effecting that purpose, so desirable to these gentlemen, are intended to be furnished by this amendment. Should it prevail, it will establish a precedent, that may easily be extended to that or any other object; and have we reason to believe, from what we now see and have witnessed on former occasions, that the extension will not be attempted?

Let not gentlemen, therefore, Mr. Chairman, accuse us of too much jealousy, when we zealously oppose these attempts, and charge them with supporting principles which lead to the utter overthrow of the constitution. I view their principles in that light; and in this view, I am fully confirmed by the most mature reflection, not only on the consequences of those principles, but on the manner in which they have been introduced and supported here.

But, say gentlemen, what interest can we have to subvert the constitution? Why should we harbor designs of overthrowing the government, and introducing anarchy and confusion? Have we not as much at stake, as much to lose, as you? Have we not equally concurred in the establishment of this government? And what inducement can we have to wish for its destruction?

Since gentlemen, Mr. Chairman, make this appeal to their motives, I must be permitted to offer a few observations on that subject, before I dilate, as it is my intention to do, on the object and tendency of their political system.

As to motives, Mr. Chairman, I have no difficulty in declaring, that I believe the far greater part of these gentlemen to be actuated by the purest motives. I do not say all, because I am not bound to answer for the motives of all. There are some among them, of whose motives I know nothing; but far the greater part of those who support the system, of which this amendment is a leading member, are actuated, in my opinion, by motives as pure, I will not say as my own, because perhaps those gentlemen may deny me the merit of

pure motives, but as those of the best and purest men in this country and if I could find security against the consequences of men's actions, in the uprightness of their intentions, I never should apprehend harm from these gentlemen. But, Mr. Chairman, does history, experience, or common sense inform us, that such security can be found? Do we not confine lunatics, and keep knives and razors out of the hands of children? Why? Not because we are afraid of their intentions, but of their actions: because we are justly apprehensive of their doing mischief, without intending it.

Does not history teach us that there is nothing more common, than for men to do mischief when they mean to do good? Did the La Fayettes, the Rochesancalds, the Liancours, the Lameths, and the Clermonts of France, when they first taught the doctrines of insurrection, and stirred up the mob to resist the government, intend to pull down ruin on their country, their families and themselves? Did they intend to procure their own death or banishment, and the confiscation of their estates; to send to the guillotine hundreds of thousands of the best of citizens, including their own families and friends; to drench the whole country in blood, and transfer the most absolute power into the hands of the vilest of mankind? Certainly they had no such intentions; and yet we find that these consequences did result from their measures. France and the world have groaned and are groaning under these consequences; nor are they less real or less deplorable, because their authors intended to do good and not mischief. Fanatics never, or very rarely indeed, intend to do mischief; and yet all experience proves, that no description of men are half so mischievous. They rush blindly on, without reflection or hesitation, and aim directly at the accomplishment of their designs, without being delayed or turned aside by any considerations of the result.

With these awful examples before us, shall we trust fanatic men with power, by reason of their upright

motives, or sit regardless of the consequences of their actions, because we are convinced that their intentions are pure? So far otherwise, Mr. Chairman, that, in my opinion, their honesty is an additional reason for dreading them. Of your cool, calculating, political knaves I am never afraid. Such men are not apt to be much trusted; and moreover, they never do mischief, but when there is something to be gained by it. They never do mischief for mischief's sake; and being, for the most part, men of sense and reflection, you may generally convince them that their own interest lies in avoiding mischief. But it is the sincere, the honest fanatic whom I dread, and whom I think myself bound to restrain, as I would confine a maniac. His honesty, his zeal, and his good character, enable him to inspire confidence and gain proselytes. The consciousness of upright intentions renders him as bold as he is blind. He rushes directly forward, without looking to the right hand or the left; pulls down all that stands in his way, regardless on whom it may fall; destroys a country, in order to make it free; inflicts unheard of calamities on the present generation, for the happiness of posterity; and makes experiments on governments and nations, with the calm indifference of an anatomist dissecting the body of a malefactor. These are the men of whom I am afraid, and whom I think it my duty at all times and places to withstand: men whose projects and experiments have brought ruin on other countries, and will bring it on this, unless they are resisted and restrained, by the sober and reflecting part of the community.

After all, Mr. Chairman, I am not much afraid of these men. There was, indeed, a time when their efforts might have been formidable; because that phren

sy
of revolution which seemed to have been poured out
upon the earth like a vial of wrath, which had fallen
upon mankind like a plague, did once extend its dread-
ful influence to this country, where, in a greater or less
degree, it infected every description of people, and

made them eager for change and ripe for revolution. But it has passed away never to return. Fortunately, before the disease had risen to its height here, time was given for observing its terrible effects elsewhere; and the American people, profiting by example, and aided by the peculiar happiness of their situation, first resisted and have finally subdued this dreadful malady, the love of revolution.

In this, I repeat again, they have been aided no less by their own happy situation, than by the mournful experience of other countries. For, revolutions, Mr. Chairman, are brought about in all countries, by three descriptions of men, philosophers, jacobins and sansculottes. They exist in all countries, and accordingly, in all countries are to be found the materials of revolution; but they exist in different proportions, and according as these proportions are greater or less in any country, so is the danger of revolution with which it is threatened.

The philosophers are the pioneers of revolution. They advance always in front, and prepare the way, by preaching infidelity, and weakening the respect of the people for ancient instructions. They are, for the most part, fanatics of virtuous lives, and not unfrequently of specious talents. They have always, according to the expression of an ancient writer," Satis eloquentiæ, sapientiæ parum;" eloquence enough, but very little sense. They declaim with warmth on the miseries of mankind, the abuses of government, and the vices of rulers, all of which they engage to remove, provided their theories should once be adopted. They talk of the perfectibility of man, of the dignity of his nature; and entirely forgetting what he is, declaim perpetually about what he should be. Thus they allure and seduce the visionary, the superficial and the unthinking part of mankind. They are, for the most part, honest, always zealous, and always plausible; whereby they become exceedingly formidable. Of the three classes employed in the work of revolution,

they are infinitely the most to be dreaded; for until they have shaken the foundations of order, and infused a spirit of discontent and innovation into the community, neither the jacobins nor the sans-culottes can produce any considerable effect. The army cannot find entrance, until these forerunners have corrupted the garrison, to open the gates. Of these men we, in this country, have enough and more than enough.

Of jacobins we also have plenty. They follow close in the train of the philosophers, and profit by all their labors. This class is composed of that daring, ambitious and unprincipled set of men, who, possessing much courage, considerable talents, but no character, are unable to obtain power, the object of all their designs, by regular means, and therefore perpetually attempt to seize it by violence. Tyrants when in power, and demagogues when out, they lie in wait for every opportunity of seizing on the government per fas aut nefas, and for this purpose use all implements which come to their hands, neglect no means which promise success. Unable to enter at the door of the sheepfold, they climb in at the windows, and devour the flock. Although they use the assistance of the philosophers in gaining entrance, they dread their honesty, their zeal and their influence with the public; and accordingly, the first use they make of power, when they can obtain it, is to destroy the philosophers themselves.

As the philosophers are the pioneers, these men are the generals of the army of revolution: but both pioneers and generals are useless without an army : fortunately, the army does not exist in this country.

This army is composed of the sans-culottes; that class of idle, indigent and profligate persons, who so greatly abound in the populous countries of Europe, especially the large towns, and being destitute of every thing, having no home, no families, no regular means of subsistence, feel no attachment to the established order, which they are always ready to join in subverting, when they find any one to pay them for their as