|
To The People of
the State of New York:
OOOOAMONG the numerous advantages
promised by a well-constructed Union, none deserves to be more
accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the
violence of faction. The friend of popular governments never finds
himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he
contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not
fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without
violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper
cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into
the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under
which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue
to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to
liberty derive their most specious declamations. The valuable
improvements made by the American constitutions on the popular models,
both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired; but it
would be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that they have as
effectually obviated the danger on this side, as was wished and
expected. Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate
and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private
faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are
too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of
rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according
to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the
superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However
anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the
evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in
some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our
situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been
erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will
be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account
for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that
prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm
for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to
the other. These must be chiefly, if not wholly, effects of the
unsteadiness and injustice with which a factious spirit has tainted
our public administrations.
OOOOBy a faction, I understand a number
of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the
whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion,
or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the
permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
OOOOThere are two methods of curing the
mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by
controlling its effects.
OOOOThere are again two methods of
removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty
which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every
citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.
OOOOIt could never be more truly said
than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty
is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it
instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty,
which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction,
than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential
to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.
OOOOThe second expedient is as
impracticable as the first would be unwise. As long as the reason of
man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different
opinions will be formed. As long as the connection subsists between
his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have
a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects
to which the latter will attach themselves. The diversity in the
faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not
less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests. The
protection of these faculties is the first object of government. From
the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring
property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property
immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments
and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the
society into different interests and parties.
OOOOThe latent causes of faction are
thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought
into different degrees of activity, according to the different
circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions
concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as
well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders
ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of
other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human
passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them
with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and
oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong
is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that
where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and
fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly
passions and excite their most violent conflicts. But the most common
and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal
distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without
property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are
creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like
discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a
mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests,
grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into
different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The
regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the
principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party
and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the
government.
OOOONo man is allowed to be a judge in
his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment,
and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with
greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties
at the same time; yet what are many of the most important acts of
legislation, but so many judicial determinations, not indeed
concerning the rights of single persons, but concerning the rights of
large bodies of citizens? And what are the different classes of
legislators but advocates and parties to the causes which they
determine? Is a law proposed concerning private debts? It is a
question to which the creditors are parties on one side and the
debtors on the other. Justice ought to hold the balance between them.
Yet the parties are, and must be, themselves the judges; and the most
numerous party, or, in other words, the most powerful faction must be
expected to prevail. Shall domestic manufactures be encouraged, and in
what degree, by restrictions on foreign manufactures? are questions
which would be differently decided by the landed and the manufacturing
classes, and probably by neither with a sole regard to justice and the
public good. The apportionment of taxes on the various descriptions of
property is an act which seems to require the most exact impartiality;
yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity
and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the
rules of justice. Every shilling with which they overburden the
inferior number, is a shilling saved to their own pockets.
OOOOIt is in vain to say that
enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests,
and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened
statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such
an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and
remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate
interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of
another or the good of the whole.
OOOOThe inference to which we are
brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that
relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.
OOOOIf a faction consists of less than a
majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which
enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It
may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will
be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the
Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of
popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its
ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of
other citizens. To secure the public good and private rights against
the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the
spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to
which our inquiries are directed. Let me add that it is the great
desideratum by which this form of government can be rescued from the
opprobrium under which it has so long labored, and be recommended to
the esteem and adoption of mankind.
OOOOBy what means is this object
attainable? Evidently by one of two only. Either the existence of the
same passion or interest in a majority at the same time must be
prevented, or the majority, having such coexistent passion or
interest, must be rendered, by their number and local situation,
unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression. If the
impulse and the opportunity be suffered to coincide, we well know that
neither moral nor religious motives can be relied on as an adequate
control. They are not found to be such on the injustice and violence
of individuals, and lose their efficacy in proportion to the number
combined together, that is, in proportion as their efficacy becomes
needful.
OOOOFrom this view of the subject it may
be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society
consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer
the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of
faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be
felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result
from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the
inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual.
Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of
turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with
personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been
as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government,
have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect
equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be
perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their
opinions, and their passions.
OOOOA republic, by which I mean a
government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a
different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.
Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and
we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which
it must derive from the Union.
OOOOThe two great points of difference
between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the
government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by
the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere
of country, over which the latter may be extended.
OOOOThe effect of the first difference
is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by
passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose
wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose
patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to
temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may
well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives
of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if
pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the
other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of
local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by
corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then
betray the interests, of the people. The question resulting is,
whether small or extensive republics are more favorable to the
election of proper guardians of the public weal; and it is clearly
decided in favor of the latter by two obvious considerations:
OOOOIn the first place, it is to be
remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives
must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the
cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be
limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion
of a multitude. Hence, the number of representatives in the two cases
not being in proportion to that of the two constituents, and being
proportionally greater in the small republic, it follows that, if the
proportion of fit characters be not less in the large than in the
small republic, the former will present a greater option, and
consequently a greater probability of a fit choice.
OOOOIn the next place, as each
representative will be chosen by a greater number of citizens in the
large than in the small republic, it will be more difficult for
unworthy candidates to practice with success the vicious arts by which
elections are too often carried; and the suffrages of the people being
more free, will be more likely to centre in men who possess the most
attractive merit and the most diffusive and established characters.
OOOOIt must be confessed that in this,
as in most other cases, there is a mean, on both sides of which
inconveniences will be found to lie. By enlarging too much the number
of electors, you render the representatives too little acquainted with
all their local circumstances and lesser interests; as by reducing it
too much, you render him unduly attached to these, and too little fit
to comprehend and pursue great and national objects. The federal
Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and
aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and
particular to the State legislatures.
OOOOThe other point of difference is,
the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be
brought within the compass of republican than of democratic
government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders
factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the
latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the
distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct
parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of
the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a
majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed,
the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of
oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of
parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of
the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other
citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult
for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in
unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked
that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable
purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to
the number whose concurrence is necessary.
OOOOHence, it clearly appears, that the
same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling
the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small
republic,--is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does
the advantage consist in the substitution of representatives whose
enlightened views and virtuous sentiments render them superior to
local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not be denied that
the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these
requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded
by a greater variety of parties, against the event of any one party
being able to outnumber and oppress the rest? In an equal degree does
the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union, increase
this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles
opposed to the concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an
unjust and interested majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union
gives it the most palpable advantage.
OOOOThe influence of factious leaders
may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable
to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A
religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of
the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire
face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from
that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an
equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked
project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than
a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is
more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire
State.
OOOOIn the extent and proper structure
of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the
diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the
degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be
our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of
Federalists.
OOOOPUBLIUS.
| |