October 13, 1787
Dear Sir,
Thus I have examined the federal constitution as far as a few days leisure would
permit. It opens to my mind a new scene; instead of seeing powers cautiously lodged in the
hands of numerous legislators, and many magistrates, we see all important powers
collecting in one center, where a few men will possess them almost at discretion. And
instead of checks in the formation of the government, to secure the rights of the people
against the usurpations of those they appoint to govern, we are to understand the equal
division of lands among our people, and the strong arm furnished them by nature and
situation, are to secure them against those usurpations. If there are advantages in the
equal division of our lands, and the strong and manly habits of our people, we ought to
establish governments calculated to give duration to them, and not governments which never
can work naturally, till that equality of property, and those free and manly habits shall
be destroyed; these evidently are not the natural basis of the proposed constitution. No
man of reflection, and skilled in the science of government, can suppose these will move
on harmoniously together for ages, or even for fifty years. As to the little circumstances
commented upon, by some writers, with applause--as the age of a representative, of the
president, &c.--they have, in my mind, no weight in the general tendency of the
system.
There are, however, in my opinion, many good things in the proposed system. It is
founded on elective principles, and the deposits of powers in different hands, is
essentially right. The guards against those evils we have experienced in some states in
legislation are valuable indeed; but the value of every feature in this system is vastly
lessened for the want of that one important feature in a free government, a representation
of the people. Because we have sometimes abused democracy, I am not among those men who
think a democratic branch a nuisance; which branch shall be sufficiently numerous to admit
some of the best informed men of each order in the community into the administration of
government.
While the radical defects in the proposed system are not so soon discovered, some
temptations to each state, and to many classes of men to adopt it, are very visible. It
uses the democratic language of several of the state constitutions, particularly that of
Massachusetts; the eastern states will receive advantages so far as the regulation of
trade, by a bare majority, is committed to it: Connecticut and New Jersey will receive
their share of a general impost: The middle states will receive the advantages surrounding
the seat of government; The southern states will receive protection, and have their
negroes represented in the legislature, and large back countries will soon have a majority
in it. This system promises a large field of employment to military gentlemen, and
gentlemen of the law; and in case the government shall be executed without convulsions, it
will afford security to creditors, to the clergy, salary-men and others depending on money
payments. So far as the system promises justice and reasonable advantages, in these
respects, it ought to be supported by all honest men; but whenever it promises unequal and
improper advantages to any particular states, or orders of men, it ought to be opposed.
I have, in the course of these letters observed, that there are many good things in the
proposed constitution, and I have endeavored to point out many important defects in it. I
have admitted that we want a federal system--that we have a system presented, which, with
several alterations may be made a tolerable good one--I have admitted there is a well
founded uneasiness among creditors and mercantile men. In this situation of things, you
ask me what I think ought to be done? My opinion in this case is only the opinion of an
individual, and so far only as it corresponds with the opinions of the honest and
substantial part of the community, is it entitled to consideration. Though I am fully
satisfied that the state conventions ought most seriously to direct their exertions to
altering and amending the system proposed before they shall adopt it--yet I have not
sufficiently examined the subject, or formed an opinion, how far it will be practicable
for those conventions to carry their amendments. As to the idea, that it will be in vain
for those conventions to attempt amendments, it cannot be admitted; it is impossible to
say whether they can or not until the attempt shall be made; and when it shall be
determined, by experience, that the conventions cannot agree in amendments, it will then
be an important question before the people of the United States, whether they will adopt
or not the system proposed in its present form. This subject of consolidating the states
is new: and because forty or fifty men have agreed in a system, to suppose the good sense
of this country, an enlightened nation, must adopt it without examination, and though in a
state of profound peace, without endeavoring to amend those parts they perceive are
defective, dangerous to freedom, and destructive of the valuable principles of republican
government--is truly humiliating. It is true there may be danger in delay; but there is
danger in adopting the system in its present form; and I see the danger in either case
will arise principally from the conduct and views of two very unprincipled parties in the
United States--two fires, between which the honest and substantial people have long found
themselves situated. One party is composed of little insurgents, men in debt, who want no
law, and who want a share of the property of others; these are called levellers, Shayites,
&c. The other party is composed of a few, but more dangerous men, with their servile
dependents; these avariciously grasp at all power and property; you may discover in all
the actions of these men, an evident dislike to free and equal government, and they will
go systematically to work to change, essentially, the forms of government in this country;
these are called aristocrats, m-----ites, &c. &c. Between these two parties is the
weight of the community; the men of middling property, men not in debt on the one hand,
and men, on the other, content with republican governments, and not aiming at immense
fortunes, offices, and power. In 1786, the little insurgents, the levellers, came forth,
invaded the rights of others, and attempted to establish governments according to their
wills. Their movements evidently gave encouragement to the other party, which, in 1787,
has taken the political field, and with its fashionable dependents, and the tongue and the
pen, is endeavoring to establish in a great haste, a politer kind of government. These two
parties, which will probably be opposed or united as it may suit their interests and
views, are really insignificant, compared with the solid, free, and independent part of
the community. It is not my intention to suggest, that either of these parties, and the
real friends of the proposed constitution, are the same men. The fact is, these
aristocrats support and hasten the adoption of the proposed constitution, merely because
they think it is a stepping stone to their favorite object. I think I am well founded in
this idea; I think the general politics of these men support it, as well as the common
observation among them, That the proffered plan is the best that can be got at present, it
will do for a few years, and lead to something better. The sensible and judicious part of
the community will carefully weigh all these circumstances; they will view the late
convention as a respectable body of men--America probably never will see an assembly of
men, of a like number, more respectable. But the members of the convention met without
knowing the sentiments of one man in ten thousand in these states respecting the new
ground taken. Their doings are but the first attempts in the most important scene ever
opened. Though each individual in the state conventions will not, probably, be so
respectable as each individual in the federal convention, yet as the state conventions
will probably consist of fifteen hundred or two thousand men of abilities, and versed in
the science of government, collected from all parts of the community and from all orders
of men, it must be acknowledged that the weight of respectability will be in them--In them
will be collected the solid sense and the real political character of the country, Being
revisers of the subject, they will possess peculiar advantages. To say that these
conventions ought not to attempt, coolly and deliberately, the revision of the system, or
that they cannot amend it, is very foolish or very assuming. If these conventions, after
examining the system, adopt it, I shall be perfectly satisfied, and wish to see men make
the administration of the government an equal blessing to all orders of men. I believe the
great body of our people to be virtuous and friendly to good government, to the protection
of liberty and property; and it is the duty of all good men, especially of those who are
placed as sentinels to guard their rights--it is their duty to examine into the prevailing
politics of parties, and to disclose them-- while they avoid exciting undue suspicions, to
lay facts before the people, which will enable them to form a proper judgment. Men who
wish the people of this country to determine for themselves, and deliberately to fit the
government to their situation, must feel some degree of indignation at those attempts to
hurry the adoption of a system, and to shut the door against examination. The very
attempts create suspicions, that those who make them have secret views, or see some
defects in the system, which, in the hurry of affairs, they expect will escape the eye of
a free people.
What can be the views of those gentlemen in Pennsylvania, who precipitated decisions on
this subject? What can be the views of those gentlemen in Boston, who countenanced the
Printers in shutting up the press against a fair and free investigation of this important
system in the usual way. The members of the convention have done their duty--why should
some of them fly to their states--almost forget a propriety of behavior, and precipitate
measures for the adoption of a system of their own making? I confess candidly, when I
consider these circumstances in connection with the unguarded parts of the system I have
mentioned, I feel disposed to proceed with very great caution, and to pay more attention
than usual to the conduct of particular characters. If the constitution presented be a
good one, it will stand the test with a well informed people: all are agreed that there
shall be state conventions to examine it; and we must believe it will be adopted, unless
we suppose it is a bad one, or that those conventions will make false divisions respecting
it. I admit improper measures are taken against the adoption of the system as well for
it--all who object to the plan proposed ought to point out the defects objected to, and to
propose those amendments with which they can accept it, or to propose some other system of
government, that the public mind may be known, and that we may be brought to agree in some
system of government, to strengthen and execute the present, or to provide a substitute. I
consider the field of enquiry just opened, and that we are to look to the state
conventions for ultimate decisions on the subject before us; it is not to be presumed,
that they will differ about small amendments, and lose a system when they shall have made
it substantially good; but touching the essential amendments, it is to be presumed the
several conventions will pursue the most rational measures to agree in and obtain them;
and such defects as they shall discover and not remove, they will probably notice, keep
them in view as the ground work of future amendments, and in the firm and manly language
which every free people ought to use, will suggest to those who may hereafter administer
the government, that it is their expectation, that the system will be so organized by
legislative acts, and the government so administered, as to render those defects as I
little injurious as possible. Our countrymen are entitled to an honest and faithful
government; to a government of laws and not of men; and also to one of their choosing--as
a citizen of the country, I wish to see these objects secured, and licentious, assuming,
and overbearing men restrained; if the constitution or social compact be vague and
unguarded, then we depend wholly upon the prudence, wisdom and moderation of those who
manage the affairs of government; or on what, probably, is equally uncertain and
precarious, the success of the people oppressed by the abuse of government, in receiving
it from the hands of those who abuse it, and placing it in the hands of those who will use
it well.
In every point of view, therefore, in which I have been able, as yet, to contemplate
this subject, I can discern but one rational mode of proceeding relative to it: and that
is to examine it with freedom and candor, to have state conventions some months hence,
which shall examine coolly every article, clause, and word in the system proposed, and to
adopt it with such amendments as they shall think fit. How far the state conventions ought
to pursue the mode prescribed by the federal convention of adopting or rejecting the plan
in toto, I leave it to them to determine. Our examination of the subject hitherto has been
rather of a general nature. The republican characters in the several states, who wish to
make this plan more adequate to security of liberty and property, and to the duration of
the principles of a free government, will, no doubt, collect their opinions to certain
points, and accurately define those alterations and amendments they wish; if it shall be
found they essentially disagree in them, the conventions will then be able to determine
whether to adopt the plan as it is, or what will be proper to be done.
Under these impressions, and keeping in view the improper and unadvisable lodgment of
powers in the general government, organized as it at present is, touching internal taxes,
armies and militia, the elections of its own members, causes between citizens of different
states, &c. and the want of a more perfect bill of rights, &c. I drop the subject
for the present, and when I shall have leisure to revise and correct my ideas respecting
it, and to collect into points the opinions of those who wish to make the system more
secure and safe, perhaps I may proceed to point out particularly for your consideration,
the amendments which ought to be ingrafted into this system, not only in conformity to my
own, but the deliberate opinions of others--you will with me perceive, that the objections
to the plan proposed may, by a more leisure examination be set in a stronger point of
view, especially the important one, that there is no substantial representation of the
people provided for in a government in which the most essential powers, even as to the
internal police of the country, is proposed to be lodged.
I think the honest and substantial part of the community will wish to see this system
altered, permanency and consistency given to the constitution we shall adopt; and
therefore they will be anxious to apportion the powers to the features and organizations
of the government, and to see abuse in the exercise of power more effectually guarded
against. It is suggested, that state officers, from interested motives will oppose the
constitution presented--I see no reason for this, their places in general will not be
effected, but new openings to offices and places of profit must evidently be made by the
adoption of the constitution in its present form.
Your's, &c.
THE FEDERAL FARMER.
To the REPUBLICAN.