Abstract
This chapter traces the evolution of the localist tradition in the early years of the American republic by a way of partially converging with the centralist thought and partially by subverting it and transforming it from within. The medium within which these two processes coalesced was a reinterpretation of the Constitution, a document conceived as an instrument of state-building that was so unpopular that it had to be sold by its proponents as a decentralist document. The result was a new compact theory of the American Union that claimed the union was a contract among the preexisting and sovereign states, with the federal government figuring as a limited government of designated powers. This picture sharply militated against the original idea animating its Framers in Philadelphia: consolidating the kaleidoscope of irrational local communities into a single national state. The resistance to the project forced them to explain away many inconvenient features and provisions of the Constitution; in turn, decentralists took these reservations and make a new orthodoxy out of it. Jefferson and Madison in 1798 with the doctrine of interposition/nullification and their followers in the coming decades just repackaged and philosophically refined the basic idea that independent states created the union and retained the most important powers for themselves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Modern classical liberal thinkers in America devoted to constitutionalism often argue that after the Supreme Court confirmed Roosevelt’s unprecedented expansion of the federal powers in the late 1930s, the Constitution itself ceased to exist, or was “exiled,” and the task should be to bring it back reviving the interpretations predating the New Deal, see Ginsburg (1994), Barnett (2004).
- 2.
Thomas Jefferson was the primary figure in developing the compact theory, and yet, for obvious reasons his role was routinely downplayed by historians. He had undergone a striking journey in the modern historical interpretations, from being treated as an apostle of Lockean classical liberalism, to the position of a primary expositor of anti-liberal tradition of “civic republicanism”, and back again to the Lockean roots. The newest wave of liberal revisionism is a starting point for our analysis here. This revisionism brought back into the picture the undeniable Lockean and natural-rights philosophical background of Jefferson’s political thought (Zuckert 1996, 2002; Dworetz 1998) and also revived and documented the laissez-faire economic inspiration of his economic philosophy (Appleby 2000).
- 3.
A practice of inserting federalist, i.e., decentralist language into the ratification documents, and offering further verbal assurances were the basis for the belief of nationalists that they could push through the Constitution. That those solemn assurances were probably not meant terribly seriously a good indication is a letter sent by Madison to his friend Hamilton after the Virginia ratification: “The plan meditated by the friends ⟨of⟩ the Constitution is to preface the ratification with some plain & general truths that can not affect the validity of the act; & to subjoin a recommendation which may hold up amendments as objects to be pursued in the constitutional mode. These expedients are rendered prudent by the nice balance of numbers, and the scruples entertained by some who are in general well affected. Whether they will secure us a majority, I dare not positively to declare. Our calculations promise us success by 3 or 4; or possibly 5 or 6 votes” (Madison, ‘Letter to Hamilton’, June 22, 1788). It was meant just to placate the sceptics to give them “success” by however small margin of votes.
- 4.
The year of the famous nullification crisis when John C. Calhoun defended the principles of states’ right as the leader of South Carolina resistance to Andrew Jackson’s “tariffs of abomination”. See Chapter 10 for a detailed discussion of Calhoun.
- 5.
The extent to which former anti-federalists almost overnight became Jeffersonian republicans is emphasized by Cornell, 1999. The only significant exception was Patrick Henry who was to become a strong critic of the states’ rights and the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions in the late 1790s.
- 6.
See Cheek (2001) for a more detailed analysis of this.
- 7.
The best comprehensive treatments of the Kentucky Resolves are given in Watkins (2004) and Woods (2010). The best compilation of the documents pertaining to the principles of 98 is Eliot, “The Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and ’99; with Jefferson’s Original Draft Thereof. Also, Madison’s Report, Calhoun’s Address, Resolutions of the Several States in Relation of State Rights. With Other Documents in Support of the Jeffersonian Doctrines of ’98” (Jonathan Elliot ed., Washington, DC, published by the editor 1832).
- 8.
About the alleged greater moderation of Virginia Resolutions, see Kevin Gutzman (2007).
- 9.
- 10.
Bassani (2010) offers a rather disquieting “literature review” of this problem.
- 11.
For this view of the War 1861–1865 as a fulfillment of the “promise” of 1776, see McPherson (1988), Wills (2012), Wilson (1998), among other numerous books and articles arguing that Lincoln finished the unfinished job of securing the promise of natural rights enshrined in the Declaration, but tainted by slavery and sectionalism.
- 12.
See above.
- 13.
See the previous section.
- 14.
One of the canonical formulations of the nationalist theory widely acclaimed by modern historians is Webster’s contribution to the Webster–Hayne debate in 1832, see Harlow W. Sheidley, “The Wester–Hayne Debate: Recasting New England’s Sectionalism,” New England Quarterly, Vol. 67, No. 1 (1995), pp. 5–29.
- 15.
The best indication of this is a virtual unanimity between the Straussians of both varieties and the followers of progressive and Marxist schools in denouncing the states’ rights doctrines as nothing more than justification of slavery.
- 16.
- 17.
The only exception here is Jefferson with his ward republic theory, see Chapter 2.
References
Appleby, J. (2000). Inheriting the Revolution: The First Generation of Americans. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
Aristotle. (1944). Politics (H. Rackham, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann.
Barlow J. J., Levy, L., & Masugi, K. (Eds.). (1988). The American Founding: Essays on the Formation of the Constitution. New York: Greenwood Press.
Barnett, R. (2004). Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bassani, L. M. (2010). Liberty, State and the Union: The Political Theory of Thomas Jefferson. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press.
Cheek, L. (2001). Calhoun and the Popular Rule. Columbia and New York: University of Missouri Press.
Cogan, N. (Ed.). (1997). The Compete Bill of Rights: The Drafts, Debates, Sources and Origins. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dworetz, S. (1990). The Unvarnished Doctrine: Locke, Liberalism and American Revolution. Durham: Duke University Press.
Edling, M. (2003). A Revolution in Favor of Government: Origins of the U.S. Constitution and the Making of the American State. New York: Oxford University Press.
Eliot, J. (1836). The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution. Washington, DC: Published Under the Sanction of Congress. Printed for the Editor.
Garett, Garet. ([1938] 2004). Ex America: The 50th Anniversary of the People’s Pottage. Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Press.
Ginsburg, D. (1994). Delegation Running Riot. Regulation Magazine, 1, 83–87.
Gunther, G. (Ed.). (1969). John Marshall’s Defense of McCulloch v. Maryland. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Gutzman, K. (2007). Virginia’s American Revolution: From Dominion to Republic, 1776–1840. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Gutzman, K. (2012). James Madison and the Making of America. New York: St. Martin’s Press; Book Club Edition.
Greene, J. P. (2010). Constitutional Origins of the American Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Farrand, M. (Ed.). (1911). The Records of the Federal Convention 1787 (Vol. III). New Heaven, CT: Yale University Press.
Jaffa, H. (1959). The Crisis of House Divided: An Interpretation of the Issues in the Lincoln-Douglass Debates. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jefferson, T. ([1943] 1967). Complete Jefferson (S. K. Padover, Ed.). New York: Books for Libraries Press.
Jefferson, T. (1984). Writings: Autobiography, a Summary View of the Rights of British America, Notes on the State of Virginia, Public Papers, Addresses, Messages, and Replies, Miscellany, Letters. New York: Library of America Publisher.
Jefferson, T., & Madison, J. (1995). The Republic of Letters: The Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, 1776–1826 (J. M. Smith, Ed.). New York: W. W. Norton.
Kilpatrick, J. (1957). Sovereign States. Chicago: Regnery.
Madison, J. (1908). The Writings of James Madison, Volume VIII, 1809–1819 (G. Hunt, Ed.). New York: G.P. Putnam Sons.
Maier, P. (1970). Popular Uprisings and Civil Authority in Eighteenth-Century America. The William and Mary Quarterly, 27(1), 3–35.
McPherson, J. (1988). The Battle Cry of Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reid, J. P. (1974). In a Defensive Rage: The Uses of the Mob, the Justification in Law and the Coming of the American Revolution. New York University Law Review, 49, 1043–1069.
Story, J. (1833). Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (Vol. 3). Boston: Hilliard, Gray and Company.
Taylor, J. (1820). Construction Construed and Constitutions Vindicated. Richmond: Shepherd and Pollard.
Upshur, A. P. (1863). The Brief Enquiry into the True Nature and Character of the Federal Government. Philadelphia, PA: John Campbell.
Watkins, W. (2004). Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wills, G. (2012). Lincoln at Gettysburg: The Words That Remade America. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Wilson, D. (1998). Lincoln Before Washington. New Perspectives on the Illinois Years. Chicago, IL: University of Ilionois Press.
Woods, T., Jr. (2010). Nullification. New York: Henry Regnery.
Zuckert, M. (1996). Natural Rights Republic. Notre Damme: University of Notre Damme Press.
Zuckert, M. (2002). Launching Liberalism. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jankovic, I. (2019). The Compact Theory of the Union—A Revolution Within a Form. In: The American Counter-Revolution in Favor of Liberty. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03733-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03733-8_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03732-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03733-8
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)