|
To The People of
the State of New York:
OOOO THE three last numbers of this
paper have been dedicated to an enumeration of the dangers to which we
should be exposed, in a state of disunion, from the arms and arts of
foreign nations. I shall now proceed to delineate dangers of a
different and, perhaps, still more alarming kind--those which will in
all probability flow from dissensions between the States themselves,
and from domestic factions and convulsions. These have been already in
some instances slightly anticipated; but they deserve a more
particular and more full investigation.
OOOOA man must be far gone in Utopian
speculations who can seriously doubt that, if these States should
either be wholly disunited, or only united in partial confederacies,
the subdivisions into which they might be thrown would have frequent
and violent contests with each other. To presume a want of motives for
such contests as an argument against their existence, would be to
forget that men are ambitious, vindictive, and rapacious. To look for
a continuation of harmony between a number of independent, unconnected
sovereignties in the same neighborhood, would be to disregard the
uniform course of human events, and to set at defiance the accumulated
experience of ages.
OOOOThe causes of hostility among
nations are innumerable. There are some which have a general and
almost constant operation upon the collective bodies of society. Of
this description are the love of power or the desire of pre-eminence
and dominion--the jealousy of power, or the desire of equality and
safety. There are others which have a more circumscribed though an
equally operative influence within their spheres. Such are the
rivalships and competitions of commerce between commercial nations.
And there are others, not less numerous than either of the former,
which take their origin entirely in private passions; in the
attachments, enmities, interests, hopes, and fears of leading
individuals in the communities of which they are members. Men of this
class, whether the favorites of a king or of a people, have in too
many instances abused the confidence they possessed; and assuming the
pretext of some public motive, have not scrupled to sacrifice the
national tranquillity to personal advantage or personal gratification.
OOOOThe celebrated Pericles, in
compliance with the resentment of a prostitute 1 at
the expense of much of the blood and treasure of his countrymen,
attacked, vanquished, and destroyed the city of the SAMNIANS. The same
man, stimulated by private pique against the MEGARENSIANS
2, another nation of Greece, or to avoid a
prosecution with which he was threatened as an accomplice of a
supposed theft of the statuary Phidias 3, or to get
rid of the accusations prepared to be brought against him for
dissipating the funds of the state in the purchase of popularity
4, or from a combination of all these causes, was
the primitive author of that famous and fatal war, distinguished in
the Grecian annals by the name of the PELOPONNESIAN war; which, after
various vicissitudes, intermissions, and renewals, terminated in the
ruin of the Athenian commonwealth.
OOOOThe ambitious cardinal, who was
prime minister to Henry VIII., permitting his vanity to aspire to the
triple crown 5, entertained hopes of succeeding in
the acquisition of that splendid prize by the influence of the Emperor
Charles V. To secure the favor and interest of this enterprising and
powerful monarch, he precipitated England into a war with France,
contrary to the plainest dictates of policy, and at the hazard of the
safety and independence, as well of the kingdom over which he presided
by his counsels, as of Europe in general. For if there ever was a
sovereign who bid fair to realize the project of universal monarchy,
it was the Emperor Charles V., of whose intrigues Wolsey was at once
the instrument and the dupe.
OOOOThe influence which the bigotry of
one female 6, the petulance of another
7, and the cabals of a third 8
had in the contemporary policy, ferments, and pacifications, of a
considerable part of Europe, are topics that have been too often
descanted upon not to be generally known.
OOOOTo multiply examples of the agency
of personal considerations in the production of great national events,
either foreign or domestic, according to their direction, would be an
unnecessary waste of time. Those who have but a superficial
acquaintance with the sources from which they are to be drawn, will
themselves recollect a variety of instances; and those who have a
tolerable knowledge of human nature will not stand in need of such
lights to form their opinion either of the reality or extent of that
agency. Perhaps, however, a reference, tending to illustrate the
general principle, may with propriety be made to a case which has
lately happened among ourselves. If Shays had not been a DESPERATE
DEBTOR, it is much to be doubted whether Massachusetts would have been
plunged into a civil war.
OOOOBut notwithstanding the concurring
testimony of experience, in this particular, there are still to be
found visionary or designing men, who stand ready to advocate the
paradox of perpetual peace between the States, though dismembered and
alienated from each other. The genius of republics (say they) is
pacific; the spirit of commerce has a tendency to soften the manners
of men, and to extinguish those inflammable humors which have so often
kindled into wars. Commercial republics, like ours, will never be
disposed to waste themselves in ruinous contentions with each other.
They will be governed by mutual interest, and will cultivate a spirit
of mutual amity and concord.
OOOOIs it not (we may ask these
projectors in politics) the true interest of all nations to cultivate
the same benevolent and philosophic spirit? If this be their true
interest, have they in fact pursued it? Has it not, on the contrary,
invariably been found that momentary passions, and immediate interest,
have a more active and imperious control over human conduct than
general or remote considerations of policy, utility or justice? Have
republics in practice been less addicted to war than monarchies? Are
not the former administered by MEN as well as the latter? Are there
not aversions, predilections, rivalships, and desires of unjust
acquisitions, that affect nations as well as kings? Are not popular
assemblies frequently subject to the impulses of rage, resentment,
jealousy, avarice, and of other irregular and violent propensities? Is
it not well known that their determinations are often governed by a
few individuals in whom they place confidence, and are, of course,
liable to be tinctured by the passions and views of those individuals?
Has commerce hitherto done anything more than change the objects of
war? Is not the love of wealth as domineering and enterprising a
passion as that of power or glory? Have there not been as many wars
founded upon commercial motives since that has become the prevailing
system of nations, as were before occasioned by the cupidity of
territory or dominion? Has not the spirit of commerce, in many
instances, administered new incentives to the appetite, both for the
one and for the other? Let experience, the least fallible guide of
human opinions, be appealed to for an answer to these inquiries.
OOOOSparta, Athens, Rome, and Carthage
were all republics; two of them, Athens and Carthage, of the
commercial kind. Yet were they as often engaged in wars, offensive and
defensive, as the neighboring monarchies of the same times. Sparta was
little better than a wellregulated camp; and Rome was never sated of
carnage and conquest.
OOOOCarthage, though a commercial
republic, was the aggressor in the very war that ended in her
destruction. Hannibal had carried her arms into the heart of Italy and
to the gates of Rome, before Scipio, in turn, gave him an overthrow in
the territories of Carthage, and made a conquest of the commonwealth.
OOOOVenice, in later times, figured more
than once in wars of ambition, till, becoming an object to the other
Italian states, Pope Julius II. found means to accomplish that
formidable league 9 which gave a deadly blow to the
power and pride of this haughty republic.
OOOOThe provinces of Holland, till they
were overwhelmed in debts and taxes, took a leading and conspicuous
part in the wars of Europe. They had furious contests with England for
the dominion of the sea, and were among the most persevering and most
implacable of the opponents of Louis XIV.
OOOOIn the government of Britain the
representatives of the people compose one branch of the national
legislature. Commerce has been for ages the predominant pursuit of
that country. Few nations, nevertheless, have been more frequently
engaged in war; and the wars in which that kingdom has been engaged
have, in numerous instances, proceeded from the people.
OOOOThere have been, if I may so express
it, almost as many popular as royal wars. The cries of the nation and
the importunities of their representatives have, upon various
occasions, dragged their monarchs into war, or continued them in it,
contrary to their inclinations, and sometimes contrary to the real
interests of the State. In that memorable struggle for superiority
between the rival houses of AUSTRIA and BOURBON, which so long kept
Europe in a flame, it is well known that the antipathies of the
English against the French, seconding the ambition, or rather the
avarice, of a favorite leader 10 protracted the
war beyond the limits marked out by sound policy, and for a
considerable time in opposition to the views of the court.
OOOOThe wars of these two last-mentioned
nations have in a great measure grown out of commercial
considerations,--the desire of supplanting and the fear of being
supplanted, either in particular branches of traffic or in the general
advantages of trade and navigation.
OOOOFrom this summary of what has taken
place in other countries, whose situations have borne the nearest
resemblance to our own, what reason can we have to confide in those
reveries which would seduce us into an expectation of peace and
cordiality between the members of the present confederacy, in a state
of separation? Have we not already seen enough of the fallacy and
extravagance of those idle theories which have amused us with promises
of an exemption from the imperfections, weaknesses and evils incident
to society in every shape? Is it not time to awake from the deceitful
dream of a golden age, and to adopt as a practical maxim for the
direction of our political conduct that we, as well as the other
inhabitants of the globe, are yet remote from the happy empire of
perfect wisdom and perfect virtue?
OOOOLet the point of extreme depression
to which our national dignity and credit have sunk, let the
inconveniences felt everywhere from a lax and ill administration of
government, let the revolt of a part of the State of North Carolina,
the late menacing disturbances in Pennsylvania, and the actual
insurrections and rebellions in Massachusetts, declare--!
OOOOSo far is the general sense of
mankind from corresponding with the tenets of those who endeavor to
lull asleep our apprehensions of discord and hostility between the
States, in the event of disunion, that it has from long observation of
the progress of society become a sort of axiom in politics, that
vicinity or nearness of situation, constitutes nations natural
enemies. An intelligent writer expresses himself on this subject to
this effect: "NEIGHBORING NATIONS (says he) are naturally enemies
of each other unless their common weakness forces them to league in a
CONFEDERATE REPUBLIC, and their constitution prevents the differences
that neighborhood occasions, extinguishing that secret jealousy which
disposes all states to aggrandize themselves at the expense of their
neighbors.'' 11 This passage, at the same time,
points out the EVIL and suggests the REMEDY.
OOOOPUBLIUS.
1. Aspasia, vide "Plutarch's
Life of Pericles.''
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid. Phidias was supposed to have stolen some
public gold, with the connivance of Pericles, for the embellishment of
the statue of Minerva.
5. P Worn by the popes.
6. Madame de Maintenon.
7. Duchess of Marlborough.
8. Madame de Pompadour.
9. The League of Cambray, comprehending the Emperor,
the King of France, the King of Aragon, and most of the Italian
princes and states.
10. The Duke of Marlborough.
11. Vide "Principes des Negociations'' par
1'Abbe de Mably.
| |