POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

What we are not talking about already elsewhere
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Speeches in the Connecticut Convention

by James Wadsworth & Oliver Ellsworth

January 07, 1788

Mr. Ellsworth, concluded ...

Still however, if the united states and the individual states will quarrel, if they want to fight, they may do it, and no frame of government can possibly prevent it.

It is sufficient for this constitution, that, so far from laying them under a necessity of contending, it provides every reasonable check against it.

But perhaps at some time or other there will be a contest, the states may rise against the general government.


If this does take place, if all the states combine, if all oppose, the whole will not eat up the members, but the measure which is opposed to the sense of the people, will prove abortive.

In republics, it is a fundamental principle, that the majority govern, and that the minority comply with the general voice.

How contrary then to republican principles, how humiliating is our present situation.

A single state can rise up, and put a veto upon the most important public measures.


We have seen this actually take place, a single state has controuled the general voice of the union, a minority, a very small minority has governed us.

So far is this from being consistent with republican principles, that it is in effect the worst species of monarchy.

Hence we see, how necessary for the union is a coercive principle.

No man pretends the contrary.

We all see and feel this necessity.

The only question is, shall it be a coercion of Law, or a coercion of arms.

There is no other possible alternative.

Where will those who oppose a coercion of Law, come out?

Where will they end?

A necessary consequence of their principles is a war of the States one against another.

I am for coercion by Law, that coercion which acts only upon delinquent individuals.

This constitution does not attempt to coerce sovereign bodies, States in their political capacity.

No coercion is applicable to such bodies, but that of an armed force.

If we should attempt to execute the Laws of the Union by sending an armed force against a delinquent State, it would involve the good and bad, the innocent and guilty, in the same calamity.

But this legal coercion singles out the guilty individual, and punishes him for breaking the Laws of the union.

All men will see the reasonableness of this, they will acquiesce, and say, let the guilty suffer.

How have the morals of the people been depraved for the want of an efficient government which might establish justice and righteousness.

For the want of this, iniquity has come in upon us like an overflowing flood.

If we wish to prevent this alarming evil, if we wish to protect the good citizen in his right, we must lift up the standard of justice, we must establish a national government, to be enforced by the equal decisions of Law, and the peaceable arm of the magistrate.
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Resolutions of the Tradesmen of Boston

January 07, 1788

Agreeably to an advertisement inserted in the papers of this day, the TRADESMEN of this town met at Mason’s-Hall, Green Dragon, at 6 o’clock, P. M. when JOHN LUCAS, Esq. was chosen Moderator, and after some discussion, the Moderator, Paul Revere, Esq. and Mr. Benjamin Russell, were chosen to draft certain resolutions expressive of the sense of this Body.

The Committee, after having retired, returned, and reported the following — which, being read, was unanimously adopted, and voted to be printed in the several public papers, viz.

—Preamble.—

WHEREAS some persons, intending to injure the reputation of the tradesmen of this town, have asserted, that they were unfriendly and adverse to the adoption of the constitution of the United States of America, as proposed on the 17th September last, by the Convention of the United States assembled in Philadelphia: Therefore, to manifest the falsehood of such assertions, and to discover to the world our sentiments of the proposed frame of government,

—Resolutions.—

Be it RESOLVED,

1. THAT such assertions are false and groundless, and it is the sense of this body, that all those, who propagate such reports, have no other view than the injury of our reputation, or the attainment of their own wicked purposes, on base and false grounds.

2. THAT, in the judgment of this body, the proposed frame of government, is well calculated to secure the liberties, protect the property, and guard the rights of the citizens of America; and it is our warmest wish and prayer that the same should be adopted by this commonwealth.

3. THAT, it is our opinion, if said constitution should be adopted by the United States of America, trade and navigation will revive and increase, employ and subsistence will be afforded to many of our townsmen, who are now suffering from want of the necessaries of life; that it will promote industry and morality; render us respectable as a nation; and procure us all the blessings to which we are entitled from the natural wealth of our country, our capacity for improvement, from our industry, our freedom and independence.

4. THAT it is the sense of this body, that if the proposed frame of government should be rejected, the small remains of commerce yet left us, will be annihilated, the various trades and handicrafts dependent thereon, must decay; our poor will be increased, and many of our worthy and skilful mechanicks compelled to seek employ and subsistence in strange lands.

5. THAT, in the late election of delegates to represent this town in Convention, it was our design, and the opinion of this body, the design of every good man in town, to elect such men, and such only, as would exert their utmost ability to promote the adoption of the proposed frame of government in all its parts, without any conditions, pretended amendments, or alterations whatever: and that such, and such only, will truly represent the feelings, wishes, and desires of their constituents: and if any of the delegates of this town should oppose the adoption of said frame of government in gross, or under pretence of making amendments, or alterations of any kind, or of annexing conditions to their acceptance, such delegate or delegates will act contrary to the best interests, the strongest feelings, and warmest wishes of the Tradesmen of the town of Boston.

JOHN LUCAS, Per order.
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Agrippa XI

January 08, 1788

To the People.

My last Address contained the outlines of a system fully adequate to all the useful purposes of the union.

Its object is to raise a sufficient revenue from the foreign trade, and the sale of our publick lands, to satisfy all the publick exigencies, and to encourage, at the same time, our internal industry and manufactures.

It also secures each state in its own separate rights, while the continental concerns are thrown into the general department.

The only deficiencies that I have been able to discover in the plan, and in the view of federalists they are very great ones, are, that it does not allow the interference of Congress in the domestick concerns of the state, and that it does not render our national councils so liable to foreign influence.

The first of these articles tends to guard us from that infinite multiplication of officers which the report of the Convention of Philadelphia proposes.

With regard to the second, it is evidently not of much importance to any foreign nation to purchase, at a very high price, a majority of votes in an assembly, whose members are continually exposed to a recall.

But give those members a right to sit six, or even two, years, with such extensive powers as the new system proposes, and their friendship will be well worth a purchase.


This is the only sense in which the Philadelphia system will render us more respectable in the eyes of foreigners.

In every other view they lose their respect for us, as it will render us more like their own degraded models.

It is a maxim with them, that every man has his price.

If, therefore we were to judge of what passes in the hearts of the federalists when they urge us, as they continually do, to be like other nations, and when they assign mercenary motives to the opposers of their plan, we should conclude very fairly, that themselves wish to be provided for at the publick expense.


However that may be, if we look upon the men we shall find some of their leaders to have formed pretty strong attachments to foreign nations.

Whether those attachments arose from their being educated under a royal government, from a former unfortunate mistake in politicks, or from the agencies for foreigners, or any other cause, is not in my province to determine.

But certain it is. that some of the principal fomenters of this plan have never shewn themselves capable of that generous system of policy which is founded in the affections of freemen.

Power and high life are their idols, and national funds are necessary to support them.


Some of the principal powers of Europe have already entered into treaties with us, and that some of the rest have not done it, is not owing, as is falsely pretended, to the want of power in Congress.

Holland never found any difficulty of this kind from the multitude of sovereignties in that country, which must all be consulted on such an occasion.

The resentment of Great Britain for our victories in the late war has induced that power to restrain our intercourse with their subjects.

Probably an hope, the only solace of the wretched, that their affairs would take a more favourable turn on this continent, has had some influence on their proceedings.

All their restrictions have answered the end of securing our independence by driving us into many valuable manufactures.

Their own colonies in the mean time have languished for want of an intercourse with these states.

The new settlement in Nova Scotia has miserably decayed, and the West India Islands have suffered for want of our supplies, and by the loss of our market.

This has affected the revenue; and however contemptuously some men may affect to speak of our trade, the supply of six millions of people is an object worth the attention of any nation upon earth.

Interest in such a nation as Britain will surmount their resentment.

However their pride may be stung, they will pursue after wealth.

Increase of revenue to a nation overwhelmed with a debt of near two hundred and ninety millions sterling is an object to which little piques must give way; and there is no doubt that their interest consists in securing as much of our trade as they can.

These are topicks from which are drawn some of the most plausible reasons that have been given by the federalists in favour of their plan, as derived from the sentiments of foreigners.

We have weighed them and found them wanting.

That they had not themselves full confidence in their own reasons at Philadelphia is evident from the method they took to bias the state Convention.

Mess’rs Wilson and M’Kean, two Scottish names, were repeatedly worsted in the argument.

To make amends for their own incapacity, the gallery was filled with a rabble, who shouted their applause, and these heroes of aristocracy were not ashamed, though modesty is their national virtue, to vindicate such a violation of decency: Means not less criminal, but not so flagrantly indecent, have been frequently mentioned among us to secure a majority.

But those who vote for a price, can never sanctify wrong, and treason will still retain its deformity.

Agrippa.
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Genuine Information IV

by Luther Martin

January 08, 1788

Mr. MARTIN’S Information to the House of Assembly, continued.

It has been observed, Mr. Speaker, by my honorable colleagues, that the debate respecting the mode of representation, was productive of considerable warmth; this observation is true; but, Sir, it is equally true, that if we could have tamely and servilely consented to be bound in chains, and meanly condescended to assist in riveting them fast, we might have avoided all that warmth, and have proceeded with as much calmness and coolness as any stoick could have wished.

Having thus, Sir, given the honorable members of this house, a short history of some interesting parts of our proceedings, I shall beg leave to take up the system published by the convention, and shall request your indulgence, while I make some observations on different parts of it, and give you such further information as may be in my power.

(Here Mr. Martin read the first section of the first article, and then proceeded.)

With respect to this part of the system, Mr. Speaker, there was a diversity of sentiment; those who were for two branches in the legislature, a house of representatives and a senate, urged the necessity of a second branch to serve as a check upon the first, and used all those trite and common place arguments which are proper and just, when applied to the formation of a State government over individuals variously distinguished in their habits and manners, fortune and rank; where a body chosen in a select manner, respectable for their wealth and dignity, may be necessary, frequently to prevent the hasty and rash measures of a representation more popular; but on the other side it was urged, that none of these arguments could with propriety be applied to the formation of a federal government over a number of independent States.

That it is the State governments which are to watch over and protect the rights of the individual, whether rich or poor, or of moderate circumstances, and in which the democratic and aristocratic influence or principles are to be so blended, modified, and checked as to prevent oppression and injury.

That the federal government is to guard and protect the States and their rights, and to regulate their common concerns.

That a federal government is formed by the States, as States that is in their sovereign capacities, in the same manner as treaties and alliances are formed.

That sovereignties considered as such, cannot be said to have jarring interests or principles, the one aristocratic, and the other democratic; but that the principles of a sovereignty considered as a sovereignty, are the same, whether that sovereignty is monarchical, aristocratical, democratical, or mixed.

That the history of mankind doth not furnish an instance from its earliest period to the present time, of a federal government constituted of two distinct branches.

That the members of the federal government, if appointed by the States in their State capacities, that is by their legislatures, as they ought, would be select in their choice, and coming from different States, having different interests and views; this difference of interests and views, would always be a sufficient check over the whole; and it was shewn, that even Adams, who, the reviewers have justly observed, appears to be as fond of checks and balances as Lord Chesterfield of the graces, even he declares that a council consisting of one branch has always been found sufficient in a federal government.

TO BE CONTINUED ...
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Genuine Information IV

by Luther Martin

January 08, 1788

Mr. MARTIN’S Information to the House of Assembly, continued.

It was urged, that the government we were forming was not in reality a federal but a national government, not founded on the principles of the preservation, but the abolition or consolidation of all State governments.

That we appeared totally to have forgot the business for which we were sent, and the situation of the country for which we were preparing our system.

That we had not been sent to form a government over the inhabitants of America, considered as individuals, that as individuals they were all subject to their respective State governments, which governments would still remain, though the federal government was dissolved.


That the system of government we were entrusted to prepare, was a government over these thirteen States; but that in our proceedings, we adopted principles which would be right and proper, only on the supposition that there were no State governments at all, but that all the inhabitants of this extensive continent were in their individual capacity, without government and in a state of nature.

That accordingly the system proposes the legislature to consist of two branches, the one to be drawn from the people at large, immediately in their individual capacity — the other to be chose in a more select manner, as a check upon the first.

It is in its very introduction declared to be a compact between the people of the United States as individuals — and it is to be ratified by the people at large in their capacity as individuals; all which it was said, would be quite right and proper, if there were no State governments, if all the people of this continent were in a state of nature, and we were forming one national government for them as individuals, and is nearly the same as was done in most of the States, when they formed their governments over the people who compose them.

Whereas it was urged, that the principles on which a federal government over States ought to be constructed and ratified are the reverse — that instead of the legislature consisting of two branches, one branch was sufficient, whether examined by the dictates of reason or the experience of ages.

That the representation instead of being drawn from the people at large, as individuals, ought to be drawn from the States as States in their sovereign capacity.

That in a federal government, the parties to the compact are not the people as individuals, but the States as States, and that it is by the States as States in their sovereign capacity, that the system of government ought to be ratified, and not by the people as individuals.

TO BE CONTINUED ...
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Genuine Information IV

by Luther Martin

January 08, 1788

Mr. MARTIN’S Information to the House of Assembly, continued.

It was further said, that in a federal government over States equally free, sovereign and independent, every State ought to have an equal share in making the federal laws or regulations — in deciding upon them, and in carrying them into execution, neither of which was the case in this system, but the reverse, the States not having an equal voice in the legislature, nor in the appointment of the executive, the judges, and the other officers of government.

It was insisted, that in the whole system there was but one federal feature — the appointment of the senators by the States in their sovereign capacity, that is by their legislatures, and the equality of suffrage in that branch; but it was said that this feature was only federal in appearance.

To prove this, and that the Senate as constituted could not be a security for the protection and preservation of the State governments, and that the senators could not be justly considered the representatives of the States as States, it was observed, that upon just principles of representation, the representative ought to speak the sentiments of his constituents, and ought to vote in the same manner that his constituents would do (as far as he can judge) provided his constituents were acting in person, and had the same knowledge and information with himself; and therefore that the representative ought to be dependant on his constituents, and answerable to them — that the connection between the representative and the represented, ought to be as near and as close as possible; according to these principles, Mr. Speaker, in this State it is provided by its constitution, that the representatives in Congress, shall be chosen annually, shall be paid by the State, and shall be subject to recall even within the year; so cautiously has our constitution guarded against an abuse of the trust reposed in our representatives in the federal government; whereas by the third and sixth sections of the first article of this new system, the senators are to be chosen for six years instead of being chosen annually; instead of being paid by their States who send them, they in conjunction with the other branch, are to pay themselves out of the treasury of the United States; and are not liable to be recalled during the period for which they are chosen.

Thus, Sir, for six years the senators are rendered totally and absolutely independent of their States, of whom they ought to be the representatives, without any bond or tie between them.

During that time they may join in measures ruinous and destructive to their States, even such as should totally annihilate their State governments, and their States cannot recall them, nor exercise any controul over them.

Another consideration, Mr. Speaker, it was thought ought to have great weight to prove that the smaller States cannot depend on the senate for the preservation of their rights, either against large and ambitious States, or against an ambitious, aspiring President.

The senate, Sir, is so constituted, that they are not only to compose one branch of the legislature, but by the second section of the second article, they are to compose a privy council for the President; hence it will be necessary, that they should be, in a great measure, a permanent body, constantly residing at the seat of government.


Seventy years is estimated for the life of a man; it can hardly be supposed, that a senator, especially from the States remote from the seat of empire, will accept of an appointment which must estrange him for six years from his State, without giving up to a great degree his prospects in his own State.

If he has a family, he will take his family with him to the place where the government shall be fixed, that will become his home, and there is every reason to expect that his future views and prospects will centre in the favours and emoluments either of the general government, or of the government of that State where the seat of empire is established.

In either case, he is lost to his own State.

If he places his future prospects in the favours and emoluments of the general government, he will become the dependant and creature of the President, as the system enables a senator to be appointed to offices, and without the nomination of the President, no appointment can take place; as such, he will favour the wishes of the President, and concur in his measures, who, if he has no ambitious views of his own to gratify, may be too favourable to the ambitious views of the large States, who will have an undue share in his original appointment, and on whom he will be more dependant afterwards than on the States which are smaller.

If the senator places his future prospects in that State where the seat of empire is fixed; from that time he will be in every question wherein its particular interest may be concerned the representative of that State, not of his own.

TO BE CONTINUED ...
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Genuine Information IV

by Luther Martin

January 08, 1788

Mr. MARTIN’S Information to the House of Assembly, continued.

But even this provision apparently for the security of the State governments, inadequate as it is, is entirely left at the mercy of the general government, for by the fourth section of the first article, it is expressly provided, that the Congress shall have a power to make and alter all regulations concerning the time and manner of holding elections for senators; a provision, expressly looking forward to, and I have no doubt designed for the utter extinction and abolition of all State governments; nor will this, I believe, be doubted by any person, when I inform you that some of the warm advocates and patrons of the system in convention, strenuously opposed the choice of the senators by the State legislatures, insisting that the State governments ought not to be introduced in any manner so as to be component parts of, or instruments for carrying into execution, the general government.

Nay, so far were the friends of the system from pretending that they meant it or considered it as a federal system, that on the question being proposed, “that a union of the States, merely federal, out to be the sole object of the exercise of the powers vested in the convention;” it was negatived by a majority of the members, and it was resolved, “that a national government ought to be formed” — afterwards the word “national” was struck out by them, because they thought the word might tend to alarm — and although now, they who advocate the system, pretend to call themselves federalists, in convention the distinction was just the reverse; those who opposed the system, were there considered and stiled the federal party, those who advocated it, the antifederal.

TO BE CONTINUED ...
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Genuine Information IV

by Luther Martin

January 08, 1788

Mr. MARTIN’S Information to the House of Assembly, concluded ...

Viewing it as a national, not a federal government, as calculated and designed not to protect and preserve, but to abolish and annihilate the State governments, it was opposed for the following reasons.

It was said that this continent was much too extensive for one national government, which should have sufficient power and energy to pervade and hold in obedience and subjection all its parts, consistent with the enjoyment and preservation of liberty.

That the genius and habits of the people of America, were opposed to such a government.

That during their connection with Great—Britain, they had been accustomed to have all their concerns transacted within a narrow circle, their colonial districts — they had been accustomed to have their seats of government near them, to which they might have access, without much inconvenience when their business should require it.

That at this time we find if a county is rather large, the people complain of the inconvenience, and clamour for a division of their county, or for a removal of the place where their courts are held, so as to render it more central and convenient.

That in those States, the territory of which is extensive, as soon as the population encreases remote from the seat of government, the inhabitants are urgent for a removal of the seat of their government, or to be erected into a new State.

As a proof of this, the inhabitants of the western parts of Virginia and North—Carolina, of Vermont and the province of Main, were instances, even the inhabitants of the western parts of Pennsylvania, who it was said already seriously look forward to the time when they shall either be erected into a new State, or have their seat of government removed to the Susquehannah.

If the inhabitants of the different States consider it as a grievance to attend a county—court or the seat of their own government, when a little inconvenient, can it be supposed they would ever submit to have a national government established, the seat of which would be more than a thousand miles removed from some of them?

It was insisted that governments of a republican nature, are those best calculated to preserve the freedom and happiness of the citizen.

That governments of this kind, are only calculated for a territory but small in its extent.

That the only method by which an extensive continent like America could be connected and united together consistent with the principles of freedom, must be by having a number of strong and energetic State governments for securing and protecting the rights of the individuals forming those governments, and for regulating all their concerns; and a strong energetic federal government over those States for the protection and preservation, and for regulating the common concerns of the States.

It was further insisted, that even if it was possible to effect a total abolition of the State governments at this time, and to establish one general government over the people of America, it could not long subsist, but in a little time would again be broken into a variety of governments of a smaller extent, similar in some manner to the present situation of this continent; the principal difference in all probability would be that the governments, so established, being effected by some violent convulsion, might not be formed on principles so favourable to liberty as those of our present State governments.

That this ought to be an important consideration to such of the States who had excellent governments, which was the case with Maryland and most others, whatever it might be to persons who disapproving of their particular State government would be willing to hazard every thing to overturn and destroy it.

These reasons, Sir, influenced me to vote against two branches in the legislature, and against every part of the system which was repugnant to the principles of a federal government.

Nor was there a single argument urged, or reason assigned, which to my mind was satisfactory, to prove that a good government on federal principles was unattainable, the whole of their arguments only proving, what none of us controverted, that our federal government as originally formed was defective and wanted amendment.

However, a majority of the convention hastily and inconsiderately, without condescending to make a fair trial, in their great wisdom, decided that a kind of government which a Montesquieu and a Price have declared the best calculated of any to preserve internal liberty, and to enjoy external strength and security, and the only one by which a large continent can be connected and united consistent with the principles of liberty was totally impracticable, and they acted accordingly.

(To be continued.)
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Centinel IX

by Centinel & Samuel Bryan

January 08, 1788

To THE PEOPLE OF PENNSYLVANIA.

Fellow Citizens, You have the peculiar felicity of living under the most perfect system of local government in the world; prize then this invaluable blessing as it deserves.

Suffer it not to be wrested from you, and the scourge of despotic power substituted in its place, under the specious pretence of vesting the general government of the United States with necessary power; that this would be the inevitable consequence of the establishment of the new constitution, the least consideration of its nature and tendency is sufficient to convince every unprejudiced mind.

If you were sufficiently impressed with your present favored situation, I should have no doubt of a proper dicision of the question in discussion.

The highest illustration of the excellence of the constitution of this commonwealth, is, that from its first establishment, the ambitious and profligate have been united in a constant conspiracy to destroy it; so sensible are they that it is their great enemy, that it is the great palladium of equal liberty, and the property of the people from the rapacious hand of power.

The annals of mankind do not furnish a more glorious instance of the triumph of patriotism over the lust of ambition aided by most of the wealth of the state.


The few generally prevail over the many by uniformity of council, unremitted and persevering exertion, and superior information and address; but in Pennsylvania the reverse has happened; here the well—born have been baffled in all their efforts to prostrate the altar of liberty for the purpose of substituting their own insolent sway that would degrade the freemen of this state into servile dependence upon the lordly and great.

However, it is not the nature of ambition to be discouraged; it is ever ready to improve the first opportunity to rear its baneful head and with irritated fury to wreak its vengeance on the votaries of liberty.

The present conspiracy is a continental exertion of the well born of America to obtain that darling domination, which they have not been able to accomplish in their respective states.

Of what complexion were the deputies of this state in the general convention?

Six out of eight were the inveterate enemies of our inestimable constitution, and the principals of that faction that for ten years past have kept the people in continual alarm for their liberties.

Who are the advocates of the new constitution in this state?

They consist of the same faction, with the addition of a few deluded well—meaning men, but whose number is daily lessening.

These conspirators have come forward at a most favorable conjuncture, when the state of public affairs has lulled all jealousy of power.

Emboldened by the sanction of the august name of a Washington, that they have prostituted to their purpose, they have presumed to overleap the usual gradations to absolute power, and have attempted to seize at once upon the supremacy of dominion.

The new instrument of government does indeed make a fallacious parade of some remaining privileges, and insults the understandings of the people with the semblance of liberty in some of its artful and deceptive clauses: which form but a flimsy veil over the reality of tyranny, so weakly endeavored to be concealed from the eye of freedom.

For, of what avail are the few inadequate stipulations in favor of the rights of the people, when they may be effectually counteracted and destroyed by virtue of other clauses; when these enable the rulers to renounce all dependence on their constituents, and render the latter tenants at will of every concern?


The new constitution is in fact a carte blanche, a surrender at discretion to the will and pleasure of our rulers: as this has been demonstrated to be the case, by the investigation and discussion that have taken place, I trust the same good sense and spirit which have hitherto enabled the people to triumph over the wiles of ambition, will be again exerted for their salvation.

The accounts from various parts of the country correspond with my warmest hopes, and justify my early predictions of the eventual defeat of this scheme of power and office making.

TO BE CONTINUED ...
thelivyjr
Site Admin
Posts: 54660
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 1:40 p

Re: POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICA

Post by thelivyjr »

Centinel IX, continued ...

by Centinel & Samuel Bryan

January 08, 1788

To THE PEOPLE OF PENNSYLVANIA.

The genius of liberty has sounded the alarm, and the dormant spirit of her votaries is reviving with enthusiastic ardor; the like unanimity which formerly distinguished them in their conflict with foreign despots, promises to crown their virtuous opposition on the present occasion, with signal success.

The structure of despotism that has been reared in this state, upon deception and surprise, will vanish like the baseless fabric of a dream and leave not a trace behind.

The parasites and tools of power in Northampton county ought to take warning from the fate of the Carlisle junto, lest like them, they experience the resentment of an injured people.

I would advise them not to repeat the imposition of a set of fallacious resolutions as the sense of that county, when in fact, it was the act of a despicable few, with Alexander Paterson at their head, whose achievements at Wyoming, as the meaner instrument of unfeeling avarice, have rendered infamously notorious; but yet, like the election of a Mr. Sedgwick for the little town of Stockbridge, which has been adduced as evidence of the unanimity of the western counties of Massachusetts state in favor of the new constitution, when the fact is far otherwise, this act of a few individuals will be sounded forth over the continent as a testimony of the zealous attachment of the county of Northampton to the new constitution.

By such wretched and momentary deceptions do these harpies of power endeavor to give the complexion of strength to their cause.

To prevent the detection of such impositions, to prevent the reflection of the rays of light from state to state, which, producing general illumination, would dissipate the mist of deception, and thereby prove fatal to the new constitution, all intercourse between the patriots of America is as far as possible cut off; whilst on the other hand, the conspirators have the most exact information, a common concert is every where evident, they move in unison.

There is so much mystery in the conduct of these men, such systematic deception, and fraud characterises all their measures, such extraordinary solicitude shewn by them to precipitate and surprise the people into a blind and implicit adoption of this government, that it ought to excite the most alarming apprehensions in the minds of all those who think their privileges, property and welfare worth securing.

TO BE CONTINUED ...
Post Reply