Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub
[merged small][ocr errors]

off the dominion of the English, every reason seemed to indicate a dissolution of those mercantile connexions which had before subsisted between two portions of the same people. The chief of these reasons were-the recollection of the evils produced by a seven years' war; ́à defiance and hatred of Britain, and attachment to France, as their companion in arms, and their liberator from colonial vassalage; attachment, most forcibly manifested at the breaking out of the war between France and England, in the year 1793; at which period the conversation and actions of the American people, their newspapers and pamphlets, their town-meetings and public speeches, their illuminations and clamour, almost drove the administration of Washington himself to manifest, by joining the French revolutionary republic, in its war against Britain, the strong inclination towards France, and the equally deadly hatred towards England, which then pervaded so large a portion of the United States.

These, and other reasons, it was hoped would, for ever, turn the tide of American commerce from its accustomed channel; or, if it should happen to incline a little towards the shores of England, it would require a very trifling exertion, on the part of France, to divert it entirely to her own dominions. Closer, and more accurate observation, however, will soon detect the fallacy of all such conclusions, and point out the helplessness of an artificial and circuitous policy to resist the universal efficiency of nature herself when she appeals to the human heart, in the accents of a kindred tongue, and with the all-prevailing voice of manifest advantage. Individuals may sometimes, and under certain circumstances, feel the impulses of gratitude, and act under a deep and permanent sense of kindness shown and benefits received; a great proportion of individuals, however, like Milton's hero, consider it to be a debt, "so burdensome, still paying, still to owe," that they are eager to cast it off for ever, by returning the recompence of hatred and calumny into the bosom of their benefactor. Nations, large masses of men, being a

BASIS OF THE UNITED STATES CHARACTER. 377

body in continual flux, liable to perpetual change in opinions, sentiments, relations, and actions, never can be capable of gratitude to other nations. It is idle, therefore, for France to insist upon a grateful return from the United States, on account of her aiding them in their revolutionary war; and equally idle for Britain to request that the American people shall cease to revile and calumniate all her institutions and proceedings, because her capital and credit have enabled the United States to render themselves opulent and powerful in an extensive commerce, in growing manufactures, in a widening agriculture, in a variety of thriving moneyed establishments. Interest and ambition are the pole-star and magnet of nations; gratitude and affection the incentives of individual, not of national action. Besides, the gratitude of America was due to Louis XVI. personally, and was fully cancelled by his subsequent regret that he had ever assisted the United States, and by the efforts of his cabinet, in the year 1783, to prevent England from acknowledging their independence, to exclude them from the Newfoundland fisheries, and to confine their territory to the eastward of the Alleghany mountains; all showing that the object of France was not regard to the United States, but a desire to weaken both America and Britain, by protracting the conflict between them.

Whoever has well observed America, cannot doubt that she still remains essentially English, in language, habits, laws, customs, manners, morals, and religion; that her ancient commerce with England increased, many fold, instead of declining in activity and extent, subsequent to the independence of the United States; and that, consequently, so far as relates to commercial intercourse, the independence of America has been beneficial to Britain. M. Talleyrand, indeed, labours to prove that the inconsiderate conduct of the old French government (as contradistinguished from the revolutionary system) laid the foundation of the commercial success of England with the United States. He thinks, that if, after the peace which secured the independence

of America, France had been sufficiently sensible of the full advantage of her existing position, she would have continued and sought to multiply exceedingly, those political, commercial, and social relations, which, during the revolutionary war, had been established between her and her Transatlantic Allies; and which had been forcibly, and bloodily broken off with Britain. If this had been done, the ancient habits and relations between America and England being almost forgotten, France could have contended with peculiar advantages against every thing which had the least tendency to reconcile the Americans with the English, so as to prevent the possibility of any cordial and permanent friendship ever existing between the two nations.

But the French court was fearful, that the same principles of democracy, which she had protected and encouraged by her arms in America, should introduce themselves, and be disseminated among her own people; and therefore, at the conclusion of the war in 1783, she did not sufficiently continue, and promote her political and commercial connexions with the United States. Whereas England wisely forgot, and subdued the bitterness of her resentments; she immediately reopened her channels of communication both social and mercantile with America, and rendered them still more active than at any period prior to the Revolution. By such conduct she directed the attention of the United States towards a profitable market; and thus increased the obstacles to the ascendency of French influence. For the will of man is always powerfully swayed by inclination and interest; and notwithstanding the occurrence of a long and sanguinary war, and all the efforts of political faction, the Americans have a natural bias towards England, to whose kindred people all their own habits assimilate them.

Identity of language itself, as M. Talleyrand observes, is a fundamental relation between different individuals and different countries; upon which the political moralist, and the moral philosopher, cannot too patiently, and too profoundly meditate. This very

IDENTITY OF LANGUAGE.

379

identity of tongue establishes between the two nations, America and England, a common character, which will always enable, nay, induce them to recognize and consort with each other. They mutually feel themselves at home, whenever they travel into each other's territory, they give and receive reciprocal pleasure in the interchange of sentiment and thought, in the discussion of their various opinions, views, and interests. But an insurmountable barrier is raised up between two different people, who speak two different languages; and who, therefore, cannot utter a single word, without being compelled to remember that they do not belong to the same country; between whom every solitary transmission of sentiment and thought is irksome labour, and not a social enjoyment; who never can be made to understand each other thoroughly; and with whom the result of conversation, after the fatigue of unavailing efforts to be reciprocally intelligible, is to find themselves reciprocally ridiculous. This of course applies to the mass of a people; there are well educated individuals in most countries, who can converse with each other fully in a tongue not common to both speakers.

Accordingly, notwithstanding the government of France, both under the Bourbons during the old regime and under the revolutionary regicides, whether democratic, directorial, consular, or imperial, always exercised considerable influence over the government of America; which so far from being influenced by, was always prone to suspect and take offence at every act of the British government, however harmless or well intended; yet, in every part of the United States, individual Englishmen feel themselves to be Americans ; and individual Frenchmen find themselves to be as completely strangers as if they were animals of different species at least; even if they might be considered generically the same.

Nor is it any marvel to see this natural, necessary, habitual assimilation towards England, in a country where, in addition to the identity of language in both, the great distinguishing and characteristic features of

the form of government, and of the system of municipal law, whether in the federal union, or in the separate state-sovereignties, are impressed with so strong a family resemblance to the leading lineaments of the British constitution. The personal liberty of the individual citizen in the United States rests upon precisely the same foundations as those which support the personal freedom of the British subject; namely, the habeas corpus act, and trial by jury. Whoever attends the sittings of Congress, and the state-legislatures, and listens to the discussions respecting the framing of laws, whether for the Union, or for the separate states, will hear all their quotations, analogies, and examples, taken from the laws, the history, the customs, the parliamentary rules and usages of England. In the American courts of justice, the authorities cited are the statutes, the judgments, the decrees, the reported decisions of the English courts; in familiar and friendly accompaniment with those of the American tribunals.

In the higher and more cultivated classes of society in both countries, there is also a community of taste and sentiment on subjects of literature, and a common feeling of pride in the great poets, philosophers, historians, and general writers of the mother country, that forms a strong bond of union.

Now, if a people so trained and so circumstanced, have no natural, no habitual bias and inclination towards England, we must renounce all belief and trust in the controlling influences of language, laws, habits, manners, customs and usages, upon the opinions, feelings, passions, actions, and character of men; we must deny that man receives any effectual impressions, any permanent modifications, from surrounding circumstances; from all that he sees, hears, reads, observes, and is engaged in, from the cradle to the grave. It is, comparatively, of little moment, that the names of a republic and a monarchy appear to place between the two governments distinctions which cannot be confounded, and obstacles which cannot be surmounted. For, in fact, there are strong republican features in the representative portion of the

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »