http://www.teaparty911.com/info/federalist-papers-summaries/no_85.html
Federalist Papers Summary No. 85
The Federalist Papers Summary No 85: HamiltonMay 28, 1788This paper makes the argument that the draft Constitution should be ratified now. He begins with two subjects; “the analogy of the proposed government to your own state constitution” (meaning New York where the papers were first published) and “the additional security which its adoption will afford to republican government, to liberty and to property”. He then goes on to compare the state constitution to the national plan which has a remarkable resemblance. I will not repeat the similarities but he notes that many of those against the national plan are devoted to the state plan.The additional securities to republican government, to liberty and to property to be derived from the adoption of the plan are chiefly the result of the task of preserving the union. This will restrain local factions and insurrections, and the ambition of powerful individuals who become despots of the people, in reducing foreign intervention, in preventing the military establishments that would result from wars between the states in a divided situation, in the guarantee of a republican form of government, in the exclusion of titles of nobility, and in the elimination of many practices of the state governments that have created mutual distrust in their citizens.Having now fulfilled the task he assigned himself, he apologizes for having occasionally betrayed himself “into intemperances of expression” but the charges of conspiracy against the liberties of the people and other charges against the wealthy and well-borne “have been of a nature to demand the reprobation of all honest men”.Every man is now bound to decide for himself from all that has been written if the constitution should be ratified. “Let him reflect that the object upon which he is to decide is not a particular interest of the community, but the very existence of the nation”.A final thought is whether to continue the process of drafting the constitution to make it perfect as some would prefer or to ratify it now and make amendments later. Even the friends of the draft have admitted it is not perfect and this has given the enemies the opportunity to suggest we should make it perfect before ratification. But the nation is in jeopardy because we are not united and amending the plan now before adoption will delay the process for every modification to the draft creates a new draft which will then be an entirely new consideration which will require unanimous approval of the convention (presumably a result of the article of confederation) whereas if adopted now then amendments can be approved by nine of the thirteen states. And there is a process included in the draft for making amendments even if the congress does not agree. Two thirds of the states can call for a convention for the purpose of amending the Constitution and congress must do so. Further with this process “we may safely rely on the disposition of the state legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachment of the national authority”. We wish that were true.His final plea for ratification begins with “A NATION without a NATIONAL GOVERNMENT is in my view an awful spectacle. The establishment of a constitution in time of profound peace is a PRODIGY to the completion of which I look forward with trembling anxiety. I can reconcile it to no rules of prudence to let go the hold we now have, in so arduous an enterprise, upon seven out of thirteen states (that have already ratified the plan I guess); and after having passed over so considerable a part of the ground to recommence the course. I dread the more the consequences of new attempts because I KNOW that POWERFUL INDIVIDUALS are enemies to a general national government in every possible shape.”Summary Written by Donald Mellon
- looks like we have come full circle.are there still enough that even want a free country ?Joe
- Yes, it is just a big ass job to educate enough to take the nation back - it might be one State at a time.
- "The more rules and regulations, The more thieves and robbers there will be."-- Lao-Tzu[Li Erh] (570-490 BC) 'Old Sage', Father of TaoismSource: Tao Te Ching
"A Native American grandfather was talking to his grandson about how he felt about a tragedy. He said, “I feel as if I have two wolves fighting in my heart. One wolf is the vengeful, angry, violent one. The other wolf is the loving, compassionate one.” The grandson asked him, “Which wolf will win the fight in your heart?” The grandfather answered, “The one I feed.” "-- Native American Story
Abraham Lincoln
Steven Spielberg's "Lincoln" has been a box-office hit and nominated for 12 Academy Awards, including best picture, best director and best actor for Daniel Day-Lewis, who portrayed our 16th president. I haven't seen the movie; therefore, this column is not about the movie but about a man deified by many. My colleague Thomas DiLorenzo, economics professor at Loyola University Maryland, exposed some of the Lincoln myth in his 2006 book, "Lincoln Unmasked." Now comes Joseph Fallon, cultural intelligence analyst and former U.S. Army Intelligence Center instructor, with his new e-book, "Lincoln Uncensored." Fallon's book examines 10 volumes of collected writings and speeches of Lincoln's, which include passages on slavery, secession, equality of blacks and emancipation. We don't have to rely upon anyone's interpretation. Just read his words to see what you make of them.In an 1858 letter, Lincoln said, "I have declared a thousand times, and now repeat that, in my opinion neither the General Government, nor any other power outside of the slave states, can constitutionally or rightfully interfere with slaves or slavery where it already exists." In a Springfield, Ill., speech, he explained, "My declarations upon this subject of negro slavery may be misrepresented, but can not be misunderstood. I have said that I do not understand the Declaration (of Independence) to mean that all men were created equal in all respects." Debating with Sen. Stephen Douglas, Lincoln said, "I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of ... making voters or jurors of Negroes nor of qualifying them to hold office nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races, which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality."You say, "His Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves! That proves he was against slavery." Lincoln's words: "I view the matter (Emancipation Proclamation) as a practical war measure, to be decided upon according to the advantages or disadvantages it may offer to the suppression of the rebellion." He also wrote: "I will also concede that emancipation would help us in Europe, and convince them that we are incited by something more than ambition." At the time Lincoln wrote the proclamation, war was going badly for the Union. London and Paris were considering recognizing the Confederacy and considering assisting it in its war effort.The Emancipation Proclamation was not a universal declaration. It detailed where slaves were freed, only in those states "in rebellion against the United States." Slaves remained slaves in states not in rebellion -- such as Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware. The hypocrisy of the Emancipation Proclamation came in for heavy criticism. Lincoln's own secretary of state, William Seward, said, "We show our sympathy with slavery by emancipating slaves where we cannot reach them and holding them in bondage where we can set them free."Lincoln did articulate a view of secession that would have been welcomed in 1776: "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and form a new one that suits them better. ... Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can may revolutionize and make their own of so much of the territory as they inhabit." But that was Lincoln's 1848 speech in the U.S. House of Representatives regarding the war with Mexico and the secession of Texas.Why didn't Lincoln feel the same about Southern secession? Following the money might help with an answer. Throughout most of our history, the only sources of federal revenue were excise taxes and tariffs. During the 1850s, tariffs amounted to 90 percent of federal revenue. Southern ports paid 75 percent of tariffs in 1859. What "responsible" politician would let that much revenue go?
No comments:
Post a Comment