An American Citizen, Number I

IT is impoſſible for an honeſt and feeling mind, of any nation or country whatever, to be inſenſible to the preſent circumſtances of America. Were I an Eaſt Indian, or a Turk, I ſhould conſider this ſingular ſituation of a part of my fellow creatures as the moſt curious and intereſting. Intimately connected with 〈◊〉 country, as a citizen of the union, I confeſs it entirely engroſſes my mind and feelings.

To take a proper view of the ground on which we ſtand, it may be neceſſary to recollect the manner in which the United States were originally ſettled and eſtabliſhed. Want of charity in the religious ſyſtems of Europe, and of juſtice in their political governments, were the principal moving cauſes, which drove the emigrants of various countries to the American continent. The Congregationaliſts, Quakers, Preſbyterians and other Britiſh diſſenters, the Catholics of England and Ireland, the Hugonots of France, the German Lutherans, Calviniſts, and Moravians, with ſeveral other ſocieties, eſtabliſhed themſelves in the different colonies, thereby laying the ground of that liberality in eccleſiaſtical affairs, which has been obſervable ſince the late revolution. Religious liberty naturally promotes correſponding diſpoſitions in matters of government. The conſtitution of England, as it ſtood on paper, was one of the freeſt, at that time, in the world, and the American colonies conſidered themſelves as entitled to the fulleſt enjoyment of it. Thus, when the ill-judged diſcuſſions of late times in England brought into queſtion the rights of this country, as it ſtood connected with the Britiſh crown, we were found more ſtrongly impreſſed with their importance, and accurately acquainted with their extent, than the wiſeſt and moſt learned of our brethren beyond the Atlantic. When the greateſt names in parliament inſiſted on the power of that body over the commerce of the colonies, and even the right to bind us in all caſes whatſoever, America, ſeeing that it was only another form of tyranny, inſiſted upon the immutable truth, that taxation and repreſentation are inſeparable; and, while a deſire of harmony and other conſiderations induced her into an acquieſcence in the commercial regulations of Great-Britain, it was done from the declared neceſſity of the caſe, and with a cautious, full, and abſolute ſaving of our voluntarily-ſuſpended rights. The parliament was perſevering, and America continued firm, till hoſtilities and open war commenced, and finally the late revolution cloſed the conteſt for-ever.

It is evident, from this ſhort detail, and the reflections which ariſe from it, that the quarrel between the United States and the parliament of Great-Britain did not ariſe ſo much from objections to the form of government, though undoubtedly a better one by far is now within our reach, as from a difference concerning certain important rights, reſulting from the eſſential principles of liberty, which their conſtitution actually preſerved to all the ſubjects reſiding within the realm. It was not aſſerted by America, that the people of the iſland of Great-Britain were ſlaves, but that we, though poſſeſſed abſolutely of the ſame rights, were not admitted to enjoy an equal degree of freedom.

When the declaration of independence compleated the ſeparation between the two countries, new governments were neceſſarily eſtabliſhed. Many circumſtances led to the adoption of the republican form, among which was the predilection of the people. In deviſing the frames of government, it may have been difficult to avoid extremes oppoſite to the vices of that we had juſt rejected; nevertheleſs, many of the ſtate conſtitutions we have choſen are truly excellent. Our misfortunes have been, that in the firſt inſtance we adopted no national government at all; but were kept together by common danger only; and that in the confuſions of a civil war, we framed a foederal conſtitution, now univerſally admitted to be inadequate to the preſervation of liberty, property, and the union. The queſtion is not, then, how far our ſtate conſtitutions are good, or otherwiſe—the object of our wiſhes is, to amend and ſupply the evident and allowed errors and defects of the foederal government. Let us conſider a while, that which is now propoſed to us—let us compare it with the ſo much boaſted Britiſh form of government, and ſee how much more it favours the people, and how completely it ſecures their rights, remembering, at the ſame time, that we did not diſſolve our connection with that country ſo much on account of its conſtitution, as the perverſion and mal-adminiſtration of it.

In the firſt place, let us look at the nature and powers of the head of that country, and thoſe of the oſtenſible head of ours.

The Britiſh king is the great biſhop or ſupreme head of an eſtabliſhed church, with an immenſe patronage annexed. In this capacity he commands a number of votes in the houſe of lords, by creating biſhops, who, beſides their great incomes, have votes in that aſſembly, and are judges in the laſt reſort. Theſe prelates have alſo many honorable and lucrative places to beſtow, and thus from their wealth, learning, dignities, powers, and patronage, give a great luſtre and an enormous influence to the crown.

In America, our preſident will not only be without theſe influencing advantages, but they will be in the poſſeſſion of the people at large, to ſtrengthen their hands in the event of a conteſt with him. All religious funds, honors and powers, are in the gift of numberleſs unconnected, diſunited and contending corporations, wherein the principle of perfect equality univerſally prevails. In ſhort, danger from eccleſiaſtical tyranny, that long ſtanding and ſtill remaining curſe of the people —that ſacrilegious engine of royal power in ſome countries—can be feared by no man in the United States. In Britain, their king is for life—in America, our Preſident will always 〈◊〉 one of the people at the end of four years. In that country, the king is hereditary, and may be an ideot, a knave, or a tyrant by nature, or ignorant from neglect of his education, yet cannot be removed, for "he can do no wrong." This is a favorite maxim of their conſtitution. In America, as the Preſident is to be one of the people at the end of his ſhort term, ſo will he and his fellow citizens remember, that he was originally one of the people; and that he is created by their breath. Further, he cannot be an ideot, probably not a knave or tyrant, for thoſe whom nature makes ſo diſcover it before the age of thirty-five, until which period he cannot be elected. It appears, we have not admitted that he can do no wrong, but have rather pre-ſuppoſed he may and ſometimes will do wrong, by providing for his impeachment, his trial, and his peaceable and complete removal.

In England the king has a power to create members of the upper houſe, who are judges in the higheſt court, as well as legiſlators. Our Preſident not only cannot make members of the Senate, but their creation, like his own, is by the people, through their repreſentatives: and a member of Aſſembly may and will be as certainly diſmiſſed at the end of his year, for electing a weak or wicked Senator, as for any other blunder or miſconduct.

The king of England has complete legiſlative power, while our Preſident can only uſe it when the other ſervants of the people are divided. But in all great caſes affecting the national intereſts or ſafety, his modified and reſtrained power muſt give way to the ſenſe of two-thirds of the legiſlature. In fact it amounts to no more, than a ſerious duty impoſed upon him to requeſt both houſes to re-conſider any matter on which he entertains doubts or feels apprehenſions; and hers the people have a ſtrong hold upon him from his ſole and perſonal reſponſibility.

The Preſident of the upper-houſe (or the chancellor) in England, is appointed by their king, while our Vice-Preſident, who is choſen by the people, through the electors and the Senate, is not at all dependant on the Preſident, but may exerciſe equal powers on ſome occaſions. In all royal governments, an helpleſs infant or an inexperienced youth may wear the crown. Our Preſident muſt be matured by the experience of years, and being born among us, his character at thirty-five muſt be fully underſtood. Wiſdom, virtue and active qualities of mind and body can alone make him the firſt ſervant of a free and enlightened people.

Our Preſident will fall very much ſhort indeed of any prince in his annual income, which will not be hereditary, but the abſolute allowance of the people, paſſing through the hands of their other ſervants from year to year, as it becomes neceſſary. There will be no burdens on the nation, to provide for his heir, or other branches of his family. It is probable, from the ſtate of property in America, and other circumſtances, that many citizens will exceed him in ſhow and expence,—thoſe dazzling trappings of kingly rank and power. He will have no authority to make a treaty, without two thirds of the ſenate, nor can he appoint ambaſſadors or other great officers without their approbation, which will remove the idea of patronage and influence, and of perſonal obligation and dependence. The appointment of even the inferior officers may be taken out of his hands by an act of congreſs at any time; he can create no nobility or titles of honour, nor take away offices during good behaviour. His perſon is not ſo much protected as that of a member of the houſe of repreſentatives; for he may be proceeded againſt like any other man in the ordinary courſe of law. He appoints no officer of the ſeparate ſtates. He will have no influence from placemen in the legiſlature, nor can he prorogue or diſſolve it. He will have no power over the treaſures of the ſtate; and, laſtly, as he is created through the electors, by the people at large, he muſt ever look up to the ſupport of his creators. From ſuch a ſervant, with powers ſo limited and tranſitory, there can be no danger, eſpecially when we conſider the ſolid foundations on which our national liberties are immoveably fixed, by the other proviſions of this excellent conſtitution. Whatever of dignity or authority he poſſeſſes, is a delegated part of their majeſty and their political omnipotence, tranſiently veſted in him by the people themſelves, for their own happineſs.