|
If History Interests You, then This Section of the
Site is For You |
|
Back |
Federalist
No. 14
Objections to the Proposed
Constitution From Extent of Territory Answered - From
the New York Packet. Friday, November 30, 1787. |
Next |
|
Author: James Madison
To the People of the State of New York:
WE HAVE seen the necessity of the Union, as our bulwark against
foreign danger, as the conservator of peace among ourselves, as
the guardian of our commerce and other common interests, as the
only substitute for those military establishments which have
subverted the liberties of the Old World, and as the proper
antidote for the diseases of faction, which have proved fatal to
other popular governments, and of which alarming symptoms have
been betrayed by our own. All that remains, within this branch
of our inquiries, is to take notice of an objection that may be
drawn from the great extent of country which the Union embraces.
A few observations on this subject will be the more proper, as
it is perceived that the adversaries of the new Constitution are
availing themselves of the prevailing prejudice with regard to
the practicable sphere of republican administration, in order to
supply, by imaginary difficulties, the want of those solid
objections which they endeavor in vain to find.
The error which limits republican government to a narrow
district has been unfolded and refuted in preceding papers. I
remark here only that it seems to owe its rise and prevalence
chiefly to the confounding of a republic with a democracy,
applying to the former reasonings drawn from the nature of the
latter. The true distinction between these forms was also
adverted to on a former occasion. It is, that in a democracy,
the people meet and exercise the government in person; in a
republic, they assemble and administer it by their
representatives and agents. A democracy, consequently, will be
confined to a small spot. A republic may be extended over a
large region.
To this accidental source of the error may be added the artifice
of some celebrated authors, whose writings have had a great
share in forming the modern standard of political opinions.
Being subjects either of an absolute or limited monarchy, they
have endeavored to heighten the advantages, or palliate the
evils of those forms, by placing in comparison the vices and
defects of the republican, and by citing as specimens of the
latter the turbulent democracies of ancient Greece and modern
Italy. Under the confusion of names, it has been an easy task to
transfer to a republic observations applicable to a democracy
only; and among others, the observation that it can never be
established but among a small number of people, living within a
small compass of territory.
Such a fallacy may have been the less perceived, as most of the
popular governments of antiquity were of the democratic species;
and even in modern Europe, to which we owe the great principle
of representation, no example is seen of a government wholly
popular, and founded, at the same time, wholly on that
principle. If Europe has the merit of discovering this great
mechanical power in government, by the simple agency of which
the will of the largest political body may be concentred, and
its force directed to any object which the public good requires,
America can claim the merit of making the discovery the basis of
unmixed and extensive republics. It is only to be lamented that
any of her citizens should wish to deprive her of the additional
merit of displaying its full efficacy in the establishment of
the comprehensive system now under her consideration.
As the natural limit of a democracy is that distance from the
central point which will just permit the most remote citizens to
assemble as often as their public functions demand, and will
include no greater number than can join in those functions; so
the natural limit of a republic is that distance from the centre
which will barely allow the representatives to meet as often as
may be necessary for the administration of public affairs. Can
it be said that the limits of the United States exceed this
distance? It will not be said by those who recollect that the
Atlantic coast is the longest side of the Union, that during the
term of thirteen years, the representatives of the States have
been almost continually assembled, and that the members from the
most distant States are not chargeable with greater
intermissions of attendance than those from the States in the
neighborhood of Congress.
That we may form a juster estimate with regard to this
interesting subject, let us resort to the actual dimensions of
the Union. The limits, as fixed by the treaty of peace, are: on
the east the Atlantic, on the south the latitude of thirty-one
degrees, on the west the Mississippi, and on the north an
irregular line running in some instances beyond the forty-fifth
degree, in others falling as low as the forty-second. The
southern shore of Lake Erie lies below that latitude. Computing
the distance between the thirty-first and forty-fifth degrees,
it amounts to nine hundred and seventy-three common miles;
computing it from thirty-one to forty-two degrees, to seven
hundred and sixty-four miles and a half. Taking the mean for the
distance, the amount will be eight hundred and sixty-eight miles
and three-fourths. The mean distance from the Atlantic to the
Mississippi does not probably exceed seven hundred and fifty
miles. On a comparison of this extent with that of several
countries in Europe, the practicability of rendering our system
commensurate to it appears to be demonstrable. It is not a great
deal larger than Germany, where a diet representing the whole
empire is continually assembled; or than Poland before the late
dismemberment, where another national diet was the depositary of
the supreme power. Passing by France and Spain, we find that in
Great Britain, inferior as it may be in size, the
representatives of the northern extremity of the island have as
far to travel to the national council as will be required of
those of the most remote parts of the Union.
Favorable as this view of the subject may be, some observations
remain which will place it in a light still more satisfactory.
In the first place it is to be remembered that the general
government is not to be charged with the whole power of making
and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain
enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the
republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate
provisions of any. The subordinate governments, which can extend
their care to all those other subjects which can be separately
provided for, will retain their due authority and activity. Were
it proposed by the plan of the convention to abolish the
governments of the particular States, its adversaries would have
some ground for their objection; though it would not be
difficult to show that if they were abolished the general
government would be compelled, by the principle of
self-preservation, to reinstate them in their proper
jurisdiction.
A second observation to be made is that the immediate object of
the federal Constitution is to secure the union of the thirteen
primitive States, which we know to be practicable; and to add to
them such other States as may arise in their own bosoms, or in
their neighborhoods, which we cannot doubt to be equally
practicable. The arrangements that may be necessary for those
angles and fractions of our territory which lie on our
northwestern frontier, must be left to those whom further
discoveries and experience will render more equal to the task.
Let it be remarked, in the third place, that the intercourse
throughout the Union will be facilitated by new improvements.
Roads will everywhere be shortened, and kept in better order;
accommodations for travelers will be multiplied and meliorated;
an interior navigation on our eastern side will be opened
throughout, or nearly throughout, the whole extent of the
thirteen States. The communication between the Western and
Atlantic districts, and between different parts of each, will be
rendered more and more easy by those numerous canals with which
the beneficence of nature has intersected our country, and which
art finds it so little difficult to connect and complete.
A fourth and still more important consideration is, that as
almost every State will, on one side or other, be a frontier,
and will thus find, in regard to its safety, an inducement to
make some sacrifices for the sake of the general protection; so
the States which lie at the greatest distance from the heart of
the Union, and which, of course, may partake least of the
ordinary circulation of its benefits, will be at the same time
immediately contiguous to foreign nations, and will consequently
stand, on particular occasions, in greatest need of its strength
and resources. It may be inconvenient for Georgia, or the States
forming our western or northeastern borders, to send their
representatives to the seat of government; but they would find
it more so to struggle alone against an invading enemy, or even
to support alone the whole expense of those precautions which
may be dictated by the neighborhood of continual danger. If they
should derive less benefit, therefore, from the Union in some
respects than the less distant States, they will derive greater
benefit from it in other respects, and thus the proper
equilibrium will be maintained throughout.
I submit to you, my fellow-citizens, these considerations, in
full confidence that the good sense which has so often marked
your decisions will allow them their due weight and effect; and
that you will never suffer difficulties, however formidable in
appearance, or however fashionable the error on which they may
be founded, to drive you into the gloomy and perilous scene into
which the advocates for disunion would conduct you. Hearken not
to the unnatural voice which tells you that the people of
America, knit together as they are by so many cords of
affection, can no longer live together as members of the same
family; can no longer continue the mutual guardians of their
mutual happiness; can no longer be fellowcitizens of one great,
respectable, and flourishing empire. Hearken not to the voice
which petulantly tells you that the form of government
recommended for your adoption is a novelty in the political
world; that it has never yet had a place in the theories of the
wildest projectors; that it rashly attempts what it is
impossible to accomplish. No, my countrymen, shut your ears
against this unhallowed language. Shut your hearts against the
poison which it conveys; the kindred blood which flows in the
veins of American citizens, the mingled blood which they have
shed in defense of their sacred rights, consecrate their Union,
and excite horror at the idea of their becoming aliens, rivals,
enemies. And if novelties are to be shunned, believe me, the
most alarming of all novelties, the most wild of all projects,
the most rash of all attempts, is that of rendering us in
pieces, in order to preserve our liberties and promote our
happiness. But why is the experiment of an extended republic to
be rejected, merely because it may comprise what is new? Is it
not the glory of the people of America, that, whilst they have
paid a decent regard to the opinions of former times and other
nations, they have not suffered a blind veneration for
antiquity, for custom, or for names, to overrule the suggestions
of their own good sense, the knowledge of their own situation,
and the lessons of their own experience? To this manly spirit,
posterity will be indebted for the possession, and the world for
the example, of the numerous innovations displayed on the
American theatre, in favor of private rights and public
happiness. Had no important step been taken by the leaders of
the Revolution for which a precedent could not be discovered, no
government established of which an exact model did not present
itself, the people of the United States might, at this moment
have been numbered among the melancholy victims of misguided
councils, must at best have been laboring under the weight of
some of those forms which have crushed the liberties of the rest
of mankind. Happily for America, happily, we trust, for the
whole human race, they pursued a new and more noble course. They
accomplished a revolution which has no parallel in the annals of
human society. They reared the fabrics of governments which have
no model on the face of the globe. They formed the design of a
great Confederacy, which it is incumbent on their successors to
improve and perpetuate. If their works betray imperfections, we
wonder at the fewness of them. If they erred most in the
structure of the Union, this was the work most difficult to be
executed; this is the work which has been new modelled by the
act of your convention, and it is that act on which you are now
to deliberate and to decide.
PUBLIUS. |
|
|
|
|