William Rees-Mogg
Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes
On June 19 Sotheby's will be holding an auction of “fine books and manuscripts” in New York. Included in the sale, at lot 18, is a fascinating letter from Thomas Jefferson to Dr William Bache. It is dated Philadelphia, January 2, 1800. At that time, Jefferson was Vice-President. Sotheby's estimate is that it will sell for $100,000 to $150,000. This is an historic document of the highest importance.
Jefferson himself is one of those rare historic characters whose influence still remains alive long after their death. Americans, both of liberal and conservative views, tend to regard him as the most original thinker among all the presidents, with the possible exception of Abraham Lincoln. It was Jefferson who drafted the Declaration of Independence in 1776; through his work on the Constitution of Virginia, he had considerable influence on the drafting of the US Constitution itself, though in 1787, when it was signed, Jefferson was still in Paris, as the US Ambassador to France.
The main criticism that is now made of Jefferson's career is that he, like Charles James Fox in England, became overcommitted to the extreme development of the French Revolutionary process; Jefferson became more Jacobin than the Jacobins, even expressing approval of the execution of Louis XVI, whom he had previously regarded as a “good” king. So long as there was any hope of the French Revolution following the same course as America's, Jefferson remained on the side of revolution.
The date of this letter is significant. Early February 1800 was the time when the news reached America of Napoleon's coup d'état, best known as the Coup of 18 Brumaire from the French Revolutionary calendar. In Anglo-Saxon terms, it occurred on November 9, 1799.
Jefferson's response to the news of Napoleon's seizure of power was virtually a cry of pain. The event forced him to reconsider his whole position. He wrote to Dr Bache: “You have seen the afflicting details from Paris. On what grounds the revolution has been made, we are not informed, and are still more at a loss to divine what will be its issue; whether we are to have over again the history of Robespierre, of Caesar, or of the new phenomenon of an usurpation of the government for the purpose of making it free.
“Our citizens, however, should derive from this some useful lessons. They should see the necessity to rally firmly and in close bands round their Constitution; never to suffer an iota of it to be infringed; to incubate on minorities the duties of acquiescence in the will of the majority, and in the majority a respect to the will of the minority; to beware of a military force even of citizens; and to be wary of too much confidence in any man.
“The confidence of the French people in Bonaparte has enabled him to kick down their Constitution, and instead of that to leave them dependent on his will and his life. I have never seen so awful a moment as the present.”
Many European politicians have seen the EU as a future United States of Europe, although many of them are reluctant to admit it. The extraordinary thing is that they have not studied the history of the American Constitution. This is like the problem of bishops and Adam Smith. One hardly ever meets a bishop with a student's knowledge of classical economics. They have seldom read Smith's Wealth of Nations; they just assume it must be wrong.
In the same way, there are few Europhiles with a good knowledge of late 18th-century American history. Hardly any of the “experts” on the European constitution seem to have read The Federalist, which was written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, and first published in 1788.
In 1825 Thomas Jefferson himself proposed that The Federalist should be adopted as a required text in the University of Virginia. He described it as: “An authority to which appeal is habitually made by all... as evidence of the general opinion of those who framed, and of those who accepted the Constitution of the United States, on questions as to its genuine meaning.” Perhaps The Federalist should be a required text in Brussels and for the European Court of Justice.
I do not argue that the problems of early 21st-century Europe are identical to those of late 18th-century America. I am not myself a federalist. Yet the Americans did have to face similar problems in trying to reconcile the relationship of the federal government with the individual states - the very questions that confront Europe in the Lisbon treaty.
The American Constitution has succeeded in providing the US with a stable democratic framework that has survived the great changes of the past two centuries, including - in the 20th century - two world wars, a Cold War and a slump. The US Constitution is 221 years old, and still able to produce a presidential election with three highly gifted candidates. The Constitution has repeatedly proved able to regenerate itself.
The original French Constitution was adopted only shortly after the American; within a decade it had been overtaken by the Terror and overthrown by Napoleon. Surely, Europe should be asking this question: why did the US Constitution succeed when the French Constitution has repeatedly failed? There is also the primary question of assent. The articles of the US Constitution were adopted by the Federal Convention in September 1787; the opening words are: “We, the people of the United States...”
Combined with the earlier treaties, Lisbon does form a sort of constitution, though an unsatisfactory one. Yet no one would be entitled to start this European constitution with the words: “We, the people of Europe...” It might have to be: “We, the people of Ireland...”, since the Irish are the only people allowed a vote. Will the Lisbon constitution last as long as the American? The answer is probably not.
William Rees-Mogg has had a distinguished career with The Times and The Sunday Times. He was Deputy Editor of The Sunday Times before becoming Editor of The Times in 1967, a position he held until 1981. He was made a life peer in 1988. Since 1992 he has been a columnist for The Times, writing on a variety of issues. He has also been chairman of the Broadcast Standards Council and British Arts Council
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
The premise on which the entire article is based is mistaken. The error made by Giscard was to give the title 'Treaty establishing a Consitution for Europe' to the document that emerged from the European Convention. The only accurate element was the word 'treaty'.
seosamh, Cathair,
Actually, Pauli, we know the answer to that question. During the Undeclared war with France (1798-1800) president John Adams and the Federalist party cracked down on political opposition (symbolically) with the alien and sedition acts. These laws far outstripped anything GWB has done...
Matt, Chicago, IL, USA
It's a pity about the gun law though; surely this is a classic example of a modern state stuck with an outdaed and archaic law?
Richard, Bexhill, UK
...and Jefferson's Democratic-Republican party dealt with them by simply defeating the Federalists in the next election. Jefferson, who held the laws to be unconstitutional (which they were), then pardoned all who had been convicted of sedition (there were only 10). Satisfied?
Matt, Chicago, IL, USA
Many European countries are dedicated to civil liberties and human rights but lack any sense of necessity for compromise. The American Constitution was created amid acrimony and compromise that was only resolved 87 years later during the Civil War, but also urgent crisis and necessity.
Mike, Pittsburgh,
And how long will the unwritten 'constitution' of the not-very-United Kingdom last?
Paul, Coventry,
Lisbon treaty vs the US constitution is a false comparison and a bogus issue. Look around Europe and see joined-up government, forward thinking but yet respect for tradition and difference. Let's act like grown-ups about EU -- it's not a threat, but an opportunity.
Adam, Oxford, England
We the people........ need we say more!
Brussels...... We the bureacracy in order to further extend and consolidate our powers.
When will it occur to Europeans that it is democracy itself that is under assault,Napoleon,Hitler and Stalin would all be so proud if they could see what is happening.
John W Meadows, Los Altos Hills, California
The US Constitution is the first and best of its kind. However, it is clearly showing its age. Ben Franklin said that, with luck, it could last 200 years. It is past time fro its review and revison for the next 100 years.
The Lisbon abortion won't last 20 years.
David Heigham, Madrid, Spain
Pack the Supreme Court with right wing judges as Bush has and your brilliant constitution flies out the window.
Joe reilly, Spalding, England
You have to believe that at least some European politicians understand the concept of a constitution, but none has the statesmanship to limit the EU to writing one. Instead, in the Lisbon Treaty, every lobby got to add their favourite item to a grotesque shopping list. Truly lamentable.
David Pritchard, Madrid, Spain
Most citizens of early America went there willingly to escape persecution or poverty. They created a Constitution and Govt which enshrined their liberties. The Lisbon treaty does not enshrine liberties & we are denied a vote because they know we would reject it. We the people of the EU don't want it
Donna Walker, Effingham, England
The US Constitution would surely be impossible to enact in today's world? Human rights lawyers would insist that the signatories free their slaves immediately, they'd refuse, journalists would witter on about hypocrisy, and the whole document (and several careers) would be shredded.
Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK
To the best of my knowledge, there were no referenda in America to approve the proposed constitution. The approval process was based on approval by elected representatives; similiar to that in the EU, with the exception of Ireland. Unlike the process in the EU, unanimity was not required in America.
Michael, Rockville, USA
The Lisbon consitution is clearly a half-way house in the evolution of Europe's political integration so that inevitably it will not last as long as the US constitution before it is subject to further refinement. Democratic elements need strengthening before those opening words can be used.
Marek, London,
Unlike the French, once they had succeeded in expelling the British the Americans were essentially free of external threats & internal strife - that's why the US had a stable early history. Even so, the US constitution was a 2nd attempt, after the failure of the articles of confederation (1777-88).
Jonathan, London, UK
Actually, quite a few Americans could read what Jefferson wrote. As he himself put it "Ours are the only farmers that can read Homer". Well, not all of them, I suspect, but a high proportion , and certainly more than anywhere in Europe at that time.
Mike Stone, Peterborough, UK
By the time the US Constitution was written, the Anglo-Saxons
had had about 6 centuries of parliamentary government and
a limited King, and especially strong local governments in
New England and Virginia. The French (and the Russians)
had a stronger monarchy, many more surfs, and alas violence.
Erasmus, Ridgecrest, CA, USA
There is no democratic process in the furthering of the EU/EC with this treaty/constitution. We have been denied a promised referendum and we will have no choice on who will become its new "President". It has been made by the Euro heads of State and their minions for themselves and friends/family
Wen, Oxford, England,
Er, I hope Mr. Moog has a better grasp of American Federalism than he has of The Federalist Papers(Not The Federalist. The Federalist PAPERS). First of all, Jefferson was an ANTI-federalist, and worried about the presidency assuming the character of a monarchy.
John, CT, USA
The genius of the US Constitution is that it limits itself to the constitution of government, not the making of law. If the EU were to similarly limit itself, it would have a constitution soon enough.
LeBain, Surrey,
However, the US is now a despotic nation. Once upon a time,
the Government could only take property for a "public use." This
term now includes "public purpose" such as to raise more taxes,
transfer property to friends of the powerful and remove the weak.
John, Placentia, California
The main problem with the EU constitution (or treaty) is that it is too detailed. It should contain nothing more than fundamental principles and the basic structure of government. All else needs time and tradition to develope as law through legislation which deals with problems as they come along.
Leonard Gordon, New York City, USA
there were 85 "federalist papers" for those who supported and 85 "anti-federalist papers" for those who opposed the constitution the first paper was printed in 1787.
get your fact straight
kim, houston,
The U.S. Constitution was not adopted by referendum, but by elected representatives of the people in the governments of the various states.
donnolo, Monterey, USA
Yes but I am glad to be european, even more glad not to be american!
Richard, Plymouth,
US constitution, about twenty-six pages, Lisbon, effectively hundreds.
I predict the US constitution will still be in place when Lisbon and its successors are long gone into the dustbin of history.
Stan(expat), Expat, USA
The EU constitution as proposed is 346 pages long. I submit that no one in Europe has read the entire thing let alone understands it. I also submit that any constitution that is 346 pages is not worth the paper it is printed on. I hope the Irish have enough sense to turn it down in their referendum.
John, Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Gee conditions sure have changed.......but people still lie, steal, cheat, commit treason, and fornicate with animals.
Usually the people who desire most to get rid of the US Constitution are those find it blocking thier path to power and loot.
Douglas R. Chandler, Plano, TX, USA
The writer has it exactly: the disussion contained in the Federalist papers answers the essential question of how to have liberty and government at the same time. Our European friends have been notoriously unable to answer that question since the fall of the Roman Republic.
Hugh Brennan, Princeton, NJ,USA
The conditions im the world today are considerably different from when the US constitution was written and the founding fathers never foresaw what is going on today. It is a deified, but an outdated piece of paper, written by man, not God.
Jon Maynard, Lansing MI, USA
I rarely find myself in agreement with your views. But this time I agree completely. The EU has no Jefferson, Madison or Hamilton to express a poular mandate - it has faceless bureacrats who seek to fashion a State in spite of the will of the people. This State will not flourish.
Mark, Berkhamsted,
Is George Bush, today's Napoleon Bonaparte? What would Thomas Jefferson have to say about George Bonaparte's adherence to the U.S. Constitution?
Pauli, Lonson,
There is nothing wrong with being a federalist and of openly expressing the view that we would all be better off in a united, federal Europe. But say so openly. Give the people the choice. Set up checks and balances as in America. Make it democratic. Europe is doing none of these thing as you say.
Paul Owen, Birmingham, UK
You're implying that the people of America in the early 18th C knew what the hell Jefferson was saying?? The difference today is that most Europeans can read. The US constitution sustained itself because of illiteracy which continues to this day and they do NOT have 3 gifted candidates. Wake up.
Steve Payne, Valencia, Spain
If Jefferson came back today, he might re-draft his letter to ensure protection of the "will of the majority" to never have to suffer the will of the minority. Recently in France, Muslim tombs were desecrated; outrage from the politicians, etc.! This weekend, Christian tombs desecrated => Silence!
Samuel Young, Paris, France