 CHAPTER 18. FUTURE CONDITION OF THREE RACES, PART V. In the north, as I have already remarked, a twofold migration ensues upon the abolition of slavery, or even precedes that event when circumstances have rendered it probable. The slaves quit the country to be transported southwards, and the whites of the northern states as well as the immigrants from Europe hasten to fill up their places. But these two causes cannot operate in the same manner in the southern states. On the one hand, the mass of slaves is too great for any expectation of their ever being removed from the country to be entertained. And on the other hand, the Europeans and Anglo-Americans of the north are afraid to come to inhabit a country in which labor has not yet been reinstated in its rightful honors. Besides, they very justly look upon the south, in which the proportion of the negroes equals or exceeds that of the whites, as exposed to very great dangers, and they refrain from turning their activity in that direction. Thus the inhabitants of the south would not be able, like their northern countrymen, to initiate the slaves gradually into a state of freedom by abolishing slavery. They have no means of perceptively diminishing the black population, and they would remain unsupported to repress its excesses. So that in the course of a few years a great people of free negroes would exist in the heart of a white nation of equal size. The same abuses of power which still maintains slavery would then become the source of the most alarming perils which the white population of the south might have to apprehend. At the present time the descendants of the Europeans are the sole owners of the land, the absolute masters of all labor, and the only persons who are possessed of wealth, knowledge, and arms. The blackest destitute of all these advantages, but he subsists without them because he is a slave. If he were free and obliged to provide for his own subsistence, would it be possible for him to remain without these things and to support life? Or would not the very instruments of the present superiority of the white, whilst slavery exists, expose him to a thousand dangers if it were abolished? As long as the negro remains a slave he may be kept in a condition not very far removed from that of the Brutes. But with his liberty he cannot but acquire a degree of instruction which will enable him to appreciate his misfortunes and to discern a remedy for them. Moreover there exists a singular principle of relative justice which is very firmly implanted in the human heart. Men are much more forcibly struck by those inequalities which exist within the circles of the same class than with those which may be remarked between different classes. It is more easy for them to admit slavery than to allow several millions of citizens to exist under a load of eternal infamy and hereditary wretchedness. In the North the population of freed negroes feels these hardships and resents these indignities, but its numbers and its powers are small, whilst in the South it would be numerous and strong. As soon as it is admitted that the whites and the emancipated blacks are placed upon the same territory in the situation of two alien communities, it will be readily understood that there are but two alternatives for the future. The negroes and the whites must either wholly part or wholly mingle. I have already expressed the conviction which I entertain as to the latter event. I do not imagine that the white and black races will ever live in any country upon an equal footing. But I believe the difficulty to be still greater in the United States than elsewhere. An isolated individual may surmount the prejudices of religion, of his country, or of his race, and if this individual is a king he may affect surprising changes in society. But a whole people cannot rise, as it were, above itself. A despot who should subject the Americans and their former slaves to the same yoke might perhaps succeed in commingling their races. But as long as the American democracy remains at the head of affairs, no one will undertake so difficult a task, and it may be foreseen that the freer the white population of the United States becomes, the more isolated it will remain. I have previously observed that the mixed race is the true bond of union between the Europeans and the Indians, just so the mulattoes are the true means of transition between the white and the negro, so that wherever mulattoes abound the inner mixture of the two races is not impossible. In some parts of America the European and the negro races are so crossed by one another that it is rare to meet with a man who is entirely black or entirely white. When they are arrived at this point the two races may really be said to be combined, or rather to have been absorbed in a third race which is connected with both without being identical with either. Of all the Europeans the English are those who have mixed least with the negroes. More mulattoes are to be seen in the south of the union than in the north, but still they are indefinitely more scarce than in any other European colony. Mulattoes are by no means numerous in the United States. They have no force peculiar to themselves, and when corals originating in differences of color take place, they generally side with the whites, just as the lackeys of the great in Europe assume the contemptuous heirs of nobility to the lower orders. The pride of origin which is natural to the English is singularly augmented by the personal pride which democratic liberty fosters amongst the Americans. The white citizen of the United States is proud of his race and proud of himself. But if the whites and the negroes do not intermingle in the north of the union, how should they mix in the south? Can it be supposed for an instant that an American of the southern states, placed as he must forever be between the white man with all his physical and moral superiority, and the negro will ever think of preferring the latter? The Americans of the southern states have two powerful passions which will always keep them aloof. The first is the fear of being assimilated to the negroes, their former slaves, and the second the dread of sinking below the whites, their neighbors. If I were called upon to predict what will probably occur at some future time, I should say that the abolition of slavery in the south will, in the common course of things, increase the repugnance of the white population for the men of color. I found this opinion upon the analogous observation which I already had occasion to make in the north. I there remarked that the white inhabitants of the north avoid the negroes with increasing care in proportion as the legal barriers of separation are removed by the legislature. And why should not the same result take place in the south? In the north the whites are deterred from intermingling with the blacks by the fear of an imaginary danger. In the south, where the danger would be real, I cannot imagine that the fear would be less general. If on the other hand it be admitted, and the fact is unquestionable, that the colored population perpetually accumulates in the extreme south, and that it increases more rapidly than that of the whites, and if on the other hand it be allowed that it is impossible to foresee a time at which the whites and the blacks will be so intermingled as to derive the same benefits from society, must it not be inferred that the blacks and the whites will sooner or later come to open strife in the southern states of the union. But if it be asked what the issue of the struggle is likely to be, it will readily be understood that we are here left to form a very vague surmise of the truth. The human mind may succeed in tracing a wide circle, as it were, which includes the course of future events, but within that circle a thousand various chances and circumstances may direct it in as many different ways, and in every picture of the future there is a dim spot which the eye of the understanding cannot penetrate. It appears, however, to be extremely probable that in the west Indian islands the white races destined to be subdued, and the black population to share the same fate upon the continent. In the west India islands the white planners are surrounded by an immense black population. On the continent the blacks are placed between the ocean and an innumerable people, which already extends over them in a dense mass, from the icy confines of Canada to the frontiers of Virginia, and from the banks of the Missouri to the shores of the Atlantic. If the white citizens of North America remain united, it cannot be supposed that the Negroes will escape the destruction with which they are menaced. They must be subdued by want or by the sword. But the black population which is accumulated along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico has a chance of success if the American Union is dissolved when the struggle between the two races begins. If the federal tie were broken, the citizens of the south would be wrong to rely upon any lasting sucker from their northern countrymen. The latter are well aware that the danger can never reach them, and unless they are constrained to march to the assistance of the south by a positive obligation, it may be foreseen that the sympathy of color will be insufficient to stimulate their exertions. Yet at whatever period the strife may break out, the whites of the south, even if they are abandoned to their own resources, will enter the lists with an immense superiority of knowledge and of the means of warfare. But the blacks will have numerical strength and the energy of despair upon their side, and these are powerful resources to men who have taken up arms. The fate of the white population of the southern states will, perhaps, be similar to that of the Moors in Spain. After having occupied the land for centuries, it will, perhaps, be forced to retire to the country once its ancestors came, and to abandon the negroes to the possession of a territory which Providence seems to have more peculiarly destined for them since they can subsist and labor in it more easily than the whites. The danger of a conflict between the white and the black inhabitants of the southern states of the Union, a danger which, however remote it may be, is inevitable, perpetually haunts the imagination of the Americas. The inhabitants of the north make it a common topic of conversation, though they have no direct injury to fear from the struggle, but they vainly endeavor to devise some means of obviating the misfortunes which they foresee. In the southern states the subject is not discussed. The planter does not allude to the future in conversing with strangers. The citizen does not communicate his apprehensions to his friends. He seeks to conceal them from himself, but there is something more alarming in the tacit forebodings of the south than in the clamorous spheres of the northern states. This all-pervading disquietude has given birth to an undertaking which is but little known, but which may have the effect of changing the fate of a portion of the human race. From apprehension of the dangers which I have just been describing, a certain number of American citizens have formed a society for the purpose of exporting to the coast of Guinea at their own expense such free Negroes as may be willing to escape from the oppression to which they are subject. In 1820 the society to which I allude formed a settlement in Africa upon the seventh degree of north latitude which bears the name of Liberia. The most recent intelligence informs us that 2,500 Negroes are collected there. They have introduced the democratic institutions of America into the country of their forefathers, and Liberia has a representative system of government, Negro jurymen, Negro magistrates, and Negro priests. Churches have been built, newspapers established, and, by a singular change in the vicissitudes of the world, white men are prohibited from sojourning within the settlement. This is indeed a strange caprice of fortune. Two hundred years have now elapsed since the inhabitants of Europe undertook to tear the Negro from his family and his home in order to transport him to the shores of North America. At the present day the European settlers are engaged in sending back the descendants of those very Negroes to the continent from which they were originally taken, and the barbarous Africans have been brought into contact with civilization in the midst of bondage, and have become acquainted with free political institutions in slavery. Up to the present time Africa has been closed against the arts and sciences of the whites, but the inventions of Europe will perhaps penetrate into those regions now that they are introduced by Africans themselves. The settlement of Liberia is founded upon a lofty and a most fruitful idea, but whatever may be its results with regard to the continent of Africa, it can afford no remedy to the new world. In twelve years the colonization society has transported 2,500 Negroes to Africa. In the same space of time about 700,000 blacks were born in the United States. If the colony of Liberia were so situated as to be able to receive thousands of new inhabitants every year, and if the Negroes were in a state to be sent thither with advantage, if the Union were to supply the society with annual subsidies, and to transport the Negroes to Africa in the vessels of the state, it would still be unable to counter-poise the natural increase of population amongst the blacks. And as it could not remove as many men in a year as are born upon its territory within the same space of time, it would fail in suspending the growth of the evil which is daily increasing in the United States. The Negro race will never leave those shores of the American continent to which it was brought by the passions and the vices of the Europeans. It will not disappear from the new world as long as it continues to exist. The inhabitants of the United States may retard the calamities which they apprehend, but they cannot now destroy their efficient cause. I am obliged to confess that I do not regard the abolition of slavery as a means of warding off the struggle of the two races in the United States. The Negroes may long remain slaves without complaining, but if they are once raised to the level of free men they will soon revolt at being deprived of all their civil rights, and as they cannot become the equals of the whites they will speedily declare themselves as enemies. In the north everything contributed to facilitate the emancipation of the slaves and slavery was abolished, without placing the free Negroes in a position which could become formidable since their number was too small for them ever to claim the exercise of their rights. But such is not the case in the south. The question of slavery was a question of commerce and manufacture for the slave owners in the north. For those of the south it is a question of life and death. God forbid that I should seek to justify the principle of Negro slavery, as has been done by some American writers, but I only observe that all the countries which formerly adopted that excribable principle are not equally able to abandon it at the present time. When I contemplate the condition of the south I can only discover two alternatives which may be adopted by the white inhabitants of these states. Viz. Either to emancipate the Negroes and to intermingle with them, or remaining isolated from them to keep them in a state of slavery as long as possible. All intermediate measures seemed to me likely to terminate, and that shortly in the most horrible of civil wars, and perhaps in the extirpation of one or other of the two races. Such is the view which the Americans of the south take of the question, and they act consistently with it. As they are determined not to mingle with the Negroes they refuse to emancipate them. Not that the inhabitants of the south regard slavery as necessary to the wealth of the planter, for on this point many of them agree with their northern countrymen in freely admitting that slavery is prejudicial to their interest. But they are convinced that, however prejudicial it may be, they hold their lives upon no other tenure. The instruction which is now diffused in the south has convinced the inhabitants that slavery is injurious to the slave owner. But it has also shown them, more clearly than before, that no means exist of getting rid of its bad consequences. Hence arises a singular contrast. The more the utility of slavery is contested, the more firmly is it established in the laws. And whilst the principle of servitude is gradually abolished to the north, that self-same principle gives rise to more and more rigorous consequences in the south. The legislation of the southern states with regard to slaves presents at the present day such unparalleled atrocities as to suffice to show how radically the laws of humanity have been perverted, and to betray the desperate position of the community in which that legislation has been promulgated. The Americans of this portion of the Union have not indeed augmented the hardships of slavery. They have, on the contrary, bettered the physical condition of the slaves. The only means by which the ancients maintained slavery were fetters and death. The Americans of the south of the Union have discovered more intellectual securities for the duration of their power. They have employed their despotism and their violence against the human mind. In antiquity precautions were taken to prevent the slaves from breaking his chains. At the present day measures are adopted to deprive him even of the desire of freedom. The ancients kept the bodies of their slaves in bondage, but they placed no restraint upon the mind and no check upon education, and they acted consistently with their established principle, since a natural termination of slavery then existed, and one day or other the slave might be set free and become the equal of his master. But the Americans of the south who do not admit that the Negroes can never be commingled with themselves have forbidden them to be taught to read or write under severe penalties, and as they will not raise them to their own level they sink them as nearly as possible to that of the Brutes. The hope of liberty had always been allowed to the slave to cheer the hardships of his condition, but the Americans of the south are well aware that emancipation cannot but be dangerous, when the freed man can never be assimilated to his former master. To give a man his freedom and to leave him in wretchedness and ignomy is nothing less than to prepare a future chief for a revolt of the slaves. Moreover, it has long been remarked that the presence of a free Negro vaguely agitates the minds of his less fortunate brethren and conveys to them a dim notion of their rights. The Americans of the south have consequently taken measures to prevent slave owners from emancipating their slaves in most cases, not indeed by a positive prohibition, but by subjecting that step to various forms which it is difficult to comply with. I happened to meet with an old man in the south of the Union who had lived in illicit intercourse with one of his Negroes, and had had several children by her who were born the slaves of their father. He had indeed frequently thought of bequeathing to them at least their liberty, but years had elapsed without his being able to surmount the legal obstacles to their emancipation, and in the meanwhile his old age was come and he was about to die. He pictured to himself his sons dragged from market to market and passing from the authority of a parent to the rod of the stranger, until these horrid anticipations worked his expiring imagination into frenzy. When I saw him he was a prey to all the anguish of despair, and he made me feel how awful is the retribution of nature upon those who have broken her laws. These evils are unquestionably great, but they are the necessary and foreseen consequences of the very principle of modern slavery. When the Europeans chose their slaves from a race differing from their own, which many of them considered as inferior to the other races of mankind, and which they all repelled with horror from any notion of intimate connection, they must have believed that slavery would last forever, since there is no intermediate state which can be durable between the excessive inequality produced by servitude and the complete equality which originates in independence. The Europeans did imperfectly feel this truth, but without acknowledging it even to themselves. Whenever they have had to do with negroes, their conduct has either been dictated by their interest and pride, or by their compassion. They first violated every right of humanity by their treatment of the negro, and they afterwards informed him that those rights were precious and invaluable. They affected to open their ranks to the slaves, but the negroes who attempted to penetrate into the community were driven back with scorn, and they have incautiously and involuntarily been led to admit of freedom instead of slavery, without having the courage to be wholly iniquitous or wholly just. If it be impossible to anticipate a period at which the Americans of the South will mingle their blood with that of the negroes, can they allow their slaves to become free without compromising their own security? And if they are obliged to keep that race in bondage in order to save their own families, may they not be excused for availing themselves of the means best adapted to that end. The events which are taking place in the southern states of the Union appear to me to be at once the most horrible and the most natural results of slavery. When I see the order of nature overthrown, and when I hear the cry of humanity in its veins struggle against the laws, my indignation does not light upon the men of our own time who are the instruments of these outrages, but I reserve my execration for those who, after a thousand years of freedom, brought back slavery into the world once more. There may be the efforts of the Americans of the South to maintain slavery they will not always succeed. Slavery which is now confined to a single tract of the civilized earth, which is attacked by Christianity as unjust and by political economy as prejudicial, and which is now contrasted with democratic liberties and the information of our age cannot survive. By the choice of the master or by the will of the slave it will cease, and in either case great calamities may be expected to ensue. If liberty be refused to the negroes of the South they will in the end seize it for themselves by force. If it be given they will abuse it ere long. End of Section 37. Democracy in America, Chapter 18, Section 6. Democracy in America, by Alexis de Tocqueville. Translated by Henry Reeve. Section 38, Chapter 18. Future Condition of Three Races, Part 6. What are the chances in favor of the duration of the American Union and what dangers threaten it? The maintenance of the existing institutions of the several states depends in some measure upon the maintenance of the Union itself. It is therefore important in the first instance to inquire into the probable fate of the Union. One point may indeed be assumed at once. If the present confederation were dissolved it appears to me to be incontestable that the states of which it is now composed would not return to their original isolated condition, but that several unions would then be formed in the place of one. It is not my intention to inquire into the principles upon which these new unions would probably be established, but merely to show what the causes are which may affect the dismemberment of the existing confederation. With this object I shall be obliged to retrace some of the steps which I have already taken, and to revert to topics which I have before discussed. I am aware that the reader may accuse me of repetition, but the importance of the matter which still remains to be treated is my excuse. I had rather say too much than to say too little to be thoroughly understood, and I prefer injuring the author to sliding the subject. The legislators who formed the Constitution of 1789 endeavored to confer a distinct and preponderating authority upon the federal power, but they were confined by the conditions of the task which they had undertaken to perform. They were not appointed to constitute the government of a single people, but to regulate the association of several states, and whatever their inclinations might be, they could not but divide the exercise of sovereignty in that end. In order to understand the consequences of this division, it is necessary to make a short distinction between the affairs of the government. There are some objects which are national by their very nature, that is to say, which affect the nation as a body and can only be entrusted to the man or the assembly of men who most completely represent the entire nation. Amongst these may be reckoned war and diplomacy. There are other objects which are provincial by their very nature, that is to say, which only affect certain localities, and which can only be properly treated in that locality. Such, for instance, is the budget of a municipality. Lastly, there are certain objects of a mixed nature, which are national in as much as they affect all the citizens who compose the nation, and which are provincial in as much that is not necessary that the nation itself should provide for them all. Such are the rights which regulate the civil and political condition of the citizens. No society can exist without civil and political rights. These rights, therefore, interest all the citizens alike. But it is not always necessary to the existence and the prosperity of the nation that these rights should be uniform, nor consequently that they should be regulated by the central authority. There are then two distinct categories of objects which are submitted to the direction of the sovereign power. And these categories occur in all well-constituted communities, whatever the basis of the political constitution may otherwise be. Between these two extremes, the objects which I have termed mixed may be considered to lie. As these objects are neither exclusively national nor entirely provincial, they may be obtained by a national or by a provincial government, according to the agreement of the contracting parties, without in any way impairing the contract of association. The sovereign power is usually formed by the union of separate individuals who compose a people, and individual powers or collective forces, each representing a very small portion of the sovereign authority, are the sole elements which are subjected to the general government of their choice. In this case, the general government is more naturally called upon to regulate not only those affairs which are of essential national importance, but those which are of a more local interest, and the local governments are reduced to that small share of sovereign authority which is indispensable to their prosperity. But sometimes the sovereign authority is composed of pre-organized political bodies, by virtue of circumstances anterior to their union, and in this case the provincial governments assume the control, not only of those affairs which more peculiarly belong to their province, but of all or of a part of the mixed affairs to which illusion has been made. For the Confederate nations which were independent sovereign states before their union, and which still represent a very considerable share of the sovereign power, have only consented to cede to the general government the exercise of those rights which are indispensable to the union. When the national government, independently of the prerogatives inherent in its nature, is invested with the right of regulating the affairs which relate partly to the general and partly to the local interests, it possesses a preponderating influence. Not only are its own rights extensive, but all the rights which it does not possess exist by its sufferance, and it may be apprehended that the provincial governments may be deprived of their natural and necessary prerogatives by its influence. When on the other hand the provincial governments are invested with the power of regulating those same affairs of mixed interests, an opposite tendency prevails in society. The preponderating force resides in the province, not in the nation, and it may be apprehended that the national government may in the end be stripped of the privileges which are necessary to its existence. Independent nations have therefore a natural tendency to centralization and confederations to dismemberment. It now only remains for us to apply these general principles to the American Union. The several states were necessarily possessed of the right of regulating all exclusively provincial affairs. Moreover, these same states retained the rights of determining the civil and political competency of the citizens, or regulating the reciprocal relations of the members of the community and of dispensing justice, rights which are of a general nature, but which do not necessarily abertain to the national government. We have shown that the government of the Union is invested with the power of acting in the name of the whole nation in those cases in which the nation has to appear as a single and undivided power, as, for instance, in foreign relations, and in offering a common resistance to a common enemy, in short, in conducting those affairs which I have styled exclusively national. In this division of the rights of sovereignty, the share of the Union seems at first to be more considerable than that of the states, but a more attentive investigation shows it to be less so. The undertakings of the government of the Union are more vast, but their influence is more rarely felt. Those of the provincial governments are comparatively small, but they are incessant, and they serve to keep alive the authority which they represent. The government of the Union watches the general interests of the country, but the general interests of a people have a very questionable influence upon individual happiness, whilst provincial interests produce the most immediate effect upon the welfare of the inhabitants. The Union secures the independence and the greatness of the nation, which do not immediately affect private citizens, but the several states maintain the liberty, regulate the rights, protect the fortune, and secure the life and the whole future prosperity of every citizen. The federal government is very far removed from its subjects, whilst the provincial governments are within reach of them all, and are ready to attend to the smallest appeal. The central government has upon its side the passions of a few superior men who aspire to conduct it, but upon the side of the provincial governments are the interests of all those second-rate individuals who can only hope to obtain power within their own state, and who nevertheless exercise the largest share of authority over the people because they are placed nearest to its level. The Americans have therefore much more to hope and to fear from the states than from the Union, and in conformity with the natural tendency of the human mind, they are more likely to attach themselves to the former than to the latter. In this respect their habits and feelings harmonize with their interests. When a compact nation divides its sovereignty and adopts a confederate form of government, the traditions, the customs, and the manners of the people are for a long time at variance with their legislation, and the former tend to give a degree of influence to the central government which the latter forbids. When a number of confederate states unite to form a single nation, the same causes operate in an opposite direction. I have no doubt that if France were to become a confederate republic like that of the United States, the government would at first display more energy than that of the Union. And if the Union were to alter its constitution to a monarchy like that of France, I think that the American government would be a long time in acquiring the force which now rules the latter nation. When the national existence of the Anglo-Americans began, their provincial existence was already of longstanding. Necessary relations were established between the townships and the individual citizens of the same states, and they were accustomed to consider some object as common to them all, and to conduct other affairs as exclusively relating to their own special interests. The Union is a vast body which presents no definite object to patriotic feeling. The forms and limits of the state are distinct and circumscribed, since it represents a certain number of objects which are familiar to the citizens and beloved by all. It is identified with the very soil, with the rite of property and the domestic affections, with the recollections of the past, the labors of the present, and the hopes of the future. Patriotism, then, which is frequently a mere extension of individual egoism, is still directed to the state and is not excited by the Union. Thus the tendency of the interests, the habits, and the feelings of the people is to center political activity in the states, in preference to the Union. It is easy to estimate the different forces of the two governments by remarking the manner in which they fulfill their respective functions. Whenever the government of a state has occasion to address an individual or an assembly of individuals, this language is clear and imperative. And such is also the tone of the federal government in its intercourse with individuals. But no sooner has it anything to do with a state than it begins to parley, to explain its motives and justify its conduct, to argue, advise, and in short anything but to command. If doubts are raised as to the limits of the constitutional powers of each government, the provincial government prefers its claim with boldness, and takes prompt and energetic steps to support it. In the meanwhile the government of the Union reasons, it appeals to the interests, to the good sense, to the glory of the nation. It temporizes, it negotiates, and does not consent to act until it is reduced to the last extremity. At first sight it might readily be imagined that it is the provincial government which is armed with the authority of the nation, and that Congress represents a single state. The federal government is therefore not withstanding the precautions of those who founded it, naturally so weak that it more peculiarly requires the free consent of the governed to enable it to subsist. It is easy to perceive that its object is to enable the states to realize with facility their determination of remaining united, and as long as this preliminary condition exists, its authority is great, temperate, and effective. The Constitution fits the government to control individual, and easily to surmount such obstacles as they may be inclined to offer, but it was by no means established with a view to the possible separation of one or more of the states from the Union. If the sovereignty of the Union were to engage in a struggle with that of the states at the present day, its defeat may be confidently predicted, and it is not probable that such a struggle would be seriously undertaken. As often as a steady resistance is offered to the federal government, it will be found to yield. Experience has hitherto shown that whenever a state has demanded anything with perseverance and resolution, it has invariably succeeded, and that if a separate government has distinctly refused to act, it was left to do as it thought fit. But even if the government of the Union had any strength inherent in itself, the physical situation of the country would render the exercise of that strength very difficult. The United States cover an immense territory, they are separated from each other by great distances, and the population is disseminated over the surface of a country, which is still half a wilderness. If the Union were to undertake to enforce the allegiance of the Confederate states by military means, it would be in a position very analogous to that of England at the time of the War of Independence. However strong a government may be, it cannot easily escape from the consequences of a principle which it has once admitted as the foundation of its constitution. The Union was formed by the voluntary agreement of the states and, in uniting together, they have not forfeited their nationality, nor have they been reduced to the condition of one and the same people. If one of the states chose to withdraw its name from the contract, it would be difficult to disprove its right of doing so, and the federal government would have no means of maintaining its claims directly, either by force or by right. In order to enable the federal government easily to conquer the resistance, which may be offered to it by any one of its subjects, it would be necessary that one or more of them should be specially interested in the existence of the Union, as has frequently been the case in the history of Confederations. If it be supposed that amongst the states which are united by the federal tie, there are some which exclusively enjoy the principal advantages of Union or whose prosperity depends on the duration of that Union, it is unquestionable that they will always be ready to support the central government in enforcing the obedience of the others. But the government would then be exerting a force not derived from itself, but from a principle contrary to its nature. States form Confederations in order to derive equal advantages from their Union, and in the case just alluded to, the federal government would derive its power from the unequal distribution of those benefits amongst the states. If one of the Confederate states have acquired a preponderance sufficiently great to enable it to take exclusive possession of the central authority, it will consider the other states as subject provinces, and it will cause its own supremacy to be respected under the borrowed name of the sovereignty of the Union. Great things may be done in the name of the federal government, but in reality that government will have ceased to exist. In both these cases, the power which acts in the name of the Confederation becomes stronger the more it abandons the natural state and the acknowledged principles of Confederations. In America, the existing Union is advantageous to all the states, but it is not indispensable to any one of them. Several of them might break the federal tie without compromising the welfare of the others, although their own prosperity would be lessened. As the existence and the happiness of none of the states are wholly dependent on the present constitution, they would none of them be disposed to make great personal sacrifices to maintain it. On the other hand, there is no state which seems hitherto to have its ambition much interested in the maintenance of the existing Union. They certainly do not all exercise the same influence in the federal councils, but no one of them can hope to domineer over the rest or treat them as its inferiors or as its subjects. It appears to me unquestionable that if any portion of the Union seriously desired to separate itself from the other states, they would not be able, nor indeed would they attempt to prevent it, and that the present Union will only last as long as the states which compose it choose to continue members of the Confederation. If this point be admitted, the question becomes less difficult and our object is not to inquire whether the states of the existing Union are capable of separating, but whether they will choose to remain united. Amongst the various reasons which tend to render the existing Union useful to the Americans, two principal causes are peculiarly evident to the observer. Although the Americans are, as it were, alone upon their continent, their commerce makes them the neighbors of all the nations with which they trade. Notwithstanding their apparent isolation, the Americans require a certain degree of strength, which they cannot retain otherwise than by remaining united to each other. If the states were to split, they would not only diminish the strength which they are now able to display towards foreign nations, but they would soon create foreign powers upon their own territory. A system of inland custom houses would then be established, valleys would be divided by imaginary boundary lines, the course of the rivers would be confined by territorial distinctions, and a multitude of hindrances would prevent the Americans from exploring the whole of that vast continent, which Providence has allotted to them for dominion. At present they have no invasion to fear, and consequently no standing armies to maintain, no taxes to levy. If the Union were dissolved, all these burdensome measures might ere long be required. The Americans are then very powerfully interested in the maintenance of their Union. On the other hand, it is almost impossible to discover any sort of material interest, which might at present tempt a portion of the Union to separate from the other states. When we cast our eyes upon the map of the United States, we perceive the chain of the Allegheny Mountains, running from the northeast to the southwest, and crossing nearly 1,000 miles of country. And we are led to imagine that the design of Providence was to raise between the Valley of the Mississippi and the coast of the Atlantic Ocean one of those natural barriers which break the mutual intercourse of men, and form the necessary limits of different states. But the average height of the Alleghenys does not exceed 2,500 feet. Their greatest elevation is not above 4,000 feet. Their rounded summits and the spacious valleys which they conceal within their passes are of easy access from several sides, besides which the principal rivers which fall into the Atlantic Ocean, the Hudson, the Susquehanna, and the Potomac, take their rise beyond the Alleghenys in an open district which borders upon the Valley of the Mississippi. These streams quit this tract of country, make their way through the barrier which would seem to turn them westward, and as they whine through the mountains, they open an easy and natural passage to man. No natural barrier exists in the regions which are now inhabited by the Anglo-Americans. The Alleghenys are so far from serving as a boundary to separate nations that they do not even serve as a frontier to the states. New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia comprise them within their borders, and they extend as much to the west as to the east of the line. The territory now occupied by the 24 states of the Union and the three great districts which have not yet acquired the rank of states, although they already contain inhabitants, covers a surface of 1,026,000 square miles, which is about equal to five times the extent of France. Within these limits, the qualities of the soil, the temperature, and the produce of the country are extremely various. The vast extent of territory occupied by the Anglo-American republics has given rise to doubts as to the maintenance of their Union. Here a distinction must be made. Contrary interests sometimes arise in the different provinces of a vast empire, which often terminate in open dissensions, and the extent of the country is then most prejudicial to the power of the state. But if the inhabitants of these vast regions are not divided by contrary interests, the extent of the territory may be favorable to their prosperity, for the unity of the government promotes the interchange of the different productions of the soil, and increases their value by facilitating their consumption. It is indeed easy to discover different interests in the different parts of the Union, but I am unacquainted with any which are hostile to each other. The southern states are almost exclusively agricultural. The northern states are more peculiarly commercial and manufacturing. The states of the west are at the same time agricultural and manufacturing. In the south, the crops consist of tobacco, of rice, of cotton, and of sugar. In the north and the west of wheat and maize. These are different sources of wealth, but Union is the means by which these sources are open to all, and rendered equally advantageous to the several districts. The north, which ships the produce of the Anglo-Americans to all parts of the world, and brings back the produce of the globe to the Union, is evidently interested in maintaining the confederation in its present condition, in order that the number of American producers and consumers may remain as large as possible. The north is the most natural agent of communication between the south and the west of the Union on the one hand, and the rest of the world upon the other. The north is therefore interested in the Union and prosperity of the south and west in order that they may continue to furnish raw materials for its manufacturers and cargos for its shipping. The south and the west on their side are still more directly interested in the preservation of the Union and the prosperity of the north. The produce of the south is, for the most part, exported beyond seas. The south and the west consequently stand in need of the commercial resources of the north. They are likewise interested in the maintenance of a powerful fleet by the Union to protect them efficaciously. The south and the west have no vessels, but they cannot refuse a willing subsidy to defray the expense of the Navy, for if the fleets of Europe were to blockade the ports of the south and the delta of the Mississippi, what would become of the rice of the Carolinas, the tobacco of Virginia, and the sugar and cotton which grow in the valley of the Mississippi? Every portion of the federal budget does therefore contribute to the maintenance of material interests which are common to all the Confederate states. Independently of this commercial utility, the south and the west of the Union derive great political advantages from their connection with the north. The south contains an enormous slave population, a population which is already alarming and still more formidable for the future. The states of the west lie in the remotest parts of a single valley, and all the rivers which intersect their territory rise in the Rocky Mountains or in the Alleghenies and fall into the Mississippi, which bears them onward to the Gulf of Mexico. The western states are consequently entirely cut off by their position from the traditions of Europe and the civilization of the old world. The inhabitants of the south, then, are induced to support the Union in order to avail themselves of its protection against the blacks, and the inhabitants of the west in order not to be excluded from a free communication with the rest of the globe and shut up in the wilds of Central America. The north cannot but desire the maintenance of the Union in order to remain, as it now is, the connecting link between that vast body and the other parts of the world. The temporal interests of all the several parts of the Union are, then, intimately connected, and the same assertion holds true respecting those opinions and sentiments, which may be termed the immaterial interests of men. End of section 38. Chapter 18, Part 7 of Democracy in America. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville, translated by Henry Reeve. Section 39, Chapter 18, Future Condition of Three Races, Part 7. The inhabitants of the United States talk a great deal of their attachment to their country, but I confess that I do not rely upon that calculating patriotism which is founded upon interests and which a change in the interests at stake may obliterate. Nor do I attach much importance to the language of the Americans when they manifest in their daily conversations the intention of maintaining the federal system adopted by their forefathers. A government retains its sway over a great number of its citizens, far less by the voluntary and rational consent of the multitude than by that instinctive and to a certain extent involuntary agreement which results from similarity of feelings and resemblances of opinion. I will never admit that men constitute a social body simply because they obey the same head in the same laws. Society can only exist when a great number of men consider a great number of things in the same point of view when they hold the same opinions upon many subjects and when the same occurrences suggest the same thoughts and impressions to their minds. The observer who examines the present condition of the United States upon this principle will readily discover that although the citizens are divided into 24 distinct sovereignties they nevertheless constitute a single people and he may perhaps be led to think that the state of the Anglo-American Union is more truly a state of society than that of certain nations of Europe which live under the same legislation in the same prince. Although the Anglo-Americans have several religious sects they all regard religion in the same manner. They are not always agreed upon the measures which are most conducive to good government and they vary upon some forms of the government which it is expedient to adopt but they are unanimous upon the general principles which ought to rule human society. From Maine to the Florida's and from the Missouri to the Atlantic Ocean the people is held to be the legitimate source of all power. The same notions are entertained respecting liberty and equality, the liberty of the press, the right of association, the jury and the responsibility of the agents of government. If we turn from their political and religious opinions to the moral and philosophical principles which regulate the daily actions of life and govern their conduct we shall still find the same uniformity. The Anglo-Americans acknowledge the absolute moral authority of the reason of the community as they acknowledge the political authority of the mass of citizens and they hold the public opinion is the surest arbiter of what is lawful or forbidden, true or false. The majority of them believe that a man will be led to do what is just and good by following his own interest rightly understood. They hold that every man is born in possession of the right of self-government and that no one has the right of constraining his fellow creatures to be happy. They all have a lively faith in the perfectibility of man. They are of opinion that the effects of the diffusion of knowledge must necessarily be advantageous and the consequences of ignorance fatal. They all consider society as a body and a state of improvement, humanity as a changing scene in which nothing is or ought to be permanent. And they admit that what appears to them to be good today may be superseded by something better tomorrow. I do not give all these opinions as true but I quote them as characteristic of the Americans. The Anglo-Americans are not only united together by these common opinions but they are separated from all other nations by a common feeling of pride. For the last 50 years, no pains have been spared to convince the inhabitants of the United States that they constitute the only religious, enlightened and free people. They perceive that for the present, their own democratic institutions succeed whilst those of other countries fail. Hence they conceive an overweening opinion of their superiority and they are not very remote from believing themselves to belong to a distinct race of mankind. The dangers which threaten the American Union do not originate in the diversity of interests or of opinions but in the various characters and passions of the Americans. The men who inhabit the vast territory of the United States are almost all the issue of a common stock but the effects of the climate and more especially of slavery have gradually introduced very striking differences between the British settler of the Southern States and the British settler of the North. In Europe it is generally believed that slavery has rendered the interests of one part of the Union contrary to those of another part but I by no means remarked this to be the case. Slavery has not created interests in the South contrary to those of the North but it has modified the character and changed the habits of the natives of the South. I have already explained the influence which slavery has exercised upon the commercial ability of the Americans in the South and this same influence equally extends to their manners. The slave is a servant who never remonstrates and who submits to everything without complaint. He may sometimes assassinate but he never withstands his master. In the South there are no families so poor as not to have slaves. The citizen of the Southern States of the Union is invested with a sort of domestic dictatorship from his earliest years. The first notion he acquires in life is that he is born to command and the first habit which he contracts is that of being obeyed without resistance. His education tends then to give him the character of a supercilious and a hasty man, irascible, violent and ardent in his desires, impatient of obstacles but easily discouraged if he cannot succeed upon his first attempt. The American of the Northern States is surrounded by no slaves in his childhood. He is even unattended by free servants and is usually obliged to provide for his own wants. No sooner does he enter the world than the idea of necessity assails him on every side. He soon learns to know exactly the natural limit of his authority. He never expects to subdue those who withstand him by force and he knows that the surest means of obtaining the support of his fellow creatures is to win their favor. He therefore becomes patient, reflecting, tolerant, slow to act and persevering in his designs. In the Southern States, the more immediate wants of life are always supplied. The inhabitants of those parts are not busy in the material cares of life which are always provided for by others and their imagination is diverted to more captivating and less definite objects. The American of the South is fond of grandeur, luxury and renown, of gaiety, of pleasure and above all of idleness. Nothing obliges him to exert himself in order to subsist and, as he has no necessary occupations, he gives way to indolence and does not even attempt what would be useful. But the equality of fortunes and the absence of slavery in the North plunge the inhabitants in those same cares of daily life which are disdained by the white population of the South. They are taught from infancy to combat want and to place comfort above all the pleasures of the intellect or the heart. The imagination is extinguished by the trivial details of life and the ideas become less numerous and less general but far more practical and more precise. As prosperity is the sole aim of exertion it is excellently well attained. Nature and mankind are turned to the best pecuniary advantage and society is dexterously made to contribute to the welfare of each of its members whilst individual egotism is the source of general happiness. The citizen of the North has not only experience but knowledge. Nevertheless he sets but little value upon the pleasures of knowledge. He assumes it as the means of attaining a certain end and he is only anxious to seize its more lucrative applications. The citizen of the South is more given to act upon impulse. He is more clever, more frank, more generous, more intellectual and more brilliant. The former with a greater degree of activity of common sense of information and of general aptitude has the characteristic good and evil qualities of the middle class. The latter has the tastes, the prejudices, the weaknesses and the magnanimity of all aristocracies. If two men are united in society who have the same interests and to a certain extent the same opinions but different characters, different acquirements and a different style of civilization it is probable that these men will not agree. The same remark is applicable to a society of nations. Slavery then does not attack the American Union directly in its interests but indirectly in its manners. The states which gave their assent to the federal contract in 1790 were 13 in number. The Union now consists of 34 members. The population which amounted to nearly 4 million in 1790 had more than tripled in the space of 40 years and in 1830 it amounted to nearly 13 million. Changes of such magnitude cannot take place without some danger. A society of nations as well as a society of individuals derives its principal chances of duration from the wisdom of its members. Their individual weaknesses and their limited number. The Americans who quit the coasts of the Atlantic Ocean to plunge into the Western wilderness are adventurers impatient of restraint, greedy of wealth and frequently men expelled from the states in which they were born. When they arrive in the deserts they are unknown to each other and they have neither traditions, family feeling nor the force of example to check their excesses. The empire of the laws is feeble amongst them. That of morality is still more powerless. The settlers who are constantly peopling the valley of the Mississippi are then in every respect very inferior to the Americans who inhabit the older parts of the Union. Nevertheless they already exercise a great influence in its councils and they arrive at the government of the Commonwealth before they have learnt to govern themselves. The greater the individual weakness of each of the contracting parties the greater are the chances of the duration of the contract. For their safety is then dependent upon their Union. When in 1790 the most populous of the American republics did not contain 500,000 inhabitants each of them felt its own insignificance as an independent people. And this feeling rendered compliance with the federal authority more easy. But when one of the Confederate states reckons like the state of New York, two million of inhabitants and covers an extent of territory equal in surface to a quarter of France it feels its own strength. And although it may continue to support the Union as advantageous to its prosperity it no longer regards that body as necessary to its existence. And as it continues to belong to the federal compact it soon aims at preponderance in the federal assemblies. The probable unanimity of the states is diminished as their number increases. At present the interests of the different parts of the Union are not at variance. But who is able to foresee the multifarious changes of the future in a country in which towns are founded from day to day and states almost from year to year. Since the first settlement of the British colonies the number of inhabitants has about doubled every 22 years. I perceive no causes which are likely to check this progressive increase of the Anglo-American population for the next 100 years. And before that space of time has elapsed I believe that the territories and dependencies of the United States will be covered by more than 100 million of inhabitants and divided into 40 states. I admit that these 100 million of men have no hostile interests. I suppose on the contrary that they are all equally interested in the maintenance of the Union. But I am still of opinion that where there are 100 million of men and 40 distinct nations unequally strong the continuance of the federal government can only be a fortunate accident. Whatever faith I may have in the perfectability of man until human nature is altered and men wholly transformed I shall refuse to believe in the duration of a government which is called upon to hold together 40 different peoples disseminated over a territory equal to one half of Europe in extent to avoid all rivalry, ambition and struggles between them and to direct their independent activity to the accomplishment of the same designs. But the greatest peril to which the Union is exposed by its increase arises from the continual changes which take place in the position of its internal strength. The distance from Lake Superior to the Gulf of Mexico extends from the 47th to the 30th degree of latitude a distance of more than 1200 miles as the bird flies. The frontier of the United States winds along the whole of this immense line sometimes falling within its limits but more frequently extending far beyond it into the waste. It has been calculated that the Whites advance every year at a mean distance of 17 miles along the whole of this vast boundary. Obstacles such as an unproductive district a lake or an Indian nation unexpectedly encountered are sometimes met with. The advancing column then halts for a while its two extremities fall back upon themselves and as soon as they are reunited they proceed onwards. This gradual and continuous progress of the European race towards the Rocky Mountains has the solemnity of a providential event. It is like a deluge of men rising unabatedly and daily driven onwards by the hand of God. Within this first line of conquering settlers towns are built and vast states founded. In 1790 there were only a few thousand pioneers sprinkled along the valleys of the Mississippi and at the present day these valleys contain as many inhabitants as were to be found in the whole Union in 1790. Their population amounts to nearly four million. The city of Washington was founded in 1800 in the very center of the Union but such are the changes which have taken place that it now stands at one of the extremities and the delegates of the most remote western states are already obliged to perform a journey as long as that from Vienna to Paris. All the states are born onwards at the same time in the path of fortune but of course they do not all increase and prosper in the same proportion. To the north of the Union the detached branches of the Allegheny chain which extend as far as the Atlantic Ocean form spacious roads and ports which are constantly accessible to vessels of the greatest burden but from the Potomac to the mouth of the Mississippi the coast is sandy and flat. In this part of the Union the mouths of almost all the rivers are obstructed and the few harbors which exist amongst these lagoons afford much shallower water to vessels and much fewer commercial advantages than those of the north. This first natural cause of inferiority is united to another cause proceeding from the laws. We have already seen that slavery which is abolished in the north still exists in the south and I have pointed out its fatal consequences upon the prosperity of the planter himself. The north is therefore superior to the south both in commerce and manufacture the natural consequence of which is the more rapid increase of population and of wealth within its borders. The states situate upon the shores of the Atlantic Ocean are already half people. Most of the land is held by an owner and these districts cannot therefore receive so many immigrants as the western states where a boundless field is still open to their exertions. The valley of the Mississippi is far more fertile than the coast of the Atlantic Ocean. This reason added to all the others contributes to drive the Europeans westward a fact which may be rigorously demonstrated by figures. It is found that the sum total of the population of all the United States has about tripled in the course of 40 years. But in the recent states adjacent to the Mississippi the population has increased 31 fold within the same space of time. The relative position of the central federal power is continually displaced. 40 years ago the majority of the citizens of the Union was established upon the coast of the Atlantic in the environs of the spot upon which Washington now stands. But the great body of the people is now advancing inland and to the north so that in 20 years the majority will unquestionably be on the western side of the Alleghenies. If the Union goes on to subsist the basin of the Mississippi is evidently marked out by its fertility and its extent as the future center of the federal government. In 30 or 40 years that tract of country will have assumed the rank which naturally belongs to it. It is easy to calculate that its population compared to that of the coast of the Atlantic will be in round numbers as 40 to 11. In a few years the states which founded the Union will lose the direction of its policy and the population of the Valley of the Mississippi will preponderate in the federal assemblies. This constant gravitation of the federal power and influence towards the northwest is shown every 10 years when a general census of the population is made and the number of delegates which each state sends to Congress is settled afresh. In 1790 Virginia had 19 representatives in Congress. This number continued to increase until the year 1830 when it reached to 23. From that time it began to decrease and in 1833 Virginia elected only 21 representatives. During the same period the state of New York progressed in the contrary direction. In 1790 it had 10 representatives in Congress. In 1813, 27. In 1823, 34. And in 1833, 40. The state of Ohio had only one representative in 1803. And in 1833 it had already 19. End of section 39. Democracy in America, Chapter 18, Part 8. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville translated by Henry Reeve. Section 40, Chapter 18, Future Condition of Three Races, Part 8. It is difficult to imagine a durable union of a people which is rich and strong with one which is poor and weak. Even if it were proved that the strength and wealth of the one are not the causes of the weakness and poverty of the other. But the union is still more difficult to maintain at a time at which one party is losing strength and the other is gaining it. This rapid and disproportionate increase of certain states threatens the independence of the others. New York might perhaps succeed with its two million of inhabitants and its 40 representatives in dictating to the other states in Congress. But even if the more powerful states make no attempt to bear down the lesser ones, the danger still exists. For there is almost as much in the possibility of the act as in the act itself. The weak generally mistrust the justice and reason of the strong. The states which increase the less rapidly than the others look upon those which are more favored by fortune with envy and suspicion. Hence arise the deep seated uneasiness in the ill-defined agitation which are observable in the south and which form so striking a contrast to the confidence and prosperity which are common to the other parts of the union. I am inclined to think that the hostile measures taken by the southern provinces upon a recent occasion are attributable to no other cause. The inhabitants of the southern states are of all the Americans, those who are most interested in the maintenance of the union. They would assuredly suffer most from being left to themselves. And yet they are the only citizens who threaten to break the tie of confederation. But it is easy to perceive that the south which has given four presidents, Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe to the union which perceives that it is losing its federal influence and that the number of its representatives in Congress is diminishing from year to year whilst those of the northern and western states are increasing. The south, which is peopled with ardent and irascible beings is becoming more and more irritated and alarmed. The citizens reflect upon their present position and remember their past influence with the melancholy uneasiness of men who suspect oppression. If they discover a law of the union which is not unequivocally favorable to their interests they protest against it as an abuse of force. And if their ardent remonstrances are not listened to they threaten to quit an association which loads them with burdens whilst it deprives them of their due profits. The tariff, said the inhabitants of Carolina in 1832 enriches the north and ruins the south. For if this were not the case to what can we attribute the continually increasing power and wealth of the north with its inclement skies and arid soil whilst the south which may be styled the Garden of America is rapidly declining. If the changes which I have described were gradual so that each generation at least might have time to disappear with the order of things under which it had lived the danger would be less but the progress of society in America is precipitate and almost revolutionary. The same citizen may have lived to see his state take the lead in the union and afterwards become powerless in the federal assemblies and an Anglo-American republic has been known to grow as rapidly as a man passing from birth and infancy to maturity in the course of 30 years. It must not be imagined however that the states which lose their preponderance also lose their population or their riches. No stop is put to their prosperity and they even go on to increase more rapidly than any kingdom in Europe. But they believe themselves to be impoverished because their wealth does not augment as rapidly as that of their neighbors and they think that their power is lost because they suddenly come into collision with a power greater than their own. Thus they are more heard in their feelings and their passions than in their interests. But this is amply sufficient to endanger the maintenance of the union. If kings and peoples had only their true interest in view ever since the beginning of the world the name of war would scarcely be known among mankind. Thus the prosperity of the United States is the source of the most serious dangers that threaten them. Since it tends to create in some of the Confederate states that overexcitement which accompanies a rapid increase of fortune and to awaken in others those feelings of envy, mistrust and regret which usually attend upon the loss of it. The Americans contemplate this extraordinary and hasty progress with exultation but they would be wiser to consider it with sorrow and alarm. The Americans of the United States must inevitably become one of the greatest nations in the world. Their offset will cover almost the whole of North America, the continent which they inhabit is their dominion and it cannot escape them. What urges them to take possession of it so soon? Riches, power and renown cannot fail to be theirs at some future time but they rush upon their fortune as if but a moment remained for them to make it their own. I think that I have demonstrated that the existence of the present confederation depends entirely on the continued ascent of all the Confederates and starting from this principle I have inquired into the causes which may induce the several states to separate from the others. The Union may however perish in two different ways. One of the Confederate states may choose to retire from the compact and so forcibly to sever the federal tie and it is to this supposition that most of the marks that I have made apply. Or the authority of the federal government may be progressively entrenched on by the simultaneous tendency of the United Republics to resume their independence. The central power successively stripped of all its prerogatives and reduced to impotence by tacit consent would become incompetent to fulfill its purpose and the second Union would perish like the first by a sort of senile in aptitude. The gradual weakening of the federal tie which may finally lead to the dissolution of the Union is a distinct circumstance that may produce a variety of minor consequences before it operates so violent a change. The confederation might still subsist although its government were reduced to such a degree of inanition as to paralyze the nation to cause internal anarchy and to check the general prosperity of the country. After having investigated the causes which may induce the Anglo Americans to disunite it is important to inquire whether if the Union continues to subsist their government will extend or contract its sphere of action and whether it will become more energetic or more weak. The Americans are evidently disposed to look upon their future condition with alarm. They perceive that in most of the nations of the world the exercise of the rights of sovereignty tends to fall under the control of a few individuals and they are dismayed by the idea that such will also be the case in their own country. Even the statesmen feel or affect to feel these fears. For in America centralization is by no means popular and there is no sureer means of courting the majority than by invading against the encroachments of the central power. The Americans do not perceive that the countries in which this alarming tendency to centralization exists are inhabited by a single people. Whilst the fact of the Union being so composed of different confederate communities is sufficient to battle all the interferences which might be drawn from analogous circumstances. I confess that I am inclined to consider the fears of a great number of Americans as purely imaginary and far from participating in their dread of the consolidation of power in the hands of the Union I think that the federal government is visibly losing strength. To prove this assertion I shall not have recourse to any remote occurrences but to circumstances which I have myself witnessed and which belong to our own time. An attentive examination of what is going on in the United States will easily convince us that two opposite tendencies exist in that country like two distinct currents flowing in contrary directions in the same channel. The Union has now existed for 45 years and in the course of that time a vast number of provincial prejudices which were at first hostile to its power have died away. The patriotic feeling which attended each of the Americans to his own native state is becoming less exclusive and the different parts of the Union have become more intimately connected the better they have become acquainted with each other. The post that great instrument of intellectual intercourse now reaches into the backwoods and steamboats have established daily means of communication between the different points of the coast and inland navigation of the unexampled rapidity can phase commodities up and down the rivers of the country and to these facilities of nature and art may be added those restless cravings that busy-mindedness and love of perf which are constantly urging the Americans into active life and bringing him into contact with his fellow citizens. He crosses the country in every direction he visits all the various populations of the land and there is not a province in France in which the natives are so well known to each other as the 13 million of men who cover the territory of the United States. But whilst the Americans intermingle they grow in resemblance of each other. The differences resulting from their climate, their origin and their institutions diminish and they all draw nearer and nearer to the common type. Every year thousands of men leave the North to settle in different parts of the Union. They bring with them their faith, their opinions and their manners. And as they are more enlightened than the men amongst whom they are about to dwell they soon rise to the head of affairs and they adapt society to their own advantage. This continual immigration of the North to the South is peculiarly favorable to the fusion of all the different provincial characters into one national character. The civilization of the North appears to be the common standard to which the whole nation will one day be assimilated. The commercial ties which unite the Confederate States are strengthened by the increasing manufacturers of the Americans and the Union which began to exist in their opinions gradually forms a part of their habits. The course of time has swept away the bugbear thoughts which haunted the imaginations of the citizens in 1789. The federal power is not become oppressive. It has not destroyed the independence of the States. It has not subjected the Confederates to monarchial institutions and the Union has not rendered the lesser States dependent upon the larger ones. But the confederation has continued to increase in population in wealth and in power. I am therefore convinced that the natural obstacles to the continuance of the American Union are not so powerful at the present time as they were in 1789 and that the enemies of the Union are not so numerous. Nevertheless, a careful examination of the history of the United States for the last 45 years will readily convince us that the federal power is declining nor is it difficult to explain the causes of this phenomenon. When the Constitution of 1789 was promulgated the nation was a prey to anarchy. The Union which succeeded this confusion excited much dread and much animosity but it was warmly supported because it satisfied an imperious want. Thus although it was more attacked than it is now the federal power soon reached the maximum of its authority as is usually the case with the government which triumphs after having braced its strength by the struggle. At that time the interpretation of the Constitution seemed to extend rather than to repress the federal sovereignty and the Union offered in several respects the appearance of a single and undivided people directed in its foreign and internal policy by a single government. But to attain this point the people had risen to a certain extent above itself. The Constitution had not destroyed the distinct sovereignty of the states and all communities of whatever nature they may be are impelled by a secret propensity to assert their independence. This propensity is still more decided in a country like America in which every village forms a sort of republic accustomed to conduct its own affairs. It therefore cost the states an effort to submit to the federal supremacy and all efforts however successful they may be necessarily subside with the causes in which they originated. As the federal government consolidated its authority America resumed its rank amongst the nations. Peace returned to its frontiers and public credit was restored. Confusion was succeeded by a fixed state of things which was favorable to the full and free exercise of industrious enterprise. It was this very prosperity which made the Americans forget the cause to which it was attributable and when once the danger was passed the energy and the patriotism which had enabled them to brave it disappeared from amongst them. No sooner were they delivered from the cares which oppressed them than they easily returned to their ordinary habits and gave themselves up without resistance to their natural inclinations. When a powerful government no longer appeared to be necessary they once more began to think it irksome. The Union encouraged a general prosperity and the states were not inclined to abandon the Union but they desired to render the action of the power which represented that body as light as possible. The general principle of Union was adopted but in every minor detail there was an actual tendency to independence. The principle of confederation was every day more easily admitted and more rarely applied so that the federal government brought about its own decline whilst it was creating order and peace. As soon as this tendency of public opinion began to be manifested externally the leaders of parties who lived by the passions of the people began to work it to their own advantage. The position of the federal government then became exceedingly critical. Its enemies were in possession of the popular favor and they obtained the right of conducting its policy by pledging themselves to lessen its influence. From that time forwards the government of the Union has invariably been obliged to recede as often as it has attempted to enter the list with the government of the states. And whenever an interpretation of the terms of the federal constitution has been called for that interpretation has most frequently been opposed to the Union and favorable to the states. The constitution invested the federal government with the right of providing for the interests of the nation and it had been held that no other authority was so fit to superintend the internal improvements which affected the prosperity of the whole Union such for instance as the cutting of canals. But the states were alarmed at a power distinct from their own which could thus dispose of a portion of their territory and they were afraid that the central government would by this means acquire a formidable extent of patronage within their own confines and exercise a degree of influence which they intended to reserve exclusively to their own agents. The Democratic Party which has constantly been opposed to the increase of the federal authority then accused the Congress of usurpation and the Chief Magistrate of Ambition. The central government was intimidated by the opposition and it soon acknowledged its error promising exactly to confine its influence for the future within the circle which was prescribed to it. The constitution confers upon the Union the right of treating with foreign nations. The Indian tribes which border upon the frontiers of the United States had usually been regarded in this light. As long as these savages consented to retire before the civilized settlers, the federal right was not contested. But as soon as the Indian tribe attempted to fix its dwelling upon a given spot, the adjacent states claimed possession of the lands and the rights of sovereignty over the natives. The central government soon recognized both these claims and after it had concluded treaties with the Indians as independent nations, it gave them up as subjects to the legislative tyranny of the states. Some of the states which had been founded upon the coast of the Atlantic extended indefinitely to the West into wild regions where no European had ever penetrated. The state whose confines were irrevocably fixed looked with a jealous eye upon the unbounded regions which the future would enable their neighbors to explore. The latter then agreed with a view to conciliate the others and to facilitate the active union, to lay down their own boundaries and to abandon all the territory which lay beyond those limits to the confederation at large. Thence forward the federal government became the owner of all the uncultivated lands which lie beyond the borders of the 13 states first confederated. It was invested with the right of parceling and selling them and the sums to ride from this source were exclusively reserved to the public treasure of the union in order to furnish supplies for purchasing tracts of country from the Indians for opening roads to the remote settlements and for accelerating the increase of civilization as much as possible. New states have however been formed in the course of time in the midst of those wilds which were formerly seeded by the inhabitants of the shores of the Atlantic. Congress has gone on to sell for the profit of the nation at large the uncultivated lands which those new states contained. But the latter at length asserted that as they were now fully constituted they ought to enjoy the exclusive right of converting the produce of these sails to their own use. As their remonstrances became more and more threatening Congress thought fit to deprive the union of a portion of the privileges which it had hitherto enjoyed. And at the end of 1832 it passed a law by which the greatest part of the revenue derived from the sale of lands was made over to the new western republics although the lands themselves were not seeded to them. The slightest observation in the United States enables one to appreciate the advantage which the country derives from the bank. These advantages are of several kinds but one of them is peculiarly striking to the stranger. The bank notes of the United States are taken upon the borders of the desert for the same value as at Philadelphia where the bank conducts its operations. The bank of the United States is nevertheless the object of great animosity. Its directors have proclaimed their hostility to the president and they are accused not without some show of probability of having abused their influence to thwart his election. The president therefore attacks the establishment which they represent with all the warmth of personal enmity and he is encouraged in the pursuit of his revenge by the conviction that he is supported by the secret proprensities of the majority. The bank may be regarded as the great monetary tie of the union just as Congress is the great legislative tie and the same passions which tend to render the states independent of the central power contribute to the overthrow of the bank. The bank of the United States always holds a great number of the notes issued by the provincial banks which it can at any time oblige them to convert into cash. It has itself nothing to fear from a similar demand as the extent of its resources enables it to meet all claims. But the existence of the provincial banks is thus threatened and their operations are restricted since they are only able to issue a quantity of notes duly proportioned to their capital. They submit with impatience to this salutary control. The newspapers which they have bought over and the president whose interest renders them their instrument attack the bank with the greatest vehemence. They rouse the local passions and the blind democratic instinct of the country to aid their cause and they assert that the bank directors form a permanent aristocratic body whose influence must ultimately be felt in the government and must affect those principles of equality upon which society rests in America. The contest between the bank and its opponents is only an incident in the great struggle which is going on in America between the provinces and the central power, between the spirit of democratic independence and the spirit of gradation and subordination. I do not mean that the enemies of the bank are identically the same individuals who on other points attack the federal government, but I assert that the attacks directed against the bank of the United States originate in the same propensities which mitigate against the federal government and that the very numerous opponents of the former afford a deplorable symptom of the decreasing support of the latter. The union has never displayed so much weakness as in the celebrated question of the tariff. The wars of the France Revolution and of 1812 had created manufacturing establishments in the north of the union by cutting off all free communication between America and Europe. When peace was concluded and the channel of intercourse reopened by which the produce of Europe was transmitted to the new world, the Americans thought fit to establish a system of import duties for the twofold purpose of protecting their incipient manufacturers and of paying off the amount of the debt contracted during the war. The southern states which have no manufacturers to encourage and which are exclusively agricultural soon complained of this measure. Such were the simple facts and I do not pretend to examine in this place whether their complaints were well founded or unjust. As early as the year 1820, South Carolina declared in a petition to Congress that the tariff was unconstitutional, oppressive and unjust. And the states of Georgia, Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama and Mississippi subsequently remonstrated against it with more or less vigor. But Congress far from lending an ear to these complaints raised the scale of the tariff duties in the years 1824 and 1828 and recognized anew the principle on which it was founded. A doctrine was then proclaimed or rather revived in the South which took the name of nullification. I have shown in the proper place that the object of the federal constitution was not to form a league but to create a national government. The Americans of the United States form a soul and undivided people in all the cases which are specified by that constitution. And upon these points, the will of the nation is expressed as it is in all constitutional nations by the voice of the majority. When the majority has pronounced its decision it is the duty of the minority to submit. Such is the sound legal doctrine and the only one which agrees with the text of the constitution and the known intention of those who framed it. The partisans of nullification in the South maintain on the contrary that the intention of the Americans in uniting was not to reduce themselves to the condition of one and the same people. That they meant to constitute a league of independent states and that each state consequently retains its entire sovereignty, if not de facto at least de jure and has the right of putting its own construction upon the laws of Congress and of suspending their execution within the limits of its own territory if they are held to be unconstitutional and unjust. The entire doctrine of nullification is comprised in a sentence uttered by Vice President Calhoun, the head of that party in the South, before the Senate of the United States in the year 1833, could. The constitution is a compact to which the states were parties in their sovereign capacity. Now whenever a compact is entered into by parties which acknowledge no tribunal above their authority to decide in the last resort, each of them has a right to judge for itself in relation to the nature, extent and obligations of the instrument. It is evident that a similar doctrine destroys the very basis of the federal constitution and brings back all the evils of the old confederation from which the Americans were supposed to have had to save deliverance. When South Carolina perceived that Congress turned a deaf ear to its remonstrances, it threatened to apply the doctrine of nullification to the federal tariff bill. Congress persisted in its former system and at length the storm broke out. In the course of 1832, the citizens of South Carolina named a national convention to consult upon the extraordinary measures which they were called upon to take. And on November 24th of the same year, this convention promulgated a law under the form of a decree which annulled the federal law of the tariff for bad the levy of the imposts which that law commands and refused to recognize the appeal which might be made to the federal courts of law. This decree was only to be put in execution in the ensuing month of February and it was intimated that if Congress modified the tariff before that period, South Carolina might be induced to proceed no further with her amenities. And a vague desire was afterwards expressed of submitting the question to an extraordinary assembly of all the Confederate states. End of section 40.