the foundations of Christianity +and of freedom on the banks of the Missouri, or in the prairies of Illinois. +Thus religious zeal is perpetually stimulated in the United States by the +duties of patriotism. These men do not act from an exclusive consideration of +the promises of a future life; eternity is only one motive of their devotion to +the cause; and if you converse with these missionaries of Christian +civilization, you will be surprised to find how much value they set upon the +goods of this world, and that you meet with a politician where you expected to +find a priest. They will tell you that “all the American republics are +collectively involved with each other; if the republics of the West were to +fall into anarchy, or to be mastered by a despot, the republican institutions +which now flourish upon the shores of the Atlantic Ocean would be in great +peril. It is, therefore, our interest that the new States should be religious, +in order to maintain our liberties.” +</p> + +<p> +Such are the opinions of the Americans, and if any hold that the religious +spirit which I admire is the very thing most amiss in America, and that the +only element wanting to the freedom and happiness of the human race is to +believe in some blind cosmogony, or to assert with Cabanis the secretion of +thought by the brain, I can only reply that those who hold this language have +never been in America, and that they have never seen a religious or a free +nation. When they return from their expedition, we shall hear what they have to +say. +</p> + +<p> +There are persons in France who look upon republican institutions as a +temporary means of power, of wealth, and distinction; men who are the +condottieri of liberty, and who fight for their own advantage, whatever be the +colors they wear: it is not to these that I address myself. But there are +others who look forward to the republican form of government as a tranquil and +lasting state, towards which modern society is daily impelled by the ideas and +manners of the time, and who sincerely desire to prepare men to be free. When +these men attack religious opinions, they obey the dictates of their passions +to the prejudice of their interests. Despotism may govern without faith, but +liberty cannot. Religion is much more necessary in the republic which they set +forth in glowing colors than in the monarchy which they attack; and it is more +needed in democratic republics than in any others. How is it possible that +society should escape destruction if the moral tie be not strengthened in +proportion as the political tie is relaxed? and what can be done with a people +which is its own master, if it be not submissive to the Divinity? +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0043" id="link2HCH0043"></a> Chapter XVII: Principal +Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part III</h2> + +<p> +Principal Causes Which Render Religion Powerful In America Care taken by the +Americans to separate the Church from the State—The laws, public opinion, +and even the exertions of the clergy concur to promote this end—Influence +of religion upon the mind in the United States attributable to this +cause—Reason of this—What is the natural state of men with regard +to religion at the present time—What are the peculiar and incidental +causes which prevent men, in certain countries, from arriving at this state. +</p> + +<p> +The philosophers of the eighteenth century explained the gradual decay of +religious faith in a very simple manner. Religious zeal, said they, must +necessarily fail, the more generally liberty is established and knowledge +diffused. Unfortunately, facts are by no means in accordance with their theory. +There are certain populations in Europe whose unbelief is only equalled by +their ignorance and their debasement, whilst in America one of the freest and +most enlightened nations in the world fulfils all the outward duties of +religious fervor. +</p> + +<p> +Upon my arrival in the United States, the religious aspect of the country was +the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there the +more did I perceive the great political consequences resulting from this state +of things, to which I was unaccustomed. In France I had almost always seen the +spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom pursuing courses diametrically +opposed to each other; but in America I found that they were intimately united, +and that they reigned in common over the same country. My desire to discover +the causes of this phenomenon increased from day to day. In order to satisfy it +I questioned the members of all the different sects; and I more especially +sought the society of the clergy, who are the depositaries of the different +persuasions, and who are more especially interested in their duration. As a +member of the Roman Catholic Church I was more particularly brought into +contact with several of its priests, with whom I became intimately acquainted. +To each of these men I expressed my astonishment and I explained my doubts; I +found that they differed upon matters of detail alone; and that they mainly +attributed the peaceful dominion of religion in their country to the separation +of Church and State. I do not hesitate to affirm that during my stay in America +I did not meet with a single individual, of the clergy or of the laity, who was +not of the same opinion upon this point. +</p> + +<p> +This led me to examine more attentively than I had hitherto done, the station +which the American clergy occupy in political society. I learned with surprise +that they filled no public appointments; *f not one of them is to be met with +in the administration, and they are not even represented in the legislative +assemblies. In several States *g the law excludes them from political life, +public opinion in all. And when I came to inquire into the prevailing spirit of +the clergy I found that most of its members seemed to retire of their own +accord from the exercise of power, and that they made it the pride of their +profession to abstain from politics. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ Unless this term be applied to the functions which many of them fill in the +schools. Almost all education is entrusted to the clergy.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ See the Constitution of New York, art. 7, Section 4:— “And +whereas the ministers of the gospel are, by their profession, dedicated to the +service of God and the care of souls, and ought not to be diverted from the +great duties of their functions: therefore no minister of the gospel, or priest +of any denomination whatsoever, shall at any time hereafter, under any pretence +or description whatever, be eligible to, or capable of holding, any civil or +military office or place within this State.” +</p> + +<p> +See also the constitutions of North Carolina, art. 31; Virginia; South +Carolina, art. I, Section 23; Kentucky, art. 2, Section 26; Tennessee, art. 8, +Section I; Louisiana, art. 2, Section 22.] +</p> + +<p> +I heard them inveigh against ambition and deceit, under whatever political +opinions these vices might chance to lurk; but I learned from their discourses +that men are not guilty in the eye of God for any opinions concerning political +government which they may profess with sincerity, any more than they are for +their mistakes in building a house or in driving a furrow. I perceived that +these ministers of the gospel eschewed all parties with the anxiety attendant +upon personal interest. These facts convinced me that what I had been told was +true; and it then became my object to investigate their causes, and to inquire +how it happened that the real authority of religion was increased by a state of +things which diminished its apparent force: these causes did not long escape my +researches. +</p> + +<p> +The short space of threescore years can never content the imagination of man; +nor can the imperfect joys of this world satisfy his heart. Man alone, of all +created beings, displays a natural contempt of existence, and yet a boundless +desire to exist; he scorns life, but he dreads annihilation. These different +feelings incessantly urge his soul to the contemplation of a future state, and +religion directs his musings thither. Religion, then, is simply another form of +hope; and it is no less natural to the human heart than hope itself. Men cannot +abandon their religious faith without a kind of aberration of intellect, and a +sort of violent distortion of their true natures; but they are invincibly +brought back to more pious sentiments; for unbelief is an accident, and faith +is the only permanent state of mankind. If we only consider religious +institutions in a purely human point of view, they may be said to derive an +inexhaustible element of strength from man himself, since they belong to one of +the constituent principles of human nature. +</p> + +<p> +I am aware that at certain times religion may strengthen this influence, which +originates in itself, by the artificial power of the laws, and by the support +of those temporal institutions which direct society. Religions, intimately +united to the governments of the earth, have been known to exercise a sovereign +authority derived from the twofold source of terror and of faith; but when a +religion contracts an alliance of this nature, I do not hesitate to affirm that +it commits the same error as a man who should sacrifice his future to his +present welfare; and in obtaining a power to which it has no claim, it risks +that authority which is rightfully its own. When a religion founds its empire +upon the desire of immortality which lives in every human heart, it may aspire +to universal dominion; but when it connects itself with a government, it must +necessarily adopt maxims which are only applicable to certain nations. Thus, in +forming an alliance with a political power, religion augments its authority +over a few, and forfeits the hope of reigning over all. +</p> + +<p> +As long as a religion rests upon those sentiments which are the consolation of +all affliction, it may attract the affections of mankind. But if it be mixed up +with the bitter passions of the world, it may be constrained to defend allies +whom its interests, and not the principle of love, have given to it; or to +repel as antagonists men who are still attached to its own spirit, however +opposed they may be to the powers to which it is allied. The Church cannot +share the temporal power of the State without being the object of a portion of +that animosity which the latter excites. +</p> + +<p> +The political powers which seem to be most firmly established have frequently +no better guarantee for their duration than the opinions of a generation, the +interests of the time, or the life of an individual. A law may modify the +social condition which seems to be most fixed and determinate; and with the +social condition everything else must change. The powers of society are more or +less fugitive, like the years which we spend upon the earth; they succeed each +other with rapidity, like the fleeting cares of life; and no government has +ever yet been founded upon an invariable disposition of the human heart, or +upon an imperishable interest. +</p> + +<p> +As long as a religion is sustained by those feelings, propensities, and +passions which are found to occur under the same forms, at all the different +periods of history, it may defy the efforts of time; or at least it can only be +destroyed by another religion. But when religion clings to the interests of the +world, it becomes almost as fragile a thing as the powers of earth. It is the +only one of them all which can hope for immortality; but if it be connected +with their ephemeral authority, it shares their fortunes, and may fall with +those transient passions which supported them for a day. The alliance which +religion contracts with political powers must needs be onerous to itself; since +it does not require their assistance to live, and by giving them its assistance +it may be exposed to decay. +</p> + +<p> +The danger which I have just pointed out always exists, but it is not always +equally visible. In some ages governments seem to be imperishable; in others, +the existence of society appears to be more precarious than the life of man. +Some constitutions plunge the citizens into a lethargic somnolence, and others +rouse them to feverish excitement. When governments appear to be so strong, and +laws so stable, men do not perceive the dangers which may accrue from a union +of Church and State. When governments display so much weakness, and laws so +much inconstancy, the danger is self-evident, but it is no longer possible to +avoid it; to be effectual, measures must be taken to discover its approach. +</p> + +<p> +In proportion as a nation assumes a democratic condition of society, and as +communities display democratic propensities, it becomes more and more dangerous +to connect religion with political institutions; for the time is coming when +authority will be bandied from hand to hand, when political theories will +succeed each other, and when men, laws, and constitutions will disappear, or be +modified from day to day, and this, not for a season only, but unceasingly. +Agitation and mutability are inherent in the nature of democratic republics, +just as stagnation and inertness are the law of absolute monarchies. +</p> + +<p> +If the Americans, who change the head of the Government once in four years, who +elect new legislators every two years, and renew the provincial officers every +twelvemonth; if the Americans, who have abandoned the political world to the +attempts of innovators, had not placed religion beyond their reach, where could +it abide in the ebb and flow of human opinions? where would that respect which +belongs to it be paid, amidst the struggles of faction? and what would become +of its immortality, in the midst of perpetual decay? The American clergy were +the first to perceive this truth, and to act in conformity with it. They saw +that they must renounce their religious influence, if they were to strive for +political power; and they chose to give up the support of the State, rather +than to share its vicissitudes. +</p> + +<p> +In America, religion is perhaps less powerful than it has been at certain +periods in the history of certain peoples; but its influence is more lasting. +It restricts itself to its own resources, but of those none can deprive it: its +circle is limited to certain principles, but those principles are entirely its +own, and under its undisputed control. +</p> + +<p> +On every side in Europe we hear voices complaining of the absence of religious +faith, and inquiring the means of restoring to religion some remnant of its +pristine authority. It seems to me that we must first attentively consider what +ought to be the natural state of men with regard to religion at the present +time; and when we know what we have to hope and to fear, we may discern the end +to which our efforts ought to be directed. +</p> + +<p> +The two great dangers which threaten the existence of religions are schism and +indifference. In ages of fervent devotion, men sometimes abandon their +religion, but they only shake it off in order to adopt another. Their faith +changes the objects to which it is directed, but it suffers no decline. The old +religion then excites enthusiastic attachment or bitter enmity in either party; +some leave it with anger, others cling to it with increased devotedness, and +although persuasions differ, irreligion is unknown. Such, however, is not the +case when a religious belief is secretly undermined by doctrines which may be +termed negative, since they deny the truth of one religion without affirming +that of any other. Prodigious revolutions then take place in the human mind, +without the apparent co-operation of the passions of man, and almost without +his knowledge. Men lose the objects of their fondest hopes, as if through +forgetfulness. They are carried away by an imperceptible current which they +have not the courage to stem, but which they follow with regret, since it bears +them from a faith they love, to a scepticism that plunges them into despair. +</p> + +<p> +In ages which answer to this description, men desert their religious opinions +from lukewarmness rather than from dislike; they do not reject them, but the +sentiments by which they were once fostered disappear. But if the unbeliever +does not admit religion to be true, he still considers it useful. Regarding +religious institutions in a human point of view, he acknowledges their +influence upon manners and legislation. He admits that they may serve to make +men live in peace with one another, and to prepare them gently for the hour of +death. He regrets the faith which he has lost; and as he is deprived of a +treasure which he has learned to estimate at its full value, he scruples to +take it from those who still possess it. +</p> + +<p> +On the other hand, those who continue to believe are not afraid openly to avow +their faith. They look upon those who do not share their persuasion as more +worthy of pity than of opposition; and they are aware that to acquire the +esteem of the unbelieving, they are not obliged to follow their example. They +are hostile to no one in the world; and as they do not consider the society in +which they live as an arena in which religion is bound to face its thousand +deadly foes, they love their contemporaries, whilst they condemn their +weaknesses and lament their errors. +</p> + +<p> +As those who do not believe, conceal their incredulity; and as those who +believe, display their faith, public opinion pronounces itself in favor of +religion: love, support, and honor are bestowed upon it, and it is only by +searching the human soul that we can detect the wounds which it has received. +The mass of mankind, who are never without the feeling of religion, do not +perceive anything at variance with the established faith. The instinctive +desire of a future life brings the crowd about the altar, and opens the hearts +of men to the precepts and consolations of religion. +</p> + +<p> +But this picture is not applicable to us: for there are men amongst us who have +ceased to believe in Christianity, without adopting any other religion; others +who are in the perplexities of doubt, and who already affect not to believe; +and others, again, who are afraid to avow that Christian faith which they still +cherish in secret. +</p> + +<p> +Amidst these lukewarm partisans and ardent antagonists a small number of +believers exist, who are ready to brave all obstacles and to scorn all dangers +in defence of their faith. They have done violence to human weakness, in order +to rise superior to public opinion. Excited by the effort they have made, they +scarcely knew where to stop; and as they know that the first use which the +French made of independence was to attack religion, they look upon their +contemporaries with dread, and they recoil in alarm from the liberty which +their fellow-citizens are seeking to obtain. As unbelief appears to them to be +a novelty, they comprise all that is new in one indiscriminate animosity. They +are at war with their age and country, and they look upon every opinion which +is put forth there as the necessary enemy of the faith. +</p> + +<p> +Such is not the natural state of men with regard to religion at the present +day; and some extraordinary or incidental cause must be at work in France to +prevent the human mind from following its original propensities and to drive it +beyond the limits at which it ought naturally to stop. I am intimately +convinced that this extraordinary and incidental cause is the close connection +of politics and religion. The unbelievers of Europe attack the Christians as +their political opponents, rather than as their religious adversaries; they +hate the Christian religion as the opinion of a party, much more than as an +error of belief; and they reject the clergy less because they are the +representatives of the Divinity than because they are the allies of authority. +</p> + +<p> +In Europe, Christianity has been intimately united to the powers of the earth. +Those powers are now in decay, and it is, as it were, buried under their ruins. +The living body of religion has been bound down to the dead corpse of +superannuated polity: cut but the bonds which restrain it, and that which is +alive will rise once more. I know not what could restore the Christian Church +of Europe to the energy of its earlier days; that power belongs to God alone; +but it may be the effect of human policy to leave the faith in the full +exercise of the strength which it still retains. +</p> + +<p> +How The Instruction, The Habits, And The Practical Experience Of The Americans +Promote The Success Of Their Democratic Institutions +</p> + +<p> +What is to be understood by the instruction of the American people—The +human mind more superficially instructed in the United States than in +Europe—No one completely uninstructed—Reason of this—Rapidity +with which opinions are diffused even in the uncultivated States of the +West—Practical experience more serviceable to the Americans than +book-learning. +</p> + +<p> +I have but little to add to what I have already said concerning the influence +which the instruction and the habits of the Americans exercise upon the +maintenance of their political institutions. +</p> + +<p> +America has hitherto produced very few writers of distinction; it possesses no +great historians, and not a single eminent poet. The inhabitants of that +country look upon what are properly styled literary pursuits with a kind of +disapprobation; and there are towns of very second-rate importance in Europe in +which more literary works are annually published than in the twenty-four States +of the Union put together. The spirit of the Americans is averse to general +ideas; and it does not seek theoretical discoveries. Neither politics nor +manufactures direct them to these occupations; and although new laws are +perpetually enacted in the United States, no great writers have hitherto +inquired into the general principles of their legislation. The Americans have +lawyers and commentators, but no jurists; *h and they furnish examples rather +than lessons to the world. The same observation applies to the mechanical arts. +In America, the inventions of Europe are adopted with sagacity; they are +perfected, and adapted with admirable skill to the wants of the country. +Manufactures exist, but the science of manufacture is not cultivated; and they +have good workmen, but very few inventors. Fulton was obliged to proffer his +services to foreign nations for a long time before he was able to devote them +to his own country. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ [This cannot be said with truth of the country of Kent, Story, and Wheaton.]] +</p> + +<p> +The observer who is desirous of forming an opinion on the state of instruction +amongst the Anglo-Americans must consider the same object from two different +points of view. If he only singles out the learned, he will be astonished to +find how rare they are; but if he counts the ignorant, the American people will +appear to be the most enlightened community in the world. The whole population, +as I observed in another place, is situated between these two extremes. In New +England, every citizen receives the elementary notions of human knowledge; he +is moreover taught the doctrines and the evidences of his religion, the history +of his country, and the leading features of its Constitution. In the States of +Connecticut and Massachusetts, it is extremely rare to find a man imperfectly +acquainted with all these things, and a person wholly ignorant of them is a +sort of phenomenon. +</p> + +<p> +When I compare the Greek and Roman republics with these American States; the +manuscript libraries of the former, and their rude population, with the +innumerable journals and the enlightened people of the latter; when I remember +all the attempts which are made to judge the modern republics by the assistance +of those of antiquity, and to infer what will happen in our time from what took +place two thousand years ago, I am tempted to burn my books, in order to apply +none but novel ideas to so novel a condition of society. +</p> + +<p> +What I have said of New England must not, however, be applied indistinctly to +the whole Union; as we advance towards the West or the South, the instruction +of the people diminishes. In the States which are adjacent to the Gulf of +Mexico, a certain number of individuals may be found, as in our own countries, +who are devoid of the rudiments of instruction. But there is not a single +district in the United States sunk in complete ignorance; and for a very simple +reason: the peoples of Europe started from the darkness of a barbarous +condition, to advance toward the light of civilization; their progress has been +unequal; some of them have improved apace, whilst others have loitered in their +course, and some have stopped, and are still sleeping upon the way. *i +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ [In the Northern States the number of persons destitute of instruction is +inconsiderable, the largest number being 241,152 in the State of New York +(according to Spaulding’s “Handbook of American Statistics” +for 1874); but in the South no less than 1,516,339 whites and 2,671,396 colored +persons are returned as “illiterate.”]] +</p> + +<p> +Such has not been the case in the United States. The Anglo-Americans settled in +a state of civilization, upon that territory which their descendants occupy; +they had not to begin to learn, and it was sufficient for them not to forget. +Now the children of these same Americans are the persons who, year by year, +transport their dwellings into the wilds; and with their dwellings their +acquired information and their esteem for knowledge. Education has taught them +the utility of instruction, and has enabled them to transmit that instruction +to their posterity. In the United States society has no infancy, but it is born +in man’s estate. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans never use the word “peasant,” because they have no +idea of the peculiar class which that term denotes; the ignorance of more +remote ages, the simplicity of rural life, and the rusticity of the villager +have not been preserved amongst them; and they are alike unacquainted with the +virtues, the vices, the coarse habits, and the simple graces of an early stage +of civilization. At the extreme borders of the Confederate States, upon the +confines of society and of the wilderness, a population of bold adventurers +have taken up their abode, who pierce the solitudes of the American woods, and +seek a country there, in order to escape that poverty which awaited them in +their native provinces. As soon as the pioneer arrives upon the spot which is +to serve him for a retreat, he fells a few trees and builds a loghouse. Nothing +can offer a more miserable aspect than these isolated dwellings. The traveller +who approaches one of them towards nightfall, sees the flicker of the +hearth-flame through the chinks in the walls; and at night, if the wind rises, +he hears the roof of boughs shake to and fro in the midst of the great forest +trees. Who would not suppose that this poor hut is the asylum of rudeness and +ignorance? Yet no sort of comparison can be drawn between the pioneer and the +dwelling which shelters him. Everything about him is primitive and unformed, +but he is himself the result of the labor and the experience of eighteen +centuries. He wears the dress, and he speaks the language of cities; he is +acquainted with the past, curious of the future, and ready for argument upon +the present; he is, in short, a highly civilized being, who consents, for a +time, to inhabit the backwoods, and who penetrates into the wilds of the New +World with the Bible, an axe, and a file of newspapers. +</p> + +<p> +It is difficult to imagine the incredible rapidity with which public opinion +circulates in the midst of these deserts. *j I do not think that so much +intellectual intercourse takes place in the most enlightened and populous +districts of France. *k It cannot be doubted that, in the United States, the +instruction of the people powerfully contributes to the support of a democratic +republic; and such must always be the case, I believe, where instruction which +awakens the understanding is not separated from moral education which amends +the heart. But I by no means exaggerate this benefit, and I am still further +from thinking, as so many people do think in Europe, that men can be +instantaneously made citizens by teaching them to read and write. True +information is mainly derived from experience; and if the Americans had not +been gradually accustomed to govern themselves, their book-learning would not +assist them much at the present day. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ I travelled along a portion of the frontier of the United States in a sort of +cart which was termed the mail. We passed, day and night, with great rapidity +along the roads which were scarcely marked out, through immense forests; when +the gloom of the woods became impenetrable the coachman lighted branches of +fir, and we journeyed along by the light they cast. From time to time we came +to a hut in the midst of the forest, which was a post-office. The mail dropped +an enormous bundle of letters at the door of this isolated dwelling, and we +pursued our way at full gallop, leaving the inhabitants of the neighboring log +houses to send for their share of the treasure. +</p> + +<p> +[When the author visited America the locomotive and the railroad were scarcely +invented, and not yet introduced in the United States. It is superfluous to +point out the immense effect of those inventions in extending civilization and +developing the resources of that vast continent. In 1831 there were 51 miles of +railway in the United States; in 1872 there were 60,000 miles of railway.]] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ In 1832 each inhabitant of Michigan paid a sum equivalent to 1 fr. 22 cent. +(French money) to the post-office revenue, and each inhabitant of the Floridas +paid 1 fr. 5 cent. (See “National Calendar,” 1833, p. 244.) In the +same year each inhabitant of the Departement du Nord paid 1 fr. 4 cent. to the +revenue of the French post-office. (See the “Compte rendu de +l’administration des Finances,” 1833, p. 623.) Now the State of +Michigan only contained at that time 7 inhabitants per square league and +Florida only 5: the public instruction and the commercial activity of these +districts is inferior to that of most of the States in the Union, whilst the +Departement du Nord, which contains 3,400 inhabitants per square league, is one +of the most enlightened and manufacturing parts of France.] +</p> + +<p> +I have lived a great deal with the people in the United States, and I cannot +express how much I admire their experience and their good sense. An American +should never be allowed to speak of Europe; for he will then probably display a +vast deal of presumption and very foolish pride. He will take up with those +crude and vague notions which are so useful to the ignorant all over the world. +But if you question him respecting his own country, the cloud which dimmed his +intelligence will immediately disperse; his language will become as clear and +as precise as his thoughts. He will inform you what his rights are, and by what +means he exercises them; he will be able to point out the customs which obtain +in the political world. You will find that he is well acquainted with the rules +of the administration, and that he is familiar with the mechanism of the laws. +The citizen of the United States does not acquire his practical science and his +positive notions from books; the instruction he has acquired may have prepared +him for receiving those ideas, but it did not furnish them. The American learns +to know the laws by participating in the act of legislation; and he takes a +lesson in the forms of government from governing. The great work of society is +ever going on beneath his eyes, and, as it were, under his hands. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States politics are the end and aim of education; in Europe its +principal object is to fit men for private life. The interference of the +citizens in public affairs is too rare an occurrence for it to be anticipated +beforehand. Upon casting a glance over society in the two hemispheres, these +differences are indicated even by its external aspect. +</p> + +<p> +In Europe we frequently introduce the ideas and the habits of private life into +public affairs; and as we pass at once from the domestic circle to the +government of the State, we may frequently be heard to discuss the great +interests of society in the same manner in which we converse with our friends. +The Americans, on the other hand, transfuse the habits of public life into +their manners in private; and in their country the jury is introduced into the +games of schoolboys, and parliamentary forms are observed in the order of a +feast. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0044" id="link2HCH0044"></a> Chapter XVII: Principal +Causes Maintaining The Democratic Republic—Part IV</h2> + +<p> +The Laws Contribute More To The Maintenance Of The Democratic Republic In The +United States Than The Physical Circumstances Of The Country, And The Manners +More Than The Laws +</p> + +<p> +All the nations of America have a democratic state of society—Yet +democratic institutions only subsist amongst the Anglo-Americans—The +Spaniards of South America, equally favored by physical causes as the +Anglo-Americans, unable to maintain a democratic republic—Mexico, which +has adopted the Constitution of the United States, in the same +predicament—The Anglo-Americans of the West less able to maintain it than +those of the East—Reason of these different results. +</p> + +<p> +I have remarked that the maintenance of democratic institutions in the United +States is attributable to the circumstances, the laws, and the manners of that +country. *l Most Europeans are only acquainted with the first of these three +causes, and they are apt to give it a preponderating importance which it does +not really possess. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ I remind the reader of the general signification which I give to the word +“manners,” namely, the moral and intellectual characteristics of +social man taken collectively.] +</p> + +<p> +It is true that the Anglo-Saxons settled in the New World in a state of social +equality; the low-born and the noble were not to be found amongst them; and +professional prejudices were always as entirely unknown as the prejudices of +birth. Thus, as the condition of society was democratic, the empire of +democracy was established without difficulty. But this circumstance is by no +means peculiar to the United States; almost all the trans-Atlantic colonies +were founded by men equal amongst themselves, or who became so by inhabiting +them. In no one part of the New World have Europeans been able to create an +aristocracy. Nevertheless, democratic institutions prosper nowhere but in the +United States. +</p> + +<p> +The American Union has no enemies to contend with; it stands in the wilds like +an island in the ocean. But the Spaniards of South America were no less +isolated by nature; yet their position has not relieved them from the charge of +standing armies. They make war upon each other when they have no foreign +enemies to oppose; and the Anglo-American democracy is the only one which has +hitherto been able to maintain itself in peace. *m +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ [A remark which, since the great Civil War of 1861-65, ceases to be +applicable.]] +</p> + +<p> +The territory of the Union presents a boundless field to human activity, and +inexhaustible materials for industry and labor. The passion of wealth takes the +place of ambition, and the warmth of faction is mitigated by a sense of +prosperity. But in what portion of the globe shall we meet with more fertile +plains, with mightier rivers, or with more unexplored and inexhaustible riches +than in South America? +</p> + +<p> +Nevertheless, South America has been unable to maintain democratic +institutions. If the welfare of nations depended on their being placed in a +remote position, with an unbounded space of habitable territory before them, +the Spaniards of South America would have no reason to complain of their fate. +And although they might enjoy less prosperity than the inhabitants of the +United States, their lot might still be such as to excite the envy of some +nations in Europe. There are, however, no nations upon the face of the earth +more miserable than those of South America. +</p> + +<p> +Thus, not only are physical causes inadequate to produce results analogous to +those which occur in North America, but they are unable to raise the population +of South America above the level of European States, where they act in a +contrary direction. Physical causes do not, therefore, affect the destiny of +nations so much as has been supposed. +</p> + +<p> +I have met with men in New England who were on the point of leaving a country, +where they might have remained in easy circumstances, to go to seek their +fortune in the wilds. Not far from that district I found a French population in +Canada, which was closely crowded on a narrow territory, although the same +wilds were at hand; and whilst the emigrant from the United States purchased an +extensive estate with the earnings of a short term of labor, the Canadian paid +as much for land as he would have done in France. Nature offers the solitudes +of the New World to Europeans; but they are not always acquainted with the +means of turning her gifts to account. Other peoples of America have the same +physical conditions of prosperity as the Anglo-Americans, but without their +laws and their manners; and these peoples are wretched. The laws and manners of +the Anglo-Americans are therefore that efficient cause of their greatness which +is the object of my inquiry. +</p> + +<p> +I am far from supposing that the American laws are preeminently good in +themselves; I do not hold them to be applicable to all democratic peoples; and +several of them seem to be dangerous, even in the United States. Nevertheless, +it cannot be denied that the American legislation, taken collectively, is +extremely well adapted to the genius of the people and the nature of the +country which it is intended to govern. The American laws are therefore good, +and to them must be attributed a large portion of the success which attends the +government of democracy in America: but I do not believe them to be the +principal cause of that success; and if they seem to me to have more influence +upon the social happiness of the Americans than the nature of the country, on +the other hand there is reason to believe that their effect is still inferior +to that produced by the manners of the people. +</p> + +<p> +The Federal laws undoubtedly constitute the most important part of the +legislation of the United States. Mexico, which is not less fortunately +situated than the Anglo-American Union, has adopted the same laws, but is +unable to accustom itself to the government of democracy. Some other cause is +therefore at work, independently of those physical circumstances and peculiar +laws which enable the democracy to rule in the United States. +</p> + +<p> +Another still more striking proof may be adduced. Almost all the inhabitants of +the territory of the Union are the descendants of a common stock; they speak +the same language, they worship God in the same manner, they are affected by +the same physical causes, and they obey the same laws. Whence, then, do their +characteristic differences arise? Why, in the Eastern States of the Union, does +the republican government display vigor and regularity, and proceed with mature +deliberation? Whence does it derive the wisdom and the durability which mark +its acts, whilst in the Western States, on the contrary, society seems to be +ruled by the powers of chance? There, public business is conducted with an +irregularity and a passionate and feverish excitement, which does not announce +a long or sure duration. +</p> + +<p> +I am no longer comparing the Anglo-American States to foreign nations; but I am +contrasting them with each other, and endeavoring to discover why they are so +unlike. The arguments which are derived from the nature of the country and the +difference of legislation are here all set aside. Recourse must be had to some +other cause; and what other cause can there be except the manners of the +people? +</p> + +<p> +It is in the Eastern States that the Anglo-Americans have been longest +accustomed to the government of democracy, and that they have adopted the +habits and conceived the notions most favorable to its maintenance. Democracy +has gradually penetrated into their customs, their opinions, and the forms of +social intercourse; it is to be found in all the details of daily life equally +as in the laws. In the Eastern States the instruction and practical education +of the people have been most perfected, and religion has been most thoroughly +amalgamated with liberty. Now these habits, opinions, customs, and convictions +are precisely the constituent elements of that which I have denominated +manners. +</p> + +<p> +In the Western States, on the contrary, a portion of the same advantages is +still wanting. Many of the Americans of the West were born in the woods, and +they mix the ideas and the customs of savage life with the civilization of +their parents. Their passions are more intense; their religious morality less +authoritative; and their convictions less secure. The inhabitants exercise no +sort of control over their fellow-citizens, for they are scarcely acquainted +with each other. The nations of the West display, to a certain extent, the +inexperience and the rude habits of a people in its infancy; for although they +are composed of old elements, their assemblage is of recent date. +</p> + +<p> +The manners of the Americans of the United States are, then, the real cause +which renders that people the only one of the American nations that is able to +support a democratic government; and it is the influence of manners which +produces the different degrees of order and of prosperity that may be +distinguished in the several Anglo-American democracies. Thus the effect which +the geographical position of a country may have upon the duration of democratic +institutions is exaggerated in Europe. Too much importance is attributed to +legislation, too little to manners. These three great causes serve, no doubt, +to regulate and direct the American democracy; but if they were to be classed +in their proper order, I should say that the physical circumstances are less +efficient than the laws, and the laws very subordinate to the manners of the +people. I am convinced that the most advantageous situation and the best +possible laws cannot maintain a constitution in spite of the manners of a +country; whilst the latter may turn the most unfavorable positions and the +worst laws to some advantage. The importance of manners is a common truth to +which study and experience incessantly direct our attention. It may be regarded +as a central point in the range of human observation, and the common +termination of all inquiry. So seriously do I insist upon this head, that if I +have hitherto failed in making the reader feel the important influence which I +attribute to the practical experience, the habits, the opinions, in short, to +the manners of the Americans, upon the maintenance of their institutions, I +have failed in the principal object of my work. +</p> + +<p> +Whether Laws And Manners Are Sufficient To Maintain Democratic Institutions In +Other Countries Besides America +</p> + +<p> +The Anglo-Americans, if transported into Europe, would be obliged to modify +their laws—Distinction to be made between democratic institutions and +American institutions—Democratic laws may be conceived better than, or at +least different from, those which the American democracy has adopted—The +example of America only proves that it is possible to regulate democracy by the +assistance of manners and legislation. +</p> + +<p> +I have asserted that the success of democratic institutions in the United +States is more intimately connected with the laws themselves, and the manners +of the people, than with the nature of the country. But does it follow that the +same causes would of themselves produce the same results, if they were put into +operation elsewhere; and if the country is no adequate substitute for laws and +manners, can laws and manners in their turn prove a substitute for the country? +It will readily be understood that the necessary elements of a reply to this +question are wanting: other peoples are to be found in the New World besides +the Anglo-Americans, and as these people are affected by the same physical +circumstances as the latter, they may fairly be compared together. But there +are no nations out of America which have adopted the same laws and manners, +being destitute of the physical advantages peculiar to the Anglo-Americans. No +standard of comparison therefore exists, and we can only hazard an opinion upon +this subject. +</p> + +<p> +It appears to me, in the first place, that a careful distinction must be made +between the institutions of the United States and democratic institutions in +general. When I reflect upon the state of Europe, its mighty nations, its +populous cities, its formidable armies, and the complex nature of its politics, +I cannot suppose that even the Anglo-Americans, if they were transported to our +hemisphere, with their ideas, their religion, and their manners, could exist +without considerably altering their laws. But a democratic nation may be +imagined, organized differently from the American people. It is not impossible +to conceive a government really established upon the will of the majority; but +in which the majority, repressing its natural propensity to equality, should +consent, with a view to the order and the stability of the State, to invest a +family or an individual with all the prerogatives of the executive. A +democratic society might exist, in which the forces of the nation would be more +centralized than they are in the United States; the people would exercise a +less direct and less irresistible influence upon public affairs, and yet every +citizen invested with certain rights would participate, within his sphere, in +the conduct of the government. The observations I made amongst the +Anglo-Americans induce me to believe that democratic institutions of this kind, +prudently introduced into society, so as gradually to mix with the habits and +to be interfused with the opinions of the people, might subsist in other +countries besides America. If the laws of the United States were the only +imaginable democratic laws, or the most perfect which it is possible to +conceive, I should admit that the success of those institutions affords no +proof of the success of democratic institutions in general, in a country less +favored by natural circumstances. But as the laws of America appear to me to be +defective in several respects, and as I can readily imagine others of the same +general nature, the peculiar advantages of that country do not prove that +democratic institutions cannot succeed in a nation less favored by +circumstances, if ruled by better laws. +</p> + +<p> +If human nature were different in America from what it is elsewhere; or if the +social condition of the Americans engendered habits and opinions amongst them +different from those which originate in the same social condition in the Old +World, the American democracies would afford no means of predicting what may +occur in other democracies. If the Americans displayed the same propensities as +all other democratic nations, and if their legislators had relied upon the +nature of the country and the favor of circumstances to restrain those +propensities within due limits, the prosperity of the United States would be +exclusively attributable to physical causes, and it would afford no +encouragement to a people inclined to imitate their example, without sharing +their natural advantages. But neither of these suppositions is borne out by +facts. +</p> + +<p> +In America the same passions are to be met with as in Europe; some originating +in human nature, others in the democratic condition of society. Thus in the +United States I found that restlessness of heart which is natural to men, when +all ranks are nearly equal and the chances of elevation are the same to all. I +found the democratic feeling of envy expressed under a thousand different +forms. I remarked that the people frequently displayed, in the conduct of +affairs, a consummate mixture of ignorance and presumption; and I inferred that +in America, men are liable to the same failings and the same absurdities as +amongst ourselves. But upon examining the state of society more attentively, I +speedily discovered that the Americans had made great and successful efforts to +counteract these imperfections of human nature, and to correct the natural +defects of democracy. Their divers municipal laws appeared to me to be a means +of restraining the ambition of the citizens within a narrow sphere, and of +turning those same passions which might have worked havoc in the State, to the +good of the township or the parish. The American legislators have succeeded to +a certain extent in opposing the notion of rights to the feelings of envy; the +permanence of the religious world to the continual shifting of politics; the +experience of the people to its theoretical ignorance; and its practical +knowledge of business to the impatience of its desires. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans, then, have not relied upon the nature of their country to +counterpoise those dangers which originate in their Constitution and in their +political laws. To evils which are common to all democratic peoples they have +applied remedies which none but themselves had ever thought of before; and +although they were the first to make the experiment, they have succeeded in it. +</p> + +<p> +The manners and laws of the Americans are not the only ones which may suit a +democratic people; but the Americans have shown that it would be wrong to +despair of regulating democracy by the aid of manners and of laws. If other +nations should borrow this general and pregnant idea from the Americans, +without however intending to imitate them in the peculiar application which +they have made of it; if they should attempt to fit themselves for that social +condition, which it seems to be the will of Providence to impose upon the +generations of this age, and so to escape from the despotism or the anarchy +which threatens them; what reason is there to suppose that their efforts would +not be crowned with success? The organization and the establishment of +democracy in Christendom is the great political problem of the time. The +Americans, unquestionably, have not resolved this problem, but they furnish +useful data to those who undertake the task. +</p> + +<p> +Importance Of What Precedes With Respect To The State Of Europe +</p> + +<p> +It may readily be discovered with what intention I undertook the foregoing +inquiries. The question here discussed is interesting not only to the United +States, but to the whole world; it concerns, not a nation, but all mankind. If +those nations whose social condition is democratic could only remain free as +long as they are inhabitants of the wilds, we could not but despair of the +future destiny of the human race; for democracy is rapidly acquiring a more +extended sway, and the wilds are gradually peopled with men. If it were true +that laws and manners are insufficient to maintain democratic institutions, +what refuge would remain open to the nations, except the despotism of a single +individual? I am aware that there are many worthy persons at the present time +who are not alarmed at this latter alternative, and who are so tired of liberty +as to be glad of repose, far from those storms by which it is attended. But +these individuals are ill acquainted with the haven towards which they are +bound. They are so deluded by their recollections, as to judge the tendency of +absolute power by what it was formerly, and not by what it might become at the +present time. +</p> + +<p> +If absolute power were re-established amongst the democratic nations of Europe, +I am persuaded that it would assume a new form, and appear under features +unknown to our forefathers. There was a time in Europe when the laws and the +consent of the people had invested princes with almost unlimited authority; but +they scarcely ever availed themselves of it. I do not speak of the prerogatives +of the nobility, of the authority of supreme courts of justice, of corporations +and their chartered rights, or of provincial privileges, which served to break +the blows of the sovereign authority, and to maintain a spirit of resistance in +the nation. Independently of these political institutions—which, however +opposed they might be to personal liberty, served to keep alive the love of +freedom in the mind of the public, and which may be esteemed to have been +useful in this respect—the manners and opinions of the nation confined +the royal authority within barriers which were not less powerful, although they +were less conspicuous. Religion, the affections of the people, the benevolence +of the prince, the sense of honor, family pride, provincial prejudices, custom, +and public opinion limited the power of kings, and restrained their authority +within an invisible circle. The constitution of nations was despotic at that +time, but their manners were free. Princes had the right, but they had neither +the means nor the desire, of doing whatever they pleased. +</p> + +<p> +But what now remains of those barriers which formerly arrested the aggressions +of tyranny? Since religion has lost its empire over the souls of men, the most +prominent boundary which divided good from evil is overthrown; the very +elements of the moral world are indeterminate; the princes and the peoples of +the earth are guided by chance, and none can define the natural limits of +despotism and the bounds of license. Long revolutions have forever destroyed +the respect which surrounded the rulers of the State; and since they have been +relieved from the burden of public esteem, princes may henceforward surrender +themselves without fear to the seductions of arbitrary power. +</p> + +<p> +When kings find that the hearts of their subjects are turned towards them, they +are clement, because they are conscious of their strength, and they are chary +of the affection of their people, because the affection of their people is the +bulwark of the throne. A mutual interchange of good-will then takes place +between the prince and the people, which resembles the gracious intercourse of +domestic society. The subjects may murmur at the sovereign’s decree, but +they are grieved to displease him; and the sovereign chastises his subjects +with the light hand of parental affection. +</p> + +<p> +But when once the spell of royalty is broken in the tumult of revolution; when +successive monarchs have crossed the throne, so as alternately to display to +the people the weakness of their right and the harshness of their power, the +sovereign is no longer regarded by any as the Father of the State, and he is +feared by all as its master. If he be weak, he is despised; if he be strong, he +is detested. He himself is full of animosity and alarm; he finds that he is as +a stranger in his own country, and he treats his subjects like conquered +enemies. +</p> + +<p> +When the provinces and the towns formed so many different nations in the midst +of their common country, each of them had a will of its own, which was opposed +to the general spirit of subjection; but now that all the parts of the same +empire, after having lost their immunities, their customs, their prejudices, +their traditions, and their names, are subjected and accustomed to the same +laws, it is not more difficult to oppress them collectively than it was +formerly to oppress them singly. +</p> + +<p> +Whilst the nobles enjoyed their power, and indeed long after that power was +lost, the honor of aristocracy conferred an extraordinary degree of force upon +their personal opposition. They afford instances of men who, notwithstanding +their weakness, still entertained a high opinion of their personal value, and +dared to cope single-handed with the efforts of the public authority. But at +the present day, when all ranks are more and more confounded, when the +individual disappears in the throng, and is easily lost in the midst of a +common obscurity, when the honor of monarchy has almost lost its empire without +being succeeded by public virtue, and when nothing can enable man to rise above +himself, who shall say at what point the exigencies of power and the servility +of weakness will stop? +</p> + +<p> +As long as family feeling was kept alive, the antagonist of oppression was +never alone; he looked about him, and found his clients, his hereditary +friends, and his kinsfolk. If this support was wanting, he was sustained by his +ancestors and animated by his posterity. But when patrimonial estates are +divided, and when a few years suffice to confound the distinctions of a race, +where can family feeling be found? What force can there be in the customs of a +country which has changed and is still perpetually changing its aspect; in +which every act of tyranny has a precedent, and every crime an example; in +which there is nothing so old that its antiquity can save it from destruction, +and nothing so unparalleled that its novelty can prevent it from being done? +What resistance can be offered by manners of so pliant a make that they have +already often yielded? What strength can even public opinion have retained, +when no twenty persons are connected by a common tie; when not a man, nor a +family, nor chartered corporation, nor class, nor free institution, has the +power of representing or exerting that opinion; and when every +citizen—being equally weak, equally poor, and equally dependent—has +only his personal impotence to oppose to the organized force of the government? +</p> + +<p> +The annals of France furnish nothing analogous to the condition in which that +country might then be thrown. But it may more aptly be assimilated to the times +of old, and to those hideous eras of Roman oppression, when the manners of the +people were corrupted, their traditions obliterated, their habits destroyed, +their opinions shaken, and freedom, expelled from the laws, could find no +refuge in the land; when nothing protected the citizens, and the citizens no +longer protected themselves; when human nature was the sport of man, and +princes wearied out the clemency of Heaven before they exhausted the patience +of their subjects. Those who hope to revive the monarchy of Henry IV or of +Louis XIV, appear to me to be afflicted with mental blindness; and when I +consider the present condition of several European nations—a condition to +which all the others tend—I am led to believe that they will soon be left +with no other alternative than democratic liberty, or the tyranny of the +Caesars. *n +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ [This prediction of the return of France to imperial despotism, and of the +true character of that despotic power, was written in 1832, and realized to the +letter in 1852.]] +</p> + +<p> +And indeed it is deserving of consideration, whether men are to be entirely +emancipated or entirely enslaved; whether their rights are to be made equal, or +wholly taken away from them. If the rulers of society were reduced either +gradually to raise the crowd to their own level, or to sink the citizens below +that of humanity, would not the doubts of many be resolved, the consciences of +many be healed, and the community prepared to make great sacrifices with little +difficulty? In that case, the gradual growth of democratic manners and +institutions should be regarded, not as the best, but as the only means of +preserving freedom; and without liking the government of democracy, it might be +adopted as the most applicable and the fairest remedy for the present ills of +society. +</p> + +<p> +It is difficult to associate a people in the work of government; but it is +still more difficult to supply it with experience, and to inspire it with the +feelings which it requires in order to govern well. I grant that the caprices +of democracy are perpetual; its instruments are rude; its laws imperfect. But +if it were true that soon no just medium would exist between the empire of +democracy and the dominion of a single arm, should we not rather incline +towards the former than submit voluntarily to the latter? And if complete +equality be our fate, is it not better to be levelled by free institutions than +by despotic power? +</p> + +<p> +Those who, after having read this book, should imagine that my intention in +writing it has been to propose the laws and manners of the Anglo-Americans for +the imitation of all democratic peoples, would commit a very great mistake; +they must have paid more attention to the form than to the substance of my +ideas. My aim has been to show, by the example of America, that laws, and +especially manners, may exist which will allow a democratic people to remain +free. But I am very far from thinking that we ought to follow the example of +the American democracy, and copy the means which it has employed to attain its +ends; for I am well aware of the influence which the nature of a country and +its political precedents exercise upon a constitution; and I should regard it +as a great misfortune for mankind if liberty were to exist all over the world +under the same forms. +</p> + +<p> +But I am of opinion that if we do not succeed in gradually introducing +democratic institutions into France, and if we despair of imparting to the +citizens those ideas and sentiments which first prepare them for freedom, and +afterwards allow them to enjoy it, there will be no independence at all, either +for the middling classes or the nobility, for the poor or for the rich, but an +equal tyranny over all; and I foresee that if the peaceable empire of the +majority be not founded amongst us in time, we shall sooner or later arrive at +the unlimited authority of a single despot. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0045" id="link2HCH0045"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races In The United States—Part I</h2> + +<p> +The Present And Probable Future Condition Of The Three Races Which Inhabit The +Territory Of The United States +</p> + +<p> +The principal part of the task which I had imposed upon myself is now +performed. I have shown, as far as I was able, the laws and the manners of the +American democracy. Here I might stop; but the reader would perhaps feel that I +had not satisfied his expectations. +</p> + +<p> +The absolute supremacy of democracy is not all that we meet with in America; +the inhabitants of the New World may be considered from more than one point of +view. In the course of this work my subject has often led me to speak of the +Indians and the Negroes; but I have never been able to stop in order to show +what place these two races occupy in the midst of the democratic people whom I +was engaged in describing. I have mentioned in what spirit, and according to +what laws, the Anglo-American Union was formed; but I could only glance at the +dangers which menace that confederation, whilst it was equally impossible for +me to give a detailed account of its chances of duration, independently of its +laws and manners. When speaking of the united republican States, I hazarded no +conjectures upon the permanence of republican forms in the New World, and when +making frequent allusion to the commercial activity which reigns in the Union, +I was unable to inquire into the future condition of the Americans as a +commercial people. +</p> + +<p> +These topics are collaterally connected with my subject without forming a part +of it; they are American without being democratic; and to portray democracy has +been my principal aim. It was therefore necessary to postpone these questions, +which I now take up as the proper termination of my work. +</p> + +<p> +The territory now occupied or claimed by the American Union spreads from the +shores of the Atlantic to those of the Pacific Ocean. On the east and west its +limits are those of the continent itself. On the south it advances nearly to +the tropic, and it extends upwards to the icy regions of the North. The human +beings who are scattered over this space do not form, as in Europe, so many +branches of the same stock. Three races, naturally distinct, and, I might +almost say, hostile to each other, are discoverable amongst them at the first +glance. Almost insurmountable barriers had been raised between them by +education and by law, as well as by their origin and outward characteristics; +but fortune has brought them together on the same soil, where, although they +are mixed, they do not amalgamate, and each race fulfils its destiny apart. +</p> + +<p> +Amongst these widely differing families of men, the first which attracts +attention, the superior in intelligence, in power and in enjoyment, is the +white or European, the man pre-eminent; and in subordinate grades, the negro +and the Indian. These two unhappy races have nothing in common; neither birth, +nor features, nor language, nor habits. Their only resemblance lies in their +misfortunes. Both of them occupy an inferior rank in the country they inhabit; +both suffer from tyranny; and if their wrongs are not the same, they originate, +at any rate, with the same authors. +</p> + +<p> +If we reasoned from what passes in the world, we should almost say that the +European is to the other races of mankind, what man is to the lower +animals;—he makes them subservient to his use; and when he cannot subdue, +he destroys them. Oppression has, at one stroke, deprived the descendants of +the Africans of almost all the privileges of humanity. The negro of the United +States has lost all remembrance of his country; the language which his +forefathers spoke is never heard around him; he abjured their religion and +forgot their customs when he ceased to belong to Africa, without acquiring any +claim to European privileges. But he remains half way between the two +communities; sold by the one, repulsed by the other; finding not a spot in the +universe to call by the name of country, except the faint image of a home which +the shelter of his master’s roof affords. +</p> + +<p> +The negro has no family; woman is merely the temporary companion of his +pleasures, and his children are upon an equality with himself from the moment +of their birth. Am I to call it a proof of God’s mercy or a visitation of +his wrath, that man in certain states appears to be insensible to his extreme +wretchedness, and almost affects, with a depraved taste, the cause of his +misfortunes? The negro, who is plunged in this abyss of evils, scarcely feels +his own calamitous situation. Violence made him a slave, and the habit of +servitude gives him the thoughts and desires of a slave; he admires his tyrants +more than he hates them, and finds his joy and his pride in the servile +imitation of those who oppress him: his understanding is degraded to the level +of his soul. +</p> + +<p> +The negro enters upon slavery as soon as he is born: nay, he may have been +purchased in the womb, and have begun his slavery before he began his +existence. Equally devoid of wants and of enjoyment, and useless to himself, he +learns, with his first notions of existence, that he is the property of +another, who has an interest in preserving his life, and that the care of it +does not devolve upon himself; even the power of thought appears to him a +useless gift of Providence, and he quietly enjoys the privileges of his +debasement. If he becomes free, independence is often felt by him to be a +heavier burden than slavery; for having learned, in the course of his life, to +submit to everything except reason, he is too much unacquainted with her +dictates to obey them. A thousand new desires beset him, and he is destitute of +the knowledge and energy necessary to resist them: these are masters which it +is necessary to contend with, and he has learnt only to submit and obey. In +short, he sinks to such a depth of wretchedness, that while servitude +brutalizes, liberty destroys him. +</p> + +<p> +Oppression has been no less fatal to the Indian than to the negro race, but its +effects are different. Before the arrival of white men in the New World, the +inhabitants of North America lived quietly in their woods, enduring the +vicissitudes and practising the virtues and vices common to savage nations. The +Europeans, having dispersed the Indian tribes and driven them into the deserts, +condemned them to a wandering life full of inexpressible sufferings. +</p> + +<p> +Savage nations are only controlled by opinion and by custom. When the North +American Indians had lost the sentiment of attachment to their country; when +their families were dispersed, their traditions obscured, and the chain of +their recollections broken; when all their habits were changed, and their wants +increased beyond measure, European tyranny rendered them more disorderly and +less civilized than they were before. The moral and physical condition of these +tribes continually grew worse, and they became more barbarous as they became +more wretched. Nevertheless, the Europeans have not been able to metamorphose +the character of the Indians; and though they have had power to destroy them, +they have never been able to make them submit to the rules of civilized +society. +</p> + +<p> +The lot of the negro is placed on the extreme limit of servitude, while that of +the Indian lies on the uttermost verge of liberty; and slavery does not produce +more fatal effects upon the first, than independence upon the second. The negro +has lost all property in his own person, and he cannot dispose of his existence +without committing a sort of fraud: but the savage is his own master as soon as +he is able to act; parental authority is scarcely known to him; he has never +bent his will to that of any of his kind, nor learned the difference between +voluntary obedience and a shameful subjection; and the very name of law is +unknown to him. To be free, with him, signifies to escape from all the shackles +of society. As he delights in this barbarous independence, and would rather +perish than sacrifice the least part of it, civilization has little power over +him. +</p> + +<p> +The negro makes a thousand fruitless efforts to insinuate himself amongst men +who repulse him; he conforms to the tastes of his oppressors, adopts their +opinions, and hopes by imitating them to form a part of their community. Having +been told from infancy that his race is naturally inferior to that of the +whites, he assents to the proposition and is ashamed of his own nature. In each +of his features he discovers a trace of slavery, and, if it were in his power, +he would willingly rid himself of everything that makes him what he is. +</p> + +<p> +The Indian, on the contrary, has his imagination inflated with the pretended +nobility of his origin, and lives and dies in the midst of these dreams of +pride. Far from desiring to conform his habits to ours, he loves his savage +life as the distinguishing mark of his race, and he repels every advance to +civilization, less perhaps from the hatred which he entertains for it, than +from a dread of resembling the Europeans. *a While he has nothing to oppose to +our perfection in the arts but the resources of the desert, to our tactics +nothing but undisciplined courage; whilst our well-digested plans are met by +the spontaneous instincts of savage life, who can wonder if he fails in this +unequal contest? +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ The native of North America retains his opinions and the most insignificant +of his habits with a degree of tenacity which has no parallel in history. For +more than two hundred years the wandering tribes of North America have had +daily intercourse with the whites, and they have never derived from them either +a custom or an idea. Yet the Europeans have exercised a powerful influence over +the savages: they have made them more licentious, but not more European. In the +summer of 1831 I happened to be beyond Lake Michigan, at a place called Green +Bay, which serves as the extreme frontier between the United States and the +Indians on the north-western side. Here I became acquainted with an American +officer, Major H., who, after talking to me at length on the inflexibility of +the Indian character, related the following fact:—“I formerly knew +a young Indian,” said he, “who had been educated at a college in +New England, where he had greatly distinguished himself, and had acquired the +external appearance of a member of civilized society. When the war broke out +between ourselves and the English in 1810, I saw this young man again; he was +serving in our army, at the head of the warriors of his tribe, for the Indians +were admitted amongst the ranks of the Americans, upon condition that they +would abstain from their horrible custom of scalping their victims. On the +evening of the battle of . . ., C. came and sat himself down by the fire of our +bivouac. I asked him what had been his fortune that day: he related his +exploits; and growing warm and animated by the recollection of them, he +concluded by suddenly opening the breast of his coat, saying, ‘You must +not betray me—see here!’ And I actually beheld,” said the +Major, “between his body and his shirt, the skin and hair of an English +head, still dripping with gore.”] +</p> + +<p> +The negro, who earnestly desires to mingle his race with that of the European, +cannot effect if; while the Indian, who might succeed to a certain extent, +disdains to make the attempt. The servility of the one dooms him to slavery, +the pride of the other to death. +</p> + +<p> +I remember that while I was travelling through the forests which still cover +the State of Alabama, I arrived one day at the log house of a pioneer. I did +not wish to penetrate into the dwelling of the American, but retired to rest +myself for a while on the margin of a spring, which was not far off, in the +woods. While I was in this place (which was in the neighborhood of the Creek +territory), an Indian woman appeared, followed by a negress, and holding by the +hand a little white girl of five or six years old, whom I took to be the +daughter of the pioneer. A sort of barbarous luxury set off the costume of the +Indian; rings of metal were hanging from her nostrils and ears; her hair, which +was adorned with glass beads, fell loosely upon her shoulders; and I saw that +she was not married, for she still wore that necklace of shells which the bride +always deposits on the nuptial couch. The negress was clad in squalid European +garments. They all three came and seated themselves upon the banks of the +fountain; and the young Indian, taking the child in her arms, lavished upon her +such fond caresses as mothers give; while the negress endeavored by various +little artifices to attract the attention of the young Creole. +</p> + +<p> +The child displayed in her slightest gestures a consciousness of superiority +which formed a strange contrast with her infantine weakness; as if she received +the attentions of her companions with a sort of condescension. The negress was +seated on the ground before her mistress, watching her smallest desires, and +apparently divided between strong affection for the child and servile fear; +whilst the savage displayed, in the midst of her tenderness, an air of freedom +and of pride which was almost ferocious. I had approached the group, and I +contemplated them in silence; but my curiosity was probably displeasing to the +Indian woman, for she suddenly rose, pushed the child roughly from her, and +giving me an angry look plunged into the thicket. I had often chanced to see +individuals met together in the same place, who belonged to the three races of +men which people North America. I had perceived from many different results the +preponderance of the whites. But in the picture which I have just been +describing there was something peculiarly touching; a bond of affection here +united the oppressors with the oppressed, and the effort of nature to bring +them together rendered still more striking the immense distance placed between +them by prejudice and by law. +</p> + +<p> +The Present And Probable Future Condition Of The Indian Tribes Which Inhabit +The Territory Possessed By The Union +</p> + +<p> +Gradual disappearance of the native tribes—Manner in which it takes +place—Miseries accompanying the forced migrations of the +Indians—The savages of North America had only two ways of escaping +destruction; war or civilization—They are no longer able to make +war—Reasons why they refused to become civilized when it was in their +power, and why they cannot become so now that they desire it—Instance of +the Creeks and Cherokees—Policy of the particular States towards these +Indians—Policy of the Federal Government. +</p> + +<p> +None of the Indian tribes which formerly inhabited the territory of New +England—the Naragansetts, the Mohicans, the Pecots—have any +existence but in the recollection of man. The Lenapes, who received William +Penn, a hundred and fifty years ago, upon the banks of the Delaware, have +disappeared; and I myself met with the last of the Iroquois, who were begging +alms. The nations I have mentioned formerly covered the country to the +sea-coast; but a traveller at the present day must penetrate more than a +hundred leagues into the interior of the continent to find an Indian. Not only +have these wild tribes receded, but they are destroyed; *b and as they give way +or perish, an immense and increasing people fills their place. There is no +instance upon record of so prodigious a growth, or so rapid a destruction: the +manner in which the latter change takes place is not difficult to describe. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ In the thirteen original States there are only 6,273 Indians remaining. (See +Legislative Documents, 20th Congress, No. 117, p. 90.) [The decrease in now far +greater, and is verging on extinction. See page 360 of this volume.]] +</p> + +<p> +When the Indians were the sole inhabitants of the wilds from whence they have +since been expelled, their wants were few. Their arms were of their own +manufacture, their only drink was the water of the brook, and their clothes +consisted of the skins of animals, whose flesh furnished them with food. +</p> + +<p> +The Europeans introduced amongst the savages of North America fire-arms, ardent +spirits, and iron: they taught them to exchange for manufactured stuffs, the +rough garments which had previously satisfied their untutored simplicity. +Having acquired new tastes, without the arts by which they could be gratified, +the Indians were obliged to have recourse to the workmanship of the whites; but +in return for their productions the savage had nothing to offer except the rich +furs which still abounded in his woods. Hence the chase became necessary, not +merely to provide for his subsistence, but in order to procure the only objects +of barter which he could furnish to Europe. *c Whilst the wants of the natives +were thus increasing, their resources continued to diminish. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ Messrs. Clarke and Cass, in their Report to Congress on February 4, 1829, p. +23, expressed themselves thus:—“The time when the Indians generally +could supply themselves with food and clothing, without any of the articles of +civilized life, has long since passed away. The more remote tribes, beyond the +Mississippi, who live where immense herds of buffalo are yet to be found and +who follow those animals in their periodical migrations, could more easily than +any others recur to the habits of their ancestors, and live without the white +man or any of his manufactures. But the buffalo is constantly receding. The +smaller animals, the bear, the deer, the beaver, the otter, the muskrat, etc., +principally minister to the comfort and support of the Indians; and these +cannot be taken without guns, ammunition, and traps. Among the Northwestern +Indians particularly, the labor of supplying a family with food is excessive. +Day after day is spent by the hunter without success, and during this interval +his family must subsist upon bark or roots, or perish. Want and misery are +around them and among them. Many die every winter from actual +starvation.” +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +The Indians will not live as Europeans live, and yet they can neither subsist +without them, nor exactly after the fashion of their fathers. This is +demonstrated by a fact which I likewise give upon official authority. Some +Indians of a tribe on the banks of Lake Superior had killed a European; the +American government interdicted all traffic with the tribe to which the guilty +parties belonged, until they were delivered up to justice. This measure had the +desired effect.] +</p> + +<p> +From the moment when a European settlement is formed in the neighborhood of the +territory occupied by the Indians, the beasts of chase take the alarm. *d +Thousands of savages, wandering in the forests and destitute of any fixed +dwelling, did not disturb them; but as soon as the continuous sounds of +European labor are heard in their neighborhood, they begin to flee away, and +retire to the West, where their instinct teaches them that they will find +deserts of immeasurable extent. “The buffalo is constantly +receding,” say Messrs. Clarke and Cass in their Report of the year 1829; +“a few years since they approached the base of the Alleghany; and a few +years hence they may even be rare upon the immense plains which extend to the +base of the Rocky Mountains.” I have been assured that this effect of the +approach of the whites is often felt at two hundred leagues’ distance +from their frontier. Their influence is thus exerted over tribes whose name is +unknown to them; and who suffer the evils of usurpation long before they are +acquainted with the authors of their distress. *e +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ “Five years ago,” (says Volney in his “Tableau des +Etats-Unis,” p. 370) “in going from Vincennes to Kaskaskia, a +territory which now forms part of the State of Illinois, but which at the time +I mention was completely wild (1797), you could not cross a prairie without +seeing herds of from four to five hundred buffaloes. There are now none +remaining; they swam across the Mississippi to escape from the hunters, and +more particularly from the bells of the American cows.”] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ The truth of what I here advance may be easily proved by consulting the +tabular statement of Indian tribes inhabiting the United States and their +territories. (Legislative Documents, 20th Congress, No. 117, pp. 90-105.) It is +there shown that the tribes in the centre of America are rapidly decreasing, +although the Europeans are still at a considerable distance from them.] +</p> + +<p> +Bold adventurers soon penetrate into the country the Indians have deserted, and +when they have advanced about fifteen or twenty leagues from the extreme +frontiers of the whites, they begin to build habitations for civilized beings +in the midst of the wilderness. This is done without difficulty, as the +territory of a hunting-nation is ill-defined; it is the common property of the +tribe, and belongs to no one in particular, so that individual interests are +not concerned in the protection of any part of it. +</p> + +<p> +A few European families, settled in different situations at a considerable +distance from each other, soon drive away the wild animals which remain between +their places of abode. The Indians, who had previously lived in a sort of +abundance, then find it difficult to subsist, and still more difficult to +procure the articles of barter which they stand in need of. +</p> + +<p> +To drive away their game is to deprive them of the means of existence, as +effectually as if the fields of our agriculturists were stricken with +barrenness; and they are reduced, like famished wolves, to prowl through the +forsaken woods in quest of prey. Their instinctive love of their country +attaches them to the soil which gave them birth, *f even after it has ceased to +yield anything but misery and death. At length they are compelled to acquiesce, +and to depart: they follow the traces of the elk, the buffalo, and the beaver, +and are guided by these wild animals in the choice of their future country. +Properly speaking, therefore, it is not the Europeans who drive away the native +inhabitants of America; it is famine which compels them to recede; a happy +distinction which had escaped the casuists of former times, and for which we +are indebted to modern discovery! +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ “The Indians,” say Messrs. Clarke and Cass in their Report to +Congress, p. 15, “are attached to their country by the same feelings +which bind us to ours; and, besides, there are certain superstitious notions +connected with the alienation of what the Great Spirit gave to their ancestors, +which operate strongly upon the tribes who have made few or no cessions, but +which are gradually weakened as our intercourse with them is extended. +‘We will not sell the spot which contains the bones of our +fathers,’ is almost always the first answer to a proposition for a +sale.”] +</p> + +<p> +It is impossible to conceive the extent of the sufferings which attend these +forced emigrations. They are undertaken by a people already exhausted and +reduced; and the countries to which the newcomers betake themselves are +inhabited by other tribes which receive them with jealous hostility. Hunger is +in the rear; war awaits them, and misery besets them on all sides. In the hope +of escaping from such a host of enemies, they separate, and each individual +endeavors to procure the means of supporting his existence in solitude and +secrecy, living in the immensity of the desert like an outcast in civilized +society. The social tie, which distress had long since weakened, is then +dissolved; they have lost their country, and their people soon desert them: +their very families are obliterated; the names they bore in common are +forgotten, their language perishes, and all traces of their origin disappear. +Their nation has ceased to exist, except in the recollection of the antiquaries +of America and a few of the learned of Europe. +</p> + +<p> +I should be sorry to have my reader suppose that I am coloring the picture too +highly; I saw with my own eyes several of the cases of misery which I have been +describing; and I was the witness of sufferings which I have not the power to +portray. +</p> + +<p> +At the end of the year 1831, whilst I was on the left bank of the Mississippi +at a place named by Europeans, Memphis, there arrived a numerous band of +Choctaws (or Chactas, as they are called by the French in Louisiana). These +savages had left their country, and were endeavoring to gain the right bank of +the Mississippi, where they hoped to find an asylum which had been promised +them by the American government. It was then the middle of winter, and the cold +was unusually severe; the snow had frozen hard upon the ground, and the river +was drifting huge masses of ice. The Indians had their families with them; and +they brought in their train the wounded and sick, with children newly born, and +old men upon the verge of death. They possessed neither tents nor wagons, but +only their arms and some provisions. I saw them embark to pass the mighty +river, and never will that solemn spectacle fade from my remembrance. No cry, +no sob was heard amongst the assembled crowd; all were silent. Their calamities +were of ancient date, and they knew them to be irremediable. The Indians had +all stepped into the bark which was to carry them across, but their dogs +remained upon the bank. As soon as these animals perceived that their masters +were finally leaving the shore, they set up a dismal howl, and, plunging all +together into the icy waters of the Mississippi, they swam after the boat. +</p> + +<p> +The ejectment of the Indians very often takes place at the present day, in a +regular, and, as it were, a legal manner. When the European population begins +to approach the limit of the desert inhabited by a savage tribe, the government +of the United States usually dispatches envoys to them, who assemble the +Indians in a large plain, and having first eaten and drunk with them, accost +them in the following manner: “What have you to do in the land of your +fathers? Before long, you must dig up their bones in order to live. In what +respect is the country you inhabit better than another? Are there no woods, +marshes, or prairies, except where you dwell? And can you live nowhere but +under your own sun? Beyond those mountains which you see at the horizon, beyond +the lake which bounds your territory on the west, there lie vast countries +where beasts of chase are found in great abundance; sell your lands to us, and +go to live happily in those solitudes.” After holding this language, they +spread before the eyes of the Indians firearms, woollen garments, kegs of +brandy, glass necklaces, bracelets of tinsel, earrings, and looking-glasses. *g +If, when they have beheld all these riches, they still hesitate, it is +insinuated that they have not the means of refusing their required consent, and +that the government itself will not long have the power of protecting them in +their rights. What are they to do? Half convinced, and half compelled, they go +to inhabit new deserts, where the importunate whites will not let them remain +ten years in tranquillity. In this manner do the Americans obtain, at a very +low price, whole provinces, which the richest sovereigns of Europe could not +purchase. *h +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ See, in the Legislative Documents of Congress (Doc. 117), the narrative of +what takes place on these occasions. This curious passage is from the +above-mentioned report, made to Congress by Messrs. Clarke and Cass in +February, 1829. Mr. Cass is now the Secretary of War. +</p> + +<p> +“The Indians,” says the report, “reach the treaty-ground poor +and almost naked. Large quantities of goods are taken there by the traders, and +are seen and examined by the Indians. The women and children become importunate +to have their wants supplied, and their influence is soon exerted to induce a +sale. Their improvidence is habitual and unconquerable. The gratification of +his immediate wants and desires is the ruling passion of an Indian. The +expectation of future advantages seldom produces much effect. The experience of +the past is lost, and the prospects of the future disregarded. It would be +utterly hopeless to demand a cession of land, unless the means were at hand of +gratifying their immediate wants; and when their condition and circumstances +are fairly considered, it ought not to surprise us that they are so anxious to +relieve themselves.”] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ On May 19, 1830, Mr. Edward Everett affirmed before the House of +Representatives, that the Americans had already acquired by treaty, to the east +and west of the Mississippi, 230,000,000 of acres. In 1808 the Osages gave up +48,000,000 acres for an annual payment of $1,000. In 1818 the Quapaws yielded +up 29,000,000 acres for $4,000. They reserved for themselves a territory of +1,000,000 acres for a hunting-ground. A solemn oath was taken that it should be +respected: but before long it was invaded like the rest. Mr. Bell, in his +Report of the Committee on Indian Affairs, February 24, 1830, has these +words:—“To pay an Indian tribe what their ancient hunting-grounds +are worth to them, after the game is fled or destroyed, as a mode of +appropriating wild lands claimed by Indians, has been found more convenient, +and certainly it is more agreeable to the forms of justice, as well as more +merciful, than to assert the possession of them by the sword. Thus the practice +of buying Indian titles is but the substitute which humanity and expediency +have imposed, in place of the sword, in arriving at the actual enjoyment of +property claimed by the right of discovery, and sanctioned by the natural +superiority allowed to the claims of civilized communities over those of savage +tribes. Up to the present time so invariable has been the operation of certain +causes, first in diminishing the value of forest lands to the Indians, and +secondly in disposing them to sell readily, that the plan of buying their right +of occupancy has never threatened to retard, in any perceptible degree, the +prosperity of any of the States.” (Legislative Documents, 21st Congress, +No. 227, p. 6.)] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0046" id="link2HCH0046"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part II</h2> + +<p> +These are great evils; and it must be added that they appear to me to be +irremediable. I believe that the Indian nations of North America are doomed to +perish; and that whenever the Europeans shall be established on the shores of +the Pacific Ocean, that race of men will be no more. *i The Indians had only +the two alternatives of war or civilization; in other words, they must either +have destroyed the Europeans or become their equals. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ This seems, indeed, to be the opinion of almost all American statesmen. +“Judging of the future by the past,” says Mr. Cass, “we +cannot err in anticipating a progressive diminution of their numbers, and their +eventual extinction, unless our border should become stationary, and they be +removed beyond it, or unless some radical change should take place in the +principles of our intercourse with them, which it is easier to hope for than to +expect.”] +</p> + +<p> +At the first settlement of the colonies they might have found it possible, by +uniting their forces, to deliver themselves from the small bodies of strangers +who landed on their continent. *j They several times attempted to do it, and +were on the point of succeeding; but the disproportion of their resources, at +the present day, when compared with those of the whites, is too great to allow +such an enterprise to be thought of. Nevertheless, there do arise from time to +time among the Indians men of penetration, who foresee the final destiny which +awaits the native population, and who exert themselves to unite all the tribes +in common hostility to the Europeans; but their efforts are unavailing. Those +tribes which are in the neighborhood of the whites, are too much weakened to +offer an effectual resistance; whilst the others, giving way to that childish +carelessness of the morrow which characterizes savage life, wait for the near +approach of danger before they prepare to meet it; some are unable, the others +are unwilling, to exert themselves. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ Amongst other warlike enterprises, there was one of the Wampanaogs, and other +confederate tribes, under Metacom in 1675, against the colonists of New +England; the English were also engaged in war in Virginia in 1622.] +</p> + +<p> +It is easy to foresee that the Indians will never conform to civilization; or +that it will be too late, whenever they may be inclined to make the experiment. +</p> + +<p> +Civilization is the result of a long social process which takes place in the +same spot, and is handed down from one generation to another, each one +profiting by the experience of the last. Of all nations, those submit to +civilization with the most difficulty which habitually live by the chase. +Pastoral tribes, indeed, often change their place of abode; but they follow a +regular order in their migrations, and often return again to their old +stations, whilst the dwelling of the hunter varies with that of the animals he +pursues. +</p> + +<p> +Several attempts have been made to diffuse knowledge amongst the Indians, +without controlling their wandering propensities; by the Jesuits in Canada, and +by the Puritans in New England; *k but none of these endeavors were crowned by +any lasting success. Civilization began in the cabin, but it soon retired to +expire in the woods. The great error of these legislators of the Indians was +their not understanding that, in order to succeed in civilizing a people, it is +first necessary to fix it; which cannot be done without inducing it to +cultivate the soil; the Indians ought in the first place to have been +accustomed to agriculture. But not only are they destitute of this +indispensable preliminary to civilization, they would even have great +difficulty in acquiring it. Men who have once abandoned themselves to the +restless and adventurous life of the hunter, feel an insurmountable disgust for +the constant and regular labor which tillage requires. We see this proved in +the bosom of our own society; but it is far more visible among peoples whose +partiality for the chase is a part of their national character. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ See the “Histoire de la Nouvelle France,” by Charlevoix, and the +work entitled “Lettres edifiantes.”] +</p> + +<p> +Independently of this general difficulty, there is another, which applies +peculiarly to the Indians; they consider labor not merely as an evil, but as a +disgrace; so that their pride prevents them from becoming civilized, as much as +their indolence. *l +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ “In all the tribes,” says Volney, in his “Tableau des +Etats-Unis,” p. 423, “there still exists a generation of old +warriors, who cannot forbear, when they see their countrymen using the hoe, +from exclaiming against the degradation of ancient manners, and asserting that +the savages owe their decline to these innovations; adding, that they have only +to return to their primitive habits in order to recover their power and their +glory.”] +</p> + +<p> +There is no Indian so wretched as not to retain under his hut of bark a lofty +idea of his personal worth; he considers the cares of industry and labor as +degrading occupations; he compares the husbandman to the ox which traces the +furrow; and even in our most ingenious handicraft, he can see nothing but the +labor of slaves. Not that he is devoid of admiration for the power and +intellectual greatness of the whites; but although the result of our efforts +surprises him, he contemns the means by which we obtain it; and while he +acknowledges our ascendancy, he still believes in his superiority. War and +hunting are the only pursuits which appear to him worthy to be the occupations +of a man. *m The Indian, in the dreary solitude of his woods, cherishes the +same ideas, the same opinions as the noble of the Middle Ages in his castle, +and he only requires to become a conqueror to complete the resemblance; thus, +however strange it may seem, it is in the forests of the New World, and not +amongst the Europeans who people its coasts, that the ancient prejudices of +Europe are still in existence. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ The following description occurs in an official document: “Until a +young man has been engaged with an enemy, and has performed some acts of valor, +he gains no consideration, but is regarded nearly as a woman. In their great +war-dances all the warriors in succession strike the post, as it is called, and +recount their exploits. On these occasions their auditory consists of the +kinsmen, friends, and comrades of the narrator. The profound impression which +his discourse produces on them is manifested by the silent attention it +receives, and by the loud shouts which hail its termination. The young man who +finds himself at such a meeting without anything to recount is very unhappy; +and instances have sometimes occurred of young warriors, whose passions had +been thus inflamed, quitting the war-dance suddenly, and going off alone to +seek for trophies which they might exhibit, and adventures which they might be +allowed to relate.”] +</p> + +<p> +More than once, in the course of this work, I have endeavored to explain the +prodigious influence which the social condition appears to exercise upon the +laws and the manners of men; and I beg to add a few words on the same subject. +</p> + +<p> +When I perceive the resemblance which exists between the political institutions +of our ancestors, the Germans, and of the wandering tribes of North America; +between the customs described by Tacitus, and those of which I have sometimes +been a witness, I cannot help thinking that the same cause has brought about +the same results in both hemispheres; and that in the midst of the apparent +diversity of human affairs, a certain number of primary facts may be +discovered, from which all the others are derived. In what we usually call the +German institutions, then, I am inclined only to perceive barbarian habits; and +the opinions of savages in what we style feudal principles. +</p> + +<p> +However strongly the vices and prejudices of the North American Indians may be +opposed to their becoming agricultural and civilized, necessity sometimes +obliges them to it. Several of the Southern nations, and amongst others the +Cherokees and the Creeks, *n were surrounded by Europeans, who had landed on +the shores of the Atlantic; and who, either descending the Ohio or proceeding +up the Mississippi, arrived simultaneously upon their borders. These tribes +have not been driven from place to place, like their Northern brethren; but +they have been gradually enclosed within narrow limits, like the game within +the thicket, before the huntsmen plunge into the interior. The Indians who were +thus placed between civilization and death, found themselves obliged to live by +ignominious labor like the whites. They took to agriculture, and without +entirely forsaking their old habits or manners, sacrificed only as much as was +necessary to their existence. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ These nations are now swallowed up in the States of Georgia, Tennessee, +Alabama, and Mississippi. There were formerly in the South four great nations +(remnants of which still exist), the Choctaws, the Chickasaws, the Creeks, and +the Cherokees. The remnants of these four nations amounted, in 1830, to about +75,000 individuals. It is computed that there are now remaining in the +territory occupied or claimed by the Anglo-American Union about 300,000 +Indians. (See Proceedings of the Indian Board in the City of New York.) The +official documents supplied to Congress make the number amount to 313,130. The +reader who is curious to know the names and numerical strength of all the +tribes which inhabit the Anglo-American territory should consult the documents +I refer to. (Legislative Documents, 20th Congress, No. 117, pp. 90-105.) [In +the Census of 1870 it is stated that the Indian population of the United States +is only 25,731, of whom 7,241 are in California.]] +</p> + +<p> +The Cherokees went further; they created a written language; established a +permanent form of government; and as everything proceeds rapidly in the New +World, before they had all of them clothes, they set up a newspaper. *o +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ I brought back with me to France one or two copies of this singular +publication.] +</p> + +<p> +The growth of European habits has been remarkably accelerated among these +Indians by the mixed race which has sprung up. *p Deriving intelligence from +their father’s side, without entirely losing the savage customs of the +mother, the half-blood forms the natural link between civilization and +barbarism. Wherever this race has multiplied the savage state has become +modified, and a great change has taken place in the manners of the people. *q +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ See in the Report of the Committee on Indian Affairs, 21st Congress, No. 227, +p. 23, the reasons for the multiplication of Indians of mixed blood among the +Cherokees. The principal cause dates from the War of Independence. Many +Anglo-Americans of Georgia, having taken the side of England, were obliged to +retreat among the Indians, where they married.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ Unhappily the mixed race has been less numerous and less influential in North +America than in any other country. The American continent was peopled by two +great nations of Europe, the French and the English. The former were not slow +in connecting themselves with the daughters of the natives, but there was an +unfortunate affinity between the Indian character and their own: instead of +giving the tastes and habits of civilized life to the savages, the French too +often grew passionately fond of the state of wild freedom they found them in. +They became the most dangerous of the inhabitants of the desert, and won the +friendship of the Indian by exaggerating his vices and his virtues. M. de +Senonville, the governor of Canada, wrote thus to Louis XIV in 1685: “It +has long been believed that in order to civilize the savages we ought to draw +them nearer to us. But there is every reason to suppose we have been mistaken. +Those which have been brought into contact with us have not become French, and +the French who have lived among them are changed into savages, affecting to +dress and live like them.” (“History of New France,” by +Charlevoix, vol. ii., p. 345.) The Englishman, on the contrary, continuing +obstinately attached to the customs and the most insignificant habits of his +forefathers, has remained in the midst of the American solitudes just what he +was in the bosom of European cities; he would not allow of any communication +with savages whom he despised, and avoided with care the union of his race with +theirs. Thus while the French exercised no salutary influence over the Indians, +the English have always remained alien from them.] +</p> + +<p> +The success of the Cherokees proves that the Indians are capable of +civilization, but it does not prove that they will succeed in it. This +difficulty which the Indians find in submitting to civilization proceeds from +the influence of a general cause, which it is almost impossible for them to +escape. An attentive survey of history demonstrates that, in general, barbarous +nations have raised themselves to civilization by degrees, and by their own +efforts. Whenever they derive knowledge from a foreign people, they stood +towards it in the relation of conquerors, and not of a conquered nation. When +the conquered nation is enlightened, and the conquerors are half savage, as in +the case of the invasion of Rome by the Northern nations or that of China by +the Mongols, the power which victory bestows upon the barbarian is sufficient +to keep up his importance among civilized men, and permit him to rank as their +equal, until he becomes their rival: the one has might on his side, the other +has intelligence; the former admires the knowledge and the arts of the +conquered, the latter envies the power of the conquerors. The barbarians at +length admit civilized man into their palaces, and he in turn opens his schools +to the barbarians. But when the side on which the physical force lies, also +possesses an intellectual preponderance, the conquered party seldom become +civilized; it retreats, or is destroyed. It may therefore be said, in a general +way, that savages go forth in arms to seek knowledge, but that they do not +receive it when it comes to them. +</p> + +<p> +If the Indian tribes which now inhabit the heart of the continent could summon +up energy enough to attempt to civilize themselves, they might possibly +succeed. Superior already to the barbarous nations which surround them, they +would gradually gain strength and experience, and when the Europeans should +appear upon their borders, they would be in a state, if not to maintain their +independence, at least to assert their right to the soil, and to incorporate +themselves with the conquerors. But it is the misfortune of Indians to be +brought into contact with a civilized people, which is also (it must be owned) +the most avaricious nation on the globe, whilst they are still semi-barbarian: +to find despots in their instructors, and to receive knowledge from the hand of +oppression. Living in the freedom of the woods, the North American Indian was +destitute, but he had no feeling of inferiority towards anyone; as soon, +however, as he desires to penetrate into the social scale of the whites, he +takes the lowest rank in society, for he enters, ignorant and poor, within the +pale of science and wealth. After having led a life of agitation, beset with +evils and dangers, but at the same time filled with proud emotions, *r he is +obliged to submit to a wearisome, obscure, and degraded state; and to gain the +bread which nourishes him by hard and ignoble labor; such are in his eyes the +only results of which civilization can boast: and even this much he is not sure +to obtain. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ There is in the adventurous life of the hunter a certain irresistible charm, +which seizes the heart of man and carries him away in spite of reason and +experience. This is plainly shown by the memoirs of Tanner. Tanner is a +European who was carried away at the age of six by the Indians, and has +remained thirty years with them in the woods. Nothing can be conceived more +appalling that the miseries which he describes. He tells us of tribes without a +chief, families without a nation to call their own, men in a state of +isolation, wrecks of powerful tribes wandering at random amid the ice and snow +and desolate solitudes of Canada. Hunger and cold pursue them; every day their +life is in jeopardy. Amongst these men, manners have lost their empire, +traditions are without power. They become more and more savage. Tanner shared +in all these miseries; he was aware of his European origin; he was not kept +away from the whites by force; on the contrary, he came every year to trade +with them, entered their dwellings, and witnessed their enjoyments; he knew +that whenever he chose to return to civilized life he was perfectly able to do +so—and he remained thirty years in the deserts. When he came into +civilized society he declared that the rude existence which he described, had a +secret charm for him which he was unable to define: he returned to it again and +again: at length he abandoned it with poignant regret; and when he was at +length fixed among the whites, several of his children refused to share his +tranquil and easy situation. I saw Tanner myself at the lower end of Lake +Superior; he seemed to me to be more like a savage than a civilized being. His +book is written without either taste or order; but he gives, even +unconsciously, a lively picture of the prejudices, the passions, the vices, +and, above all, of the destitution in which he lived.] +</p> + +<p> +When the Indians undertake to imitate their European neighbors, and to till the +earth like the settlers, they are immediately exposed to a very formidable +competition. The white man is skilled in the craft of agriculture; the Indian +is a rough beginner in an art with which he is unacquainted. The former reaps +abundant crops without difficulty, the latter meets with a thousand obstacles +in raising the fruits of the earth. +</p> + +<p> +The European is placed amongst a population whose wants he knows and partakes. +The savage is isolated in the midst of a hostile people, with whose manners, +language, and laws he is imperfectly acquainted, but without whose assistance +he cannot live. He can only procure the materials of comfort by bartering his +commodities against the goods of the European, for the assistance of his +countrymen is wholly insufficient to supply his wants. When the Indian wishes +to sell the produce of his labor, he cannot always meet with a purchaser, +whilst the European readily finds a market; and the former can only produce at +a considerable cost that which the latter vends at a very low rate. Thus the +Indian has no sooner escaped those evils to which barbarous nations are +exposed, than he is subjected to the still greater miseries of civilized +communities; and he finds is scarcely less difficult to live in the midst of +our abundance, than in the depth of his own wilderness. +</p> + +<p> +He has not yet lost the habits of his erratic life; the traditions of his +fathers and his passion for the chase are still alive within him. The wild +enjoyments which formerly animated him in the woods, painfully excite his +troubled imagination; and his former privations appear to be less keen, his +former perils less appalling. He contrasts the independence which he possessed +amongst his equals with the servile position which he occupies in civilized +society. On the other hand, the solitudes which were so long his free home are +still at hand; a few hours’ march will bring him back to them once more. +The whites offer him a sum, which seems to him to be considerable, for the +ground which he has begun to clear. This money of the Europeans may possibly +furnish him with the means of a happy and peaceful subsistence in remoter +regions; and he quits the plough, resumes his native arms, and returns to the +wilderness forever. *s The condition of the Creeks and Cherokees, to which I +have already alluded, sufficiently corroborates the truth of this deplorable +picture. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +s <br /> +[ The destructive influence of highly civilized nations upon others which are +less so, has been exemplified by the Europeans themselves. About a century ago +the French founded the town of Vincennes up on the Wabash, in the middle of the +desert; and they lived there in great plenty until the arrival of the American +settlers, who first ruined the previous inhabitants by their competition, and +afterwards purchased their lands at a very low rate. At the time when M. de +Volney, from whom I borrow these details, passed through Vincennes, the number +of the French was reduced to a hundred individuals, most of whom were about to +pass over to Louisiana or to Canada. These French settlers were worthy people, +but idle and uninstructed: they had contracted many of the habits of savages. +The Americans, who were perhaps their inferiors, in a moral point of view, were +immeasurably superior to them in intelligence: they were industrious, well +informed, rich, and accustomed to govern their own community. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +I myself saw in Canada, where the intellectual difference between the two races +is less striking, that the English are the masters of commerce and manufacture +in the Canadian country, that they spread on all sides, and confine the French +within limits which scarcely suffice to contain them. In like manner, in +Louisiana, almost all activity in commerce and manufacture centres in the hands +of the Anglo-Americans. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +But the case of Texas is still more striking: the State of Texas is a part of +Mexico, and lies upon the frontier between that country and the United States. +In the course of the last few years the Anglo-Americans have penetrated into +this province, which is still thinly peopled; they purchase land, they produce +the commodities of the country, and supplant the original population. It may +easily be foreseen that if Mexico takes no steps to check this change, the +province of Texas will very shortly cease to belong to that government. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +If the different degrees—comparatively so slight—which exist in +European civilization produce results of such magnitude, the consequences which +must ensue from the collision of the most perfect European civilization with +Indian savages may readily be conceived.] +</p> + +<p> +The Indians, in the little which they have done, have unquestionably displayed +as much natural genius as the peoples of Europe in their most important +designs; but nations as well as men require time to learn, whatever may be +their intelligence and their zeal. Whilst the savages were engaged in the work +of civilization, the Europeans continued to surround them on every side, and to +confine them within narrower limits; the two races gradually met, and they are +now in immediate juxtaposition to each other. The Indian is already superior to +his barbarous parent, but he is still very far below his white neighbor. With +their resources and acquired knowledge, the Europeans soon appropriated to +themselves most of the advantages which the natives might have derived from the +possession of the soil; they have settled in the country, they have purchased +land at a very low rate or have occupied it by force, and the Indians have been +ruined by a competition which they had not the means of resisting. They were +isolated in their own country, and their race only constituted a colony of +troublesome aliens in the midst of a numerous and domineering people. *t +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +t <br /> +[ See in the Legislative Documents (21st Congress, No. 89) instances of +excesses of every kind committed by the whites upon the territory of the +Indians, either in taking possession of a part of their lands, until compelled +to retire by the troops of Congress, or carrying off their cattle, burning +their houses, cutting down their corn, and doing violence to their persons. It +appears, nevertheless, from all these documents that the claims of the natives +are constantly protected by the government from the abuse of force. The Union +has a representative agent continually employed to reside among the Indians; +and the report of the Cherokee agent, which is among the documents I have +referred to, is almost always favorable to the Indians. “The intrusion of +whites,” he says, “upon the lands of the Cherokees would cause ruin +to the poor, helpless, and inoffensive inhabitants.” And he further +remarks upon the attempt of the State of Georgia to establish a division line +for the purpose of limiting the boundaries of the Cherokees, that the line +drawn having been made by the whites, and entirely upon ex parte evidence of +their several rights, was of no validity whatever.] +</p> + +<p> +Washington said in one of his messages to Congress, “We are more +enlightened and more powerful than the Indian nations, we are therefore bound +in honor to treat them with kindness and even with generosity.” But this +virtuous and high-minded policy has not been followed. The rapacity of the +settlers is usually backed by the tyranny of the government. Although the +Cherokees and the Creeks are established upon the territory which they +inhabited before the settlement of the Europeans, and although the Americans +have frequently treated with them as with foreign nations, the surrounding +States have not consented to acknowledge them as independent peoples, and +attempts have been made to subject these children of the woods to +Anglo-American magistrates, laws, and customs. *u Destitution had driven these +unfortunate Indians to civilization, and oppression now drives them back to +their former condition: many of them abandon the soil which they had begun to +clear, and return to their savage course of life. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +u <br /> +[ In 1829 the State of Alabama divided the Creek territory into counties, and +subjected the Indian population to the power of European magistrates. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +In 1830 the State of Mississippi assimilated the Choctaws and Chickasaws to the +white population, and declared that any of them that should take the title of +chief would be punished by a fine of $1,000 and a year’s imprisonment. +When these laws were enforced upon the Choctaws, who inhabited that district, +the tribe assembled, their chief communicated to them the intentions of the +whites, and read to them some of the laws to which it was intended that they +should submit; and they unanimously declared that it was better at once to +retreat again into the wilds.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0047" id="link2HCH0047"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part III</h2> + + +<p> +If we consider the tyrannical measures which have been adopted by the +legislatures of the Southern States, the conduct of their Governors, and the +decrees of their courts of justice, we shall be convinced that the entire +expulsion of the Indians is the final result to which the efforts of their +policy are directed. The Americans of that part of the Union look with jealousy +upon the aborigines, *v they are aware that these tribes have not yet lost the +traditions of savage life, and before civilization has permanently fixed them +to the soil, it is intended to force them to recede by reducing them to +despair. The Creeks and Cherokees, oppressed by the several States, have +appealed to the central government, which is by no means insensible to their +misfortunes, and is sincerely desirous of saving the remnant of the natives, +and of maintaining them in the free possession of that territory, which the +Union is pledged to respect. *w But the several States oppose so formidable a +resistance to the execution of this design, that the government is obliged to +consent to the extirpation of a few barbarous tribes in order not to endanger +the safety of the American Union. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +v <br /> +[ The Georgians, who are so much annoyed by the proximity of the Indians, +inhabit a territory which does not at present contain more than seven +inhabitants to the square mile. In France there are one hundred and sixty-two +inhabitants to the same extent of country.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +w <br /> +[ In 1818 Congress appointed commissioners to visit the Arkansas Territory, +accompanied by a deputation of Creeks, Choctaws, and Chickasaws. This +expedition was commanded by Messrs. Kennerly, M’Coy, Wash Hood, and John +Bell. See the different reports of the commissioners, and their journal, in the +Documents of Congress, No. 87, House of Representatives.] +</p> + +<p> +But the federal government, which is not able to protect the Indians, would +fain mitigate the hardships of their lot; and, with this intention, proposals +have been made to transport them into more remote regions at the public cost. +</p> + +<p> +Between the thirty-third and thirty-seventh degrees of north latitude, a vast +tract of country lies, which has taken the name of Arkansas, from the principal +river that waters its extent. It is bounded on the one side by the confines of +Mexico, on the other by the Mississippi. Numberless streams cross it in every +direction; the climate is mild, and the soil productive, but it is only +inhabited by a few wandering hordes of savages. The government of the Union +wishes to transport the broken remnants of the indigenous population of the +South to the portion of this country which is nearest to Mexico, and at a great +distance from the American settlements. +</p> + +<p> +We were assured, towards the end of the year 1831, that 10,000 Indians had +already gone down to the shores of the Arkansas; and fresh detachments were +constantly following them; but Congress has been unable to excite a unanimous +determination in those whom it is disposed to protect. Some, indeed, are +willing to quit the seat of oppression, but the most enlightened members of the +community refuse to abandon their recent dwellings and their springing crops; +they are of opinion that the work of civilization, once interrupted, will never +be resumed; they fear that those domestic habits which have been so recently +contracted, may be irrevocably lost in the midst of a country which is still +barbarous, and where nothing is prepared for the subsistence of an agricultural +people; they know that their entrance into those wilds will be opposed by +inimical hordes, and that they have lost the energy of barbarians, without +acquiring the resources of civilization to resist their attacks. Moreover, the +Indians readily discover that the settlement which is proposed to them is +merely a temporary expedient. Who can assure them that they will at length be +allowed to dwell in peace in their new retreat? The United States pledge +themselves to the observance of the obligation; but the territory which they at +present occupy was formerly secured to them by the most solemn oaths of +Anglo-American faith. *x The American government does not indeed rob them of +their lands, but it allows perpetual incursions to be made on them. In a few +years the same white population which now flocks around them, will track them +to the solitudes of the Arkansas; they will then be exposed to the same evils +without the same remedies, and as the limits of the earth will at last fail +them, their only refuge is the grave. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +x <br /> +[ The fifth article of the treaty made with the Creeks in August, 1790, is in +the following words:—“The United States solemnly guarantee to the +Creek nation all their land within the limits of the United States.” +</p> + +<p> +The seventh article of the treaty concluded in 1791 with the Cherokees +says:—“The United States solemnly guarantee to the Cherokee nation +all their lands not hereby ceded.” The following article declared that if +any citizen of the United States or other settler not of the Indian race should +establish himself upon the territory of the Cherokees, the United States would +withdraw their protection from that individual, and give him up to be punished +as the Cherokee nation should think fit.] +</p> + +<p> +The Union treats the Indians with less cupidity and rigor than the policy of +the several States, but the two governments are alike destitute of good faith. +The States extend what they are pleased to term the benefits of their laws to +the Indians, with a belief that the tribes will recede rather than submit; and +the central government, which promises a permanent refuge to these unhappy +beings is well aware of its inability to secure it to them. *y +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +y <br /> +[ This does not prevent them from promising in the most solemn manner to do so. +See the letter of the President addressed to the Creek Indians, March 23, 1829 +(Proceedings of the Indian Board, in the city of New York, p. 5): “Beyond +the great river Mississippi, where a part of your nation has gone, your father +has provided a country large enough for all of you, and he advises you to +remove to it. There your white brothers will not trouble you; they will have no +claim to the land, and you can live upon it, you and all your children, as long +as the grass grows, or the water runs, in peace and plenty. It will be yours +forever.” +</p> + +<p> +The Secretary of War, in a letter written to the Cherokees, April 18, 1829, +(see the same work, p. 6), declares to them that they cannot expect to retain +possession of the lands at that time occupied by them, but gives them the most +positive assurance of uninterrupted peace if they would remove beyond the +Mississippi: as if the power which could not grant them protection then, would +be able to afford it them hereafter!] +</p> + +<p> +Thus the tyranny of the States obliges the savages to retire, the Union, by its +promises and resources, facilitates their retreat; and these measures tend to +precisely the same end. *z “By the will of our Father in Heaven, the +Governor of the whole world,” said the Cherokees in their petition to +Congress, *a “the red man of America has become small, and the white man +great and renowned. When the ancestors of the people of these United States +first came to the shores of America they found the red man strong: though he +was ignorant and savage, yet he received them kindly, and gave them dry land to +rest their weary feet. They met in peace, and shook hands in token of +friendship. Whatever the white man wanted and asked of the Indian, the latter +willingly gave. At that time the Indian was the lord, and the white man the +suppliant. But now the scene has changed. The strength of the red man has +become weakness. As his neighbors increased in numbers his power became less +and less, and now, of the many and powerful tribes who once covered these +United States, only a few are to be seen—a few whom a sweeping pestilence +has left. The northern tribes, who were once so numerous and powerful, are now +nearly extinct. Thus it has happened to the red man of America. Shall we, who +are remnants, share the same fate?” +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +z <br /> +[ To obtain a correct idea of the policy pursued by the several States and the +Union with respect to the Indians, it is necessary to consult, 1st, “The +Laws of the Colonial and State Governments relating to the Indian +Inhabitants.” (See the Legislative Documents, 21st Congress, No. 319.) +2d, The Laws of the Union on the same subject, and especially that of March 30, +1802. (See Story’s “Laws of the United States.”) 3d, The +Report of Mr. Cass, Secretary of War, relative to Indian Affairs, November 29, +1823.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ December 18, 1829.] +</p> + +<p> +“The land on which we stand we have received as an inheritance from our +fathers, who possessed it from time immemorial, as a gift from our common +Father in Heaven. They bequeathed it to us as their children, and we have +sacredly kept it, as containing the remains of our beloved men. This right of +inheritance we have never ceded nor ever forfeited. Permit us to ask what +better right can the people have to a country than the right of inheritance and +immemorial peaceable possession? We know it is said of late by the State of +Georgia and by the Executive of the United States, that we have forfeited this +right; but we think this is said gratuitously. At what time have we made the +forfeit? What great crime have we committed, whereby we must forever be +divested of our country and rights? Was it when we were hostile to the United +States, and took part with the King of Great Britain, during the struggle for +independence? If so, why was not this forfeiture declared in the first treaty +of peace between the United States and our beloved men? Why was not such an +article as the following inserted in the treaty:—‘The United States +give peace to the Cherokees, but, for the part they took in the late war, +declare them to be but tenants at will, to be removed when the convenience of +the States, within whose chartered limits they live, shall require it’? +That was the proper time to assume such a possession. But it was not thought +of, nor would our forefathers have agreed to any treaty whose tendency was to +deprive them of their rights and their country.” +</p> + +<p> +Such is the language of the Indians: their assertions are true, their +forebodings inevitable. From whichever side we consider the destinies of the +aborigines of North America, their calamities appear to be irremediable: if +they continue barbarous, they are forced to retire; if they attempt to civilize +their manners, the contact of a more civilized community subjects them to +oppression and destitution. They perish if they continue to wander from waste +to waste, and if they attempt to settle they still must perish; the assistance +of Europeans is necessary to instruct them, but the approach of Europeans +corrupts and repels them into savage life; they refuse to change their habits +as long as their solitudes are their own, and it is too late to change them +when they are constrained to submit. +</p> + +<p> +The Spaniards pursued the Indians with bloodhounds, like wild beasts; they +sacked the New World with no more temper or compassion than a city taken by +storm; but destruction must cease, and frenzy be stayed; the remnant of the +Indian population which had escaped the massacre mixed with its conquerors, and +adopted in the end their religion and their manners. *b The conduct of the +Americans of the United States towards the aborigines is characterized, on the +other hand, by a singular attachment to the formalities of law. Provided that +the Indians retain their barbarous condition, the Americans take no part in +their affairs; they treat them as independent nations, and do not possess +themselves of their hunting grounds without a treaty of purchase; and if an +Indian nation happens to be so encroached upon as to be unable to subsist upon +its territory, they afford it brotherly assistance in transporting it to a +grave sufficiently remote from the land of its fathers. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ The honor of this result is, however, by no means due to the Spaniards. If +the Indian tribes had not been tillers of the ground at the time of the arrival +of the Europeans, they would unquestionably have been destroyed in South as +well as in North America.] +</p> + +<p> +The Spaniards were unable to exterminate the Indian race by those unparalleled +atrocities which brand them with indelible shame, nor did they even succeed in +wholly depriving it of its rights; but the Americans of the United States have +accomplished this twofold purpose with singular felicity; tranquilly, legally, +philanthropically, without shedding blood, and without violating a single great +principle of morality in the eyes of the world. *c It is impossible to destroy +men with more respect for the laws of humanity. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ See, amongst other documents, the report made by Mr. Bell in the name of the +Committee on Indian Affairs, February 24, 1830, in which is most logically +established and most learnedly proved, that “the fundamental principle +that the Indians had no right by virtue of their ancient possession either of +will or sovereignty, has never been abandoned either expressly or by +implication.” In perusing this report, which is evidently drawn up by an +experienced hand, one is astonished at the facility with which the author gets +rid of all arguments founded upon reason and natural right, which he designates +as abstract and theoretical principles. The more I contemplate the difference +between civilized and uncivilized man with regard to the principles of justice, +the more I observe that the former contests the justice of those rights which +the latter simply violates.] +</p> + +<p> +[I leave this chapter wholly unchanged, for it has always appeared to me to be +one of the most eloquent and touching parts of this book. But it has ceased to +be prophetic; the destruction of the Indian race in the United States is +already consummated. In 1870 there remained but 25,731 Indians in the whole +territory of the Union, and of these by far the largest part exist in +California, Michigan, Wisconsin, Dakota, and New Mexico and Nevada. In New +England, Pennsylvania, and New York the race is extinct; and the predictions of +M. de Tocqueville are fulfilled. —Translator’s Note.] +</p> + +<p> +Situation Of The Black Population In The United States, And Dangers With Which +Its Presence Threatens The Whites +</p> + +<p> +Why it is more difficult to abolish slavery, and to efface all vestiges of it +amongst the moderns than it was amongst the ancients—In the United States +the prejudices of the Whites against the Blacks seem to increase in proportion +as slavery is abolished—Situation of the Negroes in the Northern and +Southern States—Why the Americans abolish slavery—Servitude, which +debases the slave, impoverishes the master—Contrast between the left and +the right bank of the Ohio—To what attributable—The Black race, as +well as slavery, recedes towards the South—Explanation of this +fact—Difficulties attendant upon the abolition of slavery in the +South—Dangers to come—General anxiety—Foundation of a Black +colony in Africa—Why the Americans of the South increase the hardships of +slavery, whilst they are distressed at its continuance. +</p> + +<p> +The Indians will perish in the same isolated condition in which they have +lived; but the destiny of the negroes is in some measure interwoven with that +of the Europeans. These two races are attached to each other without +intermingling, and they are alike unable entirely to separate or to combine. +The most formidable of all the ills which threaten the future existence of the +Union arises from the presence of a black population upon its territory; and in +contemplating the cause of the present embarrassments or of the future dangers +of the United States, the observer is invariably led to consider this as a +primary fact. +</p> + +<p> +The permanent evils to which mankind is subjected are usually produced by the +vehement or the increasing efforts of men; but there is one calamity which +penetrated furtively into the world, and which was at first scarcely +distinguishable amidst the ordinary abuses of power; it originated with an +individual whose name history has not preserved; it was wafted like some +accursed germ upon a portion of the soil, but it afterwards nurtured itself, +grew without effort, and spreads naturally with the society to which it +belongs. I need scarcely add that this calamity is slavery. Christianity +suppressed slavery, but the Christians of the sixteenth century re-established +it—as an exception, indeed, to their social system, and restricted to one +of the races of mankind; but the wound thus inflicted upon humanity, though +less extensive, was at the same time rendered far more difficult of cure. +</p> + +<p> +It is important to make an accurate distinction between slavery itself and its +consequences. The immediate evils which are produced by slavery were very +nearly the same in antiquity as they are amongst the moderns; but the +consequences of these evils were different. The slave, amongst the ancients, +belonged to the same race as his master, and he was often the superior of the +two in education *d and instruction. Freedom was the only distinction between +them; and when freedom was conferred they were easily confounded together. The +ancients, then, had a very simple means of avoiding slavery and its evil +consequences, which was that of affranchisement; and they succeeded as soon as +they adopted this measure generally. Not but, in ancient States, the vestiges +of servitude subsisted for some time after servitude itself was abolished. +There is a natural prejudice which prompts men to despise whomsoever has been +their inferior long after he is become their equal; and the real inequality +which is produced by fortune or by law is always succeeded by an imaginary +inequality which is implanted in the manners of the people. Nevertheless, this +secondary consequence of slavery was limited to a certain term amongst the +ancients, for the freedman bore so entire a resemblance to those born free, +that it soon became impossible to distinguish him from amongst them. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ It is well known that several of the most distinguished authors of antiquity, +and amongst them Aesop and Terence, were, or had been slaves. Slaves were not +always taken from barbarous nations, and the chances of war reduced highly +civilized men to servitude.] +</p> + +<p> +The greatest difficulty in antiquity was that of altering the law; amongst the +moderns it is that of altering the manners; and, as far as we are concerned, +the real obstacles begin where those of the ancients left off. This arises from +the circumstance that, amongst the moderns, the abstract and transient fact of +slavery is fatally united to the physical and permanent fact of color. The +tradition of slavery dishonors the race, and the peculiarity of the race +perpetuates the tradition of slavery. No African has ever voluntarily emigrated +to the shores of the New World; whence it must be inferred, that all the blacks +who are now to be found in that hemisphere are either slaves or freedmen. Thus +the negro transmits the eternal mark of his ignominy to all his descendants; +and although the law may abolish slavery, God alone can obliterate the traces +of its existence. +</p> + +<p> +The modern slave differs from his master not only in his condition, but in his +origin. You may set the negro free, but you cannot make him otherwise than an +alien to the European. Nor is this all; we scarcely acknowledge the common +features of mankind in this child of debasement whom slavery has brought +amongst us. His physiognomy is to our eyes hideous, his understanding weak, his +tastes low; and we are almost inclined to look upon him as a being intermediate +between man and the brutes. *e The moderns, then, after they have abolished +slavery, have three prejudices to contend against, which are less easy to +attack and far less easy to conquer than the mere fact of servitude: the +prejudice of the master, the prejudice of the race, and the prejudice of color. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ To induce the whites to abandon the opinion they have conceived of the moral +and intellectual inferiority of their former slaves, the negroes must change; +but as long as this opinion subsists, to change is impossible.] +</p> + +<p> +It is difficult for us, who have had the good fortune to be born amongst men +like ourselves by nature, and equal to ourselves by law, to conceive the +irreconcilable differences which separate the negro from the European in +America. But we may derive some faint notion of them from analogy. France was +formerly a country in which numerous distinctions of rank existed, that had +been created by the legislation. Nothing can be more fictitious than a purely +legal inferiority; nothing more contrary to the instinct of mankind than these +permanent divisions which had been established between beings evidently +similar. Nevertheless these divisions subsisted for ages; they still subsist in +many places; and on all sides they have left imaginary vestiges, which time +alone can efface. If it be so difficult to root out an inequality which solely +originates in the law, how are those distinctions to be destroyed which seem to +be based upon the immutable laws of Nature herself? When I remember the extreme +difficulty with which aristocratic bodies, of whatever nature they may be, are +commingled with the mass of the people; and the exceeding care which they take +to preserve the ideal boundaries of their caste inviolate, I despair of seeing +an aristocracy disappear which is founded upon visible and indelible signs. +Those who hope that the Europeans will ever mix with the negroes, appear to me +to delude themselves; and I am not led to any such conclusion by my own reason, +or by the evidence of facts. +</p> + +<p> +Hitherto, wherever the whites have been the most powerful, they have maintained +the blacks in a subordinate or a servile position; wherever the negroes have +been strongest they have destroyed the whites; such has been the only +retribution which has ever taken place between the two races. +</p> + +<p> +I see that in a certain portion of the territory of the United States at the +present day, the legal barrier which separated the two races is tending to fall +away, but not that which exists in the manners of the country; slavery recedes, +but the prejudice to which it has given birth remains stationary. Whosoever has +inhabited the United States must have perceived that in those parts of the +Union in which the negroes are no longer slaves, they have in no wise drawn +nearer to the whites. On the contrary, the prejudice of the race appears to be +stronger in the States which have abolished slavery, than in those where it +still exists; and nowhere is it so intolerant as in those States where +servitude has never been known. +</p> + +<p> +It is true, that in the North of the Union, marriages may be legally contracted +between negroes and whites; but public opinion would stigmatize a man who +should connect himself with a negress as infamous, and it would be difficult to +meet with a single instance of such a union. The electoral franchise has been +conferred upon the negroes in almost all the States in which slavery has been +abolished; but if they come forward to vote, their lives are in danger. If +oppressed, they may bring an action at law, but they will find none but whites +amongst their judges; and although they may legally serve as jurors, prejudice +repulses them from that office. The same schools do not receive the child of +the black and of the European. In the theatres, gold cannot procure a seat for +the servile race beside their former masters; in the hospitals they lie apart; +and although they are allowed to invoke the same Divinity as the whites, it +must be at a different altar, and in their own churches, with their own clergy. +The gates of Heaven are not closed against these unhappy beings; but their +inferiority is continued to the very confines of the other world; when the +negro is defunct, his bones are cast aside, and the distinction of condition +prevails even in the equality of death. The negro is free, but he can share +neither the rights, nor the pleasures, nor the labor, nor the afflictions, nor +the tomb of him whose equal he has been declared to be; and he cannot meet him +upon fair terms in life or in death. +</p> + +<p> +In the South, where slavery still exists, the negroes are less carefully kept +apart; they sometimes share the labor and the recreations of the whites; the +whites consent to intermix with them to a certain extent, and although the +legislation treats them more harshly, the habits of the people are more +tolerant and compassionate. In the South the master is not afraid to raise his +slave to his own standing, because he knows that he can in a moment reduce him +to the dust at pleasure. In the North the white no longer distinctly perceives +the barrier which separates him from the degraded race, and he shuns the negro +with the more pertinacity, since he fears lest they should some day be +confounded together. +</p> + +<p> +Amongst the Americans of the South, nature sometimes reasserts her rights, and +restores a transient equality between the blacks and the whites; but in the +North pride restrains the most imperious of human passions. The American of the +Northern States would perhaps allow the negress to share his licentious +pleasures, if the laws of his country did not declare that she may aspire to be +the legitimate partner of his bed; but he recoils with horror from her who +might become his wife. +</p> + +<p> +Thus it is, in the United States, that the prejudice which repels the negroes +seems to increase in proportion as they are emancipated, and inequality is +sanctioned by the manners whilst it is effaced from the laws of the country. +But if the relative position of the two races which inhabit the United States +is such as I have described, it may be asked why the Americans have abolished +slavery in the North of the Union, why they maintain it in the South, and why +they aggravate its hardships there? The answer is easily given. It is not for +the good of the negroes, but for that of the whites, that measures are taken to +abolish slavery in the United States. +</p> + +<p> +The first negroes were imported into Virginia about the year 1621. *f In +America, therefore, as well as in the rest of the globe, slavery originated in +the South. Thence it spread from one settlement to another; but the number of +slaves diminished towards the Northern States, and the negro population was +always very limited in New England. *g +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ See Beverley’s “History of Virginia.” See also in +Jefferson’s “Memoirs” some curious details concerning the +introduction of negroes into Virginia, and the first Act which prohibited the +importation of them in 1778.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ The number of slaves was less considerable in the North, but the advantages +resulting from slavery were not more contested there than in the South. In +1740, the Legislature of the State of New York declared that the direct +importation of slaves ought to be encouraged as much as possible, and smuggling +severely punished in order not to discourage the fair trader. (Kent’s +“Commentaries,” vol. ii. p. 206.) Curious researches, by Belknap, +upon slavery in New England, are to be found in the “Historical +Collection of Massachusetts,” vol. iv. p. 193. It appears that negroes +were introduced there in 1630, but that the legislation and manners of the +people were opposed to slavery from the first; see also, in the same work, the +manner in which public opinion, and afterwards the laws, finally put an end to +slavery.] +</p> + +<p> +A century had scarcely elapsed since the foundation of the colonies, when the +attention of the planters was struck by the extraordinary fact, that the +provinces which were comparatively destitute of slaves, increased in +population, in wealth, and in prosperity more rapidly than those which +contained the greatest number of negroes. In the former, however, the +inhabitants were obliged to cultivate the soil themselves, or by hired +laborers; in the latter they were furnished with hands for which they paid no +wages; yet although labor and expenses were on the one side, and ease with +economy on the other, the former were in possession of the most advantageous +system. This consequence seemed to be the more difficult to explain, since the +settlers, who all belonged to the same European race, had the same habits, the +same civilization, the same laws, and their shades of difference were extremely +slight. +</p> + +<p> +Time, however, continued to advance, and the Anglo-Americans, spreading beyond +the coasts of the Atlantic Ocean, penetrated farther and farther into the +solitudes of the West; they met with a new soil and an unwonted climate; the +obstacles which opposed them were of the most various character; their races +intermingled, the inhabitants of the South went up towards the North, those of +the North descended to the South; but in the midst of all these causes, the +same result occurred at every step, and in general, the colonies in which there +were no slaves became more populous and more rich than those in which slavery +flourished. The more progress was made, the more was it shown that slavery, +which is so cruel to the slave, is prejudicial to the master. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0048" id="link2HCH0048"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part IV</h2> + +<p> +But this truth was most satisfactorily demonstrated when civilization reached +the banks of the Ohio. The stream which the Indians had distinguished by the +name of Ohio, or Beautiful River, waters one of the most magnificent valleys +that has ever been made the abode of man. Undulating lands extend upon both +shores of the Ohio, whose soil affords inexhaustible treasures to the laborer; +on either bank the air is wholesome and the climate mild, and each of them +forms the extreme frontier of a vast State: That which follows the numerous +windings of the Ohio upon the left is called Kentucky, that upon the right +bears the name of the river. These two States only differ in a single respect; +Kentucky has admitted slavery, but the State of Ohio has prohibited the +existence of slaves within its borders. *h +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ Not only is slavery prohibited in Ohio, but no free negroes are allowed to +enter the territory of that State, or to hold property in it. See the Statutes +of Ohio.] +</p> + +<p> +Thus the traveller who floats down the current of the Ohio to the spot where +that river falls into the Mississippi, may be said to sail between liberty and +servitude; and a transient inspection of the surrounding objects will convince +him as to which of the two is most favorable to mankind. Upon the left bank of +the stream the population is rare; from time to time one descries a troop of +slaves loitering in the half-desert fields; the primaeval forest recurs at +every turn; society seems to be asleep, man to be idle, and nature alone offers +a scene of activity and of life. From the right bank, on the contrary, a +confused hum is heard which proclaims the presence of industry; the fields are +covered with abundant harvests, the elegance of the dwellings announces the +taste and activity of the laborer, and man appears to be in the enjoyment of +that wealth and contentment which is the reward of labor. *i +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ The activity of Ohio is not confined to individuals, but the undertakings of +the State are surprisingly great; a canal has been established between Lake +Erie and the Ohio, by means of which the valley of the Mississippi communicates +with the river of the North, and the European commodities which arrive at New +York may be forwarded by water to New Orleans across five hundred leagues of +continent.] +</p> + +<p> +The State of Kentucky was founded in 1775, the State of Ohio only twelve years +later; but twelve years are more in America than half a century in Europe, and, +at the present day, the population of Ohio exceeds that of Kentucky by two +hundred and fifty thousand souls. *j These opposite consequences of slavery and +freedom may readily be understood, and they suffice to explain many of the +differences which we remark between the civilization of antiquity and that of +our own time. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ The exact numbers given by the census of 1830 were: Kentucky, 688,-844; Ohio, +937,679. [In 1890 the population of Ohio was 3,672,316, that of Kentucky, +1,858,635.]] +</p> + +<p> +Upon the left bank of the Ohio labor is confounded with the idea of slavery, +upon the right bank it is identified with that of prosperity and improvement; +on the one side it is degraded, on the other it is honored; on the former +territory no white laborers can be found, for they would be afraid of +assimilating themselves to the negroes; on the latter no one is idle, for the +white population extends its activity and its intelligence to every kind of +employment. Thus the men whose task it is to cultivate the rich soil of +Kentucky are ignorant and lukewarm; whilst those who are active and enlightened +either do nothing or pass over into the State of Ohio, where they may work +without dishonor. +</p> + +<p> +It is true that in Kentucky the planters are not obliged to pay wages to the +slaves whom they employ; but they derive small profits from their labor, whilst +the wages paid to free workmen would be returned with interest in the value of +their services. The free workman is paid, but he does his work quicker than the +slave, and rapidity of execution is one of the great elements of economy. The +white sells his services, but they are only purchased at the times at which +they may be useful; the black can claim no remuneration for his toil, but the +expense of his maintenance is perpetual; he must be supported in his old age as +well as in the prime of manhood, in his profitless infancy as well as in the +productive years of youth. Payment must equally be made in order to obtain the +services of either class of men: the free workman receives his wages in money, +the slave in education, in food, in care, and in clothing. The money which a +master spends in the maintenance of his slaves goes gradually and in detail, so +that it is scarcely perceived; the salary of the free workman is paid in a +round sum, which appears only to enrich the individual who receives it, but in +the end the slave has cost more than the free servant, and his labor is less +productive. *k +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ Independently of these causes, which, wherever free workmen abound, render +their labor more productive and more economical than that of slaves, another +cause may be pointed out which is peculiar to the United States: the sugar-cane +has hitherto been cultivated with success only upon the banks of the +Mississippi, near the mouth of that river in the Gulf of Mexico. In Louisiana +the cultivation of the sugar-cane is exceedingly lucrative, and nowhere does a +laborer earn so much by his work, and, as there is always a certain relation +between the cost of production and the value of the produce, the price of +slaves is very high in Louisiana. But Louisiana is one of the confederated +States, and slaves may be carried thither from all parts of the Union; the +price given for slaves in New Orleans consequently raises the value of slaves +in all the other markets. The consequence of this is, that in the countries +where the land is less productive, the cost of slave labor is still very +considerable, which gives an additional advantage to the competition of free +labor.] +</p> + +<p> +The influence of slavery extends still further; it affects the character of the +master, and imparts a peculiar tendency to his ideas and his tastes. Upon both +banks of the Ohio, the character of the inhabitants is enterprising and +energetic; but this vigor is very differently exercised in the two States. The +white inhabitant of Ohio, who is obliged to subsist by his own exertions, +regards temporal prosperity as the principal aim of his existence; and as the +country which he occupies presents inexhaustible resources to his industry and +ever-varying lures to his activity, his acquisitive ardor surpasses the +ordinary limits of human cupidity: he is tormented by the desire of wealth, and +he boldly enters upon every path which fortune opens to him; he becomes a +sailor, a pioneer, an artisan, or a laborer with the same indifference, and he +supports, with equal constancy, the fatigues and the dangers incidental to +these various professions; the resources of his intelligence are astonishing, +and his avidity in the pursuit of gain amounts to a species of heroism. +</p> + +<p> +But the Kentuckian scorns not only labor, but all the undertakings which labor +promotes; as he lives in an idle independence, his tastes are those of an idle +man; money loses a portion of its value in his eyes; he covets wealth much less +than pleasure and excitement; and the energy which his neighbor devotes to +gain, turns with him to a passionate love of field sports and military +exercises; he delights in violent bodily exertion, he is familiar with the use +of arms, and is accustomed from a very early age to expose his life in single +combat. Thus slavery not only prevents the whites from becoming opulent, but +even from desiring to become so. +</p> + +<p> +As the same causes have been continually producing opposite effects for the +last two centuries in the British colonies of North America, they have +established a very striking difference between the commercial capacity of the +inhabitants of the South and those of the North. At the present day it is only +the Northern States which are in possession of shipping, manufactures, +railroads, and canals. This difference is perceptible not only in comparing the +North with the South, but in comparing the several Southern States. Almost all +the individuals who carry on commercial operations, or who endeavor to turn +slave labor to account in the most Southern districts of the Union, have +emigrated from the North. The natives of the Northern States are constantly +spreading over that portion of the American territory where they have less to +fear from competition; they discover resources there which escaped the notice +of the inhabitants; and, as they comply with a system which they do not +approve, they succeed in turning it to better advantage than those who first +founded and who still maintain it. +</p> + +<p> +Were I inclined to continue this parallel, I could easily prove that almost all +the differences which may be remarked between the characters of the Americans +in the Southern and in the Northern States have originated in slavery; but this +would divert me from my subject, and my present intention is not to point out +all the consequences of servitude, but those effects which it has produced upon +the prosperity of the countries which have admitted it. +</p> + +<p> +The influence of slavery upon the production of wealth must have been very +imperfectly known in antiquity, as slavery then obtained throughout the +civilized world; and the nations which were unacquainted with it were +barbarous. And indeed Christianity only abolished slavery by advocating the +claims of the slave; at the present time it may be attacked in the name of the +master, and, upon this point, interest is reconciled with morality. +</p> + +<p> +As these truths became apparent in the United States, slavery receded before +the progress of experience. Servitude had begun in the South, and had thence +spread towards the North; but it now retires again. Freedom, which started from +the North, now descends uninterruptedly towards the South. Amongst the great +States, Pennsylvania now constitutes the extreme limit of slavery to the North: +but even within those limits the slave system is shaken: Maryland, which is +immediately below Pennsylvania, is preparing for its abolition; and Virginia, +which comes next to Maryland, is already discussing its utility and its +dangers. *l +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ A peculiar reason contributes to detach the two last-mentioned States from +the cause of slavery. The former wealth of this part of the Union was +principally derived from the cultivation of tobacco. This cultivation is +specially carried on by slaves; but within the last few years the market-price +of tobacco has diminished, whilst the value of the slaves remains the same. +Thus the ratio between the cost of production and the value of the produce is +changed. The natives of Maryland and Virginia are therefore more disposed than +they were thirty years ago, to give up slave labor in the cultivation of +tobacco, or to give up slavery and tobacco at the same time.] +</p> + +<p> +No great change takes place in human institutions without involving amongst its +causes the law of inheritance. When the law of primogeniture obtained in the +South, each family was represented by a wealthy individual, who was neither +compelled nor induced to labor; and he was surrounded, as by parasitic plants, +by the other members of his family who were then excluded by law from sharing +the common inheritance, and who led the same kind of life as himself. The very +same thing then occurred in all the families of the South as still happens in +the wealthy families of some countries in Europe, namely, that the younger sons +remain in the same state of idleness as their elder brother, without being as +rich as he is. This identical result seems to be produced in Europe and in +America by wholly analogous causes. In the South of the United States the whole +race of whites formed an aristocratic body, which was headed by a certain +number of privileged individuals, whose wealth was permanent, and whose leisure +was hereditary. These leaders of the American nobility kept alive the +traditional prejudices of the white race in the body of which they were the +representatives, and maintained the honor of inactive life. This aristocracy +contained many who were poor, but none who would work; its members preferred +want to labor, consequently no competition was set on foot against negro +laborers and slaves, and, whatever opinion might be entertained as to the +utility of their efforts, it was indispensable to employ them, since there was +no one else to work. +</p> + +<p> +No sooner was the law of primogeniture abolished than fortunes began to +diminish, and all the families of the country were simultaneously reduced to a +state in which labor became necessary to procure the means of subsistence: +several of them have since entirely disappeared, and all of them learned to +look forward to the time at which it would be necessary for everyone to provide +for his own wants. Wealthy individuals are still to be met with, but they no +longer constitute a compact and hereditary body, nor have they been able to +adopt a line of conduct in which they could persevere, and which they could +infuse into all ranks of society. The prejudice which stigmatized labor was in +the first place abandoned by common consent; the number of needy men was +increased, and the needy were allowed to gain a laborious subsistence without +blushing for their exertions. Thus one of the most immediate consequences of +the partible quality of estates has been to create a class of free laborers. As +soon as a competition was set on foot between the free laborer and the slave, +the inferiority of the latter became manifest, and slavery was attacked in its +fundamental principle, which is the interest of the master. +</p> + +<p> +As slavery recedes, the black population follows its retrograde course, and +returns with it towards those tropical regions from which it originally came. +However singular this fact may at first appear to be, it may readily be +explained. Although the Americans abolish the principle of slavery, they do not +set their slaves free. To illustrate this remark, I will quote the example of +the State of New York. In 1788, the State of New York prohibited the sale of +slaves within its limits, which was an indirect method of prohibiting the +importation of blacks. Thenceforward the number of negroes could only increase +according to the ratio of the natural increase of population. But eight years +later a more decisive measure was taken, and it was enacted that all children +born of slave parents after July 4, 1799, should be free. No increase could +then take place, and although slaves still existed, slavery might be said to be +abolished. +</p> + +<p> +From the time at which a Northern State prohibited the importation of slaves, +no slaves were brought from the South to be sold in its markets. On the other +hand, as the sale of slaves was forbidden in that State, an owner was no longer +able to get rid of his slave (who thus became a burdensome possession) +otherwise than by transporting him to the South. But when a Northern State +declared that the son of the slave should be born free, the slave lost a large +portion of his market value, since his posterity was no longer included in the +bargain, and the owner had then a strong interest in transporting him to the +South. Thus the same law prevents the slaves of the South from coming to the +Northern States, and drives those of the North to the South. +</p> + +<p> +The want of free hands is felt in a State in proportion as the number of slaves +decreases. But in proportion as labor is performed by free hands, slave labor +becomes less productive; and the slave is then a useless or onerous possession, +whom it is important to export to those Southern States where the same +competition is not to be feared. Thus the abolition of slavery does not set the +slave free, but it merely transfers him from one master to another, and from +the North to the South. +</p> + +<p> +The emancipated negroes, and those born after the abolition of slavery, do not, +indeed, migrate from the North to the South; but their situation with regard to +the Europeans is not unlike that of the aborigines of America; they remain half +civilized, and deprived of their rights in the midst of a population which is +far superior to them in wealth and in knowledge; where they are exposed to the +tyranny of the laws *m and the intolerance of the people. On some accounts they +are still more to be pitied than the Indians, since they are haunted by the +reminiscence of slavery, and they cannot claim possession of a single portion +of the soil: many of them perish miserably, *n and the rest congregate in the +great towns, where they perform the meanest offices, and lead a wretched and +precarious existence. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ The States in which slavery is abolished usually do what they can to render +their territory disagreeable to the negroes as a place of residence; and as a +kind of emulation exists between the different States in this respect, the +unhappy blacks can only choose the least of the evils which beset them.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ There is a very great difference between the mortality of the blacks and of +the whites in the States in which slavery is abolished; from 1820 to 1831 only +one out of forty-two individuals of the white population died in Philadelphia; +but one negro out of twenty-one individuals of the black population died in the +same space of time. The mortality is by no means so great amongst the negroes +who are still slaves. (See Emerson’s “Medical Statistics,” p. +28.)] +</p> + +<p> +But even if the number of negroes continued to increase as rapidly as when they +were still in a state of slavery, as the number of whites augments with twofold +rapidity since the abolition of slavery, the blacks would soon be, as it were, +lost in the midst of a strange population. +</p> + +<p> +A district which is cultivated by slaves is in general more scantily peopled +than a district cultivated by free labor: moreover, America is still a new +country, and a State is therefore not half peopled at the time when it +abolishes slavery. No sooner is an end put to slavery than the want of free +labor is felt, and a crowd of enterprising adventurers immediately arrive from +all parts of the country, who hasten to profit by the fresh resources which are +then opened to industry. The soil is soon divided amongst them, and a family of +white settlers takes possession of each tract of country. Besides which, +European emigration is exclusively directed to the free States; for what would +be the fate of a poor emigrant who crosses the Atlantic in search of ease and +happiness if he were to land in a country where labor is stigmatized as +degrading? +</p> + +<p> +Thus the white population grows by its natural increase, and at the same time +by the immense influx of emigrants; whilst the black population receives no +emigrants, and is upon its decline. The proportion which existed between the +two races is soon inverted. The negroes constitute a scanty remnant, a poor +tribe of vagrants, which is lost in the midst of an immense people in full +possession of the land; and the presence of the blacks is only marked by the +injustice and the hardships of which they are the unhappy victims. +</p> + +<p> +In several of the Western States the negro race never made its appearance, and +in all the Northern States it is rapidly declining. Thus the great question of +its future condition is confined within a narrow circle, where it becomes less +formidable, though not more easy of solution. +</p> + +<p> +The more we descend towards the South, the more difficult does it become to +abolish slavery with advantage: and this arises from several physical causes +which it is important to point out. +</p> + +<p> +The first of these causes is the climate; it is well known that in proportion +as Europeans approach the tropics they suffer more from labor. Many of the +Americans even assert that within a certain latitude the exertions which a +negro can make without danger are fatal to them; *o but I do not think that +this opinion, which is so favorable to the indolence of the inhabitants of +southern regions, is confirmed by experience. The southern parts of the Union +are not hotter than the South of Italy and of Spain; *p and it may be asked why +the European cannot work as well there as in the two latter countries. If +slavery has been abolished in Italy and in Spain without causing the +destruction of the masters, why should not the same thing take place in the +Union? I cannot believe that nature has prohibited the Europeans in Georgia and +the Floridas, under pain of death, from raising the means of subsistence from +the soil, but their labor would unquestionably be more irksome and less +productive to them than to the inhabitants of New England. As the free workman +thus loses a portion of his superiority over the slave in the Southern States, +there are fewer inducements to abolish slavery. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ This is true of the spots in which rice is cultivated; rice-grounds, which +are unwholesome in all countries, are particularly dangerous in those regions +which are exposed to the beams of a tropical sun. Europeans would not find it +easy to cultivate the soil in that part of the New World if it must be +necessarily be made to produce rice; but may they not subsist without +rice-grounds?] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ These States are nearer to the equator than Italy and Spain, but the +temperature of the continent of America is very much lower than that of Europe. +</p> + +<p> +The Spanish Government formerly caused a certain number of peasants from the +Acores to be transported into a district of Louisiana called Attakapas, by way +of experiment. These settlers still cultivate the soil without the assistance +of slaves, but their industry is so languid as scarcely to supply their most +necessary wants.] +</p> + +<p> +All the plants of Europe grow in the northern parts of the Union; the South has +special productions of its own. It has been observed that slave labor is a very +expensive method of cultivating corn. The farmer of corn land in a country +where slavery is unknown habitually retains a small number of laborers in his +service, and at seed-time and harvest he hires several additional hands, who +only live at his cost for a short period. But the agriculturist in a slave +State is obliged to keep a large number of slaves the whole year round, in +order to sow his fields and to gather in his crops, although their services are +only required for a few weeks; but slaves are unable to wait till they are +hired, and to subsist by their own labor in the mean time like free laborers; +in order to have their services they must be bought. Slavery, independently of +its general disadvantages, is therefore still more inapplicable to countries in +which corn is cultivated than to those which produce crops of a different kind. +The cultivation of tobacco, of cotton, and especially of the sugar-cane, +demands, on the other hand, unremitting attention: and women and children are +employed in it, whose services are of but little use in the cultivation of +wheat. Thus slavery is naturally more fitted to the countries from which these +productions are derived. Tobacco, cotton, and the sugar-cane are exclusively +grown in the South, and they form one of the principal sources of the wealth of +those States. If slavery were abolished, the inhabitants of the South would be +constrained to adopt one of two alternatives: they must either change their +system of cultivation, and then they would come into competition with the more +active and more experienced inhabitants of the North; or, if they continued to +cultivate the same produce without slave labor, they would have to support the +competition of the other States of the South, which might still retain their +slaves. Thus, peculiar reasons for maintaining slavery exist in the South which +do not operate in the North. +</p> + +<p> +But there is yet another motive which is more cogent than all the others: the +South might indeed, rigorously speaking, abolish slavery; but how should it rid +its territory of the black population? Slaves and slavery are driven from the +North by the same law, but this twofold result cannot be hoped for in the +South. +</p> + +<p> +The arguments which I have adduced to show that slavery is more natural and +more advantageous in the South than in the North, sufficiently prove that the +number of slaves must be far greater in the former districts. It was to the +southern settlements that the first Africans were brought, and it is there that +the greatest number of them have always been imported. As we advance towards +the South, the prejudice which sanctions idleness increases in power. In the +States nearest to the tropics there is not a single white laborer; the negroes +are consequently much more numerous in the South than in the North. And, as I +have already observed, this disproportion increases daily, since the negroes +are transferred to one part of the Union as soon as slavery is abolished in the +other. Thus the black population augments in the South, not only by its natural +fecundity, but by the compulsory emigration of the negroes from the North; and +the African race has causes of increase in the South very analogous to those +which so powerfully accelerate the growth of the European race in the North. +</p> + +<p> +In the State of Maine there is one negro in 300 inhabitants; in Massachusetts, +one in 100; in New York, two in 100; in Pennsylvania, three in the same number; +in Maryland, thirty-four; in Virginia, forty-two; and lastly, in South Carolina +*q fifty-five per cent. Such was the proportion of the black population to the +whites in the year 1830. But this proportion is perpetually changing, as it +constantly decreases in the North and augments in the South. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ We find it asserted in an American work, entitled “Letters on the +Colonization Society,” by Mr. Carey, 1833, “That for the last forty +years the black race has increased more rapidly than the white race in the +State of South Carolina; and that if we take the average population of the five +States of the South into which slaves were first introduced, viz., Maryland, +Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia, we shall find that from +1790 to 1830 the whites have augmented in the proportion of 80 to 100, and the +blacks in that of 112 to 100.” +</p> + +<p> +In the United States, in 1830, the population of the two races stood as +follows:— +</p> + +<p> +States where slavery is abolished, 6,565,434 whites; 120,520 blacks. Slave +States, 3,960,814 whites; 2,208,102 blacks. [In 1890 the United States +contained a population of 54,983,890 whites, and 7,638,360 negroes.]] +</p> + +<p> +It is evident that the most Southern States of the Union cannot abolish slavery +without incurring very great dangers, which the North had no reason to +apprehend when it emancipated its black population. We have already shown the +system by which the Northern States secure the transition from slavery to +freedom, by keeping the present generation in chains, and setting their +descendants free; by this means the negroes are gradually introduced into +society; and whilst the men who might abuse their freedom are kept in a state +of servitude, those who are emancipated may learn the art of being free before +they become their own masters. But it would be difficult to apply this method +in the South. To declare that all the negroes born after a certain period shall +be free, is to introduce the principle and the notion of liberty into the heart +of slavery; the blacks whom the law thus maintains in a state of slavery from +which their children are delivered, are astonished at so unequal a fate, and +their astonishment is only the prelude to their impatience and irritation. +Thenceforward slavery loses, in their eyes, that kind of moral power which it +derived from time and habit; it is reduced to a mere palpable abuse of force. +The Northern States had nothing to fear from the contrast, because in them the +blacks were few in number, and the white population was very considerable. But +if this faint dawn of freedom were to show two millions of men their true +position, the oppressors would have reason to tremble. After having +affranchised the children of their slaves the Europeans of the Southern States +would very shortly be obliged to extend the same benefit to the whole black +population. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0049" id="link2HCH0049"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part V</h2> + +<p> +In the North, as I have already remarked, a twofold migration ensues upon the +abolition of slavery, or even precedes that event when circumstances have +rendered it probable; the slaves quit the country to be transported southwards; +and the whites of the Northern States, as well as the emigrants from Europe, +hasten to fill up their place. But these two causes cannot operate in the same +manner in the Southern States. On the one hand, the mass of slaves is too great +for any expectation of their ever being removed from the country to be +entertained; and on the other hand, the Europeans and Anglo-Americans of the +North are afraid to come to inhabit a country in which labor has not yet been +reinstated in its rightful honors. Besides, they very justly look upon the +States in which the proportion of the negroes equals or exceeds that of the +whites, as exposed to very great dangers; and they refrain from turning their +activity in that direction. +</p> + +<p> +Thus the inhabitants of the South would not be able, like their Northern +countrymen, to initiate the slaves gradually into a state of freedom by +abolishing slavery; they have no means of perceptibly diminishing the black +population, and they would remain unsupported to repress its excesses. So that +in the course of a few years, a great people of free negroes would exist in the +heart of a white nation of equal size. +</p> + +<p> +The same abuses of power which still maintain slavery, would then become the +source of the most alarming perils which the white population of the South +might have to apprehend. At the present time the descendants of the Europeans +are the sole owners of the land; the absolute masters of all labor; and the +only persons who are possessed of wealth, knowledge, and arms. The black is +destitute of all these advantages, but he subsists without them because he is a +slave. If he were free, and obliged to provide for his own subsistence, would +it be possible for him to remain without these things and to support life? Or +would not the very instruments of the present superiority of the white, whilst +slavery exists, expose him to a thousand dangers if it were abolished? +</p> + +<p> +As long as the negro remains a slave, he may be kept in a condition not very +far removed from that of the brutes; but, with his liberty, he cannot but +acquire a degree of instruction which will enable him to appreciate his +misfortunes, and to discern a remedy for them. Moreover, there exists a +singular principle of relative justice which is very firmly implanted in the +human heart. Men are much more forcibly struck by those inequalities which +exist within the circle of the same class, than with those which may be +remarked between different classes. It is more easy for them to admit slavery, +than to allow several millions of citizens to exist under a load of eternal +infamy and hereditary wretchedness. In the North the population of freed +negroes feels these hardships and resents these indignities; but its numbers +and its powers are small, whilst in the South it would be numerous and strong. +</p> + +<p> +As soon as it is admitted that the whites and the emancipated blacks are placed +upon the same territory in the situation of two alien communities, it will +readily be understood that there are but two alternatives for the future; the +negroes and the whites must either wholly part or wholly mingle. I have already +expressed the conviction which I entertain as to the latter event. *r I do not +imagine that the white and black races will ever live in any country upon an +equal footing. But I believe the difficulty to be still greater in the United +States than elsewhere. An isolated individual may surmount the prejudices of +religion, of his country, or of his race, and if this individual is a king he +may effect surprising changes in society; but a whole people cannot rise, as it +were, above itself. A despot who should subject the Americans and their former +slaves to the same yoke, might perhaps succeed in commingling their races; but +as long as the American democracy remains at the head of affairs, no one will +undertake so difficult a task; and it may be foreseen that the freer the white +population of the United States becomes, the more isolated will it remain. *s +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ This opinion is sanctioned by authorities infinitely weightier than anything +that I can say: thus, for instance, it is stated in the “Memoirs of +Jefferson” (as collected by M. Conseil), “Nothing is more clearly +written in the book of destiny than the emancipation of the blacks; and it is +equally certain that the two races will never live in a state of equal freedom +under the same government, so insurmountable are the barriers which nature, +habit, and opinions have established between them.”] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +s <br /> +[ If the British West India planters had governed themselves, they would +assuredly not have passed the Slave Emancipation Bill which the mother-country +has recently imposed upon them.] +</p> + +<p> +I have previously observed that the mixed race is the true bond of union +between the Europeans and the Indians; just so the mulattoes are the true means +of transition between the white and the negro; so that wherever mulattoes +abound, the intermixture of the two races is not impossible. In some parts of +America, the European and the negro races are so crossed by one another, that +it is rare to meet with a man who is entirely black, or entirely white: when +they are arrived at this point, the two races may really be said to be +combined; or rather to have been absorbed in a third race, which is connected +with both without being identical with either. +</p> + +<p> +Of all the Europeans the English are those who have mixed least with the +negroes. More mulattoes are to be seen in the South of the Union than in the +North, but still they are infinitely more scarce than in any other European +colony: mulattoes are by no means numerous in the United States; they have no +force peculiar to themselves, and when quarrels originating in differences of +color take place, they generally side with the whites; just as the lackeys of +the great, in Europe, assume the contemptuous airs of nobility to the lower +orders. +</p> + +<p> +The pride of origin, which is natural to the English, is singularly augmented +by the personal pride which democratic liberty fosters amongst the Americans: +the white citizen of the United States is proud of his race, and proud of +himself. But if the whites and the negroes do not intermingle in the North of +the Union, how should they mix in the South? Can it be supposed for an instant, +that an American of the Southern States, placed, as he must forever be, between +the white man with all his physical and moral superiority and the negro, will +ever think of preferring the latter? The Americans of the Southern States have +two powerful passions which will always keep them aloof; the first is the fear +of being assimilated to the negroes, their former slaves; and the second the +dread of sinking below the whites, their neighbors. +</p> + +<p> +If I were called upon to predict what will probably occur at some future time, +I should say, that the abolition of slavery in the South will, in the common +course of things, increase the repugnance of the white population for the men +of color. I found this opinion upon the analogous observation which I already +had occasion to make in the North. I there remarked that the white inhabitants +of the North avoid the negroes with increasing care, in proportion as the legal +barriers of separation are removed by the legislature; and why should not the +same result take place in the South? In the North, the whites are deterred from +intermingling with the blacks by the fear of an imaginary danger; in the South, +where the danger would be real, I cannot imagine that the fear would be less +general. +</p> + +<p> +If, on the one hand, it be admitted (and the fact is unquestionable) that the +colored population perpetually accumulates in the extreme South, and that it +increases more rapidly than that of the whites; and if, on the other hand, it +be allowed that it is impossible to foresee a time at which the whites and the +blacks will be so intermingled as to derive the same benefits from society; +must it not be inferred that the blacks and the whites will, sooner or later, +come to open strife in the Southern States of the Union? But if it be asked +what the issue of the struggle is likely to be, it will readily be understood +that we are here left to form a very vague surmise of the truth. The human mind +may succeed in tracing a wide circle, as it were, which includes the course of +future events; but within that circle a thousand various chances and +circumstances may direct it in as many different ways; and in every picture of +the future there is a dim spot, which the eye of the understanding cannot +penetrate. It appears, however, to be extremely probable that in the West +Indian Islands the white race is destined to be subdued, and the black +population to share the same fate upon the continent. +</p> + +<p> +In the West India Islands the white planters are surrounded by an immense black +population; on the continent, the blacks are placed between the ocean and an +innumerable people, which already extends over them in a dense mass, from the +icy confines of Canada to the frontiers of Virginia, and from the banks of the +Missouri to the shores of the Atlantic. If the white citizens of North America +remain united, it cannot be supposed that the negroes will escape the +destruction with which they are menaced; they must be subdued by want or by the +sword. But the black population which is accumulated along the coast of the +Gulf of Mexico, has a chance of success if the American Union is dissolved when +the struggle between the two races begins. If the federal tie were broken, the +citizens of the South would be wrong to rely upon any lasting succor from their +Northern countrymen. The latter are well aware that the danger can never reach +them; and unless they are constrained to march to the assistance of the South +by a positive obligation, it may be foreseen that the sympathy of color will be +insufficient to stimulate their exertions. +</p> + +<p> +Yet, at whatever period the strife may break out, the whites of the South, even +if they are abandoned to their own resources, will enter the lists with an +immense superiority of knowledge and of the means of warfare; but the blacks +will have numerical strength and the energy of despair upon their side, and +these are powerful resources to men who have taken up arms. The fate of the +white population of the Southern States will, perhaps, be similar to that of +the Moors in Spain. After having occupied the land for centuries, it will +perhaps be forced to retire to the country whence its ancestors came, and to +abandon to the negroes the possession of a territory, which Providence seems to +have more peculiarly destined for them, since they can subsist and labor in it +more easily that the whites. +</p> + +<p> +The danger of a conflict between the white and the black inhabitants of the +Southern States of the Union—a danger which, however remote it may be, is +inevitable—perpetually haunts the imagination of the Americans. The +inhabitants of the North make it a common topic of conversation, although they +have no direct injury to fear from the struggle; but they vainly endeavor to +devise some means of obviating the misfortunes which they foresee. In the +Southern States the subject is not discussed: the planter does not allude to +the future in conversing with strangers; the citizen does not communicate his +apprehensions to his friends; he seeks to conceal them from himself; but there +is something more alarming in the tacit forebodings of the South, than in the +clamorous fears of the Northern States. +</p> + +<p> +This all-pervading disquietude has given birth to an undertaking which is but +little known, but which may have the effect of changing the fate of a portion +of the human race. From apprehension of the dangers which I have just been +describing, a certain number of American citizens have formed a society for the +purpose of exporting to the coast of Guinea, at their own expense, such free +negroes as may be willing to escape from the oppression to which they are +subject. *t In 1820, the society to which I allude formed a settlement in +Africa, upon the seventh degree of north latitude, which bears the name of +Liberia. The most recent intelligence informs us that 2,500 negroes are +collected there; they have introduced the democratic institutions of America +into the country of their forefathers; and Liberia has a representative system +of government, negro jurymen, negro magistrates, and negro priests; churches +have been built, newspapers established, and, by a singular change in the +vicissitudes of the world, white men are prohibited from sojourning within the +settlement. *u +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +t <br /> +[ This society assumed the name of “The Society for the Colonization of +the Blacks.” See its annual reports; and more particularly the fifteenth. +See also the pamphlet, to which allusion has already been made, entitled +“Letters on the Colonization Society, and on its probable Results,” +by Mr. Carey, Philadelphia, 1833.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +u <br /> +[ This last regulation was laid down by the founders of the settlement; they +apprehended that a state of things might arise in Africa similar to that which +exists on the frontiers of the United States, and that if the negroes, like the +Indians, were brought into collision with a people more enlightened than +themselves, they would be destroyed before they could be civilized.] +</p> + +<p> +This is indeed a strange caprice of fortune. Two hundred years have now elapsed +since the inhabitants of Europe undertook to tear the negro from his family and +his home, in order to transport him to the shores of North America; at the +present day, the European settlers are engaged in sending back the descendants +of those very negroes to the Continent from which they were originally taken; +and the barbarous Africans have been brought into contact with civilization in +the midst of bondage, and have become acquainted with free political +institutions in slavery. Up to the present time Africa has been closed against +the arts and sciences of the whites; but the inventions of Europe will perhaps +penetrate into those regions, now that they are introduced by Africans +themselves. The settlement of Liberia is founded upon a lofty and a most +fruitful idea; but whatever may be its results with regard to the Continent of +Africa, it can afford no remedy to the New World. +</p> + +<p> +In twelve years the Colonization Society has transported 2,500 negroes to +Africa; in the same space of time about 700,000 blacks were born in the United +States. If the colony of Liberia were so situated as to be able to receive +thousands of new inhabitants every year, and if the negroes were in a state to +be sent thither with advantage; if the Union were to supply the society with +annual subsidies, *v and to transport the negroes to Africa in the vessels of +the State, it would still be unable to counterpoise the natural increase of +population amongst the blacks; and as it could not remove as many men in a year +as are born upon its territory within the same space of time, it would fail in +suspending the growth of the evil which is daily increasing in the States. *w +The negro race will never leave those shores of the American continent, to +which it was brought by the passions and the vices of Europeans; and it will +not disappear from the New World as long as it continues to exist. The +inhabitants of the United States may retard the calamities which they +apprehend, but they cannot now destroy their efficient cause. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +v <br /> +[ Nor would these be the only difficulties attendant upon the undertaking; if +the Union undertook to buy up the negroes now in America, in order to transport +them to Africa, the price of slaves, increasing with their scarcity, would soon +become enormous; and the States of the North would never consent to expend such +great sums for a purpose which would procure such small advantages to +themselves. If the Union took possession of the slaves in the Southern States +by force, or at a rate determined by law, an insurmountable resistance would +arise in that part of the country. Both alternatives are equally impossible.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +w <br /> +[ In 1830 there were in the United States 2,010,327 slaves and 319,439 free +blacks, in all 2,329,766 negroes: which formed about one-fifth of the total +population of the United States at that time.] +</p> + +<p> +I am obliged to confess that I do not regard the abolition of slavery as a +means of warding off the struggle of the two races in the United States. The +negroes may long remain slaves without complaining; but if they are once raised +to the level of free men, they will soon revolt at being deprived of all their +civil rights; and as they cannot become the equals of the whites, they will +speedily declare themselves as enemies. In the North everything contributed to +facilitate the emancipation of the slaves; and slavery was abolished, without +placing the free negroes in a position which could become formidable, since +their number was too small for them ever to claim the exercise of their rights. +But such is not the case in the South. The question of slavery was a question +of commerce and manufacture for the slave-owners in the North; for those of the +South, it is a question of life and death. God forbid that I should seek to +justify the principle of negro slavery, as has been done by some American +writers! But I only observe that all the countries which formerly adopted that +execrable principle are not equally able to abandon it at the present time. +</p> + +<p> +When I contemplate the condition of the South, I can only discover two +alternatives which may be adopted by the white inhabitants of those States; +viz., either to emancipate the negroes, and to intermingle with them; or, +remaining isolated from them, to keep them in a state of slavery as long as +possible. All intermediate measures seem to me likely to terminate, and that +shortly, in the most horrible of civil wars, and perhaps in the extirpation of +one or other of the two races. Such is the view which the Americans of the +South take of the question, and they act consistently with it. As they are +determined not to mingle with the negroes, they refuse to emancipate them. +</p> + +<p> +Not that the inhabitants of the South regard slavery as necessary to the wealth +of the planter, for on this point many of them agree with their Northern +countrymen in freely admitting that slavery is prejudicial to their interest; +but they are convinced that, however prejudicial it may be, they hold their +lives upon no other tenure. The instruction which is now diffused in the South +has convinced the inhabitants that slavery is injurious to the slave-owner, but +it has also shown them, more clearly than before, that no means exist of +getting rid of its bad consequences. Hence arises a singular contrast; the more +the utility of slavery is contested, the more firmly is it established in the +laws; and whilst the principle of servitude is gradually abolished in the +North, that self-same principle gives rise to more and more rigorous +consequences in the South. +</p> + +<p> +The legislation of the Southern States with regard to slaves, presents at the +present day such unparalleled atrocities as suffice to show how radically the +laws of humanity have been perverted, and to betray the desperate position of +the community in which that legislation has been promulgated. The Americans of +this portion of the Union have not, indeed, augmented the hardships of slavery; +they have, on the contrary, bettered the physical condition of the slaves. The +only means by which the ancients maintained slavery were fetters and death; the +Americans of the South of the Union have discovered more intellectual +securities for the duration of their power. They have employed their despotism +and their violence against the human mind. In antiquity, precautions were taken +to prevent the slave from breaking his chains; at the present day measures are +adopted to deprive him even of the desire of freedom. The ancients kept the +bodies of their slaves in bondage, but they placed no restraint upon the mind +and no check upon education; and they acted consistently with their established +principle, since a natural termination of slavery then existed, and one day or +other the slave might be set free, and become the equal of his master. But the +Americans of the South, who do not admit that the negroes can ever be +commingled with themselves, have forbidden them to be taught to read or to +write, under severe penalties; and as they will not raise them to their own +level, they sink them as nearly as possible to that of the brutes. +</p> + +<p> +The hope of liberty had always been allowed to the slave to cheer the hardships +of his condition. But the Americans of the South are well aware that +emancipation cannot but be dangerous, when the freed man can never be +assimilated to his former master. To give a man his freedom, and to leave him +in wretchedness and ignominy, is nothing less than to prepare a future chief +for a revolt of the slaves. Moreover, it has long been remarked that the +presence of a free negro vaguely agitates the minds of his less fortunate +brethren, and conveys to them a dim notion of their rights. The Americans of +the South have consequently taken measures to prevent slave-owners from +emancipating their slaves in most cases; not indeed by a positive prohibition, +but by subjecting that step to various forms which it is difficult to comply +with. I happened to meet with an old man, in the South of the Union, who had +lived in illicit intercourse with one of his negresses, and had had several +children by her, who were born the slaves of their father. He had indeed +frequently thought of bequeathing to them at least their liberty; but years had +elapsed without his being able to surmount the legal obstacles to their +emancipation, and in the mean while his old age was come, and he was about to +die. He pictured to himself his sons dragged from market to market, and passing +from the authority of a parent to the rod of the stranger, until these horrid +anticipations worked his expiring imagination into frenzy. When I saw him he +was a prey to all the anguish of despair, and he made me feel how awful is the +retribution of nature upon those who have broken her laws. +</p> + +<p> +These evils are unquestionably great; but they are the necessary and foreseen +consequence of the very principle of modern slavery. When the Europeans chose +their slaves from a race differing from their own, which many of them +considered as inferior to the other races of mankind, and which they all +repelled with horror from any notion of intimate connection, they must have +believed that slavery would last forever; since there is no intermediate state +which can be durable between the excessive inequality produced by servitude and +the complete equality which originates in independence. The Europeans did +imperfectly feel this truth, but without acknowledging it even to themselves. +Whenever they have had to do with negroes, their conduct has either been +dictated by their interest and their pride, or by their compassion. They first +violated every right of humanity by their treatment of the negro and they +afterwards informed him that those rights were precious and inviolable. They +affected to open their ranks to the slaves, but the negroes who attempted to +penetrate into the community were driven back with scorn; and they have +incautiously and involuntarily been led to admit of freedom instead of slavery, +without having the courage to be wholly iniquitous, or wholly just. +</p> + +<p> +If it be impossible to anticipate a period at which the Americans of the South +will mingle their blood with that of the negroes, can they allow their slaves +to become free without compromising their own security? And if they are obliged +to keep that race in bondage in order to save their own families, may they not +be excused for availing themselves of the means best adapted to that end? The +events which are taking place in the Southern States of the Union appear to me +to be at once the most horrible and the most natural results of slavery. When I +see the order of nature overthrown, and when I hear the cry of humanity in its +vain struggle against the laws, my indignation does not light upon the men of +our own time who are the instruments of these outrages; but I reserve my +execration for those who, after a thousand years of freedom, brought back +slavery into the world once more. +</p> + +<p> +Whatever may be the efforts of the Americans of the South to maintain slavery, +they will not always succeed. Slavery, which is now confined to a single tract +of the civilized earth, which is attacked by Christianity as unjust, and by +political economy as prejudicial; and which is now contrasted with democratic +liberties and the information of our age, cannot survive. By the choice of the +master, or by the will of the slave, it will cease; and in either case great +calamities may be expected to ensue. If liberty be refused to the negroes of +the South, they will in the end seize it for themselves by force; if it be +given, they will abuse it ere long. *x +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +x <br /> +[ [This chapter is no longer applicable to the condition of the negro race in +the United States, since the abolition of slavery was the result, though not +the object, of the great Civil War, and the negroes have been raised to the +condition not only of freedmen, but of citizens; and in some States they +exercise a preponderating political power by reason of their numerical +majority. Thus, in South Carolina there were in 1870, 289,667 whites and +415,814 blacks. But the emancipation of the slaves has not solved the problem, +how two races so different and so hostile are to live together in peace in one +country on equal terms. That problem is as difficult, perhaps more difficult +than ever; and to this difficulty the author’s remarks are still +perfectly applicable.]] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0050" id="link2HCH0050"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part VI</h2> + +<p> +What Are The Chances In Favor Of The Duration Of The American Union, And What +Dangers Threaten It *y +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +y <br /> +[ [This chapter is one of the most curious and interesting portions of the +work, because it embraces almost all the constitutional and social questions +which were raised by the great secession of the South and decided by the +results of the Civil War. But it must be confessed that the sagacity of the +author is sometimes at fault in these speculations, and did not save him from +considerable errors, which the course of events has since made apparent. He +held that “the legislators of the Constitution of 1789 were not appointed +to constitute the government of a single people, but to regulate the +association of several States; that the Union was formed by the voluntary +agreement of the States, and in uniting together they have not forfeited their +nationality, nor have they been reduced to the condition of one and the same +people.” Whence he inferred that “if one of the States chose to +withdraw its name from the contract, it would be difficult to disprove its +right of doing so; and that the Federal Government would have no means of +maintaining its claims directly, either by force or by right.” This is +the Southern theory of the Constitution, and the whole case of the South in +favor of secession. To many Europeans, and to some American (Northern) jurists, +this view appeared to be sound; but it was vigorously resisted by the North, +and crushed by force of arms. +</p> + +<p> +The author of this book was mistaken in supposing that the “Union was a +vast body which presents no definite object to patriotic feeling.” When +the day of trial came, millions of men were ready to lay down their lives for +it. He was also mistaken in supposing that the Federal Executive is so weak +that it requires the free consent of the governed to enable it to subsist, and +that it would be defeated in a struggle to maintain the Union against one or +more separate States. In 1861 nine States, with a population of 8,753,000, +seceded, and maintained for four years a resolute but unequal contest for +independence, but they were defeated. +</p> + +<p> +Lastly, the author was mistaken in supposing that a community of interests +would always prevail between North and South sufficiently powerful to bind them +together. He overlooked the influence which the question of slavery must have +on the Union the moment that the majority of the people of the North declared +against it. In 1831, when the author visited America, the anti-slavery +agitation had scarcely begun; and the fact of Southern slavery was accepted by +men of all parties, even in the States where there were no slaves: and that was +unquestionably the view taken by all the States and by all American statesmen +at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, in 1789. But in the course of +thirty years a great change took place, and the North refused to perpetuate +what had become the “peculiar institution” of the South, especially +as it gave the South a species of aristocratic preponderance. The result was +the ratification, in December, 1865, of the celebrated 13th article or +amendment of the Constitution, which declared that “neither slavery nor +involuntary servitude—except as a punishment for crime—shall exist +within the United States.” To which was soon afterwards added the 15th +article, “The right of citizens to vote shall not be denied or abridged +by the United States, or by any State, on account of race, color, or previous +servitude.” The emancipation of several millions of negro slaves without +compensation, and the transfer to them of political preponderance in the States +in which they outnumber the white population, were acts of the North totally +opposed to the interests of the South, and which could only have been carried +into effect by conquest.—Translator’s Note.]] +</p> + +<p> +Reason for which the preponderating force lies in the States rather than in the +Union—The Union will only last as long as all the States choose to belong +to it—Causes which tend to keep them united—Utility of the Union to +resist foreign enemies, and to prevent the existence of foreigners in +America—No natural barriers between the several States—No +conflicting interests to divide them—Reciprocal interests of the +Northern, Southern, and Western States—Intellectual ties of +union—Uniformity of opinions—Dangers of the Union resulting from +the different characters and the passions of its citizens—Character of +the citizens in the South and in the North—The rapid growth of the Union +one of its greatest dangers—Progress of the population to the +Northwest—Power gravitates in the same direction—Passions +originating from sudden turns of fortune—Whether the existing Government +of the Union tends to gain strength, or to lose it—Various signs of its +decrease—Internal improvements—Waste lands—Indians—The +Bank—The Tariff—General Jackson. +</p> + +<p> +The maintenance of the existing institutions of the several States depends in +some measure upon the maintenance of the Union itself. It is therefore +important in the first instance to inquire into the probable fate of the Union. +One point may indeed be assumed at once: if the present confederation were +dissolved, it appears to me to be incontestable that the States of which it is +now composed would not return to their original isolated condition, but that +several unions would then be formed in the place of one. It is not my intention +to inquire into the principles upon which these new unions would probably be +established, but merely to show what the causes are which may effect the +dismemberment of the existing confederation. +</p> + +<p> +With this object I shall be obliged to retrace some of the steps which I have +already taken, and to revert to topics which I have before discussed. I am +aware that the reader may accuse me of repetition, but the importance of the +matter which still remains to be treated is my excuse; I had rather say too +much, than say too little to be thoroughly understood, and I prefer injuring +the author to slighting the subject. +</p> + +<p> +The legislators who formed the Constitution of 1789 endeavored to confer a +distinct and preponderating authority upon the federal power. But they were +confined by the conditions of the task which they had undertaken to perform. +They were not appointed to constitute the government of a single people, but to +regulate the association of several States; and, whatever their inclinations +might be, they could not but divide the exercise of sovereignty in the end. +</p> + +<p> +In order to understand the consequences of this division, it is necessary to +make a short distinction between the affairs of the Government. There are some +objects which are national by their very nature, that is to say, which affect +the nation as a body, and can only be intrusted to the man or the assembly of +men who most completely represent the entire nation. Amongst these may be +reckoned war and diplomacy. There are other objects which are provincial by +their very nature, that is to say, which only affect certain localities, and +which can only be properly treated in that locality. Such, for instance, is the +budget of a municipality. Lastly, there are certain objects of a mixed nature, +which are national inasmuch as they affect all the citizens who compose the +nation, and which are provincial inasmuch as it is not necessary that the +nation itself should provide for them all. Such are the rights which regulate +the civil and political condition of the citizens. No society can exist without +civil and political rights. These rights therefore interest all the citizens +alike; but it is not always necessary to the existence and the prosperity of +the nation that these rights should be uniform, nor, consequently, that they +should be regulated by the central authority. +</p> + +<p> +There are, then, two distinct categories of objects which are submitted to the +direction of the sovereign power; and these categories occur in all +well-constituted communities, whatever the basis of the political constitution +may otherwise be. Between these two extremes the objects which I have termed +mixed may be considered to lie. As these objects are neither exclusively +national nor entirely provincial, they may be obtained by a national or by a +provincial government, according to the agreement of the contracting parties, +without in any way impairing the contract of association. +</p> + +<p> +The sovereign power is usually formed by the union of separate individuals, who +compose a people; and individual powers or collective forces, each representing +a very small portion of the sovereign authority, are the sole elements which +are subjected to the general Government of their choice. In this case the +general Government is more naturally called upon to regulate, not only those +affairs which are of essential national importance, but those which are of a +more local interest; and the local governments are reduced to that small share +of sovereign authority which is indispensable to their prosperity. +</p> + +<p> +But sometimes the sovereign authority is composed of preorganized political +bodies, by virtue of circumstances anterior to their union; and in this case +the provincial governments assume the control, not only of those affairs which +more peculiarly belong to their province, but of all, or of a part of the mixed +affairs to which allusion has been made. For the confederate nations which were +independent sovereign States before their union, and which still represent a +very considerable share of the sovereign power, have only consented to cede to +the general Government the exercise of those rights which are indispensable to +the Union. +</p> + +<p> +When the national Government, independently of the prerogatives inherent in its +nature, is invested with the right of regulating the affairs which relate +partly to the general and partly to the local interests, it possesses a +preponderating influence. Not only are its own rights extensive, but all the +rights which it does not possess exist by its sufferance, and it may be +apprehended that the provincial governments may be deprived of their natural +and necessary prerogatives by its influence. +</p> + +<p> +When, on the other hand, the provincial governments are invested with the power +of regulating those same affairs of mixed interest, an opposite tendency +prevails in society. The preponderating force resides in the province, not in +the nation; and it may be apprehended that the national Government may in the +end be stripped of the privileges which are necessary to its existence. +</p> + +<p> +Independent nations have therefore a natural tendency to centralization, and +confederations to dismemberment. +</p> + +<p> +It now only remains for us to apply these general principles to the American +Union. The several States were necessarily possessed of the right of regulating +all exclusively provincial affairs. Moreover these same States retained the +rights of determining the civil and political competency of the citizens, or +regulating the reciprocal relations of the members of the community, and of +dispensing justice; rights which are of a general nature, but which do not +necessarily appertain to the national Government. We have shown that the +Government of the Union is invested with the power of acting in the name of the +whole nation in those cases in which the nation has to appear as a single and +undivided power; as, for instance, in foreign relations, and in offering a +common resistance to a common enemy; in short, in conducting those affairs +which I have styled exclusively national. +</p> + +<p> +In this division of the rights of sovereignty, the share of the Union seems at +first sight to be more considerable than that of the States; but a more +attentive investigation shows it to be less so. The undertakings of the +Government of the Union are more vast, but their influence is more rarely felt. +Those of the provincial governments are comparatively small, but they are +incessant, and they serve to keep alive the authority which they represent. The +Government of the Union watches the general interests of the country; but the +general interests of a people have a very questionable influence upon +individual happiness, whilst provincial interests produce a most immediate +effect upon the welfare of the inhabitants. The Union secures the independence +and the greatness of the nation, which do not immediately affect private +citizens; but the several States maintain the liberty, regulate the rights, +protect the fortune, and secure the life and the whole future prosperity of +every citizen. +</p> + +<p> +The Federal Government is very far removed from its subjects, whilst the +provincial governments are within the reach of them all, and are ready to +attend to the smallest appeal. The central Government has upon its side the +passions of a few superior men who aspire to conduct it; but upon the side of +the provincial governments are the interests of all those second-rate +individuals who can only hope to obtain power within their own State, and who +nevertheless exercise the largest share of authority over the people because +they are placed nearest to its level. The Americans have therefore much more to +hope and to fear from the States than from the Union; and, in conformity with +the natural tendency of the human mind, they are more likely to attach +themselves to the former than to the latter. In this respect their habits and +feelings harmonize with their interests. +</p> + +<p> +When a compact nation divides its sovereignty, and adopts a confederate form of +government, the traditions, the customs, and the manners of the people are for +a long time at variance with their legislation; and the former tend to give a +degree of influence to the central government which the latter forbids. When a +number of confederate states unite to form a single nation, the same causes +operate in an opposite direction. I have no doubt that if France were to become +a confederate republic like that of the United States, the government would at +first display more energy than that of the Union; and if the Union were to +alter its constitution to a monarchy like that of France, I think that the +American Government would be a long time in acquiring the force which now rules +the latter nation. When the national existence of the Anglo-Americans began, +their provincial existence was already of long standing; necessary relations +were established between the townships and the individual citizens of the same +States; and they were accustomed to consider some objects as common to them +all, and to conduct other affairs as exclusively relating to their own special +interests. +</p> + +<p> +The Union is a vast body which presents no definite object to patriotic +feeling. The forms and limits of the State are distinct and circumscribed; +since it represents a certain number of objects which are familiar to the +citizens and beloved by all. It is identified with the very soil, with the +right of property and the domestic affections, with the recollections of the +past, the labors of the present, and the hopes of the future. Patriotism, then, +which is frequently a mere extension of individual egotism, is still directed +to the State, and is not excited by the Union. Thus the tendency of the +interests, the habits, and the feelings of the people is to centre political +activity in the States, in preference to the Union. +</p> + +<p> +It is easy to estimate the different forces of the two governments, by +remarking the manner in which they fulfil their respective functions. Whenever +the government of a State has occasion to address an individual or an assembly +of individuals, its language is clear and imperative; and such is also the tone +of the Federal Government in its intercourse with individuals, but no sooner +has it anything to do with a State than it begins to parley, to explain its +motives and to justify its conduct, to argue, to advise, and, in short, +anything but to command. If doubts are raised as to the limits of the +constitutional powers of each government, the provincial government prefers its +claim with boldness, and takes prompt and energetic steps to support it. In the +mean while the Government of the Union reasons; it appeals to the interests, to +the good sense, to the glory of the nation; it temporizes, it negotiates, and +does not consent to act until it is reduced to the last extremity. At first +sight it might readily be imagined that it is the provincial government which +is armed with the authority of the nation, and that Congress represents a +single State. +</p> + +<p> +The Federal Government is, therefore, notwithstanding the precautions of those +who founded it, naturally so weak that it more peculiarly requires the free +consent of the governed to enable it to subsist. It is easy to perceive that +its object is to enable the States to realize with facility their determination +of remaining united; and, as long as this preliminary condition exists, its +authority is great, temperate, and effective. The Constitution fits the +Government to control individuals, and easily to surmount such obstacles as +they may be inclined to offer; but it was by no means established with a view +to the possible separation of one or more of the States from the Union. +</p> + +<p> +If the sovereignty of the Union were to engage in a struggle with that of the +States at the present day, its defeat may be confidently predicted; and it is +not probable that such a struggle would be seriously undertaken. As often as a +steady resistance is offered to the Federal Government it will be found to +yield. Experience has hitherto shown that whenever a State has demanded +anything with perseverance and resolution, it has invariably succeeded; and +that if a separate government has distinctly refused to act, it was left to do +as it thought fit. *z +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +z <br /> +[ See the conduct of the Northern States in the war of 1812. “During that +war,” says Jefferson in a letter to General Lafayette, “four of the +Eastern States were only attached to the Union, like so many inanimate bodies +to living men.”] +</p> + +<p> +But even if the Government of the Union had any strength inherent in itself, +the physical situation of the country would render the exercise of that +strength very difficult. *a The United States cover an immense territory; they +are separated from each other by great distances; and the population is +disseminated over the surface of a country which is still half a wilderness. If +the Union were to undertake to enforce the allegiance of the confederate States +by military means, it would be in a position very analogous to that of England +at the time of the War of Independence. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ The profound peace of the Union affords no pretext for a standing army; and +without a standing army a government is not prepared to profit by a favorable +opportunity to conquer resistance, and take the sovereign power by surprise. +[This note, and the paragraph in the text which precedes, have been shown by +the results of the Civil War to be a misconception of the writer.]] +</p> + +<p> +However strong a government may be, it cannot easily escape from the +consequences of a principle which it has once admitted as the foundation of its +constitution. The Union was formed by the voluntary agreement of the States; +and, in uniting together, they have not forfeited their nationality, nor have +they been reduced to the condition of one and the same people. If one of the +States chose to withdraw its name from the contract, it would be difficult to +disprove its right of doing so; and the Federal Government would have no means +of maintaining its claims directly, either by force or by right. In order to +enable the Federal Government easily to conquer the resistance which may be +offered to it by any one of its subjects, it would be necessary that one or +more of them should be specially interested in the existence of the Union, as +has frequently been the case in the history of confederations. +</p> + +<p> +If it be supposed that amongst the States which are united by the federal tie +there are some which exclusively enjoy the principal advantages of union, or +whose prosperity depends on the duration of that union, it is unquestionable +that they will always be ready to support the central Government in enforcing +the obedience of the others. But the Government would then be exerting a force +not derived from itself, but from a principle contrary to its nature. States +form confederations in order to derive equal advantages from their union; and +in the case just alluded to, the Federal Government would derive its power from +the unequal distribution of those benefits amongst the States. +</p> + +<p> +If one of the confederate States have acquired a preponderance sufficiently +great to enable it to take exclusive possession of the central authority, it +will consider the other States as subject provinces, and it will cause its own +supremacy to be respected under the borrowed name of the sovereignty of the +Union. Great things may then be done in the name of the Federal Government, but +in reality that Government will have ceased to exist. *b In both these cases, +the power which acts in the name of the confederation becomes stronger the more +it abandons the natural state and the acknowledged principles of +confederations. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ Thus the province of Holland in the republic of the Low Countries, and the +Emperor in the Germanic Confederation, have sometimes put themselves in the +place of the union, and have employed the federal authority to their own +advantage.] +</p> + +<p> +In America the existing Union is advantageous to all the States, but it is not +indispensable to any one of them. Several of them might break the federal tie +without compromising the welfare of the others, although their own prosperity +would be lessened. As the existence and the happiness of none of the States are +wholly dependent on the present Constitution, they would none of them be +disposed to make great personal sacrifices to maintain it. On the other hand, +there is no State which seems hitherto to have its ambition much interested in +the maintenance of the existing Union. They certainly do not all exercise the +same influence in the federal councils, but no one of them can hope to domineer +over the rest, or to treat them as its inferiors or as its subjects. +</p> + +<p> +It appears to me unquestionable that if any portion of the Union seriously +desired to separate itself from the other States, they would not be able, nor +indeed would they attempt, to prevent it; and that the present Union will only +last as long as the States which compose it choose to continue members of the +confederation. If this point be admitted, the question becomes less difficult; +and our object is, not to inquire whether the States of the existing Union are +capable of separating, but whether they will choose to remain united. +</p> + +<p> +Amongst the various reasons which tend to render the existing Union useful to +the Americans, two principal causes are peculiarly evident to the observer. +Although the Americans are, as it were, alone upon their continent, their +commerce makes them the neighbors of all the nations with which they trade. +Notwithstanding their apparent isolation, the Americans require a certain +degree of strength, which they cannot retain otherwise than by remaining united +to each other. If the States were to split, they would not only diminish the +strength which they are now able to display towards foreign nations, but they +would soon create foreign powers upon their own territory. A system of inland +custom-houses would then be established; the valleys would be divided by +imaginary boundary lines; the courses of the rivers would be confined by +territorial distinctions; and a multitude of hindrances would prevent the +Americans from exploring the whole of that vast continent which Providence has +allotted to them for a dominion. At present they have no invasion to fear, and +consequently no standing armies to maintain, no taxes to levy. If the Union +were dissolved, all these burdensome measures might ere long be required. The +Americans are then very powerfully interested in the maintenance of their +Union. On the other hand, it is almost impossible to discover any sort of +material interest which might at present tempt a portion of the Union to +separate from the other States. +</p> + +<p> +When we cast our eyes upon the map of the United States, we perceive the chain +of the Alleghany Mountains, running from the northeast to the southwest, and +crossing nearly one thousand miles of country; and we are led to imagine that +the design of Providence was to raise between the valley of the Mississippi and +the coast of the Atlantic Ocean one of those natural barriers which break the +mutual intercourse of men, and form the necessary limits of different States. +But the average height of the Alleghanies does not exceed 2,500 feet; their +greatest elevation is not above 4,000 feet; their rounded summits, and the +spacious valleys which they conceal within their passes, are of easy access +from several sides. Besides which, the principal rivers which fall into the +Atlantic Ocean—the Hudson, the Susquehanna, and the Potomac—take +their rise beyond the Alleghanies, in an open district, which borders upon the +valley of the Mississippi. These streams quit this tract of country, make their +way through the barrier which would seem to turn them westward, and as they +wind through the mountains they open an easy and natural passage to man. No +natural barrier exists in the regions which are now inhabited by the +Anglo-Americans; the Alleghanies are so far from serving as a boundary to +separate nations, that they do not even serve as a frontier to the States. New +York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia comprise them within their borders, and they +extend as much to the west as to the east of the line. The territory now +occupied by the twenty-four States of the Union, and the three great districts +which have not yet acquired the rank of States, although they already contain +inhabitants, covers a surface of 1,002,600 square miles, *c which is about +equal to five times the extent of France. Within these limits the qualities of +the soil, the temperature, and the produce of the country, are extremely +various. The vast extent of territory occupied by the Anglo-American republics +has given rise to doubts as to the maintenance of their Union. Here a +distinction must be made; contrary interests sometimes arise in the different +provinces of a vast empire, which often terminate in open dissensions; and the +extent of the country is then most prejudicial to the power of the State. But +if the inhabitants of these vast regions are not divided by contrary interests, +the extent of the territory may be favorable to their prosperity; for the unity +of the government promotes the interchange of the different productions of the +soil, and increases their value by facilitating their consumption. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ See “Darby’s View of the United States,” p. 435. [In 1890 +the number of States and Territories had increased to 51, the population to +62,831,900, and the area of the States, 3,602,990 square miles. This does not +include the Philippine Islands, Hawaii, or Porto Rico. A conservative estimate +of the population of the Philippine Islands is 8,000,000; that of Hawaii, by +the census of 1897, was given at 109,020; and the present estimated population +of Porto Rico is 900,000. The area of the Philippine Islands is about 120,000 +square miles, that of Hawaii is 6,740 square miles, and the area of Porto Rico +is about 3,600 square miles.]] +</p> + +<p> +It is indeed easy to discover different interests in the different parts of the +Union, but I am unacquainted with any which are hostile to each other. The +Southern States are almost exclusively agricultural. The Northern States are +more peculiarly commercial and manufacturing. The States of the West are at the +same time agricultural and manufacturing. In the South the crops consist of +tobacco, of rice, of cotton, and of sugar; in the North and the West, of wheat +and maize. These are different sources of wealth; but union is the means by +which these sources are opened to all, and rendered equally advantageous to the +several districts. +</p> + +<p> +The North, which ships the produce of the Anglo-Americans to all parts of the +world, and brings back the produce of the globe to the Union, is evidently +interested in maintaining the confederation in its present condition, in order +that the number of American producers and consumers may remain as large as +possible. The North is the most natural agent of communication between the +South and the West of the Union on the one hand, and the rest of the world upon +the other; the North is therefore interested in the union and prosperity of the +South and the West, in order that they may continue to furnish raw materials +for its manufactures, and cargoes for its shipping. +</p> + +<p> +The South and the West, on their side, are still more directly interested in +the preservation of the Union, and the prosperity of the North. The produce of +the South is, for the most part, exported beyond seas; the South and the West +consequently stand in need of the commercial resources of the North. They are +likewise interested in the maintenance of a powerful fleet by the Union, to +protect them efficaciously. The South and the West have no vessels, but they +cannot refuse a willing subsidy to defray the expenses of the navy; for if the +fleets of Europe were to blockade the ports of the South and the delta of the +Mississippi, what would become of the rice of the Carolinas, the tobacco of +Virginia, and the sugar and cotton which grow in the valley of the Mississippi? +Every portion of the federal budget does therefore contribute to the +maintenance of material interests which are common to all the confederate +States. +</p> + +<p> +Independently of this commercial utility, the South and the West of the Union +derive great political advantages from their connection with the North. The +South contains an enormous slave population; a population which is already +alarming, and still more formidable for the future. The States of the West lie +in the remotest parts of a single valley; and all the rivers which intersect +their territory rise in the Rocky Mountains or in the Alleghanies, and fall +into the Mississippi, which bears them onwards to the Gulf of Mexico. The +Western States are consequently entirely cut off, by their position, from the +traditions of Europe and the civilization of the Old World. The inhabitants of +the South, then, are induced to support the Union in order to avail themselves +of its protection against the blacks; and the inhabitants of the West in order +not to be excluded from a free communication with the rest of the globe, and +shut up in the wilds of central America. The North cannot but desire the +maintenance of the Union, in order to remain, as it now is, the connecting link +between that vast body and the other parts of the world. +</p> + +<p> +The temporal interests of all the several parts of the Union are, then, +intimately connected; and the same assertion holds true respecting those +opinions and sentiments which may be termed the immaterial interests of men. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0051" id="link2HCH0051"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part VII</h2> + +<p> +The inhabitants of the United States talk a great deal of their attachment to +their country; but I confess that I do not rely upon that calculating +patriotism which is founded upon interest, and which a change in the interests +at stake may obliterate. Nor do I attach much importance to the language of the +Americans, when they manifest, in their daily conversations, the intention of +maintaining the federal system adopted by their forefathers. A government +retains its sway over a great number of citizens, far less by the voluntary and +rational consent of the multitude, than by that instinctive, and to a certain +extent involuntary agreement, which results from similarity of feelings and +resemblances of opinion. I will never admit that men constitute a social body, +simply because they obey the same head and the same laws. Society can only +exist when a great number of men consider a great number of things in the same +point of view; when they hold the same opinions upon many subjects, and when +the same occurrences suggest the same thoughts and impressions to their minds. +</p> + +<p> +The observer who examines the present condition of the United States upon this +principle, will readily discover, that although the citizens are divided into +twenty-four distinct sovereignties, they nevertheless constitute a single +people; and he may perhaps be led to think that the state of the Anglo-American +Union is more truly a state of society than that of certain nations of Europe +which live under the same legislation and the same prince. +</p> + +<p> +Although the Anglo-Americans have several religious sects, they all regard +religion in the same manner. They are not always agreed upon the measures which +are most conducive to good government, and they vary upon some of the forms of +government which it is expedient to adopt; but they are unanimous upon the +general principles which ought to rule human society. From Maine to the +Floridas, and from the Missouri to the Atlantic Ocean, the people is held to be +the legitimate source of all power. The same notions are entertained respecting +liberty and equality, the liberty of the press, the right of association, the +jury, and the responsibility of the agents of Government. +</p> + +<p> +If we turn from their political and religious opinions to the moral and +philosophical principles which regulate the daily actions of life and govern +their conduct, we shall still find the same uniformity. The Anglo-Americans *d +acknowledge the absolute moral authority of the reason of the community, as +they acknowledge the political authority of the mass of citizens; and they hold +that public opinion is the surest arbiter of what is lawful or forbidden, true +or false. The majority of them believe that a man will be led to do what is +just and good by following his own interest rightly understood. They hold that +every man is born in possession of the right of self-government, and that no +one has the right of constraining his fellow-creatures to be happy. They have +all a lively faith in the perfectibility of man; they are of opinion that the +effects of the diffusion of knowledge must necessarily be advantageous, and the +consequences of ignorance fatal; they all consider society as a body in a state +of improvement, humanity as a changing scene, in which nothing is, or ought to +be, permanent; and they admit that what appears to them to be good to-day may +be superseded by something better-to-morrow. I do not give all these opinions +as true, but I quote them as characteristic of the Americans. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ It is scarcely necessary for me to observe that by the expression +Anglo-Americans, I only mean to designate the great majority of the nation; for +a certain number of isolated individuals are of course to be met with holding +very different opinions.] +</p> + +<p> +The Anglo-Americans are not only united together by these common opinions, but +they are separated from all other nations by a common feeling of pride. For the +last fifty years no pains have been spared to convince the inhabitants of the +United States that they constitute the only religious, enlightened, and free +people. They perceive that, for the present, their own democratic institutions +succeed, whilst those of other countries fail; hence they conceive an +overweening opinion of their superiority, and they are not very remote from +believing themselves to belong to a distinct race of mankind. +</p> + +<p> +The dangers which threaten the American Union do not originate in the diversity +of interests or of opinions, but in the various characters and passions of the +Americans. The men who inhabit the vast territory of the United States are +almost all the issue of a common stock; but the effects of the climate, and +more especially of slavery, have gradually introduced very striking differences +between the British settler of the Southern States and the British settler of +the North. In Europe it is generally believed that slavery has rendered the +interests of one part of the Union contrary to those of another part; but I by +no means remarked this to be the case: slavery has not created interests in the +South contrary to those of the North, but it has modified the character and +changed the habits of the natives of the South. +</p> + +<p> +I have already explained the influence which slavery has exercised upon the +commercial ability of the Americans in the South; and this same influence +equally extends to their manners. The slave is a servant who never +remonstrates, and who submits to everything without complaint. He may sometimes +assassinate, but he never withstands, his master. In the South there are no +families so poor as not to have slaves. The citizen of the Southern States of +the Union is invested with a sort of domestic dictatorship, from his earliest +years; the first notion he acquires in life is that he is born to command, and +the first habit which he contracts is that of being obeyed without resistance. +His education tends, then, to give him the character of a supercilious and a +hasty man; irascible, violent, and ardent in his desires, impatient of +obstacles, but easily discouraged if he cannot succeed upon his first attempt. +</p> + +<p> +The American of the Northern States is surrounded by no slaves in his +childhood; he is even unattended by free servants, and is usually obliged to +provide for his own wants. No sooner does he enter the world than the idea of +necessity assails him on every side: he soon learns to know exactly the natural +limit of his authority; he never expects to subdue those who withstand him, by +force; and he knows that the surest means of obtaining the support of his +fellow-creatures, is to win their favor. He therefore becomes patient, +reflecting, tolerant, slow to act, and persevering in his designs. +</p> + +<p> +In the Southern States the more immediate wants of life are always supplied; +the inhabitants of those parts are not busied in the material cares of life, +which are always provided for by others; and their imagination is diverted to +more captivating and less definite objects. The American of the South is fond +of grandeur, luxury, and renown, of gayety, of pleasure, and above all of +idleness; nothing obliges him to exert himself in order to subsist; and as he +has no necessary occupations, he gives way to indolence, and does not even +attempt what would be useful. +</p> + +<p> +But the equality of fortunes, and the absence of slavery in the North, plunge +the inhabitants in those same cares of daily life which are disdained by the +white population of the South. They are taught from infancy to combat want, and +to place comfort above all the pleasures of the intellect or the heart. The +imagination is extinguished by the trivial details of life, and the ideas +become less numerous and less general, but far more practical and more precise. +As prosperity is the sole aim of exertion, it is excellently well attained; +nature and mankind are turned to the best pecuniary advantage, and society is +dexterously made to contribute to the welfare of each of its members, whilst +individual egotism is the source of general happiness. +</p> + +<p> +The citizen of the North has not only experience, but knowledge: nevertheless +he sets but little value upon the pleasures of knowledge; he esteems it as the +means of attaining a certain end, and he is only anxious to seize its more +lucrative applications. The citizen of the South is more given to act upon +impulse; he is more clever, more frank, more generous, more intellectual, and +more brilliant. The former, with a greater degree of activity, of common-sense, +of information, and of general aptitude, has the characteristic good and evil +qualities of the middle classes. The latter has the tastes, the prejudices, the +weaknesses, and the magnanimity of all aristocracies. If two men are united in +society, who have the same interests, and to a certain extent the same +opinions, but different characters, different acquirements, and a different +style of civilization, it is probable that these men will not agree. The same +remark is applicable to a society of nations. Slavery, then, does not attack +the American Union directly in its interests, but indirectly in its manners. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ Census of 1790, 3,929,328; 1830, 12,856,165; 1860, 31,443,321; 1870, +38,555,983; 1890, 62,831,900.] +</p> + +<p> +The States which gave their assent to the federal contract in 1790 were +thirteen in number; the Union now consists of thirty-four members. The +population, which amounted to nearly 4,000,000 in 1790, had more than tripled +in the space of forty years; and in 1830 it amounted to nearly 13,000,000. *e +Changes of such magnitude cannot take place without some danger. +</p> + +<p> +A society of nations, as well as a society of individuals, derives its +principal chances of duration from the wisdom of its members, their individual +weakness, and their limited number. The Americans who quit the coasts of the +Atlantic Ocean to plunge into the western wilderness, are adventurers impatient +of restraint, greedy of wealth, and frequently men expelled from the States in +which they were born. When they arrive in the deserts they are unknown to each +other, and they have neither traditions, family feeling, nor the force of +example to check their excesses. The empire of the laws is feeble amongst them; +that of morality is still more powerless. The settlers who are constantly +peopling the valley of the Mississippi are, then, in every respect very +inferior to the Americans who inhabit the older parts of the Union. +Nevertheless, they already exercise a great influence in its councils; and they +arrive at the government of the commonwealth before they have learnt to govern +themselves. *f +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ This indeed is only a temporary danger. I have no doubt that in time society +will assume as much stability and regularity in the West as it has already done +upon the coast of the Atlantic Ocean.] +</p> + +<p> +The greater the individual weakness of each of the contracting parties, the +greater are the chances of the duration of the contract; for their safety is +then dependent upon their union. When, in 1790, the most populous of the +American republics did not contain 500,000 inhabitants, *g each of them felt +its own insignificance as an independent people, and this feeling rendered +compliance with the federal authority more easy. But when one of the +confederate States reckons, like the State of New York, 2,000,000 of +inhabitants, and covers an extent of territory equal in surface to a quarter of +France, *h it feels its own strength; and although it may continue to support +the Union as advantageous to its prosperity, it no longer regards that body as +necessary to its existence, and as it continues to belong to the federal +compact, it soon aims at preponderance in the federal assemblies. The probable +unanimity of the States is diminished as their number increases. At present the +interests of the different parts of the Union are not at variance; but who is +able to foresee the multifarious changes of the future, in a country in which +towns are founded from day to day, and States almost from year to year? +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ Pennsylvania contained 431,373 inhabitants in 1790 [and 5,258,014 in 1890.]] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ The area of the State of New York is 49,170 square miles. [See U. S. census +report of 1890.]] +</p> + +<p> +Since the first settlement of the British colonies, the number of inhabitants +has about doubled every twenty-two years. I perceive no causes which are likely +to check this progressive increase of the Anglo-American population for the +next hundred years; and before that space of time has elapsed, I believe that +the territories and dependencies of the United States will be covered by more +than 100,000,000 of inhabitants, and divided into forty States. *i I admit that +these 100,000,000 of men have no hostile interests. I suppose, on the contrary, +that they are all equally interested in the maintenance of the Union; but I am +still of opinion that where there are 100,000,000 of men, and forty distinct +nations, unequally strong, the continuance of the Federal Government can only +be a fortunate accident. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ If the population continues to double every twenty-two years, as it has done +for the last two hundred years, the number of inhabitants in the United States +in 1852 will be twenty millions; in 1874, forty-eight millions; and in 1896, +ninety-six millions. This may still be the case even if the lands on the +western slope of the Rocky Mountains should be found to be unfit for +cultivation. The territory which is already occupied can easily contain this +number of inhabitants. One hundred millions of men disseminated over the +surface of the twenty-four States, and the three dependencies, which constitute +the Union, would only give 762 inhabitants to the square league; this would be +far below the mean population of France, which is 1,063 to the square league; +or of England, which is 1,457; and it would even be below the population of +Switzerland, for that country, notwithstanding its lakes and mountains, +contains 783 inhabitants to the square league. See “Malte Brun,” +vol. vi. p. 92. +</p> + +<p> +[The actual result has fallen somewhat short of these calculations, in spite of +the vast territorial acquisitions of the United States: but in 1899 the +population is probably about eighty-seven millions, including the population of +the Philippines, Hawaii, and Porto Rico.]] +</p> + +<p> +Whatever faith I may have in the perfectibility of man, until human nature is +altered, and men wholly transformed, I shall refuse to believe in the duration +of a government which is called upon to hold together forty different peoples, +disseminated over a territory equal to one-half of Europe in extent; to avoid +all rivalry, ambition, and struggles between them, and to direct their +independent activity to the accomplishment of the same designs. +</p> + +<p> +But the greatest peril to which the Union is exposed by its increase arises +from the continual changes which take place in the position of its internal +strength. The distance from Lake Superior to the Gulf of Mexico extends from +the 47th to the 30th degree of latitude, a distance of more than 1,200 miles as +the bird flies. The frontier of the United States winds along the whole of this +immense line, sometimes falling within its limits, but more frequently +extending far beyond it, into the waste. It has been calculated that the whites +advance every year a mean distance of seventeen miles along the whole of his +vast boundary. *j Obstacles, such as an unproductive district, a lake or an +Indian nation unexpectedly encountered, are sometimes met with. The advancing +column then halts for a while; its two extremities fall back upon themselves, +and as soon as they are reunited they proceed onwards. This gradual and +continuous progress of the European race towards the Rocky Mountains has the +solemnity of a providential event; it is like a deluge of men rising +unabatedly, and daily driven onwards by the hand of God. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ See Legislative Documents, 20th Congress, No. 117, p. 105.] +</p> + +<p> +Within this first line of conquering settlers towns are built, and vast States +founded. In 1790 there were only a few thousand pioneers sprinkled along the +valleys of the Mississippi; and at the present day these valleys contain as +many inhabitants as were to be found in the whole Union in 1790. Their +population amounts to nearly 4,000,000. *k The city of Washington was founded +in 1800, in the very centre of the Union; but such are the changes which have +taken place, that it now stands at one of the extremities; and the delegates of +the most remote Western States are already obliged to perform a journey as long +as that from Vienna to Paris. *l +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ 3,672,317—Census of 1830.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ The distance from Jefferson, the capital of the State of Missouri, to +Washington is 1,019 miles. (“American Almanac,” 1831, p. 48.)] +</p> + +<p> +All the States are borne onwards at the same time in the path of fortune, but +of course they do not all increase and prosper in the same proportion. To the +North of the Union the detached branches of the Alleghany chain, which extend +as far as the Atlantic Ocean, form spacious roads and ports, which are +constantly accessible to vessels of the greatest burden. But from the Potomac +to the mouth of the Mississippi the coast is sandy and flat. In this part of +the Union the mouths of almost all the rivers are obstructed; and the few +harbors which exist amongst these lagoons afford much shallower water to +vessels, and much fewer commercial advantages than those of the North. +</p> + +<p> +This first natural cause of inferiority is united to another cause proceeding +from the laws. We have already seen that slavery, which is abolished in the +North, still exists in the South; and I have pointed out its fatal consequences +upon the prosperity of the planter himself. +</p> + +<p> +The North is therefore superior to the South both in commerce *m and +manufacture; the natural consequence of which is the more rapid increase of +population and of wealth within its borders. The States situate upon the shores +of the Atlantic Ocean are already half-peopled. Most of the land is held by an +owner; and these districts cannot therefore receive so many emigrants as the +Western States, where a boundless field is still open to their exertions. The +valley of the Mississippi is far more fertile than the coast of the Atlantic +Ocean. This reason, added to all the others, contributes to drive the Europeans +westward—a fact which may be rigorously demonstrated by figures. It is +found that the sum total of the population of all the United States has about +tripled in the course of forty years. But in the recent States adjacent to the +Mississippi, the population has increased thirty-one-fold, within the same +space of time. *n +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ The following statements will suffice to show the difference which exists +between the commerce of the South and that of the North:— +</p> + +<p> +In 1829 the tonnage of all the merchant vessels belonging to Virginia, the two +Carolinas, and Georgia (the four great Southern States), amounted to only 5,243 +tons. In the same year the tonnage of the vessels of the State of Massachusetts +alone amounted to 17,322 tons. (See Legislative Documents, 21st Congress, 2d +session, No. 140, p. 244.) Thus the State of Massachusetts had three times as +much shipping as the four above-mentioned States. Nevertheless the area of the +State of Massachusetts is only 7,335 square miles, and its population amounts +to 610,014 inhabitants [2,238,943 in 1890]; whilst the area of the four other +States I have quoted is 210,000 square miles, and their population 3,047,767. +Thus the area of the State of Massachusetts forms only one-thirtieth part of +the area of the four States; and its population is five times smaller than +theirs. (See “Darby’s View of the United States.”) Slavery is +prejudicial to the commercial prosperity of the South in several different +ways; by diminishing the spirit of enterprise amongst the whites, and by +preventing them from meeting with as numerous a class of sailors as they +require. Sailors are usually taken from the lowest ranks of the population. But +in the Southern States these lowest ranks are composed of slaves, and it is +very difficult to employ them at sea. They are unable to serve as well as a +white crew, and apprehensions would always be entertained of their mutinying in +the middle of the ocean, or of their escaping in the foreign countries at which +they might touch.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ “Darby’s View of the United States,” p. 444.] +</p> + +<p> +The relative position of the central federal power is continually displaced. +Forty years ago the majority of the citizens of the Union was established upon +the coast of the Atlantic, in the environs of the spot upon which Washington +now stands; but the great body of the people is now advancing inland and to the +north, so that in twenty years the majority will unquestionably be on the +western side of the Alleghanies. If the Union goes on to subsist, the basin of +the Mississippi is evidently marked out, by its fertility and its extent, as +the future centre of the Federal Government. In thirty or forty years, that +tract of country will have assumed the rank which naturally belongs to it. It +is easy to calculate that its population, compared to that of the coast of the +Atlantic, will be, in round numbers, as 40 to 11. In a few years the States +which founded the Union will lose the direction of its policy, and the +population of the valley of the Mississippi will preponderate in the federal +assemblies. +</p> + +<p> +This constant gravitation of the federal power and influence towards the +northwest is shown every ten years, when a general census of the population is +made, and the number of delegates which each State sends to Congress is settled +afresh. *o In 1790 Virginia had nineteen representatives in Congress. This +number continued to increase until the year 1813, when it reached to +twenty-three; from that time it began to decrease, and in 1833 Virginia elected +only twenty-one representatives. *p During the same period the State of New +York progressed in the contrary direction: in 1790 it had ten representatives +in Congress; in 1813, twenty-seven; in 1823, thirty-four; and in 1833, forty. +The State of Ohio had only one representative in 1803, and in 1833 it had +already nineteen. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ It may be seen that in the course of the last ten years (1820-1830) the +population of one district, as, for instance, the State of Delaware, has +increased in the proportion of five per cent.; whilst that of another, as the +territory of Michigan, has increased 250 per cent. Thus the population of +Virginia had augmented thirteen per cent., and that of the border State of Ohio +sixty-one per cent., in the same space of time. The general table of these +changes, which is given in the “National Calendar,” displays a +striking picture of the unequal fortunes of the different States.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ It has just been said that in the course of the last term the population of +Virginia has increased thirteen per cent.; and it is necessary to explain how +the number of representatives for a State may decrease, when the population of +that State, far from diminishing, is actually upon the increase. I take the +State of Virginia, to which I have already alluded, as my term of comparison. +The number of representatives of Virginia in 1823 was proportionate to the +total number of the representatives of the Union, and to the relation which the +population bore to that of the whole Union: in 1833 the number of +representatives of Virginia was likewise proportionate to the total number of +the representatives of the Union, and to the relation which its population, +augmented in the course of ten years, bore to the augmented population of the +Union in the same space of time. The new number of Virginian representatives +will then be to the old numver, on the one hand, as the new numver of all the +representatives is to the old number; and, on the other hand, as the +augmentation of the population of Virginia is to that of the whole population +of the country. Thus, if the increase of the population of the lesser country +be to that of the greater in an exact inverse ratio of the proportion between +the new and the old numbers of all the representatives, the number of the +representatives of Virginia will remain stationary; and if the increase of the +Virginian population be to that of the whole Union in a feeblerratio than the +new number of the representatives of the Union to the old number, the number of +the representatives of Virginia must decrease. [Thus, to the 56th Congress in +1899, Virginia and West Virginia send only fourteen representatives.]] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0052" id="link2HCH0052"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part VIII</h2> + +<p> +It is difficult to imagine a durable union of a people which is rich and strong +with one which is poor and weak, even if it were proved that the strength and +wealth of the one are not the causes of the weakness and poverty of the other. +But union is still more difficult to maintain at a time at which one party is +losing strength, and the other is gaining it. This rapid and disproportionate +increase of certain States threatens the independence of the others. New York +might perhaps succeed, with its 2,000,000 of inhabitants and its forty +representatives, in dictating to the other States in Congress. But even if the +more powerful States make no attempt to bear down the lesser ones, the danger +still exists; for there is almost as much in the possibility of the act as in +the act itself. The weak generally mistrust the justice and the reason of the +strong. The States which increase less rapidly than the others look upon those +which are more favored by fortune with envy and suspicion. Hence arise the +deep-seated uneasiness and ill-defined agitation which are observable in the +South, and which form so striking a contrast to the confidence and prosperity +which are common to other parts of the Union. I am inclined to think that the +hostile measures taken by the Southern provinces upon a recent occasion are +attributable to no other cause. The inhabitants of the Southern States are, of +all the Americans, those who are most interested in the maintenance of the +Union; they would assuredly suffer most from being left to themselves; and yet +they are the only citizens who threaten to break the tie of confederation. But +it is easy to perceive that the South, which has given four Presidents, +Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, to the Union, which perceives that +it is losing its federal influence, and that the number of its representatives +in Congress is diminishing from year to year, whilst those of the Northern and +Western States are increasing; the South, which is peopled with ardent and +irascible beings, is becoming more and more irritated and alarmed. The citizens +reflect upon their present position and remember their past influence, with the +melancholy uneasiness of men who suspect oppression: if they discover a law of +the Union which is not unequivocally favorable to their interests, they protest +against it as an abuse of force; and if their ardent remonstrances are not +listened to, they threaten to quit an association which loads them with burdens +whilst it deprives them of their due profits. “The tariff,” said +the inhabitants of Carolina in 1832, “enriches the North, and ruins the +South; for if this were not the case, to what can we attribute the continually +increasing power and wealth of the North, with its inclement skies and arid +soil; whilst the South, which may be styled the garden of America, is rapidly +declining?” *q +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ See the report of its committee to the Convention which proclaimed the +nullification of the tariff in South Carolina.] +</p> + +<p> +If the changes which I have described were gradual, so that each generation at +least might have time to disappear with the order of things under which it had +lived, the danger would be less; but the progress of society in America is +precipitate, and almost revolutionary. The same citizen may have lived to see +his State take the lead in the Union, and afterwards become powerless in the +federal assemblies; and an Anglo-American republic has been known to grow as +rapidly as a man passing from birth and infancy to maturity in the course of +thirty years. It must not be imagined, however, that the States which lose +their preponderance, also lose their population or their riches: no stop is put +to their prosperity, and they even go on to increase more rapidly than any +kingdom in Europe. *r But they believe themselves to be impoverished because +their wealth does not augment as rapidly as that of their neighbors; any they +think that their power is lost, because they suddenly come into collision with +a power greater than their own: *s thus they are more hurt in their feelings +and their passions than in their interests. But this is amply sufficient to +endanger the maintenance of the Union. If kings and peoples had only had their +true interests in view ever since the beginning of the world, the name of war +would scarcely be known among mankind. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ The population of a country assuredly constitutes the first element of its +wealth. In the ten years (1820-1830) during which Virginia lost two of its +representatives in Congress, its population increased in the proportion of 13.7 +per cent.; that of Carolina in the proportion of fifteen per cent.; and that of +Georgia, 15.5 per cent. (See the “American Almanac,” 1832, p. 162) +But the population of Russia, which increases more rapidly than that of any +other European country, only augments in ten years at the rate of 9.5 per +cent.; in France, at the rate of seven per cent.; and in Europe in general, at +the rate of 4.7 per cent. (See “Malte Brun,” vol. vi. p. 95)] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +s <br /> +[ It must be admitted, however, that the depreciation which has taken place in +the value of tobacco, during the last fifty years, has notably diminished the +opulence of the Southern planters: but this circumstance is as independent of +the will of their Northern brethren as it is of their own.] +</p> + +<p> +Thus the prosperity of the United States is the source of the most serious +dangers that threaten them, since it tends to create in some of the confederate +States that over-excitement which accompanies a rapid increase of fortune; and +to awaken in others those feelings of envy, mistrust, and regret which usually +attend upon the loss of it. The Americans contemplate this extraordinary and +hasty progress with exultation; but they would be wiser to consider it with +sorrow and alarm. The Americans of the United States must inevitably become one +of the greatest nations in the world; their offset will cover almost the whole +of North America; the continent which they inhabit is their dominion, and it +cannot escape them. What urges them to take possession of it so soon? Riches, +power, and renown cannot fail to be theirs at some future time, but they rush +upon their fortune as if but a moment remained for them to make it their own. +</p> + +<p> +I think that I have demonstrated that the existence of the present +confederation depends entirely on the continued assent of all the confederates; +and, starting from this principle, I have inquired into the causes which may +induce the several States to separate from the others. The Union may, however, +perish in two different ways: one of the confederate States may choose to +retire from the compact, and so forcibly to sever the federal tie; and it is to +this supposition that most of the remarks that I have made apply: or the +authority of the Federal Government may be progressively entrenched on by the +simultaneous tendency of the united republics to resume their independence. The +central power, successively stripped of all its prerogatives, and reduced to +impotence by tacit consent, would become incompetent to fulfil its purpose; and +the second Union would perish, like the first, by a sort of senile inaptitude. +The gradual weakening of the federal tie, which may finally lead to the +dissolution of the Union, is a distinct circumstance, that may produce a +variety of minor consequences before it operates so violent a change. The +confederation might still subsist, although its Government were reduced to such +a degree of inanition as to paralyze the nation, to cause internal anarchy, and +to check the general prosperity of the country. +</p> + +<p> +After having investigated the causes which may induce the Anglo-Americans to +disunite, it is important to inquire whether, if the Union continues to +subsist, their Government will extend or contract its sphere of action, and +whether it will become more energetic or more weak. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans are evidently disposed to look upon their future condition with +alarm. They perceive that in most of the nations of the world the exercise of +the rights of sovereignty tends to fall under the control of a few individuals, +and they are dismayed by the idea that such will also be the case in their own +country. Even the statesmen feel, or affect to feel, these fears; for, in +America, centralization is by no means popular, and there is no surer means of +courting the majority than by inveighing against the encroachments of the +central power. The Americans do not perceive that the countries in which this +alarming tendency to centralization exists are inhabited by a single people; +whilst the fact of the Union being composed of different confederate +communities is sufficient to baffle all the inferences which might be drawn +from analogous circumstances. I confess that I am inclined to consider the +fears of a great number of Americans as purely imaginary; and far from +participating in their dread of the consolidation of power in the hands of the +Union, I think that the Federal Government is visibly losing strength. +</p> + +<p> +To prove this assertion I shall not have recourse to any remote occurrences, +but to circumstances which I have myself witnessed, and which belong to our own +time. +</p> + +<p> +An attentive examination of what is going on in the United States will easily +convince us that two opposite tendencies exist in that country, like two +distinct currents flowing in contrary directions in the same channel. The Union +has now existed for forty-five years, and in the course of that time a vast +number of provincial prejudices, which were at first hostile to its power, have +died away. The patriotic feeling which attached each of the Americans to his +own native State is become less exclusive; and the different parts of the Union +have become more intimately connected the better they have become acquainted +with each other. The post, *t that great instrument of intellectual +intercourse, now reaches into the backwoods; and steamboats have established +daily means of communication between the different points of the coast. An +inland navigation of unexampled rapidity conveys commodities up and down the +rivers of the country. *u And to these facilities of nature and art may be +added those restless cravings, that busy-mindedness, and love of pelf, which +are constantly urging the American into active life, and bringing him into +contact with his fellow-citizens. He crosses the country in every direction; he +visits all the various populations of the land; and there is not a province in +France in which the natives are so well known to each other as the 13,000,000 +of men who cover the territory of the United States. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +t <br /> +[ In 1832, the district of Michigan, which only contains 31,639 inhabitants, +and is still an almost unexplored wilderness, possessed 940 miles of +mail-roads. The territory of Arkansas, which is still more uncultivated, was +already intersected by 1,938 miles of mail-roads. (See the report of the +General Post Office, November 30, 1833.) The postage of newspapers alone in the +whole Union amounted to $254,796.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +u <br /> +[ In the course of ten years, from 1821 to 1831, 271 steamboats have been +launched upon the rivers which water the valley of the Mississippi alone. In +1829 259 steamboats existed in the United States. (See Legislative Documents, +No. 140, p. 274.)] +</p> + +<p> +But whilst the Americans intermingle, they grow in resemblance of each other; +the differences resulting from their climate, their origin, and their +institutions, diminish; and they all draw nearer and nearer to the common type. +Every year, thousands of men leave the North to settle in different parts of +the Union: they bring with them their faith, their opinions, and their manners; +and as they are more enlighthned than the men amongst whom they are about to +dwell, they soon rise to the head of affairs, and they adapt society to their +own advantage. This continual emigration of the North to the South is +peculiarly favorable to the fusion of all the different provincial characters +into one national character. The civilization of the North appears to be the +common standard, to which the whole nation will one day be assimilated. +</p> + +<p> +The commercial ties which unite the confederate States are strengthened by the +increasing manufactures of the Americans; and the union which began to exist in +their opinions, gradually forms a part of their habits: the course of time has +swept away the bugbear thoughts which haunted the imaginations of the citizens +in 1789. The federal power is not become oppressive; it has not destroyed the +independence of the States; it has not subjected the confederates to monarchial +institutions; and the Union has not rendered the lesser States dependent upon +the larger ones; but the confederation has continued to increase in population, +in wealth, and in power. I am therefore convinced that the natural obstacles to +the continuance of the American Union are not so powerful at the present time +as they were in 1789; and that the enemies of the Union are not so numerous. +</p> + +<p> +Nevertheless, a careful examination of the history of the United States for the +last forty-five years will readily convince us that the federal power is +declining; nor is it difficult to explain the causes of this phenomenon. *v +When the Constitution of 1789 was promulgated, the nation was a prey to +anarchy; the Union, which succeeded this confusion, excited much dread and much +animosity; but it was warmly supported because it satisfied an imperious want. +Thus, although it was more attacked than it is now, the federal power soon +reached the maximum of its authority, as is usually the case with a government +which triumphs after having braced its strength by the struggle. At that time +the interpretation of the Constitution seemed to extend, rather than to +repress, the federal sovereignty; and the Union offered, in several respects, +the appearance of a single and undivided people, directed in its foreign and +internal policy by a single Government. But to attain this point the people had +risen, to a certain extent, above itself. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +v <br /> +[ [Since 1861 the movement is certainly in the opposite direction, and the +federal power has largely increased, and tends to further increase.]] +</p> + +<p> +The Constitution had not destroyed the distinct sovereignty of the States; and +all communities, of whatever nature they may be, are impelled by a secret +propensity to assert their independence. This propensity is still more decided +in a country like America, in which every village forms a sort of republic +accustomed to conduct its own affairs. It therefore cost the States an effort +to submit to the federal supremacy; and all efforts, however successful they +may be, necessarily subside with the causes in which they originated. +</p> + +<p> +As the Federal Government consolidated its authority, America resumed its rank +amongst the nations, peace returned to its frontiers, and public credit was +restored; confusion was succeeded by a fixed state of things, which was +favorable to the full and free exercise of industrious enterprise. It was this +very prosperity which made the Americans forget the cause to which it was +attributable; and when once the danger was passed, the energy and the +patriotism which had enabled them to brave it disappeared from amongst them. No +sooner were they delivered from the cares which oppressed them, than they +easily returned to their ordinary habits, and gave themselves up without +resistance to their natural inclinations. When a powerful Government no longer +appeared to be necessary, they once more began to think it irksome. The Union +encouraged a general prosperity, and the States were not inclined to abandon +the Union; but they desired to render the action of the power which represented +that body as light as possible. The general principle of Union was adopted, but +in every minor detail there was an actual tendency to independence. The +principle of confederation was every day more easily admitted, and more rarely +applied; so that the Federal Government brought about its own decline, whilst +it was creating order and peace. +</p> + +<p> +As soon as this tendency of public opinion began to be manifested externally, +the leaders of parties, who live by the passions of the people, began to work +it to their own advantage. The position of the Federal Government then became +exceedingly critical. Its enemies were in possession of the popular favor; and +they obtained the right of conducting its policy by pledging themselves to +lessen its influence. From that time forwards the Government of the Union has +invariably been obliged to recede, as often as it has attempted to enter the +lists with the governments of the States. And whenever an interpretation of the +terms of the Federal Constitution has been called for, that interpretation has +most frequently been opposed to the Union, and favorable to the States. +</p> + +<p> +The Constitution invested the Federal Government with the right of providing +for the interests of the nation; and it had been held that no other authority +was so fit to superintend the “internal improvements” which +affected the prosperity of the whole Union; such, for instance, as the cutting +of canals. But the States were alarmed at a power, distinct from their own, +which could thus dispose of a portion of their territory; and they were afraid +that the central Government would, by this means, acquire a formidable extent +of patronage within their own confines, and exercise a degree of influence +which they intended to reserve exclusively to their own agents. The Democratic +party, which has constantly been opposed to the increase of the federal +authority, then accused the Congress of usurpation, and the Chief Magistrate of +ambition. The central Government was intimidated by the opposition; and it soon +acknowledged its error, promising exactly to confine its influence for the +future within the circle which was prescribed to it. +</p> + +<p> +The Constitution confers upon the Union the right of treating with foreign +nations. The Indian tribes, which border upon the frontiers of the United +States, had usually been regarded in this light. As long as these savages +consented to retire before the civilized settlers, the federal right was not +contested: but as soon as an Indian tribe attempted to fix its dwelling upon a +given spot, the adjacent States claimed possession of the lands and the rights +of sovereignty over the natives. The central Government soon recognized both +these claims; and after it had concluded treaties with the Indians as +independent nations, it gave them up as subjects to the legislative tyranny of +the States. *w +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +w <br /> +[ See in the Legislative Documents, already quoted in speaking of the Indians, +the letter of the President of the United States to the Cherokees, his +correspondence on this subject with his agents, and his messages to Congress.] +</p> + +<p> +Some of the States which had been founded upon the coast of the Atlantic, +extended indefinitely to the West, into wild regions where no European had ever +penetrated. The States whose confines were irrevocably fixed, looked with a +jealous eye upon the unbounded regions which the future would enable their +neighbors to explore. The latter then agreed, with a view to conciliate the +others, and to facilitate the act of union, to lay down their own boundaries, +and to abandon all the territory which lay beyond those limits to the +confederation at large. *x Thenceforward the Federal Government became the +owner of all the uncultivated lands which lie beyond the borders of the +thirteen States first confederated. It was invested with the right of +parcelling and selling them, and the sums derived from this source were +exclusively reserved to the public treasure of the Union, in order to furnish +supplies for purchasing tracts of country from the Indians, for opening roads +to the remote settlements, and for accelerating the increase of civilization as +much as possible. New States have, however, been formed in the course of time, +in the midst of those wilds which were formerly ceded by the inhabitants of the +shores of the Atlantic. Congress has gone on to sell, for the profit of the +nation at large, the uncultivated lands which those new States contained. But +the latter at length asserted that, as they were now fully constituted, they +ought to enjoy the exclusive right of converting the produce of these sales to +their own use. As their remonstrances became more and more threatening, +Congress thought fit to deprive the Union of a portion of the privileges which +it had hitherto enjoyed; and at the end of 1832 it passed a law by which the +greatest part of the revenue derived from the sale of lands was made over to +the new western republics, although the lands themselves were not ceded to +them. *y +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +x <br /> +[ The first act of session was made by the State of New York in 1780; Virginia, +Massachusetts, Connecticut, South and North Carolina, followed this example at +different times, and lastly, the act of cession of Georgia was made as recently +as 1802.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +y <br /> +[ It is true that the President refused his assent to this law; but he +completely adopted it in principle. (See Message of December 8, 1833.)] +</p> + +<p> +The slightest observation in the United States enables one to appreciate the +advantages which the country derives from the bank. These advantages are of +several kinds, but one of them is peculiarly striking to the stranger. The +banknotes of the United States are taken upon the borders of the desert for the +same value as at Philadelphia, where the bank conducts its operations. *z +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +z <br /> +[ The present Bank of the United States was established in 1816, with a capital +of $35,000,000; its charter expires in 1836. Last year Congress passed a law to +renew it, but the President put his veto upon the bill. The struggle is still +going on with great violence on either side, and the speedy fall of the bank +may easily be foreseen. [It was soon afterwards extinguished by General +Jackson.]] +</p> + +<p> +The Bank of the United States is nevertheless the object of great animosity. +Its directors have proclaimed their hostility to the President: and they are +accused, not without some show of probability, of having abused their influence +to thwart his election. The President therefore attacks the establishment which +they represent with all the warmth of personal enmity; and he is encouraged in +the pursuit of his revenge by the conviction that he is supported by the secret +propensities of the majority. The bank may be regarded as the great monetary +tie of the Union, just as Congress is the great legislative tie; and the same +passions which tend to render the States independent of the central power, +contribute to the overthrow of the bank. +</p> + +<p> +The Bank of the United States always holds a great number of the notes issued +by the provincial banks, which it can at any time oblige them to convert into +cash. It has itself nothing to fear from a similar demand, as the extent of its +resources enables it to meet all claims. But the existence of the provincial +banks is thus threatened, and their operations are restricted, since they are +only able to issue a quantity of notes duly proportioned to their capital. They +submit with impatience to this salutary control. The newspapers which they have +bought over, and the President, whose interest renders him their instrument, +attack the bank with the greatest vehemence. They rouse the local passions and +the blind democratic instinct of the country to aid their cause; and they +assert that the bank directors form a permanent aristocratic body, whose +influence must ultimately be felt in the Government, and must affect those +principles of equality upon which society rests in America. +</p> + +<p> +The contest between the bank and its opponents is only an incident in the great +struggle which is going on in America between the provinces and the central +power; between the spirit of democratic independence and the spirit of +gradation and subordination. I do not mean that the enemies of the bank are +identically the same individuals who, on other points, attack the Federal +Government; but I assert that the attacks directed against the bank of the +United States originate in the same propensities which militate against the +Federal Government; and that the very numerous opponents of the former afford a +deplorable symptom of the decreasing support of the latter. +</p> + +<p> +The Union has never displayed so much weakness as in the celebrated question of +the tariff. *a The wars of the French Revolution and of 1812 had created +manufacturing establishments in the North of the Union, by cutting off all free +communication between America and Europe. When peace was concluded, and the +channel of intercourse reopened by which the produce of Europe was transmitted +to the New World, the Americans thought fit to establish a system of import +duties, for the twofold purpose of protecting their incipient manufactures and +of paying off the amount of the debt contracted during the war. The Southern +States, which have no manufactures to encourage, and which are exclusively +agricultural, soon complained of this measure. Such were the simple facts, and +I do not pretend to examine in this place whether their complaints were well +founded or unjust. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +a <br /> +[ See principally for the details of this affair, the Legislative Documents, +22d Congress, 2d Session, No. 30.] +</p> + +<p> +As early as the year 1820, South Carolina declared, in a petition to Congress, +that the tariff was “unconstitutional, oppressive, and unjust.” And +the States of Georgia, Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi +subsequently remonstrated against it with more or less vigor. But Congress, far +from lending an ear to these complaints, raised the scale of tariff duties in +the years 1824 and 1828, and recognized anew the principle on which it was +founded. A doctrine was then proclaimed, or rather revived, in the South, which +took the name of Nullification. +</p> + +<p> +I have shown in the proper place that the object of the Federal Constitution +was not to form a league, but to create a national government. The Americans of +the United States form a sole and undivided people, in all the cases which are +specified by that Constitution; and upon these points the will of the nation is +expressed, as it is in all constitutional nations, by the voice of the +majority. When the majority has pronounced its decision, it is the duty of the +minority to submit. Such is the sound legal doctrine, and the only one which +agrees with the text of the Constitution, and the known intention of those who +framed it. +</p> + +<p> +The partisans of Nullification in the South maintain, on the contrary, that the +intention of the Americans in uniting was not to reduce themselves to the +condition of one and the same people; that they meant to constitute a league of +independent States; and that each State, consequently retains its entire +sovereignty, if not de facto, at least de jure; and has the right of putting +its own construction upon the laws of Congress, and of suspending their +execution within the limits of its own territory, if they are held to be +unconstitutional and unjust. +</p> + +<p> +The entire doctrine of Nullification is comprised in a sentence uttered by +Vice-President Calhoun, the head of that party in the South, before the Senate +of the United States, in the year 1833: “The Constitution is a +compact to which the States were parties in their sovereign capacity; now, +whenever a compact is entered into by parties which acknowledge no tribunal +above their authority to decide in the last resort, each of them has a right to +judge for itself in relation to the nature, extent, and obligations of the +instrument.” It is evident that a similar doctrine destroys the very +basis of the Federal Constitution, and brings back all the evils of the old +confederation, from which the Americans were supposed to have had a safe +deliverance. +</p> + +<p> +When South Carolina perceived that Congress turned a deaf ear to its +remonstrances, it threatened to apply the doctrine of nullification to the +federal tariff bill. Congress persisted in its former system; and at length the +storm broke out. In the course of 1832 the citizens of South Carolina, *b named +a national Convention, to consult upon the extraordinary measures which they +were called upon to take; and on November 24th of the same year this Convention +promulgated a law, under the form of a decree, which annulled the federal law +of the tariff, forbade the levy of the imposts which that law commands, and +refused to recognize the appeal which might be made to the federal courts of +law. *c This decree was only to be put in execution in the ensuing month of +February, and it was intimated, that if Congress modified the tariff before +that period, South Carolina might be induced to proceed no further with her +menaces; and a vague desire was afterwards expressed of submitting the question +to an extraordinary assembly of all the confederate States. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +b <br /> +[ That is to say, the majority of the people; for the opposite party, called +the Union party, always formed a very strong and active minority. Carolina may +contain about 47,000 electors; 30,000 were in favor of nullification, and +17,000 opposed to it.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +c <br /> +[ This decree was preceded by a report of the committee by which it was framed, +containing the explanation of the motives and object of the law. The following +passage occurs in it, p. 34:—“When the rights reserved by the +Constitution to the different States are deliberately violated, it is the duty +and the right of those States to interfere, in order to check the progress of +the evil; to resist usurpation, and to maintain, within their respective +limits, those powers and privileges which belong to them as independent +sovereign States. If they were destitute of this right, they would not be +sovereign. South Carolina declares that she acknowledges no tribunal upon earth +above her authority. She has indeed entered into a solemn compact of union with +the other States; but she demands, and will exercise, the right of putting her +own construction upon it; and when this compact is violated by her sister +States, and by the Government which they have created, she is determined to +avail herself of the unquestionable right of judging what is the extent of the +infraction, and what are the measures best fitted to obtain justice.”] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0053" id="link2HCH0053"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part IX</h2> + +<p> +In the meantime South Carolina armed her militia, and prepared for war. But +Congress, which had slighted its suppliant subjects, listened to their +complaints as soon as they were found to have taken up arms. *d A law was +passed, by which the tariff duties were to be progressively reduced for ten +years, until they were brought so low as not to exceed the amount of supplies +necessary to the Government. *e Thus Congress completely abandoned the +principle of the tariff; and substituted a mere fiscal impost to a system of +protective duties. *f The Government of the Union, in order to conceal its +defeat, had recourse to an expedient which is very much in vogue with feeble +governments. It yielded the point de facto, but it remained inflexible upon the +principles in question; and whilst Congress was altering the tariff law, it +passed another bill, by which the President was invested with extraordinary +powers, enabling him to overcome by force a resistance which was then no longer +to be apprehended. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +d <br /> +[ Congress was finally decided to take this step by the conduct of the powerful +State of Virginia, whose legislature offered to serve as mediator between the +Union and South Carolina. Hitherto the latter State had appeared to be entirely +abandoned, even by the States which had joined in her remonstrances.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +e <br /> +[ This law was passed on March 2, 1833.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +f <br /> +[ This bill was brought in by Mr. Clay, and it passed in four days through both +Houses of Congress by an immense majority.] +</p> + +<p> +But South Carolina did not consent to leave the Union in the enjoyment of these +scanty trophies of success: the same national Convention which had annulled the +tariff bill, met again, and accepted the proffered concession; but at the same +time it declared its unabated perseverance in the doctrine of Nullification: and +to prove what it said, it annulled the law investing the President with +extraordinary powers, although it was very certain that the clauses of that law +would never be carried into effect. +</p> + +<p> +Almost all the controversies of which I have been speaking have taken place +under the Presidency of General Jackson; and it cannot be denied that in the +question of the tariff he has supported the claims of the Union with vigor and +with skill. I am, however, of opinion that the conduct of the individual who +now represents the Federal Government may be reckoned as one of the dangers +which threaten its continuance. +</p> + +<p> +Some persons in Europe have formed an opinion of the possible influence of +General Jackson upon the affairs of his country, which appears highly +extravagant to those who have seen more of the subject. We have been told that +General Jackson has won sundry battles, that he is an energetic man, prone by +nature and by habit to the use of force, covetous of power, and a despot by +taste. All this may perhaps be true; but the inferences which have been drawn +from these truths are exceedingly erroneous. It has been imagined that General +Jackson is bent on establishing a dictatorship in America, on introducing a +military spirit, and on giving a degree of influence to the central authority +which cannot but be dangerous to provincial liberties. But in America the time +for similar undertakings, and the age for men of this kind, is not yet come: if +General Jackson had entertained a hope of exercising his authority in this +manner, he would infallibly have forfeited his political station, and +compromised his life; accordingly he has not been so imprudent as to make any +such attempt. +</p> + +<p> +Far from wishing to extend the federal power, the President belongs to the +party which is desirous of limiting that power to the bare and precise letter +of the Constitution, and which never puts a construction upon that act +favorable to the Government of the Union; far from standing forth as the +champion of centralization, General Jackson is the agent of all the jealousies +of the States; and he was placed in the lofty station he occupies by the +passions of the people which are most opposed to the central Government. It is +by perpetually flattering these passions that he maintains his station and his +popularity. General Jackson is the slave of the majority: he yields to its +wishes, its propensities, and its demands; say rather, that he anticipates and +forestalls them. +</p> + +<p> +Whenever the governments of the States come into collision with that of the +Union, the President is generally the first to question his own rights: he +almost always outstrips the legislature; and when the extent of the federal +power is controverted, he takes part, as it were, against himself; he conceals +his official interests, and extinguishes his own natural inclinations. Not +indeed that he is naturally weak or hostile to the Union; for when the majority +decided against the claims of the partisans of nullification, he put himself at +its head, asserted the doctrines which the nation held distinctly and +energetically, and was the first to recommend forcible measures; but General +Jackson appears to me, if I may use the American expressions, to be a +Federalist by taste, and a Republican by calculation. +</p> + +<p> +General Jackson stoops to gain the favor of the majority, but when he feels +that his popularity is secure, he overthrows all obstacles in the pursuit of +the objects which the community approves, or of those which it does not look +upon with a jealous eye. He is supported by a power with which his predecessors +were unacquainted; and he tramples on his personal enemies whenever they cross +his path with a facility which no former President ever enjoyed; he takes upon +himself the responsibility of measures which no one before him would have +ventured to attempt: he even treats the national representatives with disdain +approaching to insult; he puts his veto upon the laws of Congress, and +frequently neglects to reply to that powerful body. He is a favorite who +sometimes treats his master roughly. The power of General Jackson perpetually +increases; but that of the President declines; in his hands the Federal +Government is strong, but it will pass enfeebled into the hands of his +successor. +</p> + +<p> +I am strangely mistaken if the Federal Government of the United States be not +constantly losing strength, retiring gradually from public affairs, and +narrowing its circle of action more and more. It is naturally feeble, but it +now abandons even its pretensions to strength. On the other hand, I thought +that I remarked a more lively sense of independence, and a more decided +attachment to provincial government in the States. The Union is to subsist, but +to subsist as a shadow; it is to be strong in certain cases, and weak in all +others; in time of warfare, it is to be able to concentrate all the forces of +the nation and all the resources of the country in its hands; and in time of +peace its existence is to be scarcely perceptible: as if this alternate +debility and vigor were natural or possible. +</p> + +<p> +I do not foresee anything for the present which may be able to check this +general impulse of public opinion; the causes in which it originated do not +cease to operate with the same effect. The change will therefore go on, and it +may be predicted that, unless some extraordinary event occurs, the Government +of the Union will grow weaker and weaker every day. +</p> + +<p> +I think, however, that the period is still remote at which the federal power +will be entirely extinguished by its inability to protect itself and to +maintain peace in the country. The Union is sanctioned by the manners and +desires of the people; its results are palpable, its benefits visible. When it +is perceived that the weakness of the Federal Government compromises the +existence of the Union, I do not doubt that a reaction will take place with a +view to increase its strength. +</p> + +<p> +The Government of the United States is, of all the federal governments which +have hitherto been established, the one which is most naturally destined to +act. As long as it is only indirectly assailed by the interpretation of its +laws, and as long as its substance is not seriously altered, a change of +opinion, an internal crisis, or a war, may restore all the vigor which it +requires. The point which I have been most anxious to put in a clear light is +simply this: Many people, especially in France, imagine that a change in +opinion is going on in the United States, which is favorable to a +centralization of power in the hands of the President and the Congress. I hold +that a contrary tendency may distinctly be observed. So far is the Federal +Government from acquiring strength, and from threatening the sovereignty of the +States, as it grows older, that I maintain it to be growing weaker and weaker, +and that the sovereignty of the Union alone is in danger. Such are the facts +which the present time discloses. The future conceals the final result of this +tendency, and the events which may check, retard, or accelerate the changes I +have described; but I do not affect to be able to remove the veil which hides +them from our sight. +</p> + +<p> +Of The Republican Institutions Of The United States, And What Their Chances Of +Duration Are +</p> + +<p> +The Union is accidental—The Republican institutions have more prospect of +permanence—A republic for the present the natural state of the +Anglo-Americans—Reason of this—In order to destroy it, all the laws +must be changed at the same time, and a great alteration take place in +manners—Difficulties experienced by the Americans in creating an +aristocracy. +</p> + +<p> +The dismemberment of the Union, by the introduction of war into the heart of +those States which are now confederate, with standing armies, a dictatorship, +and a heavy taxation, might, eventually, compromise the fate of the republican +institutions. But we ought not to confound the future prospects of the republic +with those of the Union. The Union is an accident, which will only last as long +as circumstances are favorable to its existence; but a republican form of +government seems to me to be the natural state of the Americans; which nothing +but the continued action of hostile causes, always acting in the same +direction, could change into a monarchy. The Union exists principally in the +law which formed it; one revolution, one change in public opinion, might +destroy it forever; but the republic has a much deeper foundation to rest upon. +</p> + +<p> +What is understood by a republican government in the United States is the slow +and quiet action of society upon itself. It is a regular state of things really +founded upon the enlightened will of the people. It is a conciliatory +government under which resolutions are allowed time to ripen; and in which they +are deliberately discussed, and executed with mature judgment. The republicans +in the United States set a high value upon morality, respect religious belief, +and acknowledge the existence of rights. They profess to think that a people +ought to be moral, religious, and temperate, in proportion as it is free. What +is called the republic in the United States, is the tranquil rule of the +majority, which, after having had time to examine itself, and to give proof of +its existence, is the common source of all the powers of the State. But the +power of the majority is not of itself unlimited. In the moral world humanity, +justice, and reason enjoy an undisputed supremacy; in the political world +vested rights are treated with no less deference. The majority recognizes these +two barriers; and if it now and then overstep them, it is because, like +individuals, it has passions, and, like them, it is prone to do what is wrong, +whilst it discerns what is right. +</p> + +<p> +But the demagogues of Europe have made strange discoveries. A republic is not, +according to them, the rule of the majority, as has hitherto been thought, but +the rule of those who are strenuous partisans of the majority. It is not the +people who preponderates in this kind of government, but those who are best +versed in the good qualities of the people. A happy distinction, which allows +men to act in the name of nations without consulting them, and to claim their +gratitude whilst their rights are spurned. A republican government, moreover, +is the only one which claims the right of doing whatever it chooses, and +despising what men have hitherto respected, from the highest moral obligations +to the vulgar rules of common-sense. It had been supposed, until our time, that +despotism was odious, under whatever form it appeared. But it is a discovery of +modern days that there are such things as legitimate tyranny and holy +injustice, provided they are exercised in the name of the people. +</p> + +<p> +The ideas which the Americans have adopted respecting the republican form of +government, render it easy for them to live under it, and insure its duration. +If, in their country, this form be often practically bad, at least it is +theoretically good; and, in the end, the people always acts in conformity to +it. +</p> + +<p> +It was impossible at the foundation of the States, and it would still be +difficult, to establish a central administration in America. The inhabitants +are dispersed over too great a space, and separated by too many natural +obstacles, for one man to undertake to direct the details of their existence. +America is therefore pre-eminently the country of provincial and municipal +government. To this cause, which was plainly felt by all the Europeans of the +New World, the Anglo-Americans added several others peculiar to themselves. +</p> + +<p> +At the time of the settlement of the North American colonies, municipal liberty +had already penetrated into the laws as well as the manners of the English; and +the emigrants adopted it, not only as a necessary thing, but as a benefit which +they knew how to appreciate. We have already seen the manner in which the +colonies were founded: every province, and almost every district, was peopled +separately by men who were strangers to each other, or who associated with very +different purposes. The English settlers in the United States, therefore, early +perceived that they were divided into a great number of small and distinct +communities which belonged to no common centre; and that it was needful for +each of these little communities to take care of its own affairs, since there +did not appear to be any central authority which was naturally bound and easily +enabled to provide for them. Thus, the nature of the country, the manner in +which the British colonies were founded, the habits of the first emigrants, in +short everything, united to promote, in an extraordinary degree, municipal and +provincial liberties. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States, therefore, the mass of the institutions of the country is +essentially republican; and in order permanently to destroy the laws which form +the basis of the republic, it would be necessary to abolish all the laws at +once. At the present day it would be even more difficult for a party to succeed +in founding a monarchy in the United States than for a set of men to proclaim +that France should henceforward be a republic. Royalty would not find a system +of legislation prepared for it beforehand; and a monarchy would then exist, +really surrounded by republican institutions. The monarchical principle would +likewise have great difficulty in penetrating into the manners of the +Americans. +</p> + +<p> +In the United States, the sovereignty of the people is not an isolated doctrine +bearing no relation to the prevailing manners and ideas of the people: it may, +on the contrary, be regarded as the last link of a chain of opinions which +binds the whole Anglo-American world. That Providence has given to every human +being the degree of reason necessary to direct himself in the affairs which +interest him exclusively—such is the grand maxim upon which civil and +political society rests in the United States. The father of a family applies it +to his children; the master to his servants; the township to its officers; the +province to its townships; the State to its provinces; the Union to the States; +and when extended to the nation, it becomes the doctrine of the sovereignty of +the people. +</p> + +<p> +Thus, in the United States, the fundamental principle of the republic is the +same which governs the greater part of human actions; republican notions +insinuate themselves into all the ideas, opinions, and habits of the Americans, +whilst they are formerly recognized by the legislation: and before this +legislation can be altered the whole community must undergo very serious +changes. In the United States, even the religion of most of the citizens is +republican, since it submits the truths of the other world to private judgment: +as in politics the care of its temporal interests is abandoned to the good +sense of the people. Thus every man is allowed freely to take that road which +he thinks will lead him to heaven; just as the law permits every citizen to +have the right of choosing his government. +</p> + +<p> +It is evident that nothing but a long series of events, all having the same +tendency, can substitute for this combination of laws, opinions, and manners, a +mass of opposite opinions, manners, and laws. +</p> + +<p> +If republican principles are to perish in America, they can only yield after a +laborious social process, often interrupted, and as often resumed; they will +have many apparent revivals, and will not become totally extinct until an +entirely new people shall have succeeded to that which now exists. Now, it must +be admitted that there is no symptom or presage of the approach of such a +revolution. There is nothing more striking to a person newly arrived in the +United States, than the kind of tumultuous agitation in which he finds +political society. The laws are incessantly changing, and at first sight it +seems impossible that a people so variable in its desires should avoid +adopting, within a short space of time, a completely new form of government. +Such apprehensions are, however, premature; the instability which affects +political institutions is of two kinds, which ought not to be confounded: the +first, which modifies secondary laws, is not incompatible with a very settled +state of society; the other shakes the very foundations of the Constitution, +and attacks the fundamental principles of legislation; this species of +instability is always followed by troubles and revolutions, and the nation +which suffers under it is in a state of violent transition. +</p> + +<p> +Experience shows that these two kinds of legislative instability have no +necessary connection; for they have been found united or separate, according to +times and circumstances. The first is common in the United States, but not the +second: the Americans often change their laws, but the foundation of the +Constitution is respected. +</p> + +<p> +In our days the republican principle rules in America, as the monarchical +principle did in France under Louis XIV. The French of that period were not +only friends of the monarchy, but they thought it impossible to put anything in +its place; they received it as we receive the rays of the sun and the return of +the seasons. Amongst them the royal power had neither advocates nor opponents. +In like manner does the republican government exist in America, without +contention or opposition; without proofs and arguments, by a tacit agreement, a +sort of consensus universalis. It is, however, my opinion that by changing +their administrative forms as often as they do, the inhabitants of the United +States compromise the future stability of their government. +</p> + +<p> +It may be apprehended that men, perpetually thwarted in their designs by the +mutability of the legislation, will learn to look upon republican institutions +as an inconvenient form of society; the evil resulting from the instability of +the secondary enactments might then raise a doubt as to the nature of the +fundamental principles of the Constitution, and indirectly bring about a +revolution; but this epoch is still very remote. +</p> + +<p> +It may, however, be foreseen even now, that when the Americans lose their +republican institutions they will speedily arrive at a despotic government, +without a long interval of limited monarchy. Montesquieu remarked, that nothing +is more absolute than the authority of a prince who immediately succeeds a +republic, since the powers which had fearlessly been intrusted to an elected +magistrate are then transferred to a hereditary sovereign. This is true in +general, but it is more peculiarly applicable to a democratic republic. In the +United States, the magistrates are not elected by a particular class of +citizens, but by the majority of the nation; they are the immediate +representatives of the passions of the multitude; and as they are wholly +dependent upon its pleasure, they excite neither hatred nor fear: hence, as I +have already shown, very little care has been taken to limit their influence, +and they are left in possession of a vast deal of arbitrary power. This state +of things has engendered habits which would outlive itself; the American +magistrate would retain his power, but he would cease to be responsible for the +exercise of it; and it is impossible to say what bounds could then be set to +tyranny. +</p> + +<p> +Some of our European politicians expect to see an aristocracy arise in America, +and they already predict the exact period at which it will be able to assume +the reins of government. I have previously observed, and I repeat my assertion, +that the present tendency of American society appears to me to become more and +more democratic. Nevertheless, I do not assert that the Americans will not, at +some future time, restrict the circle of political rights in their country, or +confiscate those rights to the advantage of a single individual; but I cannot +imagine that they will ever bestow the exclusive exercise of them upon a +privileged class of citizens, or, in other words, that they will ever found an +aristocracy. +</p> + +<p> +An aristocratic body is composed of a certain number of citizens who, without +being very far removed from the mass of the people, are, nevertheless, +permanently stationed above it: a body which it is easy to touch and difficult +to strike; with which the people are in daily contact, but with which they can +never combine. Nothing can be imagined more contrary to nature and to the +secret propensities of the human heart than a subjection of this kind; and men +who are left to follow their own bent will always prefer the arbitrary power of +a king to the regular administration of an aristocracy. Aristocratic +institutions cannot subsist without laying down the inequality of men as a +fundamental principle, as a part and parcel of the legislation, affecting the +condition of the human family as much as it affects that of society; but these +are things so repugnant to natural equity that they can only be extorted from +men by constraint. +</p> + +<p> +I do not think a single people can be quoted, since human society began to +exist, which has, by its own free will and by its own exertions, created an +aristocracy within its own bosom. All the aristocracies of the Middle Ages were +founded by military conquest; the conqueror was the noble, the vanquished +became the serf. Inequality was then imposed by force; and after it had been +introduced into the manners of the country it maintained its own authority, and +was sanctioned by the legislation. Communities have existed which were +aristocratic from their earliest origin, owing to circumstances anterior to +that event, and which became more democratic in each succeeding age. Such was +the destiny of the Romans, and of the barbarians after them. But a people, +having taken its rise in civilization and democracy, which should gradually +establish an inequality of conditions, until it arrived at inviolable +privileges and exclusive castes, would be a novelty in the world; and nothing +intimates that America is likely to furnish so singular an example. +</p> + +<p> +Reflection On The Causes Of The Commercial Prosperity Of The Of The United +States +</p> + +<p> +The Americans destined by Nature to be a great maritime people—Extent of +their coasts—Depth of their ports—Size of their rivers—The +commercial superiority of the Anglo-Americans less attributable, however, to +physical circumstances than to moral and intellectual causes—Reason of +this opinion—Future destiny of the Anglo-Americans as a commercial +nation—The dissolution of the Union would not check the maritime vigor of +the States—Reason of this—Anglo-Americans will naturally supply the +wants of the inhabitants of South America—They will become, like the +English, the factors of a great portion of the world. +</p> + +<p> +The coast of the United States, from the Bay of Fundy to the Sabine River in +the Gulf of Mexico, is more than two thousand miles in extent. These shores +form an unbroken line, and they are all subject to the same government. No +nation in the world possesses vaster, deeper, or more secure ports for shipping +than the Americans. +</p> + +<p> +The inhabitants of the United States constitute a great civilized people, which +fortune has placed in the midst of an uncultivated country at a distance of +three thousand miles from the central point of civilization. America +consequently stands in daily need of European trade. The Americans will, no +doubt, ultimately succeed in producing or manufacturing at home most of the +articles which they require; but the two continents can never be independent of +each other, so numerous are the natural ties which exist between their wants, +their ideas, their habits, and their manners. +</p> + +<p> +The Union produces peculiar commodities which are now become necessary to us, +but which cannot be cultivated, or can only be raised at an enormous expense, +upon the soil of Europe. The Americans only consume a small portion of this +produce, and they are willing to sell us the rest. Europe is therefore the +market of America, as America is the market of Europe; and maritime commerce is +no less necessary to enable the inhabitants of the United States to transport +their raw materials to the ports of Europe, than it is to enable us to supply +them with our manufactured produce. The United States were therefore +necessarily reduced to the alternative of increasing the business of other +maritime nations to a great extent, if they had themselves declined to enter +into commerce, as the Spaniards of Mexico have hitherto done; or, in the second +place, of becoming one of the first trading powers of the globe. +</p> + +<p> +The Anglo-Americans have always displayed a very decided taste for the sea. The +Declaration of Independence broke the commercial restrictions which united them +to England, and gave a fresh and powerful stimulus to their maritime genius. +Ever since that time, the shipping of the Union has increased in almost the +same rapid proportion as the number of its inhabitants. The Americans +themselves now transport to their own shores nine-tenths of the European +produce which they consume. *g And they also bring three-quarters of the +exports of the New World to the European consumer. *h The ships of the United +States fill the docks of Havre and of Liverpool; whilst the number of English +and French vessels which are to be seen at New York is comparatively small. *i +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +g <br /> +[ The total value of goods imported during the year which ended on September +30, 1832, was $101,129,266. The value of the cargoes of foreign vessels did not +amount to $10,731,039, or about one-tenth of the entire sum.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +h <br /> +[ The value of goods exported during the same year amounted to $87,176,943; the +value of goods exported by foreign vessels amounted to $21,036,183, or about +one quarter of the whole sum. (Williams’s “Register,” 1833, +p. 398.)] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +i <br /> +[ The tonnage of the vessels which entered all the ports of the Union in the +years 1829, 1830, and 1831, amounted to 3,307,719 tons, of which 544,571 tons +were foreign vessels; they stood, therefore, to the American vessels in a ratio +of about 16 to 100. (“National Calendar,” 1833, p. 304.) The +tonnage of the English vessels which entered the ports of London, Liverpool, +and Hull, in the years 1820, 1826, and 1831, amounted to 443,800 tons. The +foreign vessels which entered the same ports during the same years amounted to +159,431 tons. The ratio between them was, therefore, about 36 to 100. +(“Companion to the Almanac,” 1834, p. 169.) In the year 1832 the +ratio between the foreign and British ships which entered the ports of Great +Britain was 29 to 100. [These statements relate to a condition of affairs which +has ceased to exist; the Civil War and the heavy taxation of the United States +entirely altered the trade and navigation of the country.]] +</p> + +<p> +Thus, not only does the American merchant face the competition of his own +countrymen, but he even supports that of foreign nations in their own ports +with success. This is readily explained by the fact that the vessels of the +United States can cross the seas at a cheaper rate than any other vessels in +the world. As long as the mercantile shipping of the United States preserves +this superiority, it will not only retain what it has acquired, but it will +constantly increase in prosperity. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2HCH0054" id="link2HCH0054"></a> Chapter XVIII: Future +Condition Of Three Races—Part X</h2> + +<p> +It is difficult to say for what reason the Americans can trade at a lower rate +than other nations; and one is at first led to attribute this circumstance to +the physical or natural advantages which are within their reach; but this +supposition is erroneous. The American vessels cost almost as much to build as +our own; *j they are not better built, and they generally last for a shorter +time. The pay of the American sailor is more considerable than the pay on board +European ships; which is proved by the great number of Europeans who are to be +met with in the merchant vessels of the United States. But I am of opinion that +the true cause of their superiority must not be sought for in physical +advantages, but that it is wholly attributable to their moral and intellectual +qualities. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +j <br /> +[ Materials are, generally speaking, less expensive in America than in Europe, +but the price of labor is much higher.] +</p> + +<p> +The following comparison will illustrate my meaning. During the campaigns of +the Revolution the French introduced a new system of tactics into the art of +war, which perplexed the oldest generals, and very nearly destroyed the most +ancient monarchies in Europe. They undertook (what had never before been +attempted) to make shift without a number of things which had always been held +to be indispensable in warfare; they required novel exertions on the part of +their troops which no civilized nations had ever thought of; they achieved +great actions in an incredibly short space of time; and they risked human life +without hesitation to obtain the object in view. The French had less money and +fewer men than their enemies; their resources were infinitely inferior; +nevertheless they were constantly victorious, until their adversaries chose to +imitate their example. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans have introduced a similar system into their commercial +speculations; and they do for cheapness what the French did for conquest. The +European sailor navigates with prudence; he only sets sail when the weather is +favorable; if an unforseen accident befalls him, he puts into port; at night he +furls a portion of his canvas; and when the whitening billows intimate the +vicinity of land, he checks his way, and takes an observation of the sun. But +the American neglects these precautions and braves these dangers. He weighs +anchor in the midst of tempestuous gales; by night and by day he spreads his +sheets to the wind; he repairs as he goes along such damage as his vessel may +have sustained from the storm; and when he at last approaches the term of his +voyage, he darts onward to the shore as if he already descried a port. The +Americans are often shipwrecked, but no trader crosses the seas so rapidly. And +as they perform the same distance in a shorter time, they can perform it at a +cheaper rate. +</p> + +<p> +The European touches several times at different ports in the course of a long +voyage; he loses a good deal of precious time in making the harbor, or in +waiting for a favorable wind to leave it; and he pays daily dues to be allowed +to remain there. The American starts from Boston to go to purchase tea in +China; he arrives at Canton, stays there a few days, and then returns. In less +than two years he has sailed as far as the entire circumference of the globe, +and he has seen land but once. It is true that during a voyage of eight or ten +months he has drunk brackish water and lived upon salt meat; that he has been +in a continual contest with the sea, with disease, and with a tedious +existence; but upon his return he can sell a pound of his tea for a half-penny +less than the English merchant, and his purpose is accomplished. +</p> + +<p> +I cannot better explain my meaning than by saying that the Americans affect a +sort of heroism in their manner of trading. But the European merchant will +always find it very difficult to imitate his American competitor, who, in +adopting the system which I have just described, follows not only a calculation +of his gain, but an impulse of his nature. +</p> + +<p> +The inhabitants of the United States are subject to all the wants and all the +desires which result from an advanced stage of civilization; but as they are +not surrounded by a community admirably adapted, like that of Europe, to +satisfy their wants, they are often obliged to procure for themselves the +various articles which education and habit have rendered necessaries. In +America it sometimes happens that the same individual tills his field, builds +his dwelling, contrives his tools, makes his shoes, and weaves the coarse stuff +of which his dress is composed. This circumstance is prejudicial to the +excellence of the work; but it powerfully contributes to awaken the +intelligence of the workman. Nothing tends to materialize man, and to deprive +his work of the faintest trace of mind, more than extreme division of labor. In +a country like America, where men devoted to special occupations are rare, a +long apprenticeship cannot be required from anyone who embraces a profession. +The Americans, therefore, change their means of gaining a livelihood very +readily; and they suit their occupations to the exigencies of the moment, in +the manner most profitable to themselves. Men are to be met with who have +successively been barristers, farmers, merchants, ministers of the gospel, and +physicians. If the American be less perfect in each craft than the European, at +least there is scarcely any trade with which he is utterly unacquainted. His +capacity is more general, and the circle of his intelligence is enlarged. +</p> + +<p> +The inhabitants of the United States are never fettered by the axioms of their +profession; they escape from all the prejudices of their present station; they +are not more attached to one line of operation than to another; they are not +more prone to employ an old method than a new one; they have no rooted habits, +and they easily shake off the influence which the habits of other nations might +exercise upon their minds from a conviction that their country is unlike any +other, and that its situation is without a precedent in the world. America is a +land of wonders, in which everything is in constant motion, and every movement +seems an improvement. The idea of novelty is there indissolubly connected with +the idea of amelioration. No natural boundary seems to be set to the efforts of +man; and what is not yet done is only what he has not yet attempted to do. +</p> + +<p> +This perpetual change which goes on in the United States, these frequent +vicissitudes of fortune, accompanied by such unforeseen fluctuations in private +and in public wealth, serve to keep the minds of the citizens in a perpetual +state of feverish agitation, which admirably invigorates their exertions, and +keeps them in a state of excitement above the ordinary level of mankind. The +whole life of an American is passed like a game of chance, a revolutionary +crisis, or a battle. As the same causes are continually in operation throughout +the country, they ultimately impart an irresistible impulse to the national +character. The American, taken as a chance specimen of his countrymen, must +then be a man of singular warmth in his desires, enterprising, fond of +adventure, and, above all, of innovation. The same bent is manifest in all that +he does; he introduces it into his political laws, his religious doctrines, his +theories of social economy, and his domestic occupations; he bears it with him +in the depths of the backwoods, as well as in the business of the city. It is +this same passion, applied to maritime commerce, which makes him the cheapest +and the quickest trader in the world. +</p> + +<p> +As long as the sailors of the United States retain these inspiriting +advantages, and the practical superiority which they derive from them, they +will not only continue to supply the wants of the producers and consumers of +their own country, but they will tend more and more to become, like the +English, the factors of all other peoples. *k This prediction has already begun +to be realized; we perceive that the American traders are introducing +themselves as intermediate agents in the commerce of several European nations; +*l and America will offer a still wider field to their enterprise. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +k <br /> +[ It must not be supposed that English vessels are exclusively employed in +transporting foreign produce into England, or British produce to foreign +countries; at the present day the merchant shipping of England may be regarded +in the light of a vast system of public conveyances, ready to serve all the +producers of the world, and to open communications between all peoples. The +maritime genius of the Americans prompts them to enter into competition with +the English.] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +l <br /> +[ Part of the commerce of the Mediterranean is already carried on by American +vessels.] +</p> + +<p> +The great colonies which were founded in South America by the Spaniards and the +Portuguese have since become empires. Civil war and oppression now lay waste +those extensive regions. Population does not increase, and the thinly scattered +inhabitants are too much absorbed in the cares of self-defense even to attempt +any amelioration of their condition. Such, however, will not always be the +case. Europe has succeeded by her own efforts in piercing the gloom of the +Middle Ages; South America has the same Christian laws and Christian manners as +we have; she contains all the germs of civilization which have grown amidst the +nations of Europe or their offsets, added to the advantages to be derived from +our example: why then should she always remain uncivilized? It is clear that +the question is simply one of time; at some future period, which may be more or +less remote, the inhabitants of South America will constitute flourishing and +enlightened nations. +</p> + +<p> +But when the Spaniards and Portuguese of South America begin to feel the wants +common to all civilized nations, they will still be unable to satisfy those +wants for themselves; as the youngest children of civilization, they must +perforce admit the superiority of their elder brethren. They will be +agriculturists long before they succeed in manufactures or commerce, and they +will require the mediation of strangers to exchange their produce beyond seas +for those articles for which a demand will begin to be felt. +</p> + +<p> +It is unquestionable that the Americans of the North will one day supply the +wants of the Americans of the South. Nature has placed them in contiguity, and +has furnished the former with every means of knowing and appreciating those +demands, of establishing a permanent connection with those States, and of +gradually filling their markets. The merchants of the United States could only +forfeit these natural advantages if he were very inferior to the merchant of +Europe; to whom he is, on the contrary, superior in several respects. The +Americans of the United States already exercise a very considerable moral +influence upon all the peoples of the New World. They are the source of +intelligence, and all the nations which inhabit the same continent are already +accustomed to consider them as the most enlightened, the most powerful, and the +most wealthy members of the great American family. All eyes are therefore +turned towards the Union; and the States of which that body is composed are the +models which the other communities try to imitate to the best of their power; +it is from the United States that they borrow their political principles and +their laws. +</p> + +<p> +The Americans of the United States stand in precisely the same position with +regard to the peoples of South America as their fathers, the English, occupy +with regard to the Italians, the Spaniards, the Portuguese, and all those +nations of Europe which receive their articles of daily consumption from +England, because they are less advanced in civilization and trade. England is +at this time the natural emporium of almost all the nations which are within +its reach; the American Union will perform the same part in the other +hemisphere; and every community which is founded, or which prospers in the New +World, is founded and prospers to the advantage of the Anglo-Americans. +</p> + +<p> +If the Union were to be dissolved, the commerce of the States which now compose +it would undoubtedly be checked for a time; but this consequence would be less +perceptible than is generally supposed. It is evident that, whatever may +happen, the commercial States will remain united. They are all contiguous to +each other; they have identically the same opinions, interests, and manners; +and they are alone competent to form a very great maritime power. Even if the +South of the Union were to become independent of the North, it would still +require the services of those States. I have already observed that the South is +not a commercial country, and nothing intimates that it is likely to become so. +The Americans of the South of the United States will therefore be obliged, for +a long time to come, to have recourse to strangers to export their produce, and +to supply them with the commodities which are requisite to satisfy their wants. +But the Northern States are undoubtedly able to act as their intermediate +agents cheaper than any other merchants. They will therefore retain that +employment, for cheapness is the sovereign law of commerce. National claims and +national prejudices cannot resist the influence of cheapness. Nothing can be +more virulent than the hatred which exists between the Americans of the United +States and the English. But notwithstanding these inimical feelings, the +Americans derive the greater part of their manufactured commodities from +England, because England supplies them at a cheaper rate than any other nation. +Thus the increasing prosperity of America turns, notwithstanding the grudges of +the Americans, to the advantage of British manufactures. +</p> + +<p> +Reason shows and experience proves that no commercial prosperity can be durable +if it cannot be united, in case of need, to naval force. This truth is as well +understood in the United States as it can be anywhere else: the Americans are +already able to make their flag respected; in a few years they will be able to +make it feared. I am convinced that the dismemberment of the Union would not +have the effect of diminishing the naval power of the Americans, but that it +would powerfully contribute to increase it. At the present time the commercial +States are connected with others which have not the same interests, and which +frequently yield an unwilling consent to the increase of a maritime power by +which they are only indirectly benefited. If, on the contrary, the commercial +States of the Union formed one independent nation, commerce would become the +foremost of their national interests; they would consequently be willing to +make very great sacrifices to protect their shipping, and nothing would prevent +them from pursuing their designs upon this point. +</p> + +<p> +Nations, as well as men, almost always betray the most prominent features of +their future destiny in their earliest years. When I contemplate the ardor with +which the Anglo-Americans prosecute commercial enterprise, the advantages which +befriend them, and the success of their undertakings, I cannot refrain from +believing that they will one day become the first maritime power of the globe. +They are born to rule the seas, as the Romans were to conquer the world. +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<h2><a name="link2H_CONC" id="link2H_CONC"></a> Conclusion</h2> + +<p> +I have now nearly reached the close of my inquiry; hitherto, in speaking of the +future destiny of the United States, I have endeavored to divide my subject +into distinct portions, in order to study each of them with more attention. My +present object is to embrace the whole from one single point; the remarks I +shall make will be less detailed, but they will be more sure. I shall perceive +each object less distinctly, but I shall descry the principal facts with more +certainty. A traveller who has just left the walls of an immense city, climbs +the neighboring hill; as he goes father off he loses sight of the men whom he +has so recently quitted; their dwellings are confused in a dense mass; he can +no longer distinguish the public squares, and he can scarcely trace out the +great thoroughfares; but his eye has less difficulty in following the +boundaries of the city, and for the first time he sees the shape of the vast +whole. Such is the future destiny of the British race in North America to my +eye; the details of the stupendous picture are overhung with shade, but I +conceive a clear idea of the entire subject. +</p> + +<p> +The territory now occupied or possessed by the United States of America forms +about one-twentieth part of the habitable earth. But extensive as these +confines are, it must not be supposed that the Anglo-American race will always +remain within them; indeed, it has already far overstepped them. +</p> + +<p> +There was once a time at which we also might have created a great French nation +in the American wilds, to counterbalance the influence of the English upon the +destinies of the New World. France formerly possessed a territory in North +America, scarcely less extensive than the whole of Europe. The three greatest +rivers of that continent then flowed within her dominions. The Indian tribes +which dwelt between the mouth of the St. Lawrence and the delta of the +Mississippi were unaccustomed to any other tongue but ours; and all the +European settlements scattered over that immense region recalled the traditions +of our country. Louisbourg, Montmorency, Duquesne, St. Louis, Vincennes, New +Orleans (for such were the names they bore) are words dear to France and +familiar to our ears. +</p> + +<p> +But a concourse of circumstances, which it would be tedious to enumerate, *m +have deprived us of this magnificent inheritance. Wherever the French settlers +were numerically weak and partially established, they have disappeared: those +who remain are collected on a small extent of country, and are now subject to +other laws. The 400,000 French inhabitants of Lower Canada constitute, at the +present time, the remnant of an old nation lost in the midst of a new people. A +foreign population is increasing around them unceasingly and on all sides, +which already penetrates amongst the ancient masters of the country, +predominates in their cities and corrupts their language. This population is +identical with that of the United States; it is therefore with truth that I +asserted that the British race is not confined within the frontiers of the +Union, since it already extends to the northeast. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +m <br /> +[ The foremost of these circumstances is, that nations which are accustomed to +free institutions and municipal government are better able than any others to +found prosperous colonies. The habit of thinking and governing for oneself is +indispensable in a new country, where success necessarily depends, in a great +measure, upon the individual exertions of the settlers.] +</p> + +<p> +To the northwest nothing is to be met with but a few insignificant Russian +settlements; but to the southwest, Mexico presents a barrier to the +Anglo-Americans. Thus, the Spaniards and the Anglo-Americans are, properly +speaking, the only two races which divide the possession of the New World. The +limits of separation between them have been settled by a treaty; but although +the conditions of that treaty are exceedingly favorable to the Anglo-Americans, +I do not doubt that they will shortly infringe this arrangement. Vast +provinces, extending beyond the frontiers of the Union towards Mexico, are +still destitute of inhabitants. The natives of the United States will forestall +the rightful occupants of these solitary regions. They will take possession of +the soil, and establish social institutions, so that when the legal owner +arrives at length, he will find the wilderness under cultivation, and strangers +quietly settled in the midst of his inheritance. *n +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +n <br /> +[ [This was speedily accomplished, and ere long both Texas and California +formed part of the United States. The Russian settlements were acquired by +purchase.]] +</p> + +<p> +The lands of the New World belong to the first occupant, and they are the +natural reward of the swiftest pioneer. Even the countries which are already +peopled will have some difficulty in securing themselves from this invasion. I +have already alluded to what is taking place in the province of Texas. The +inhabitants of the United States are perpetually migrating to Texas, where they +purchase land; and although they conform to the laws of the country, they are +gradually founding the empire of their own language and their own manners. The +province of Texas is still part of the Mexican dominions, but it will soon +contain no Mexicans; the same thing has occurred whenever the Anglo-Americans +have come into contact with populations of a different origin. +</p> + +<p> +It cannot be denied that the British race has acquired an amazing preponderance +over all the other European races in the New World; and that it is very +superior to them in civilization, in industry, and in power. As long as it is +only surrounded by desert or thinly peopled countries, as long as it encounters +no dense populations upon its route, through which it cannot work its way, it +will assuredly continue to spread. The lines marked out by treaties will not +stop it; but it will everywhere transgress these imaginary barriers. +</p> + +<p> +The geographical position of the British race in the New World is peculiarly +favorable to its rapid increase. Above its northern frontiers the icy regions +of the Pole extend; and a few degrees below its southern confines lies the +burning climate of the Equator. The Anglo-Americans are, therefore, placed in +the most temperate and habitable zone of the continent. +</p> + +<p> +It is generally supposed that the prodigious increase of population in the +United States is posterior to their Declaration of Independence. But this is an +error: the population increased as rapidly under the colonial system as it does +at the present day; that is to say, it doubled in about twenty-two years. But +this proportion which is now applied to millions, was then applied to thousands +of inhabitants; and the same fact which was scarcely noticeable a century ago, +is now evident to every observer. +</p> + +<p> +The British subjects in Canada, who are dependent on a king, augment and spread +almost as rapidly as the British settlers of the United States, who live under +a republican government. During the war of independence, which lasted eight +years, the population continued to increase without intermission in the same +ratio. Although powerful Indian nations allied with the English existed at that +time upon the western frontiers, the emigration westward was never checked. +Whilst the enemy laid waste the shores of the Atlantic, Kentucky, the western +parts of Pennsylvania, and the States of Vermont and of Maine were filling with +inhabitants. Nor did the unsettled state of the Constitution, which succeeded +the war, prevent the increase of the population, or stop its progress across +the wilds. Thus, the difference of laws, the various conditions of peace and +war, of order and of anarchy, have exercised no perceptible influence upon the +gradual development of the Anglo-Americans. This may be readily understood; for +the fact is, that no causes are sufficiently general to exercise a simultaneous +influence over the whole of so extensive a territory. One portion of the +country always offers a sure retreat from the calamities which afflict another +part; and however great may be the evil, the remedy which is at hand is greater +still. +</p> + +<p> +It must not, then, be imagined that the impulse of the British race in the New +World can be arrested. The dismemberment of the Union, and the hostilities +which might ensure, the abolition of republican institutions, and the +tyrannical government which might succeed it, may retard this impulse, but they +cannot prevent it from ultimately fulfilling the destinies to which that race +is reserved. No power upon earth can close upon the emigrants that fertile +wilderness which offers resources to all industry, and a refuge from all want. +Future events, of whatever nature they may be, will not deprive the Americans +of their climate or of their inland seas, of their great rivers or of their +exuberant soil. Nor will bad laws, revolutions, and anarchy be able to +obliterate that love of prosperity and that spirit of enterprise which seem to +be the distinctive characteristics of their race, or to extinguish that +knowledge which guides them on their way. +</p> + +<p> +Thus, in the midst of the uncertain future, one event at least is sure. At a +period which may be said to be near (for we are speaking of the life of a +nation), the Anglo-Americans will alone cover the immense space contained +between the polar regions and the tropics, extending from the coasts of the +Atlantic to the shores of the Pacific Ocean. The territory which will probably +be occupied by the Anglo-Americans at some future time, may be computed to +equal three-quarters of Europe in extent. *o The climate of the Union is upon +the whole preferable to that of Europe, and its natural advantages are not less +great; it is therefore evident that its population will at some future time be +proportionate to our own. Europe, divided as it is between so many different +nations, and torn as it has been by incessant wars and the barbarous manners of +the Middle Ages, has notwithstanding attained a population of 410 inhabitants +to the square league. *p What cause can prevent the United States from having +as numerous a population in time? +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +o <br /> +[ The United States already extend over a territory equal to one-half of +Europe. The area of Europe is 500,000 square leagues, and its population +205,000,000 of inhabitants. (“Malte Brun,” liv. 114. vol. vi. p. +4.) +</p> + +<p> +[This computation is given in French leagues, which were in use when the author +wrote. Twenty years later, in 1850, the superficial area of the United States +had been extended to 3,306,865 square miles of territory, which is about the +area of Europe.]] +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +p <br /> +[ See “Malte Brun,” liv. 116, vol. vi. p. 92.] +</p> + +<p> +Many ages must elapse before the divers offsets of the British race in America +cease to present the same homogeneous characteristics: and the time cannot be +foreseen at which a permanent inequality of conditions will be established in +the New World. Whatever differences may arise, from peace or from war, from +freedom or oppression, from prosperity or want, between the destinies of the +different descendants of the great Anglo-American family, they will at least +preserve an analogous social condition, and they will hold in common the +customs and the opinions to which that social condition has given birth. +</p> + +<p> +In the Middle Ages, the tie of religion was sufficiently powerful to imbue all +the different populations of Europe with the same civilization. The British of +the New World have a thousand other reciprocal ties; and they live at a time +when the tendency to equality is general amongst mankind. The Middle Ages were +a period when everything was broken up; when each people, each province, each +city, and each family, had a strong tendency to maintain its distinct +individuality. At the present time an opposite tendency seems to prevail, and +the nations seem to be advancing to unity. Our means of intellectual +intercourse unite the most remote parts of the earth; and it is impossible for +men to remain strangers to each other, or to be ignorant of the events which +are taking place in any corner of the globe. The consequence is that there is +less difference, at the present day, between the Europeans and their +descendants in the New World, than there was between certain towns in the +thirteenth century which were only separated by a river. If this tendency to +assimilation brings foreign nations closer to each other, it must a fortiori +prevent the descendants of the same people from becoming aliens to each other. +</p> + +<p> +The time will therefore come when one hundred and fifty millions of men will be +living in North America, *q equal in condition, the progeny of one race, owing +their origin to the same cause, and preserving the same civilization, the same +language, the same religion, the same habits, the same manners, and imbued with +the same opinions, propagated under the same forms. The rest is uncertain, but +this is certain; and it is a fact new to the world—a fact fraught with +such portentous consequences as to baffle the efforts even of the imagination. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +q <br /> +[ This would be a population proportionate to that of Europe, taken at a mean +rate of 410 inhabitants to the square league.] +</p> + +<p> +There are, at the present time, two great nations in the world which seem to +tend towards the same end, although they started from different points: I +allude to the Russians and the Americans. Both of them have grown up unnoticed; +and whilst the attention of mankind was directed elsewhere, they have suddenly +assumed a most prominent place amongst the nations; and the world learned their +existence and their greatness at almost the same time. +</p> + +<p> +All other nations seem to have nearly reached their natural limits, and only to +be charged with the maintenance of their power; but these are still in the act +of growth; *r all the others are stopped, or continue to advance with extreme +difficulty; these are proceeding with ease and with celerity along a path to +which the human eye can assign no term. The American struggles against the +natural obstacles which oppose him; the adversaries of the Russian are men; the +former combats the wilderness and savage life; the latter, civilization with +all its weapons and its arts: the conquests of the one are therefore gained by +the ploughshare; those of the other by the sword. The Anglo-American relies +upon personal interest to accomplish his ends, and gives free scope to the +unguided exertions and common-sense of the citizens; the Russian centres all +the authority of society in a single arm: the principal instrument of the +former is freedom; of the latter servitude. Their starting-point is different, +and their courses are not the same; yet each of them seems to be marked out by +the will of Heaven to sway the destinies of half the globe. +</p> + +<p class="footnote"> +r <br /> +[ Russia is the country in the Old World in which population increases most +rapidly in proportion.] +</p> + +</div><!--end chapter--> + +<div>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 815 ***</div> +</body> +</html> + diff --git a/815-h/images/cover.jpg b/815-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..e2478f6 --- /dev/null +++ b/815-h/images/cover.jpg |
