8. Discuss the character of the colonial governor. (Beard, pages 3-7.)

9. What were the chief powers of the colonial legislature? (Beard, page 8.)

10. Describe the colonial judiciary. (Beard, pages 12-14.)

11. What was the extent of the suffrage in colonial times? (Beard, pages 8-10.)

TOPICS FOR INVESTIGATION AND REPORT

I

1. Ill.u.s.trate the nature of government by tracing the origin and development of a club or society of which you are a member, or with which you are familiar.

2. Early pioneer life in your community, with particular reference to social and economic conditions. (Consult local histories, or, where possible, interview an old settler in your section.)

3. Origin and development of local government in your section.

(Proceed as with Topic 2.)

4. The origin of the first const.i.tution of your State.

5. A cla.s.sification of the present-day governments of the world on the basis of their democratic character.

II

6. Genesis of the limited monarchy. (White, _The Making of the English Const.i.tution,_ pages 253-285.)

7. Origin and development of Parliament. (White, _The Making of the English Const.i.tution,_ pages 298-322.)

8. Origin and development of the English judiciary. (White, _The Making of the English Const.i.tution,_ pages 122-252.)

9. Historical evolution of democracy. (Bryce, _Modern Democracies,_ vol. 1, chapter iv.)

10. Theoretical basis of democracy. (Bryce, _Modern Democracies,_ vol.

1, chapter v.)

11. Difficulty of defining the term "democracy." (Bryce, _Modern Democracies,_ vol. 1, chapter iii.)

12. American political theory before the Revolution. (Beard, _Readings in American Government and Politics,_ pages 14-16.)

13. Contributions of the West to American Democracy. (Turner, _The Frontier in American History,_ chapter ix.)

14. Development of the General Court in Ma.s.sachusetts. (Osgood, _The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century,_ vol. i, pages 141-166.)

15. A Boston town meeting. (Beard, _Readings in American Government and Politics,_ pages 11-13.)

16. Local government in Virginia. (Bruce, _Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century,_ vol. ii, chapter xx. Beard, _Readings in American Government and Politics,_ pages 13-14.)

CHAPTER III

THE DEVELOPMENT OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY

22. LOCAL VERSUS NATIONAL SPIRIT.--The outbreak of the American Revolution proved that the colonies were so deeply attached to democracy that they were willing to fight for it. But the spirit which animated the Revolution was local, rather than national. The colonial protests which in 1776 reached their climax in the Declaration of Independence, had to do almost entirely with the rights of the colonies as individual states, and with the determination of those states to defend the principle of self-government. The war created thirteen practically independent states, among which the spirit of state sovereignty was much stronger than was the inclination to form an indissoluble union. The Revolution emphasized local and state interests rather than intercolonial cooperation, and however much the colonists appreciated local democracy in 1776, they had yet to learn to think in terms of a national patriotism. A brief review of the attempts at union before 1787 will serve to ill.u.s.trate this important point.

23. EARLY ATTEMPTS AT UNION.--The first notable attempt at union was made in 1643, when Ma.s.sachusetts Bay, Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven formed a league, chiefly for the purpose of mutual defense. This league was in force for forty years, and rendered effective service in the Indian wars.

In 1754 delegates from seven of the colonies met at Albany and adopted a plan of union proposed by Benjamin Franklin. The plan provided for a colonial army, the control of public lands, legislation affecting the general welfare, and the levying of taxes for intercolonial projects.

In America Franklin's plan was regarded with considerable favor, but it was never given serious consideration by the British Parliament.

The project fell through.

Still later (1765) delegates from nine of the colonies met in the Stamp Act Congress, for the purpose of drawing up a protest against the taxation policy of the mother country.

The two continental congresses may also be regarded as steps toward union. The first of these met in 1774 and concerned itself chiefly with a declaration of rights and grievances. The second (1775-1781) a.s.sumed revolutionary powers, and, with the consent of the people, exercised those powers during the greater part of the war period.

24. THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION.--Nothing so clearly ill.u.s.trates the sectional feeling of that era as the history of the Articles of Confederation. The Articles were adopted by the Second Continental Congress in 1777, but on account of the tardiness with which some of the states ratified them, they were not put into actual operation until March 1, 1781. By the terms of the Articles the states yielded some of their powers, the central government being given the right to declare war, borrow and coin money, establish post offices, and otherwise act for the general good. On the other hand, the Articles declared that "each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right which is not by this federation delegated to the United States."

Thus the new government was a confederation or league of states, rather than a federal government such as we have to-day. There was no national executive, and no judiciary. All authority was concentrated in a one-chambered congress, in which each state was represented by not fewer than two and not more than seven members. The delegates were subject to recall by the legislatures of their respective states. Each state had one vote, which was determined by a majority of the state's delegates who were present when the vote was taken.

25. DEFECTS OF THE CONFEDERATION GOVERNMENT.--The government established by the Articles of Confederation had a number of grave defects. The fundamental difficulty was that the central government had no real authority or power. The Congress of the Confederation could reach individuals only through the action of the state governments, and these it could not coerce. Thus the Congress could declare war, and make requisitions upon the states for troops, but it could not enlist a single soldier. It could make laws, but had no power to enforce them. It could make treaties with foreign governments, but could not oblige the states to respect those agreements. The central government could not levy taxes, but was obliged to accept whatever sums the states chose to contribute. The Confederation government could not even protect itself, or the states, against violence. It lacked force, and without the ability to exert force, a government is a government in name only.

Not only did the central government fail to enlist the respect and support of the states, but it could not induce the states to respect or support one another. Congress had no power to regulate either foreign or domestic commerce, each state being free to control the commercial activities of its citizens as it saw fit In many cases the states engaged in trade wars, that is, they levied heavy duties upon the commerce of one another, or even refused to allow their citizens to buy goods from, or sell goods to, persons in neighboring states.

Matters calling for unity of action and friendly cooperation, such as roads and ca.n.a.ls, were ignored or neglected because of interstate jealousy. Whereas they should have united against the grave dangers of the period immediately following the war, the states often wasted time and energy in controversy and strife.

26. FAILURE OF THE CONFEDERATION GOVERNMENT.--The Confederation government, established in 1781, functioned weakly during the remaining two years of the war, and then declined rapidly in power and influence. The defects of the Articles could not be remedied, for amendment was by unanimous consent only, and on every occasion that an amendment was proposed, one or more states refused their a.s.sent.

According to John Fiske, the five years following the peace of 1783 const.i.tuted the most critical period in the history of the American people. Business was demoralized. Most of the states were issuing worthless paper money, and several of them pa.s.sed laws impairing the obligation of contracts. In a movement known as Shay's Rebellion (1786-1787), a portion of the debtor cla.s.s of Ma.s.sachusetts attempted to prevent the collection of debts. Paper money depreciated so greatly that in many places it ceased to pa.s.s as currency. The central government could not raise money to meet its ordinary expenses, and in 1783 Congress was forced to flee Philadelphia to escape the wrath of some eighty Pennsylvania soldiers whom it could not pay.

Demoralization and civil strife at home were matched by ridicule and suspicion abroad. Congress could not pay the interest on the national debt. As early as 1783 our foreign credit was gone. Many European statesmen scoffed at the American government. France denied the existence of a general government in America. In England our diplomatic representatives suffered numerous humiliations. They were told, for example, that the British would not relinquish the western forts promised us by the Treaty of Paris until our national government was able to force the several American states to observe the treaty.

27. OBSTACLES TO UNION.--There are three important reasons why the states failed to draw together into a firm union before 1787.

In the first place, each state considered itself a sovereign body, and of governments above and beyond itself it was naturally suspicious.

Many of the Americans had regarded the British government as a super- government, imposed against the will of the American people, and maintained in spite of their protests. The Dominion of New England, which, prior to the adoption of the Articles of Confederation, had been the nearest approach to union, was recalled with anger and in fear. This plan, forced upon the Americans in 1686 by the king, united eight of the colonies under the rule of Governor Andros. The union was dissolved by the Bloodless Revolution of 1688, but the arbitrary rule of Andros was long cited by the Americans as proof of the despotic character of any government beyond that of the individual states.

A second explanation of the failure of the states to unite before 1787 is to be found in the social and economic differences existing among the states. Most of the inhabitants of New England were grouped in small, compact communities, and were engaged in shipbuilding and commerce, rather than in agriculture. There was an aristocratic group, but most of the people belonged to the middle cla.s.s, and were simple and even severe in their tastes. In the middle colonies, on the other hand, most of the people were small farmers of mixed religious and racial character. Social cla.s.ses existed to a considerable extent.

Finally, the South was devoted to large plantations, cultivated by black slaves. Social lines were sharply drawn, and a genuine aristocratic cla.s.s was already well formed.

A third reason for the weakness of the cooperative spirit among the states is to be found in the lack of means of transportation and communication. Travel was mostly confined to natural waterways, or to rude paths over which horses proceeded with great difficulty. As late as 1800 it often took a horseman longer to go from Boston to New York than it now takes to go by rail from New York to San Francisco and back again. There were no railroads in those days, no telephones, no telegraph, and practically no postal service. Life was primarily rural, even on the seacoast. Most interests centered about the local community, or at farthest, about the colony or state. In many sections there was little exchange of products or of ideas. From the resulting isolation there developed a strong feeling of localism or provincialism. Ignorance and suspicion of intercolonial affairs gave rise to misunderstandings, and emphasized differences and disputes which in themselves were unimportant. Thus jealousy and hostility often sprang up where mutual confidence and cooperation were sorely needed.

28. NEGATIVE FORCES FAVORING UNION.--The failure of the Articles of Confederation is one of the most discouraging chapters in the development of American democracy. And yet it is an indispensable chapter, for it demonstrated, far more convincingly than could any theoretical argument, that there must be one great American nation rather than thirteen or more unrelated republics. Six years of practical experience with the Articles of Confederation taught the absolute necessity of a strong central government. The weaknesses of the Confederation government const.i.tuted the most spectacular of the forces favoring union in 1787, and yet these forces were negative in character: the states accepted the Const.i.tution of 1787 not so much because they were attracted by it, as because they saw little chance of getting along without it.

29. POSITIVE FORCES FAVORING UNION.--It should be noted, on the other hand, that for a long period previous to the adoption of the Const.i.tution of 1787, certain positive forces were impelling the states toward union. In their Old World homes most of the settlers had occupied somewhat the same social position, and had been used to somewhat the same economic conditions. This common background const.i.tuted, in their New World homes, a unifying force of great importance. Long before 1787, too, the great majority of the settlers were of English descent, speaking the English language, and, except for the Roman Catholics of Maryland, professing some form of Protestantism.

In spite of the numerous jealousies and rivalries among the various sections of the country, there were at work forces which tended to break down the spirit of localism or provincialism. Though the Revolution established thirteen separate states, the war had encouraged the Americans to feel that they were a single people with a common destiny. The soldiers of various sections had rubbed elbows with one another during the French and Indian wars, and during the Revolution. This had served to encourage a feeling of comradeship between the inhabitants of different communities. The population of the country was doubling every twenty years, and groups previously isolated were coming into contact with one another. Interstate cooperation was not only more necessary than ever before, but it was less difficult to bring about. Highways were being improved, and the postal service gradually extended, with the result that a more wholesome social life was made possible.