ROANE ON THE NATIONAL CONSTITUTION.

1. PUBLIC LETTER OF "PLAIN DEALER" TO GOVERNOR RANDOLPH, FEBRUARY 13, 1788.*

To the Editor of the Chronicle:

"A writer calling himself Plain Dealer, who is bitter in Principle v. The Constitution, has attacked me in the paper. I suspect the author to be Mr. Spencer Roane, and the importunities of some to me in public and private are designed to throw me unequivocally and without condition into the opposition."

After a long and general expectancy of some dissertation on the subject of the proposed Federal Constitution, worthy the first magistrate of the respectable State of Virginia, a letter of His Excellency, Governor Randolph, of October 10, 1787, is at length presented to the public. Previous to the appearance of this letter, various opinions were prevailing in different parts of this country respecting the gentleman's real opinion on the subject of the said Constitution; and it becomes difficult for many to conjecture how His Excellency would devise a middle course, so as to catch the spirit of all his countrymen, and to reconcile himself to all parties. It was not known to me, at least, that His Excellency felt an "unwillingness to disturb the harmony of the assemblage" on this important subject, nor could I conceive that the sentiment of even the oldest man among us could "excite a contest unfavorable" to the fairest discussion of the question. On the other hand, I thought it right that the adversaries of the Constitution, as well

*Mr. Paul Leicester Ford identified this letter and reprinted it in his "Essays on the Constitution," page 385, published in Brooklyn, 1892. It is republished now because of the scarcity of Roane's writings, and because it seems to have been the beginning of Roane's attacks on the proposed National Constitution and its interpretation by John Marshall in later years.

as its framers, should candidly avow their real sentiments as early and decidedly as possible, for the information of those who are to determine. It is true, His Excellency was prevented from delivering his opinion sooner, "by motives of delicacy arising from two questions depending before the General Assembly-one respecting the Constitution, the other respecting himself," but I am of opinion that during the pendency of a question concerning the Constitution, every information on the subject is most properly to be adduced; and I did not know that being or not being Governor of Virginia (an office in a great degree nominal) was sufficient to deter a real patriot from speaking the warning voice of opposition, in behalf of the liberties of his country.

The letter above mentioned can derive no aid from panegyric as to the brilliancy and elegance of its style, for, unlike the threadbare discourses of other statesmen on the dry subject of Government, it amuses us with a number of fine words. But how shall I express my dislike of the ultimatum of His Excellency's letter, wherein he declares "that to offer our best effort for amendment, they cannot be obtained, he will adopt the Constitution as it is.” How is this declaration reconcilable to a former opinion of His Excellency's, expressed to the Honorable Richard Henry Lee, and repeated by the latter gentleman in his letter,* as printed in the public papers, "that either a monarchy or an aristocracy will be generated from the proposed Constitution." Good God! how can the first magistrate and father of a pure republican government, after a feeble parade of opposition, and before his desired plan of amendments has been determined upon, declare that he will accept a Constitution which is to beget a monarchy or an aristocracy? How can such a determination be reconcilable to the feelings of Virginia, and to the principles which have prevailed in almost every Legislature of the Union, who looked no farther than the amendment of our present Republican Confederation? I have charity to believe that the respectable characters, who signed this Constitu*See Elliott's Debates, I, 503.

tion did so, thinking that neither a monarchy nor an aristocracy would ensue, but that they should thereby preserve and ameliorate the Republic of America; but never until now, that His Excellency has let the cat out of the bag, did I suppose that any member of the Convention, at least from the Republican State of Virginia, would accept a Constitution, whereby the Republic of his constituents is to be sacrificed in its infancy, and before it has had a fair trial. But His Excellency will adopt this Constitution "BECAUSE HE WOULD REGULATE HIMSELF BY THE SPIRIT OF AMERICA." But is His Excellency a prophet, as well as a politician? Can he foretell future events? How else can he at this time discover what the spirit of America is? But, admitting his infallibility for a moment, how far will his principle carry him? Why, that if the dominion of Shays, instead of that of the new Constitution, should be generally accepted, and become the spirit of America, His Excellency, too, would turn Shayite! And yet this question of the Constitution is "ONE ON WHICH THE FATE OF THOUSANDS YET UNBORN DEPENDS." It is His Excellency's opinion, as expressed in the aforesaid letter, that the powers which are acknowledged necessary for supporting the Union, cannot safely be entrusted to our Congress as at present constituted; and his vain objection is "that the representation of the States bears no proportion to their importance." This is literally true, but is equally true of the Senate of the proposed Constitution, which is to be an essential part of the Legislature; and yet His Excellency will accept the latter, and not agree to invest the necessary powers in the former, although the above objection equally applies to both. Nay, I am inclined to believe that the injurious consequences of this unequal representation will operate more strongly under the new government, for under the present Confederation the members of Congress are removable at the pleasure of their constituents; whereas, under the proposed Constitution, the only method of removing a wicked, unskilful or treacherous senator, will be by impeachment before. the Senate itself, of which he is a member.

These, Mr. Printer, are some of the inconsistencies which even a slight observation of the above letter will suggest. It is not my purpose to oppose now, or to investigate, the merits of the Constitution. This I leave to abler pens, and to the common sense of my countrymen. The science of government is in itself simple and plain; and if in the history of mankind no perfect government can be found, let it be attributed to the chicane, perfidy and ambition of those who fabricate them, and who are, more or less, in common with all mankind, infected with a lust of power. It is, however, certainly not consistent with sound sense to accept a Constitution, knowing it to be imperfect; and His Excellency acknowledges the proposed one to have radical objections. A Constitution ought to be like Cæsar's wife, not only good, but unsuspected, since it is the highest compact which men are capable of forming, and involves the dearest rights of life, liberty and property. I fear His Excellency has done no service to his favorite scheme of amendment (and he, too, seems to be of the same opinion), by his very candid declaration at the end of his letter. Subtlety and chicane in politics are equally odious and dishonorable; but when it is considered that the present is not the golden age-the epoch of virtue, candor and integrity-that the views of ambitious and designing men are continually working to their own aggrandizement, and to the overthrow of liberty, and that the discordant interests of thirteen different Commonwealths are to be reconciled and promoted by one general government; common reason will teach us that the utmost caution, secrecy, and political sagacity is requisite to secure to each the important blessings of a good government.

I shall now take my leave of his Excellency and the above-mentioned letter, declaring my highest veneration for his character and abilities; and it can be no impeachment of the talents of any man who has not served a regular apprenticeship to politics, to say, that his opinions on an intricate political question are erroneous. For if, as the celebrated Dr. Blackstone observes, "in every art, occupation or science, commercial or mechanical, some method of instruc

tion or apprenticeship is held necessary, how much more requisite will such apprenticeship be found to be, in the science of government, the noblest and most difficult of any.-A PLAIN DEALER.

2. CASE OF MCCULLOCH v. MARYLAND.*

To the Editor of the Enquirer:

I.

SIR-I have read with considerable attention the opinion pronounced by the Chief Justice of the U. S. in the case of McCulloch against the State of Maryland. In that opinion we are informed, First, That it is the unanimous and decided opinion of the Supreme Court, that the Act to incorporate the Bank of the U. S. is a law, made in pursuance of the Constitution, and is a part of the supreme law of the land; and, Secondly, That the court is also unanimously of opinion that the law of Maryland, imposing a tax on the Bank of Maryland, is unconstitutional and void. We are not informed whether this whole court united in the course of reasoning adopted by the Chief Justice, nor whether they all accorded in the various positions and principles which he advanced. It may be, that some of them admitted that the bank law is unconstitutional, and yet did not think proper to deny that the several States are parties to the Federal compact, it may be, that some of them, without giving to the term "necessary" the liberal and latitudinous construction attached to it by the Chief Justice, and before him by Mr. Secretary Hamilton, may yet have thought that the measure of incorporating a bank was "necessary and proper" for carrying into execution some of the specific powers granted to Congress; or some of them may have believed that it was the duty of Congress to have judged of that "necessity and propriety;" and having exercised their un

*The papers signed "Amphictyon" have been identified by examination of the Jefferson and Madison correspondence now in the Library of Congress.