"Seventhly, what can be a better or a n.o.bler work, and more worthy of a Christian, than to erect and support a reformed particular church in its infancy, and unite our forces with such a company of faithful people, as by timely a.s.sistance may grow stronger and prosper; but for want of it, may be put to great hazards, if not be wholly ruined.
"Eighthly, if any such as are known to be G.o.dly, and live in wealth and prosperity here, shall forsake all this to join with this reformed church, and with it run the hazard of a hard and mean condition, it will be an example of great use, both for the removing of scandal, and to give more life unto the faith of G.o.d"s people in their prayers for the plantation, and also to encourage others to join the more willingly in it."
Farther on, when he declares the principles of the church of New England with respect to morals, Mather inveighs with violence against the custom of drinking healths at table, which he denounces as a pagan and abominable practice. He proscribes with the same rigor all ornaments for the hair used by the female s.e.x, as well as their custom of having the arms and neck uncovered.
In another part of his work he relates several instances of witchcraft which had alarmed New England. It is plain that the visible action of the devil in the affairs of this world appeared to him an incontestible and evident fact.
This work of Cotton Mather displays in many places, the spirit of civil liberty and political independence which characterized the times in which he lived. Their principles respecting government are discoverable at every page. Thus, for instance, the inhabitants of Ma.s.sachusetts, in the year 1630, ten years after the foundation of Plymouth, are found to have devoted 400_l_. sterling to the establishment of the University of Cambridge. In pa.s.sing from the general doc.u.ments relative to the history of New England, to those which describe the several states comprised within its limits, I ought first to notice The History of the Colony of Ma.s.sachusetts, by Hutchinson, Lieutenant-Governor of the Ma.s.sachusetts Province, 2 vols., 8vo.
The history of Hutchinson, which I have several times quoted in the chapter to which this note relates, commences in the year 1628 and ends in 1750. Throughout the work there is a striking air of truth and the greatest simplicity of style; it is full of minute details.
The best history to consult concerning Connecticut is that of Benjamin Trumbull, ent.i.tled, A Complete History of Connecticut, Civil and Ecclesiastical, 1630-1764; 2 vols., 8vo., printed in 1818, at New Haven.
This history contains a clear and calm account of all the events which happened in Connecticut during the period given in the t.i.tle. The author drew from the best sources; and his narrative bears the stamp of truth.
All that he says of the early days of Connecticut is extremely curious.
See especially the const.i.tution of 1639, vol. i., ch. vi., p. 100; and also the penal laws of Connecticut, vol. i., ch. vii., p. 123.
The History of New Hampshire, by Jeremy Belknap, is a work held in merited estimation. It was printed at Boston in 1792, in 2 vols., 8vo. The third chapter of the first volume is particularly worthy of attention for the valuable details it affords on the political and religious principles of the puritans, on the causes of their emigration, and on their laws. The following curious quotation is given from a sermon delivered in 1663: "It concerneth New England always to remember that they are a plantation religious, not a plantation of trade. The profession of the purity of doctrine, worship, and discipline, is written on her forehead. Let merchants, and such as are increasing cent per cent, remember this, that worldly gain was not the end and design of the people of New England, but religion. And if any man among us make religion as twelve, and the world as thirteen, such an one hath not the true spirit of a true New Englishman." The reader of Belknap will find in his work more general ideas, and more strength of thought, than are to be met with in the American historians even to the present day.
Among the central states which deserve our attention for their remote origin, New York and Pennsylvania are the foremost. The best history we have of the former is ent.i.tled A History of New York, by William Smith, printed in London in 1757. Smith gives us important details of the wars between the French and English in America. His is the best account of the famous confederation of the Iroquois.
With respect to Pennsylvania, I cannot do better than point out the work of Proud, ent.i.tled the History of Pennsylvania, from the original Inst.i.tution and Settlement of that Province, under the first Proprietor and Governor, William Penn, in 1681, till after the year 1742; by Robert Proud; 2 vols., 8vo., printed at Philadelphia in 1797. This work is deserving of the especial attention of the reader; it contains a ma.s.s of curious doc.u.ments concerning Penn, the doctrine of the Quakers, and the character, manners, and customs of the first inhabitants of Pennsylvania.
APPENDIX G.--Page 48.
We read in Jefferson"s Memoirs as follows:--
"At the time of the first settlement of the English in Virginia, when land was had for little or nothing, some provident persons having obtained large grants of it, and being desirous of maintaining the splendor of their families, entailed their property upon their descendants. The transmission of these estates from generation to generation, to men who bore the same name, had the effect of raising up a distinct cla.s.s of families, who, possessing by law the privilege of perpetuating their wealth, formed by these means a sort of patrician order, distinguished by the grandeur and luxury of their establishments.
From this order it was that the king usually chose his counsellor of state." (This pa.s.sage is extracted and translated from M. Conseil"s work upon the Life of Jefferson, ent.i.tled, "_Melanges Politiques et Philosophiques de Jefferson_.")
In the United States, the princ.i.p.al clauses of the English law respecting descent have been universally rejected. The first rule that we follow, says Mr. Kent, touching inheritance, is the following: If a man dies intestate, his property goes to his heirs in a direct line.
If he has but one heir or heiress, he or she succeeds to the whole. If there are several heirs of the same degree, they divide the inheritance equally among them, without distinction of s.e.x.
This rule was prescribed for the first time in the state of New York by a statute of the 23d of February, 1786. (See Revised Statutes, vol.
iii., Appendix, p. 48.) It has since then been adopted in the revised statutes of the same state. At the present day this law holds good throughout the whole of the United States, with the exception of the state of Vermont, where the male heir inherits a double portion: Kent"s Commentaries, vol. iv., p. 370. Mr. Kent, in the same work, vol. iv., p.
1-22, gives an historical account of American legislation on the subject of entail; by this we learn that previous to the revolution the colonies followed the English law of entail. Estates tail were abolished in Virginia in 1776, on a motion of Mr. Jefferson. They were suppressed in New York in 1786; and have since been abolished in North Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, and Missouri. In Vermont, Indiana, Illinois, South Carolina, and Louisiana, entail was never introduced.
Those States which thought proper to preserve the English law of entail, modified it in such a way as to deprive it of its most aristocratic tendencies. "Our general principles on the subject of government," says Mr. Kent, "tend to favor the free circulation of property."
It cannot fail to strike the French reader who studies the law of inheritance, that on these questions the French legislation is infinitely more democratic even than the American.
The American law makes an equal division of the father"s property, but only in the case of his will not being known; "for every man," says the law, "in the state of New York (Revised Statutes, vol. iii., Appendix, p. 51), has entire liberty, power, and authority, to dispose of his property by will, to leave it entire, or divided in favor of any persons he chooses as his heirs, provided he do not leave it to a political body or any corporation." The French law obliges the testator to divide his property equally, or nearly so, among his heirs.
Most of the American republics still admit of entails, under certain restrictions; but the French law prohibits entail in all cases.
If the social condition of the Americans is more democratic than that of the French, the laws of the latter are the most democratic of the two.
This may be explained more easily than at first appears to be the case.
In France, democracy is still occupied in the work of destruction; in America it reigns quietly over the ruins it has made.
APPENDIX H.--Page 55.
SUMMARY OF THE QUALIFICATIONS OF VOTERS IN THE UNITED STATES.
All the states agree in granting the right of voting at the age of twenty-one. In all of them it is necessary to have resided for a certain time in the district where the vote is given. This period varies from three months to two years.
As to the qualification; in the state of Ma.s.sachusetts it is necessary to have an income of three pounds sterling or a capital of sixty pounds.
In Rhode Island a man must possess landed property to the amount of 133 dollars.
In Connecticut he must have a property which gives an income of seventeen dollars. A year of service in the militia also gives the elective privilege.
In New Jersey, an elector must have a property of fifty pounds a year.
In South Carolina and Maryland, the elector must possess fifty acres of land.
In Tennessee, he must possess some property.
In the states of Mississippi, Ohio, Georgia, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Delaware, New York, the only necessary qualification for voting is that of paying the taxes; and in most of the states, to serve in the militia is equivalent to the payment of taxes.
In Maine and New Hampshire any man can vote who is not on the pauper list.
Lastly, in the states of Missouri, Alabama, Illinois, Louisiana, Indiana, Kentucky, and Vermont, the conditions of voting have no reference to the property of the elector.
I believe there is no other state beside that of North Carolina in which different conditions are applied to the voting for the senate and the electing the house of representatives. The electors of the former, in this case, should possess in property fifty acres of land; to vote for the latter, nothing more is required than to pay taxes.
APPENDIX I.--Page 92.
The small number of custom-house officers employed in the United States compared with the extent of the coast renders smuggling very easy; notwithstanding which it is less practised than elsewhere, because everybody endeavors to suppress it. In America there is no police for the prevention of fires, and such accidents are more frequent than in Europe, but in general they are more speedily extinguished, because the surrounding population is prompt in lending a.s.sistance.
APPENDIX K--Page 94.
It is incorrect to a.s.sert that centralization was produced by the French revolution: the revolution brought it to perfection, but did not create it. The mania for centralization and government regulations dates from the time when jurists began to take a share in the government, in the time of Philippe-le-Bel; ever since which period they have been on the increase. In the year 1775, M. de Malesherbes, speaking in the name of the Cour des Aides, said to Louis XIV. (see "Memoires pour servir a l"Histoire du Droit Public de la France eft matiere d"lmpots," p. 654, printed at Brussels in 1779):
"Every corporation and every community of citizens retained the right of administering its own affairs; a right which not only forms part of the primitive const.i.tution of the kingdom, but has a still higher origin; for it is the right of nature and of reason. Nevertheless, your subjects, sire, have been deprived of it; and we cannot refrain from saying that in this respect your government has fallen into puerile extremes. From the time when powerful ministers made it a political principle to prevent the convocation of a national a.s.sembly, one consequence has succeeded another, until the deliberations of the inhabitants of a village are declared null when they have not been authorized by the intendant. Of course, if the community have an expensive undertaking to carry through, it must remain under the control of the sub-delegate of the intendant, and consequently follow the plan he proposes, employ his favorite workmen, pay them according to his pleasure; and if an action at law is deemed necessary, the intendant"s permission must be obtained. The cause must be pleaded before this first tribunal, previous to its being carried into a public court; and if the opinion of the intendant is opposed to that of the inhabitants, or if their adversary enjoys his favor, the community is deprived of the power of defending its rights. Such are the means, sire, which have been exerted to extinguish the munic.i.p.al spirit in France; and to stifle, if possible, the opinions of the citizens. The nation may be said to lie under an interdict, and to be in wardship under guardians."
What could be said more to the purpose at the present day, when the revolution has achieved what are called its victories in centralization?
In 1789, Jefferson wrote from Paris to one of his friends: "There is no country where the mania for over-governing has taken deeper root than in France, or been the source of greater mischief." Letter to Madison, 28th August, 1789.
The fact is that for several centuries past the central power of France has done everything it could to extend central administration; it has acknowledged no other limits than its own strength. The central power to which the revolution gave birth made more rapid advances than any of its predecessors, because it was stronger and wiser than they had been; Louis XIV. committed the welfare of such communities to the caprice of an intendant; Napoleon left them to that of the minister. The same principle governed both, though its consequences were more or less remote.
APPENDIX L.--Page 97.
This immutability of the const.i.tution of France is a necessary consequence of the laws of that country.