of the American union. "These debts are to be paid," they said, "first to an ally, who to his arms has added the succours of his treasury, and who to his important loans has added liberal donations, the King of France; in the second place to individuals in a foreign country, who were the first to give so precious a token of their confidence in our justice. Another class of creditors is that illustrious and patriotic band of fellow citizens whose blood and whose bravery have defended the liberties of their country, who have patiently borne, among other distresses, the privation of their stipends, while the distresses of their country disabled it from bestowing them, and who even now ask only for such security for the residue of their claims as their country is now unquestionably able to provide. The remaining class of creditors is composed partly of such of our fellow citizens as originally lent to the public the use of their funds, or have since received transfers from the lenders, and partly them whose property has been either advanced or assumed for the public service."

This address was followed by a very able and affecting letter from Washington; but all in vain. This was in June, 1783. Neither the recommendations of congress nor the counsels and entreaties of this parent, this protecting genius of his country, received, it seems, from the provincial legislatures, the consideration which the public exigence demanded, nor did they meet, as it was called, "that universal assent, which was necessary to give them effect."

The revenue

The subject was again taken up in 1786. system of 1783 was again solemnly recommended by congress to the several states, and they were implored to avoid the fatal evils which must flow from a violation of those principles of justice which it was told them, and truly told them, were the only solid basis of the honour and prosperity of nations. They were implored in vain, and Washington had been obliged, in a letter to a friend, to confess that America was descending from the high ground on which she stood into the veil of confusion and darkness.

At length a new government, the federal government, was formed at the close of the year 1789, to act for the whole continent; to control, on particular occasions and for general purposes, the different provincial legislatures; and when this government was once formed (a proper image of executive power), resolutions were carried (though still with the greatest difficulty) for the funding of the public debt; that is, for providing proper payment for all the creditors of the state, military and civil, foreign and domestic.

The discussions that took place on the subject, as given by Marshall, are remarkable. To endeavour to understand them and reflect upon them would be a very useful exercise to any one who hopes hereafter to interfere, with advantage to his country, either in the criticism or the conduct of public affairs.

To this discussion I can only in this manner allude. I could have wished to have entered into it, and given you some general idea of the difficulties with which the more wise part of the American legislators had to struggle; but I have occupied you very long with the general subject already, indeed too long, as it will be thought by those who do not consider how important in the concerus of mankind are the questions which have been more or less connected with the observations I have been making-how far the depreciation of the paper currency may be fatal to a national cause, when maintained against a foreign or domestic oppressor; the nature of paper money, the obligations of public faith, public gratitude, national honour; how far communities may be trusted with the government of themselves; the necessity of a strong executive power lodged somewhere or other in every form of government that is to exhibit any proper adherence to the principles of reason, justice, and national faith-in every form of government that is to advance the prosperity, secure the interests, or even protect the freedom of any civilised society among mankind.

LECTURE XXXVI.

AMERICAN WAR.

I SHALL now proceed to lay before you other particulars, which I think may serve to illustrate the subject to which I adverted in my last lecture, the necessity of executive government. I do so because I conceive this to be the great point of instruction that is offered by the history of America, after the first lessons have been given; those that are of a very opposite nature: those which I have proposed to you in former lectures: the injustice, I mean, and inexpediency of government too authoritative, of rule too arbitrary, such as Great Britain certainly was guilty of attempting to enforce upon her colonies in the beginning of this memorable contest.

Congress was at first only a committee, as I have already noted, an assembly of men delegated from the different states of the American union. They could only recommend whatever measures they thought expedient, they could enforce none.

For some time these recommendations were received as laws, but at length you will see, as you read the history (you will have collected even from the notices I have been able already to afford you), how miserable were the effects produced by the want of all proper executive power in the government.

At last a sort of confederation was agreed upon, and the congress was avowedly considered as the head of the whole union, acting for and representing all the different states of the continent. This confederation may be called the second stage of the revolutionary government of America.

But still no proper executive power was given even to this

confederation, and nothing could be more unfavourable to the best interests of the country than to leave the confede rated government so weak in executive power, and in fact thus to set up an assembly to act the part of a government, and leave it in the meantime at the mercy of thirteen other distinct sovereigns, each exercising the real powers of government in different provinces of the same country.

Yet such was the fact, and for some years continued to be the fact, in a manner that really exercises not a little the patience and good humour of any one who sits at a distance and reads the history of these events.

To any such person, this celebrated question of the federal government, that is, the question whether there should be a general government for the whole continent, appears, I had almost ventured to say, no question at all; however, it must have agitated America at the time, and continued to agitate America long after. To suffer thirteen republics to arise, to quarrel among each other, to destroy each other's interests, to be incapable of any connection with the rest of the world, rather than combine the whole, by some general government, into a great community that might, in the progress of things, become a mighty nation, is a proposition so monstrous and extravagant, that I know not how it is to be looked upon any other than the most important specimen which the history of the world affords of the influence of local feelings, long-established associations, and all those partial views and jealousies which, in parishes, corporations, and public meetings, we see so often occur, and which are always so justly the ridicule and scorn of every intelligent member of the community.

as

It must be supposed, indeed, out of that common respect which is always due to the opinions of others, that the principles of liberty were, somehow or other, considered as involved in the question: and this was certainly the case. The antifederalists reasoned, for instance, each in their particular state, after the following manner: that the liberties of that

state would be endangered by being committed to the guar dianship of a general legislature, acting at a distance, and with no particular regard for its criticisms or complaints; that this general legislature must have a president, this president a senate, and that he must even have a court, executive officers, &c.; that, in short, the continent of America would be exposed to all the calamities (such they thought them) of a king, an aristocracy, a regular army, as in the old governments of Europe.

But if such be their reasonings, as they certainly were, this I hold to be of itself a lesson for all those who love liberty, and who would extend its blessings to their country. Men are not to be pedants in liberty, any more than in virtue. Though they are not to be oppressed by tyrants, they must at least be governed by their fellow-men. The great principles of independence in the heart of man are to be cherished and upheld; but order, prosperity, the purposes of society, must be accomplished. The many must delegate the government of themselves to the few. Control, executive power, must be lodged somewhere; and the question is not, as the friends of liberty sometimes suppose, how the executive power can be made sufficiently weak, but only how it can be made sufficiently strong, and yet brought within the influence of the criticism of the community; i. e. in other words, how it can secure the people from themselves, and yet be rendered properly alive to feelings of sympathy and respect for them, and alive also to the obligations of justice and good faith, and to sentiments of honour.

This, indeed, is a problem in the management of mankind not easily to be solved; but it is the real problem-the proper problem, to exercise the patriotism of wise and vir tuous men; and such men are not, from the difficulty of it, to rush headlong into any extremes, either of authoritative, arbitrary government on the one hand, or mere democracy on the other.

It was so late almost as the year 1789, before the people of