The Anti-Federalist Library

October 11, 1787

To the Citizens of the State of New York,

“Remember, O my friends! the lows, the rights.

The generous plan of power deliver’d down.

By your renown’d Forefathers;

So dearly bought, the price of so much blood!

O let it never perish in your hands!

But piously transmit it to your children.

The object of my last address to you was to engage your dispassionateconsideration of the new Fœderal government; to caution you against precipitancy inthe adoption of it; to recommend a correction of its errors, if it contained any; to hint toyou the danger of an easy perversion of some of its powers; to solicit you to separateyourselves from party, and to be independent of and uninfluenced by any in yourprinciples of politics: and, that address was closed with a promise of future observationson the same subject which should be justified by reason and truth. Here I intended tohave rested the introduction, but a writer under the signature of CÆSAR, in Mr. Childs’spaper of the 1st instant, who treats you with passion, insult, and threat[,] hasanticipated those observations which would otherwise have remained in silence until afuture period…But, what is the language of Cæsar—he redicules your prerogative,power, and majesty—he talks of this proferred constitution as the tender mercy of abenevolent sovereign to deluded subjects, or, as his tyrant name-­‐sake, of his proferredgrace to the virtuous Cato:—he shuts the door of free deliberation and discussion, anddeclares, that you must receive this government in manner and form as it is proferred—that you cannot revise nor amend it, and lastly, to close the scene, he insinuates, that itwill be more healthy for you that the American Fabius should be induced to accept ofthe presidency of this new government than that, in case you do not acquiesce, heshould be solicited to command an army to impose it on you. Is not your indignationroused at this absolute, imperious stile?—For what did you open the veins of yourcitizens and expend their treasure?—For what did you throw off the yoke of Britain andcall yourselves independent?—Was it from a disposition fond of change, or to procurenew masters?—if those were your motives, you have your reward before you—go,—retire into silent obscurity, and kiss the rod that scourges you—bury the prospects youhad in store, that you and your posterity would participate in the blessings of freedom,and the employments of your country—let the rich and insolent alone be your rulers—perhaps you are designed by providence as an emphatic evidence of the mutability ofhuman affairs, to have the shew of happiness only, that your misery may seem thesharper, and if so, you must submit. But, if you had nobler views, and you are notdesigned by heaven as an example—are you now to be derided and insulted?—is thepower of thinking, on the only subject important to you, to be taken away? and if perchance you should happen to dissent from Cæsar, are you to have Cæsar’s principlescrammed down your throats with an army?—God forbid!…

…Cæsar, with his usual dogmatism, enquires, if I had talents to throw light on thesubject of legislation, why did I not offer them when the Convention was in session?—he is answered in a moment—I thought with him and you, that the wisdom of America,in that Convention, was drawn as it were to a Focus—I placed an unbounded confidencein some of the characters who were members of it, from the services they had renderedtheir country, without adverting to the ambitious and interested views of others. I waswillingly led to expect a model of perfection and security that would have astonishedthe world. Therefore, to have offered observation, on the subject of legislation, underthese impressions, would have discovered no less arrogance than Cæsar. TheConvention too, when in session, shut their doors to the observations of thecommunity, and their members were under an obligation of secrecy—Nothingtranspired—to have suggested remarks on unknown and anticipated principles wouldhave been like a man groping in the dark, and folly in the extreme. I confess, however, Ihave been disappointed, and Cæsar is candid enough to make the same declaration, forhe thinks it might have been more perfect.

But to call in dispute, at this time, and in the manner Cæsar does, the right of freedeliberation on this subject, is like a man’s propounding a question to another, andtelling him, at the same time, that if he does not answer agreeable to the opinion of thepropounder, he will exert force to make him of the same sentiment:—to exemplify this,it will be necessary to give you a short history of the rise and progress of theConvention, and the conduct of congress thereon. The states in Congress suggested,that the articles of confederation had provided for making alterations in theconfederation—that there were defects therein, and as a mean to remedy which, aConvention of delegates, appointed by the different states, was resolved expedient tobe held for the sole and express purpose of revising it, and reporting to Congress andthe different legislatures such alterations and provisions therein as should (when agreedto in Congress and confirmed by the several states) render the fœderal constitutionadequate to the exigencies of government. This resolution is sent to the different states,and the legislature of this state, with others, appoint, in conformity thereto, delegatesfor the purpose, and in the words mentioned in that resolve, as by the resolution ofCongress, and the concurrent resolutions of the senate and assembly of this state,subjoined, will appear. For the sole and express purpose aforesaid a Convention ofdelegates is formed at Philadelphia:—what have they done? have they revised theconfederation, and has Congress agreed to their report?—neither is the fact.—ThisConvention have exceeded the authority given to them, and have transmitted toCongress a new political fabric, essentially and fundamentally distinct and different fromit, in which the different states do not retain separately their sovereignty andindependency, united by a confederated league—but one entire sovereignty—aconsolidation of them into one government—in which new provisions and powers arenot made and vested in Congress, but in an assembly, senate, and president, who arenot known in the articles of confederation.—Congress, without agreeing to, orapproving of, this system proferred by the Convention, have sent it to the differentlegislatures, not for their confirmation, but to submit it to the people; not in conformityto their own resolution, but in conformity to the resolution of the Convention made andprovided in that case. Was it then, from the face of the foregoing facts, the intention ofCongress, and of this and the other states, that the essence of our present nationalgovernment should be annihilated, or that it should be retained and only had anincrease of substantial necessary power? Congress, sensible of this latter principle, andthat the Convention had taken on themselves a power which neither they nor the otherstates had a right to delegate to them, and that they could not agree to, and approve ofthis consolidated system, nor the states confirm it—have been silent on its character;and though many have dwelt on their unanimity, it is no less than the unanimity ofopinion that it originated in an assumption of power, which your voice alone cansanctify. This new government, therefore, founded in usurpation, is referred to youropinion as the origin of power not heretofore delegated, and, to this end, the exerciseof the prerogative of free examination is essentially necessary; and yet you areunhesitatingly to acquiesce, and if you do not, the American Fabius, if we may believeCæsar, is to command an army to impose it. It is not my view to rouse your passions, Ionly wish to excite you to, and assist you in, a cool and deliberate discussion of thesubject, to urge you to behave like sensible freemen. Think, speak, act, and assert youropinions and rights—let the same good sense govern you with respect to the adoptionof a future system for the administration of your public affairs that influenced you in theformation of the present…