CONSTITUTION

•LESSONS FROM THE ENGLISH EXPERIENCE

–THE IMPORTANCE OF OWNING PROPERTY

–MISTRUST OF NOBILITY
DETERMINATION FOR SELF-DETERMINATION

–BELIEF IN THE SUPERIORITY OF AN ELECTED, REPRESENTATIVE BODY

–DEEP, ABIDING DISTRUST OF A STANDING (REGULAR) ARMY

CONSTITUTION

• LESSONS FROM THE ENGLISH EXPERIENCE

– RESISTANCE TO TAXATION

– PREFERENCE FOR DECENTRALIZED GOVERNMENT

– INTOLERENCE FOR MONARCHY (ARBITRARY POWER)

– THE RIGHT (OR DUTY) OF A PEOPLE TO REBEL AGAINST SUCH

– RELIGIOUS (CHRISTIAN, BUT NOT ROMAN CATHOLIC)TOLERANCE

CONSTITUTION

• WHERE DID THE FOUNDERS GET THEIR IDEAS?

– FREEDOM

– NATURAL RIGHTS

– WHERE GOVERNMENT DERIVES ITS AUTHORITY

– SOCIAL CONTRACT

– THE RIGHT TO REBEL

CONSTITUTION/EUROPEAN ROOTS

• HUMANISM

– ERASMUS

– (HUGO DE GROOT) GROTIUS

– ST. THOMAS MORE

• ENLIGHTENMENT

– HOBBES*

– JOHN LOCKE*

– JEAN-JAQUES ROUSSEAU

– ADAM SMITH

• *PRE-ENLIGHTENMENT

CONSTITUTION

• HUMANISM

– Name given to the intellectual, literary, and scientific movement of the fourteenth to the sixteenth centuries, a movement which aimed at basing every branch of learning on the literature and culture of classical antiquity.

– PROPER WORSHIP OF GOD

• ADMIRATION OF CREATION

• MAN THE CROWN OF CREATION

CONSTITUTION

• (DESIDERIUS) ERASMUS

– ANTI FORMALISM

– LEADERS AS SERVANTS

• GROTIUS (HUGO DE GROOT)

– PIONEER OF NATURAL RIGHTS

– NATURAL LAW

• PRIMARY LAWS OF NATURE

– DIVINE

• SECONDARY LAWS OF NATURE

– REASON (MAN)

• NATURAL RIGHTS APPLY TO INDIVIDUALS AND STATES

CONSTITUTION

• MORE

– UTOPIA

• NOWHERE

• DIALOGUE

• JAMESTOWN

CONSTITUTION

• ENLIGHTENMENT

– PARIS

– LONDON

• HUMAN REASON TO COMBAT

– INGNORANCE

– SUPERSTITION (ESTABLISHED CHURCHES)

– TYRANNY (HEREDITARY ARISTOCRACY)

CONSTITUTION

• HOBBES (1588-1679)

– LEVIATHAN

– STATE ANALOGOUS TO HUMAN BODY

– ALL HUMAN ACTION IS SELF-SERVING

– THE NATURAL STATE

• ALL ARE EQUAL

• STATE OF PERPETUAL WAR/ALL AGAINST ALL

• NO MORALITY

• CONSTANT FEAR

CONSTITUTION

• 3 MOTIVATIONS TO END WAR

– FEAR OF DEATH

– DESIRE FOR ADEQUATE LIVING

– ATTAIN THROUGH ONE’S LABOR

• UNTIL STATE OF WAR ENDS EACH PERSON HAS A RIGHT TO EVERYTHING, INCLUDING ANOTHER’S LIFE

CONSTITUTION

• NATURAL LAW

– GROTIUS

• ALL MORAL PRINCIPLE DERIVE FROME IMUTATBLE PRINCIPLES OF REASON

• MORAL MANDATES FIXED IN NATURE ERGO, NATURAL LAWS

– HOBBES

• HUMAN SELF INTEREST + SOCIAL AGREEMENT=THE SAME THING

• LISTS LAWS OF NATURE

– ALL PERTAIN TO SELF INTEREST/ENDING CONFLICT

CONSTITUTION

• HOBBES

– NATURAL LAWS/SOCIAL CONTRACT

– POWER SURRENDERED

• PERSON

• ASSEMBLY

– DEFINES COMMONWEALTH

• SOVEREIGN

• ACTS FOR THE MULTITUDE

– COMMONSEALTHS FORMED

• BY FORCE

• BY AGREEMENT

CONSTITUTION

• HOBBES

– RIGHTS OF “SOVEREIGN”

• SUBJECTS OWE SOLE LOYALTY

• CANNOT BE FREED FROM OBLIGATION

• DISSENTERS MUST CONSENT W/ MAJORITY IN DECLARING A SOVEREIGN

• SOVEREIGN CANNOT BE EXECUTED

• SOVEREIGN CANNOT BE UNJUST/INJURE A SUBJECT

• CENSOR DOCTRINES “REPUGNANT” TO PEACE

• MAKE LAWS

• WAR/PEACE

• REWARD/PUNISHMENT

• CIVIL APPOINTMENTS

CONSTITUTION

• HOBBES

– TYPES OF GOVERNEMNTS

• MONARCHY

• ARISTOCRACY

• DEMOCRACY

– MONARCHY BEST

• Monarch's interests are the same as the people's.

• He will receive better counsel since he can select experts and get advice in private.

• His policies will be more consistent.

• Less chance of a civil war since the monarch cannot disagree with himself.

CONSTITUTION

• JOHN LOCKE (1632-1704)

• SON OF PARLIAMENTARY SOLDIER/PURITAN LAWYER

– TWO TEATISES ON CIVIL GOVERNMENT

– JUSTIFY

• CIVIL WAR

• REGICIDE

• INTERREGNUM

– COMMONWEALTH

– DICTATORSHIP

• RESTORATION

• “GLORIOUS REVOLUTION”

CONSTITUTION

• LOCKE

– RESPONE

• SIR ROBERT FILMER’S PATRIARCHA

• SUPPORT OF DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS

– MAJOR POINTS

• MAN IN NATURE (SOMEWHAT BRIGHTER PLACE THAN HOBBES’)

• NATURAL LAW

• SOCIAL CONTRACT

• NATURAL RIGHTS

• CITIZEN’S W/IN RIGHTS TO ALTER/REMOVE GOVERNMENT

• REVOLUTION LEGITIMATE

CONSTITUTION

• JOHN LOCKE

– SEPARATION OF GOVERNMENTAL POWERS

– PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT: “The great and chief end, therefore, of men's uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property.”

CONSTITUTION

• JEAN-JAQUES ROUSSEAU (1712-1778)

– THE SOCIAL CONTRACT

• SOCIETY=FAMILY WRIT LARGE

• SOCIETAL LEADER=FATHER

• PEOPLE SURRENDER FREEDOM FOR SAFETY

• MIGHT DOES NOT MAKE RIGHT

• SOCIAL CONTRACT=RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS

• CITIZENS IN ASSOCIATION CONSTITUTE THE SOVEREIGN

• EVERY INDIVIDUAL GIVES UP ALL RIGHTS

CONSTITUTION

• ADAM SMITH (1723-1790)

– INQUIRY INTO THE NATURE AND CAUSES OF THE WEALTH OF NATIONS

– “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.”

– SELF INTEREST

– SYMPATHY

CONSTITUTION

• ADAM SMITH

– DIVISION OF LABOR

– “INVISIBLE HAND”

CONSTITUTION

• ANOTHER “INFLUENCE”

– THE “IROQUOIS INFLUENCE THESIS” (IIT)

– EMPHASIS ON THE WORD THESIS

– “MOSAIC OF HISTORY”

• MORGAN 1881

• GRINDE & JOHANSEN 1982

– IROQUOIS FEDERATION INFLUENCED 2 WAYS:

» DIRECTLY

» INDIRECTLY

CONSTITUTION

• IIT

– DIRECT INFLUENCE

• ADVICE/IDEAS

• IROQUOIS SPOKESMEN TO FUTIRE AUTHORS AT CONFERENCES

– INDIRECT INFLUENCE

• EXAMPLE

• THROUGH CONTACT

CONSTITUTION

• DIRECT INFLUENCE

– STARTED IN 1744

– TREATY CONFERENCE LANCASTER PA.

– IROQUOIS LEAGUE/COMMISSIONERS PA.,VA., MD.

– B. FRANKLIN AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS

CONSTITUTION

• DIRECT INFLUENCE

– ”IT WOULD BE A VERY STRANGE THING, IF SIX NATIONS OF IGNORANT SAVAGES SHOULD BE CAPABLE OF FORMING A SCHEME FOR SUCH [A] UNION…AND YET THAT A LIKE UNION SHOULD BE IMPRACTICABLE FOR TEN OR A DOZEN ENGLISH COLONIES.” B. FRANKLIN 1750

CONSTITUTION

• DIRECT INFLUENCE

– 1754 FRANKLIN DELEGATE AT COLONIAL CONFERENCE AT ALBANY, NY.

– IROQUIS CHIEFTAN HENDRICK

• EXPLAINS CONFEDERATION

– FRANKLIN PROPOSES “ALBANY PLAN”

• (ALBANY PLAN REJECTED)

CONSTITUTION

• 1775 MTG OF CONTINENTAL CONGRESS COMMISSIONERS AND IROQUOIS

• 1776 21 IROQUOIS MET W/ CONGRESS MAY-JUNE

• DECLARATION JULY 1776

CONSTITUTION

• CHAIN OF IROQUOIS INFLUENCE

– ALBANY PLAN

– ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION

– CONSTITUTION

– LINCHPIN=FRANKLIN

• PROBLEMS WITH IIT

– NO PROOF

– CONTACT DOES NOT=INFLUENCE

– PRO HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC

– COLONISTS ALREADY FAMILIAR W/CONFEDERATIONS

• PRACTICE/THEORY

CONSTITUTION

• PREVIOUS COLONIAL EXPERIENCE

– 1643 NEW ENGLAND CONFEDERATION (AKA UNITED COLONIES OF NEW ENGLAND)

• MASSACHUSETTS BAY

• PLYMOUTH

• CONNECTICUT

• NEW HAVEN

CONSTITUTION

• PREVIOUS COLONIAL EXPERIENCE

– NEW ENGLAND CONFEDERATION

• ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION

– SECURITY

– WAGE WAR

– MAKE PEACE

– TREATIES

– ARBITRATE DOMESTIC BOUNDRY DISPUTES

– ARBITRATE TARIFFS

CONSTITUTION

• PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE

– NEW ENGLANDERS IST CONTACT W/ IROQUOIS=1677

– FUNDAMENTAL ORDERS CONNECTICUT 1638-’39

• UNITE

– HARTFORD

– WETHERSFIELD

– WINDSOR

– 20 PLANS TO UNITE COLONIES WRITTEN PRIOR TO 1744

CONSTITUTION

• PROOF (EXAMPLES USED BY FOUNDERS TO DISCREDIT CONFEDERATIONS

– FEDERALIST PAPERS

• MADISON 18, 19, 20

– AMPHICTYONIC LEAGUE C.1100 B.C.

– HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE

– POLAND

– SWISS CANTONS

– UNITED NETHERLANDS

– NO MENTION, GOOD OR ILL, OF IROQUOIS LEAGUE

CONSTITUTION

• MADISON

– “OF ANCIENT AND MODERN CONFEDERACIES” AND FEDERALIST #9

» PAPER PREPARED FOR CONTITUTIONAL CONFVENTION

» ADDED LYCIAN CONFEDERACY

CONSTITUTION

• NEGATIVE PROOF

– ANTIFEDERALISTS

• NO MENTION OF IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY

– “BRUTUS”

– “CATO”

– “SENTINEL”

– “FEDERAL FARMER”

• SUPPORT OF PROOF NONEXISTANT