Page images
PDF
EPUB

that the theory was not yet perfected in the minds of the revolutionary leaders, or of the people themselves. It is not possible for any community to shake off, by one voluntary act, the habits of thought, prejudices, and opinions, which have formed a part of their common life for generations. Under the influence of high-wrought feeling, or of a clear conception of duty or interest, a people may temporarily throw aside their former habitual modes of action, and for a time adapt themselves to a new state of social existence; but as soon as the paroxysm is past, as the flow of enthusiasm has receded, the conceptions of duty and interest become less clear, and the community gradually returns to its old customs, thoughts, and methods. Our revolutionary fathers were no exception to this rule. While colonies they had regarded their political societies as distinct; some jealousies had continually existed among them; some difference of interests had ever kept them apart. The necessities of their position, the absolute impossibility of separate revolts, the presence of a common danger, and the sentiments of an exalted patriotism, for a while swept away and buried all these local prejudices, these attachments to colonial or state independence. The interests of the whole were for a time regarded as paramount, and placed far in advance of the interests of the several parts. This perfect unity lasted long enough to produce that glorious offspring, the People of the United States, that new-born Nation, destined in the providence of God, I reverently believe, to be the example and teacher to all the nations of the earth, an example and teacher by its errors and punishments as well as by its excellencies and prosperity, until, being made perfect through suffering, it shall wield an influence over humanity even surpassing that exerted by the deathless empire of Rome.

$58. But soon after the formal act which asserted the national independence, state pride, interests, and influence, began to be felt plainly and powerfully in our national councils. The former habits were too strong to be forgotten, and they soon returned with even increased power. A government must be formed to take the place of the exist

ing one, which was regarded as revolutionary and temporary, improvised to meet the exigencies of the occasion which called it into being. As the revolution was no longer a mere policy of resistance ready to be abandoned when the British crown and parliament should yield to the demands of the colonies, but was to be prosecuted until independence should be recognized, a permanent organization must be substituted in the place of the one which had hitherto served to represent the people and to form the channel through which their national will was expressed. In the construction of this new government the separate state power triumphed over the national idea. Yet the latter was not entirely abandoned, nor was it, in fact, formally renounced. The people still remained one. They alone could decree

their own destruction, and such a suicidal act can never be established by implication; of all others it needs positive, direct proof.

Still it is true that in arranging the new Confederation, in allotting powers and functions to its government, the supremacy was conceded to the states, while the national authority was placed in a position of actual subordination. The states were assumed as the sources of power; they were represented as severally existing and as delegating a small portion of their attributes to the central agent, while they reserved a much larger share to themselves. But even in the midst of this partial abandonment of the idea with which the revolution was commenced, the general body politic was not stripped of all its insignia of nationality. It was still left as the only political society which could hold intercourse with other sovereignties, which was admitted into the family of

nations.

§ 59. On the 15th of November, 1777, Articles of Confederation, which from time to time had been discussed in the Continental Congress, were finally passed by that body and recommended to the several states for adoption. The states slowly followed the advice of Congress. All had ratified the instrument in 1778, except Delaware and Maryland. Delaware yielded in 1779, and Maryland in 1781.

§ 60. A recent writer describes the nature of the Confederation and the influences which led to it, in the following manner: "It is true, however, that this principle of one nationality thus embodied in our Declaration of Independence, was not clearly and consciously before the mind of the country at the time that declaration was made. The Union which was thus constituted was generally understood to be chiefly for mutual defence, which left the question between one or many sovereignties to be finally determined by future contingencies. Neither was it plain even to the national men of that day, either how much, or what sort of union was necessary to constitute a national government. Clear and adequate conceptions of what they were dimly striving to realize could not come in a moment, could not be other than the growth of years of effort. Also, the colonial, now the state, government were first in the field, in full organization and activity, with already more than a century of growth and consolidation, and they were intensely jealous of each other.

§ 61. From these causes it resulted that the state governments, seduced by the charms of separate independence and nationality, immediately assumed to exercise all those sovereign powers which had been reclaimed from the crown of Great Britain by an act of the people of all the states in the Union. And this assumption, although it was not so understood at the time, was, in its true character, an usurpation. Here we see that state sovereignty on this continent had its birth in a palpable usurpation, which has never been formally sanctioned by the people of a single state, much less by the people of all the states, which would have been necessary, after the Declaration of Independence, to legitimate it in any one of them.

[ocr errors]

§ 62. Having in this manner possessed themselves of sovereign powers, the states proceeded to delegate a portion of them to a confederated government under the celebrated Articles of Confederation. And here again we find the logic of usurpation ruling the whole procedure. For the states 1 See the Princeton Review for October 1861, p. 615. The article is from pen of J. H. McIlvaine, D. D., Prof. of Polit. Science, Coll. of N. J.

the

had no right, upon any theory of popular government, to form that Confederation. Whatever sovereign powers they now possessed they claimed at least to hold from the people, whose acquiescence in what, as we have seen, was at first an usurpation, did give it an informal validity. No other claim would have been tolerated for a moment. But it is evident that no government holding from the people, can have any right to alienate its sovereign powers in order to form another government. The powers which a government holds in trust from the people, it can have no right to resign into any other hands except those of the people themselves. The states had not more right to cede away the least of their sovereign powers, in order to form another government for the United States, than they had to abdicate the whole in favor of the British crown. The adoption of the Articles of Confederation by the states was an act of irresponsible power in the same line of procedure by which that power had been at first acquired.

§ 63. "The necessity for union, and the pressure of the national principle as embodied in the Declaration of Independence, were so strong that the Articles of Confederation could not represent simply and purely the idea of state sovereignty; and a very cursory examination of these articles in the light of contemporary discussions, reveals the fact that they recognize both of these hostile principles limiting, and, to a certain extent, neutralizing each other. In certain provisions it seems impossible not to recognize a decided representation of the principle of one nationality, and by no means a feeble tentative toward the formation of a national government. This attempt, however, was frustrated by the number and extent of the sovereign powers claimed as reserved to themselves by the states, and by them prohibited to the Confederacy; in which the principle of state sovereignty was represented as predominant."

§ 64. An examination of the most important features of the Articles of Confederation, will clearly show that the foregoing language is entirely correct. I shall first present a short abstract of the whole instrument, and shall then describe the general character of the government which it constitutes, and

ascertain and unfold the ideas which were embodied in this political fabric. This review will be of great assistance in the study of the present Constitution. Nothing can better indicate the nature of the existing organic law than the sharp contrasts between it and the Articles of Confederation.

§ 65. The Articles themselves purport to be made by the "Delegates of the United States of America in Congress assembled," and to be ratified by the delegates in virtue of power and authority for that purpose specially conferred upon them by the state legislatures, and are entitled "Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union between the States." The instrument establishes the following fundamental rules and stipulations for the government of the federation : — 1. That its name shall be the United States of America. 2. That each state retains its sovereignty and power which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled.

3. That the states severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other for their common defence and welfare.

4. That the free inhabitants of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges of free citizens in the several states; that no citizen of one state shall be subject to any restrictions upon trade and commerce in any other state which are not also imposed upon the citizens of the latter; that no duties shall be laid by any state upon the property of the United States; that fugitives from justice shall be given up, and full faith given to the records and judicial proceedings of every state.

5. That a congress of delegates shall be established in the following manner: Each year, every state shall appoint and maintain, in whatever manner it shall please, not less than two nor more than seven delegates, who shall meet yearly; but, in the congress thus constituted, each state shall be entitled to but one vote.

6. That no state, without the consent of the United States in Congress assembled, shall send or receive any ambassador; nor make any treaty with a foreign nation or with another state; nor lay any duty or impost which will interfere with

« PreviousContinue »