|
The Federalist No. 14
Objections to the Proposed Constitution From Extent of Territory Answered
New York Packet
Friday, November 30, 1787
[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 fellow citizens 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
|