Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Energetic Government


Sort of a guest post from the third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, taken from a letter to the fourth President of the United States, James Madison. I took the liberty of highlighting the bits I found relevant to these modern times in which we live.


Dear Sir                                                                                                              Paris Dec. 20. 1787.

My last to you was of Oct. 8 by the Count de Moustier. Yours  of July 18. Sep. 6. and Oct. 24. have been successively received, yesterday, the day before and three or four days before that. I have only had time to read the letters, the printed papers communicated with them, however interesting, being obliged to lie over till I finish my dispatches for the packet, which dispatches must go from hence the day after tomorrow. I have much to thank you for. First and most for the cyphered paragraph respecting myself. These little informations are very material towards forming my own decisions. I would be glad even to know when any individual member thinks I have gone wrong in any instance. If I know myself it would not excite ill blood in me, while it would assist to guide my conduct, perhaps to justify it, and to keep me to my duty, alert. I must thank you too for the information in Thos. Burke’s case, tho’ you will have found by a subsequent letter that I have asked of you a further investigation of that matter. It is to gratify the lady who is at the head of the Convent wherein my daughters are, and who, by her attachment and attention to them, lays me under great obligations. I shall hope therefore still to receive from you the result of the further enquiries my second letter had asked.—The parcel of rice which you informed me had miscarried accompanied my letter to the Delegates of S. Carolina. Mr. Bourgoin was to be the bearer of both and both were delivered together into the hands of his relation here who introduced him to me, and who at a subsequent moment undertook to convey them to Mr. Bourgoin. This person was an engraver particularly recommended to Dr. Franklin and Mr. Hopkinson. Perhaps he may have mislaid the little parcel of rice among his baggage.—I am much pleased that the sale of Western lands is so successful. I hope they will absorb all the Certificates of our Domestic debt speedily in the first place, and that then offered for cash they will do the same by our foreign one.

The season admitting only of operations in the Cabinet, and these being in a great measure secret, I have little to fill a letter. I will therefore make up the deficiency by adding a few words on the Constitution proposed by our Convention. I like much the general idea of framing a government which should go on of itself peaceably, without needing continual recurrence to the state legislatures. I like the organization of the government into Legislative, Judiciary and Executive. I like the power given the Legislature to levy taxes; and for that reason solely approve of the greater house being chosen by the people directly. For tho’ I think a house chosen by them will be very illy qualified to legislate for the Union, for  foreign nations &c. yet this evil does not weigh against the good of preserving inviolate the fundamental principle that the people are not to be taxed but by representatives chosen immediately by themselves. I am captivated by the compromise of the opposite claims of the great and little states, of the latter to equal, and the former to proportional influence. I am much pleased too with the substitution of the method of voting by persons, instead of that of voting by states: and I like the negative given to the Executive with a third of either house, though I should have liked it better had the Judiciary been associated for that purpose, or invested with a similar and separate power. There are other good things of less moment. I will now add what I do not like.

First the omission of a bill of rights providing clearly and without the aid of sophisms for freedom of religion, freedom of the press, protection against standing armies, restriction against monopolies, the eternal and unremitting force of the habeas corpus laws, and trials by jury in all matters of fact triable by the laws of the land and not by the law of Nations. To say, as Mr. Wilson does that a bill of rights was not necessary because all is reserved in the case of the general government which is not given, while in the particular ones all is given which is not reserved might do for the Audience to whom it was addressed, but is surely gratis dictum, opposed by strong inferences from the body of the instrument, as well as from the omission of the clause of our present confederation which had declared that in express terms. It was a hard conclusion to say because there has been no uniformity among the states as to the cases triable by jury, because some have been so incautious as to abandon this mode of trial, therefore the more prudent states shall be reduced to the same level of calamity. It would have been much more just and wise to have concluded the other way that as most of the states had judiciously preserved this palladium, those who had wandered should be brought back to it, and to have established general right instead of general wrong.

Let me add that a bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference. The second feature I dislike, and greatly dislike, is the abandonment in every instance of the necessity of rotation in office, and most particularly in the case of the President. Experience concurs with reason in concluding that the first magistrate will always be re-elected if the constitution permits it. He is then an officer for life. This once observed it becomes of so much consequence to  certain nations to have a friend or a foe at the head of our affairs that they will interfere with money and with arms. A Galloman or an Angloman will be supported by the nation he befriends. If once elected, and at a second or third election outvoted by one or two votes, he will pretend false votes, foul play, hold possession of the reins of government, be supported by the states voting for him, especially if they are the central ones lying in a compact body themselves and separating their opponents: and they will be aided by one nation of Europe, while the majority are aided by another.

The election of a President of America some years hence will be much more interesting to certain nations of Europe than ever the election of a king of Poland was. Reflect on all the instances in history antient and modern, of elective monarchies, and say if they do not give foundation for my fears, the Roman emperors, the popes, while they were of any importance, the German emperors till they became hereditary in practice, the kings of Poland, the Deys of the Ottoman dependancies. It may be said that if elections are to be attended with these disorders, the seldomer they are renewed the better. But experience shews that the only way to prevent disorder is to render them uninteresting by frequent changes. An incapacity to be elected a second time would have been the only effectual preventative. The power of removing him every fourth year by the vote of the people is a power which will not be exercised. The king of Poland is removeable every day by the Diet, yet he is never removed.—Smaller objections are the Appeal in fact as well as law, and the binding all persons Legislative, Executive and Judiciary by oath to maintain that constitution.

I do not pretend to decide what would be the best method of procuring the establishment of the manifold good things in this constitution, and of getting rid of the bad. Whether by adopting it in hopes of future amendment, or, after it has been duly weighed and canvassed by the people, after seeing the parts they generally dislike, and those they generally approve, to say to them ‘We see now what you wish. Send together your deputies again, let them frame a constitution for you omitting what you have condemned, and establishing the powers you approve. Even these will be a great addition to the energy of your government.’—At all events I hope you will not be discouraged from other trials, if the present one should fail of it’s full effect.—I have thus told you freely what I like and dislike: merely as a matter of curiosity for I know your own judgment has been formed on all these points after having heard every thing which  could be urged on them.

I own I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. The late rebellion in Massachusets has given more alarm than I think it should have done. Calculate that one rebellion in 13 states in the course of 11 years, is but one for each state in a century and a half. No country should be so long without one. Nor will any degree of power in the hands of government prevent insurrections. France with all it’s despotism, and two or three hundred thousand men always in arms has had three insurrections in the three years I have been here in every one of which greater numbers were engaged than in Massachusets and a great deal more blood was spilt. In Turkey, which Montesquieu supposes more despotic, insurrections are the events of every day. In England, where the hand of power is lighter than here, but heavier than with us they happen every half dozen years. Compare again the ferocious depredations of their insurgents with the order, the moderation and the almost self extinguishment of ours.—After all, it is my principle that the will of the Majority should always prevail. If they approve the proposed Convention in all it’s parts, I shall concur in it chearfully, in hopes that they will amend it whenever they shall find it work wrong.

I think our governments will remain virtuous for many centuries; as long as they are chiefly agricultural; and this will be as long as there shall be vacant lands in any part of America. When they get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, they will become corrupt as in Europe. Above all things I hope the education of the common people will be attended to; convinced that on their good sense we may rely with the most security for the preservation of a due degree of liberty. I have tired you by this time with my disquisitions and will therefore only add assurances of the sincerity of those sentiments of esteem and attachment with which I am Dear Sir your affectionate friend & servant,

Th: Jefferson


P.S. The instability of our laws is really an immense evil. I think it would be well to provide in our constitutions that there shall always be a twelvemonth between the ingrossing a bill and passing it: that it should then be offered to it’s passage without changing a word: and that if circumstances should be thought to require a speedier passage, it should take two thirds of both houses instead of a bare majority. (Source)


Energetic government, this constant cry of the need to "do something." In most, if not all, cases this perceived need would be better served by enforcing the laws already on the books. Not make new ones.

It is my considered opinion that the education of the "common people" is most certainly not being attended to, an ill-informed electorate makes bad, if not completely stupid choices. I think we're seeing both and have been seeing that for at least two decades, perhaps longer.

'Tis a sad state of affairs. I'm sure the Founding Fathers would be devastated.

Mr. Franklin, it appears we are unable to keep it.*

Sad, innit?





* “Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”
         “A Republic, if you can keep it.” - attributed to Ben Franklin

36 comments:

  1. Didn't know Jefferson had access to a time machine after reading this. Your first highlighted sentence, that went against the grain of how many monarchies across the world? Ya... all cultures are equal eh? How many other countries came up with a Constitution and Bill of Rights like ours? The next sentence dealt with term limits, how prescient. The quest for power and money is unraveling our Republic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I stumbled across that letter while researching ideas for a post. Thought President Jefferson's letter said it all. It touched on any number of topics which are applicable to today. A very smart man, we must work hard not to screw this up.

      Delete
    2. I'm in agreement with Nylon12. He had to have had a time machine. I thought the same thing about that paragraph. He's one of my favorite historical figures.

      Delete
    3. To bad he was abroad and not at the Constitution Convention. The document may have been a tad bit different.

      Delete
  2. Well, thanks for posting this. I mean this as a compliment, I learn more here by accident than by design elsewhere.... :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ah, someone with this country's best interests at heart, not their own. If only that were a test for emplacing those who would govern.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's very enlightening and informative to go back and read what was actually discussed and debated during the forming of the country. I dug up Madison's introduction of the Bill of Rights to Congress and the following discussions in convention to get a better handle on Second Amendment arguments. It couldn't have been made clearer that the Bill of Rights was and is a limit on goverment's actions against free citizens and the natural rights they brought with them when forming their government.

    /
    L.J.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The term "Bill of Rights" is something of a misnomer when you think about it. It's not what we, the people, can do, rather it's what the government cannot do.

      Delete
  5. Even so, by 1812, they fought the citizans on several occasions. Calling up malitias, to enforce federal rules over state rules and county rules. Er, whiskey rebellions. Still latter, to enforce states to adopt or segerate people's, and to choose a federal rule on voting, and taxes, er the great conflict of the states. And establishment of a standing army taking away the state armies ( malitias). Interesting on how it's carried out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If we, the people, don't stand up to them, the Feds will gradually take it all. (Or if they don't the individual states will. I'm looking at you California and Illinois.)

      Delete
  6. The men who created this bounty got to watch the crash of the ancien regime. When you think about it, the XYZ affair and the corsairs, it was a time of splendid isolation and we got the Quasi War. Look at how the states split back then and the creation of Maine and Vermont and Kentucky.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was an interesting period in history all around!

      Delete
  7. Here is an interesting source (sorta).

    I think their website may be in need of maintenance. Some of the links/interactive stuff doesn't work well, or at
    least I couldn't figure them out.

    http://www.rain.org/~karpeles/

    ReplyDelete
  8. At a dinner for Nobel laureates at the White House John Kennedy said I think this is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am sitting here in the formerly great state of Florida, where in one month we went from almost getting Constitutional Carry and lessening restrictions on where we can carry, to, well, almost Massachusetts. There is even a small undercurrent calling for a state income tax.

    One month.

    No one can tell me the response to that tragedy wasn't pre-planned and ready to go.

    And President Jefferson's words are never more relevant than now, as both states and federal government is grinding the 'mommy state' harder and harder down upon our necks. Our fore-fathers would never have put up with this level of oppression from their "betters."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No they would not, the drums would call the militia to the green and the next thing you know the smell of gunpowder would be in the air. Something will eventually have to give.

      Delete
  10. I'm reminded of a Beatle's Song. I thought Mr. Jefferson's talk about how often they happen was interesting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This part?
      You say you'll change the Constitution
      Well you know
      We all want to change your head


      There is so much of value in this letter that I had to include the whole thing. The man was prescient, or understood human nature far better than most.

      Delete
  11. The real genius, if you will, behind the legacy the Founding Fathers bequeathed us was less a fear of "energetic government" than a sober understanding of what human nature could do with unchecked power. Jefferson and his contemporaries successfully revolted against what history has later shown to be a relatively benign tyranny; a few years later Robespierre would demonstrate a tyranny that would have revolted George III (and it probably did). Fast forward a couple of centuries and Robespierre's "children" demonstrated what truly "energetic" governments could and would do--a trip in a time machine would have given Jefferson almost Lovecraftian nightmares. Our treatment of his legacy--almost as bad, sad to say....

    ReplyDelete
  12. What more can I say that I have not already written. It is my firm belief that this is the best blog going.

    Thanks for the post.
    Paul L. Quandt

    ReplyDelete
  13. In addition to all the obvious commentary regarding the letter's opinions on the Constitution, I noted this:
    "I have much to thank you for. First and most for the cyphered paragraph respecting myself. These little informations are very material towards forming my own decisions. I would be glad even to know when any individual member thinks I have gone wrong in any instance. If I know myself it would not excite ill blood in me, while it would assist to guide my conduct, perhaps to justify it, and to keep me to my duty, alert." [I wonder what the "cyphered" text said!]

    It is a very self-aware and confident person who seeks adverse criticism that he might do better at his task. Jefferson's request reminded me of this quote attributed to Thomas Becket, which I read long ago and have admired ever since:

    http://www.integratedcatholiclife.org/2016/12/daily-catholic-quote-from-st-thomas-becket-5/

    ReplyDelete
  14. When they get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, they will become corrupt as in Europe.

    He would be horrified to see 40 millions of people piled into giant Eastern Seaboard megalopolis stretching from DC to Boston!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup, far too crowded and it's the source of many bad ideas, same goes for the coast in California.

      Delete
  15. The election of a President of America some years hence will be much more interesting to certain nations of Europe than ever the election of a king of Poland was.

    the story of elective kings of Poland, and of the Sejm and liberum veto needs to be told too...
    Russians meddling in elections in really not new, btw. as Catherine the Great managed to sit one of her lovers onto Polish trhrone in 1700s... He did get too independent, tried to reform the state and partitions followed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Russian meddling is a very old story. It's what they do.

      Delete
  16. Russian meddeling? Never. Americans meddeling in others elections, never. It was a bit for tat.
    We hold the equivalent of a constitutional convention, every two years.and, like I say, I would bet on another convention doing what the "people" want. Or strengthen the laws that we already have. I would not bet on it. The so called elite, would settle all of us to servitude to their masters. And I don't bow down to the masters. I've seen how they treat others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Big powers meddle? Heaven forbid!

      The elite need to be careful, they're not very well-armed and depend heavily on their minions.

      Delete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)