Address at the Celebration of the 150th Anniversary of
the Declaration of Independence, Philadelphia, Pa.
July 5, 1926
Fellow Countrymen:
We meet to celebrate the birthday of America. That coming of a new life
always excites our interest. Although we know in the case of the individual that
it has been an infinite repetition reaching back beyond our vision, that only
makes it more wonderful. But how our interest and wonder increase when we behold
the miracle of the birth of a new nation. It is to pay our tribute of reverence
and respect to those who participated in such a mighty event that we annually
observe the 4th day of July. Whatever may have been the impression created by
the news which went out from this city on that summer day in 1776, there can be
no doubt as to the estimate which is now placed upon it. At the end of 150 years
the four corners of the earth unite in coming to Philadelphia as to a holy
shrine in grateful acknowledgment of a service so great, which a few inspired
men here rendered to humanity, that it is still the preeminent support of free
government throughout the world.
Although a century and a half measured in comparison with the length of human
experience is but a short time, yet measured in the life of governments and
nations it ranks as a very respectable period. Certainly enough time has elapsed
to demonstrate with a great real of thoroughness the value of our institutions
and their dependability as rules for the regulation of human conduct and the
advancement of civilization. They have been in existence long enough to become
very well seasoned. They have met, and met successfully, the test of experience
It is not so much, then, for the purpose of undertaking to proclaim new
theories and principles that this annual celebration is maintained, but rather
to reaffirm and reestablish those old theories and principles which time and the
unerring logic of events have demonstrated to be sound. Amid all the clash of
conflicting interests, amid all the welter of partisan politics, every American
can turn for solace and consolation to the Declaration of Independence and the
Constitution of the United States with the assurance and confidence that those
two great charters of freedom and justice remain firm and unshaken. Whatever
perils appear, whatever dangers threaten, the Nation remains secure in the
knowledge that the ultimate application of the law of the land will provide an
adequate defense and protection.
It is little wonder that people at home and abroad consider Independence Hall
as hallowed ground and revere the Liberty Bell as a sacred relic. That pile of
bricks and mortar, that mass of metal, might appear to the uninstructed as only
the outgrown meeting place and the shattered bell of a former time, useless now
because of more modern conveniences, but to those who know they have become
consecrated by the use which men have made of them. They have long been
identified with a great cause. They are the framework of a spiritual event. The
world looks upon them, because of their associations of one hundred and fifty
years ago, as it looks upon the Holy Land because of what took place there
nineteen hundred years ago. Through use for a righteous purpose they have become
sanctified.
It is not here necessary to examine in detail the causes which led to the
American Revolution. In their immediate occasion they were largely economic. The
colonists objected to the navigation laws which interfered with their trade,
they denied the power of Parliament to impose taxes which they were obliged to
pay, and they therefore resisted the royal governors and the royal forces which
were sent to secure obedience to these laws. But the conviction is inescapable
that a new civilization had come, a new spirit had arisen on this side of the
Atlantic more advanced and more developed in its regard for the rights of the
individual than that which characterized the Old World. Life in a new and open
country had aspirations which could not be realized in any subordinate position.
A separate establishment was ultimately inevitable. It had been decreed by the
very laws of human nature. Man everywhere has an unconquerable desire to be the
master of his own destiny.
We are obliged to conclude that the Declaration of Independence represented
the movement of a people. It was not, of course, a movement from the top.
Revolutions do not come from that direction. It was not without the support of
many of the most respectable people in the Colonies, who were entitled to all
the consideration that is given to breeding, education, and possessions. It had
the support of another element of great significance and importance to which I
shall later refer. But the preponderance of all those who occupied a position
which took on the aspect of aristocracy did not approve of the Revolution and
held toward it an attitude either of neutrality or open hostility. It was in no
sense a rising of the oppressed and downtrodden. It brought no scum to the
surface, for the reason that colonial society had developed no scum. The great
body of the people were accustomed to privations, but they were free from
depravity. If they had poverty, it was not of the hopeless kind that afflicts
great cities, but the inspiring kind that marks the spirit of the pioneer. The
American Revolution represented the informed and mature convictions of a great
mass of independent, liberty loving, God-fearing people who knew their rights,
and possessed the courage to dare to maintain them.
The Continental Congress was not only composed of great men, but it
represented a great people. While its Members did not fail to exercise a
remarkable leadership, they were equally observant of their representative
capacity. They were industrious in encouraging their constituents to instruct
them to support independence. But until such instructions were given they were
inclined to withhold action.
While North Carolina has the honor of first authorizing its delegates to
concur with other Colonies in declaring independence, it was quickly followed by
South Carolina and Georgia, which also gave general instructions broad enough to
include such action. But the first instructions which unconditionally directed
its delegates to declare for independence came from the great Commonwealth of
Virginia. These were immediately followed by Rhode Island and Massachusetts,
while the other Colonies, with the exception of New York, soon adopted a like
course.
This obedience of the delegates to the wishes of their constituents, which in
some cases caused them to modify their previous positions, is a matter of great
significance. It reveals an orderly process of government in the first place;
but more than that, it demonstrates that the Declaration of Independence was the
result of the seasoned and deliberate thought of the dominant portion of the
people of the Colonies. Adopted after long discussion and as the result of the
duly authorized expression of the preponderance of public opinion, it did not
partake of dark intrigue or hidden conspiracy. It was well advised. It had about
it nothing of the lawless and disordered nature of a riotous insurrection. It
was maintained on a plane which rises above the ordinary conception of
rebellion. It was in no sense a radical movement but took on the dignity of a
resistance to illegal usurpations. It was conservative and represented the
action of the colonists to maintain their constitutional rights which from time
immemorial had been guaranteed to them under the law of the land.
When we come to examine the action of the Continental Congress in adopting
the Declaration of Independence in the light of what was set out in that great
document and in the light of succeeding events, we can not escape the conclusion
that it had a much broader and deeper significance than a mere secession if
territory and the establishment of a new nation. Events of that nature have been
taking place since the dawn of history.One empire after another has arisen, only
to crumble away as its constituent parts separated from each other and set up
independent governments of their own. Such actions long ago became
commonplace.They have occurred too often to hold the attention of the world and
command the administration and reverence of humanity. There is something beyond
the establishment of a new nation, great as that event would be, in the
Declaration of Independence which has ever since caused it to be regarded as one
of the great charters that not only was to liberate America but was everywhere
to ennoble humanity.
It was not because it was proposed to establish a new nation, but because it
was proposed to establish a nation on new principles, that July 4, 1776, has
come to be regarded as one of the greatest days in history. Great ideas do not
burst upon the world unannounced. They are reached by a gradual development over
a length of time usually proportionate to their importance. This is especially
true of the principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence. Three very
definite propositions were set out in its preamble regarding the nature of
mankind and therefore of government. These were the doctrine that all men are
created equal, that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights, and that
therefore the source of the just powers of government must be derived from the
consent of the governed.
If no one is to be accounted as born into a superior station, if there is to
be no ruling class, and if all possess rights which can neither be bartered away
nor taken from them by any earthly power, it follows as a matter of course that
the practical authority of the Government has to rest on the consent of the
governed. While these principles were not altogether new in political action,
and were very far from new in political speculation, they had never been
assembled before and declared in such a combination. But remarkable as this may
be, it is not the chief distinction of the Declaration of Independence. The
importance of political speculation is not to be underestimated, as I shall
presently disclose. Until the idea is developed and the plan made there can be
no action.
It was the fact that our Declaration of Independence containing these
immortal truths was the political action of a duly authorized and constituted
representative public body in its sovereign capacity, supported by the force of
general opinion and by the armies of Washington already in the field, which
makes it the most important civil document in the world. It was not only the
principles declared, but the fact that therewith a new nation was born which was
to be founded upon those principles and which from that time forth in its
development has actually maintained those principles, that makes this
pronouncement an incomparable event in the history of government. It was an
assertion that a people had arisen determined to make every necessary sacrifice
for the support of these truths and by their practical application bring the War
of Independence to a successful conclusion and adopt the Constitution of the
United States with all that it has meant to civilization.
The idea that the people have a right to choose their own rulers was not new
in political history. It was the foundation of every popular attempt to depose
an undesirable king. This right was set out with a good deal of detail by the
Dutch when as early as July 26, 1581, they declared their independence of Philip
of Spain. In their long struggle with the Stuarts the British people asserted
the same principles, which finally culminated in the Bill of Rights deposing the
last of that house and placing William and Mary on the throne. In each of these
cases sovereignty through divine right was displaced by sovereignty through the
consent of the people. Running through the same documents, though expressed in
different terms, is the clear inference of inalienable rights. But we should
search these charters in vain for an assertion of the doctrine of equality. This
principle had not before appeared as an official political declaration of any
nation. It was profoundly revolutionary. It is one of the corner stones of
American institutions.
But if these truths to which the Declaration refers have not before been
adopted in their combined entirely by national authority, it is a fact that they
had been long pondered and often expressed in political speculation. It is
generally assumed that French thought had some effect upon our public mind
during Revolutionary days. This may have been true. But the principles of our
Declaration had been under discussion in the Colonies for nearly two generations
before the advent of the French political philosophy that characterized the
middle of the eighteenth century. In fact, they come from an earlier date. A
very positive echo of what the Dutch had done in 1581, and what the English were
preparing to do, appears in the assertion of the Rev. Thomas Hooker, of
Connecticut, as early as 1638, when he said in a sermon before the General Court
that--
The foundation of authority is laid in the free consent of the people.
The choice of public magistrates belongs to the people by God's own
allowance.
This doctrine found wide acceptance among the nonconformist clergy who later
made up the Congregational Church. The great apostle of this movement was the
Rev. John Wise, of Massachusetts. He was one of the leaders of the revolt
against the royal governor Andross in 1687, for which he suffered imprisonment.
He was a liberal in ecclesiastical controversies. He appears to have been
familiar with the writings of the political scientist, Samuel Pufendorf, who was
born in Saxony in 1632. Wise published a treatise entitled "The Church's Quarrel
Espoused" in 1710, which was amplified in another publication in 1717. In it he
dealt with the principles of civil government. His works were reprinted in 1772
and have been declared to have been nothing less than a textbook of liberty for
our Revolutionary fathers.
While the written word was the foundation, it is apparent that the spoken
word was the vehicle for convincing the people. This came with great force and
wide range from the successors of Hooker and Wise. It was carried on with a
missionary spirit which did not fail to reach the Scotch-Irish of North
Carolina, showing its influence by significantly making that Colony the first to
give instructions to its delegates looking to independence. This preaching
reached the neighborhood of Thomas Jefferson, who acknowledged that his "best
ideas of democracy" had been secured at church meetings.
That these ideas were prevalent in Virginia is further revealed by the
Declaration of Rights, which was prepared by George Mason and presented to the
general assembly on May 27, 1776. This document asserted popular sovereignty and
inherent natural rights, but confined the doctrine of equality to the assertion
that "All men are created equally free and independent." It can scarcely be
imagined that Jefferson was unacquainted with what had been done in his own
Commonwealth of Virginia when he took up the task of drafting the Declaration of
Independence. But these thoughts can very largely be traced back to what John
Wise was writing in 1710. He said, "Every man must be acknowledged equal to very
man." Again, "The end of all good government is to cultivate humanity and
promote the happiness of all and the good of every man in all his rights, his
life, liberty, estate, honor, and so forth * * *."
And again, "For as they have a power every man in his natural state, so upon
combination they can and do bequeath this power to others and settle it
according as their united discretion shall determine." And still again,
"Democracy is Christ's government in church and state." Here was the doctrine of
equality, popular sovereignty, and the substance of the theory of inalienable
rights clearly asserted by Wise at the opening of the eighteenth century, just
as we have the principle of the consent of the governed state by Hooker as early
as 1638.
When we take all these circumstances into consideration, it is but natural
that the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence should open with a
reference to Nature's God and should close in the final paragraphs with an
appeal to the Supreme Judge of the world and an assertion of a firm reliance on
Divine Providence. Coming from these sources, having as it did this background,
it is no wonder that Samuel Adams could say "The people seem to recognize this
resolution as though it were a decree promulgated from heaven."
No one can examine this record and escape the conclusion that in the great
outline of its principles the Declaration was the result of the religious
teachings of the preceding period. The profound philosophy which Jonathan
Edwards applied to theology, the popular preaching of George Whitefield, had
aroused the thought and stirred the people of the Colonies in preparation for
this great event. No doubt the speculations which had been going on in England,
and especially on the Continent, lent their influence to the general sentiment
of the times. Of course, the world is always influenced by all the experience
and all the thought of the past. But when we come to a contemplation of the
immediate conception of the principles of human relationship which went into the
Declaration of Independence we are not required to extend our search beyond our
own shores. They are found in the texts, the sermons, and the writings of the
early colonial clergy who were earnestly undertaking to instruct their
congregations in the great mystery of how to live. They preached equality
because they believed in the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. They
justified freedom by the text that we are all created in the divine image, all
partakers of the divine spirit.
Placing every man on a plane where he acknowledged no superiors, where no one
possessed any right to rule over him, he must inevitably choose his own rulers
through a system of self-government. This was their theory of democracy. In
those days such doctrines would scarcely have been permitted to flourish and
spread in any other country. This was the purpose which the fathers cherished.
In order that they might have freedom to express these thoughts and opportunity
to put them into action, whole congregations with their pastors had migrated to
the Colonies. These great truths were in the air that our people breathed.
Whatever else we may say of it, the Declaration of Independence was profoundly
American.
If this apprehension of the facts be correct, and the documentary evidence
would appear to verify it, then certain conclusions are bound to follow. A
spring will cease to flow if its source be dried up; a tree will wither if it
roots be destroyed. In its main features the Declaration of Independence is a
great spiritual document. It is a declaration not of material but of spiritual
conceptions. Equality, liberty, popular sovereignty, the rights of man - these
are not elements which we can see and touch. They are ideals. They have their
source and their roots in the religious convictions. They belong to the unseen
world. Unless the faith of the American people in these religious convictions is
to endure, the principles of our Declaration will perish. We can not continue to
enjoy the result if we neglect and abandon the cause.
We are too prone to overlook another conclusion. Governments do not make
ideals, but ideals make governments. This is both historically and logically
true. Of course the government can help to sustain ideals and can create
institutions through which they can be the better observed, but their source by
their very nature is in the people. The people have to bear their own
responsibilities. There is no method by which that burden can be shifted to the
government. It is not the enactment, but the observance of laws, that creates
the character of a nation.
About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is
often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that
we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance
over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their
conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to
this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are
endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just
powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress
can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or
their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not
forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of
the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that
direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are
not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.
In the development of its institutions America can fairly claim that it has
remained true to the principles which were declared 150 years ago. In all the
essentials we have achieved an equality which was never possessed by any other
people. Even in the less important matter of material possessions we have
secured a wider and wider distribution of wealth. The rights of the individual
are held sacred and protected by constitutional guaranties which even the
Government itself is bound not to violate. If there is any one thing among us
that is established beyond question, it is self-government - the right of the
people to rule. If there is any failure in respect to any of these principles,
it is because there is a failure on the part of individuals to observe them. We
hold that the duly authorized expression of the will of the people has a divine
sanction. But even in that we come back to the theory of John Wise that
"Democracy is Christ's government * * *." The ultimate sanction of law rests on
the righteous authority of the Almighty.
On an occasion like this great temptation exists to present evidence of the
practical success of our form of democratic republic at home and the
ever-broadening acceptance it is securing abroad. Although these things are well
known, their frequent consideration is an encouragement and an inspiration. But
it is not results and effects so much as sources and causes that I believe it is
even more necessary constantly to contemplate. Ours is a government of the
people. It represents their will. Its officers may sometimes go astray, but that
is not a reason for criticizing the principles of our institutions. The real
heart of the American Government depends upon the heart of the people. It is
from that source that we must look for all genuine reform. It is to that cause
that we must ascribe all our results.
It was in the contemplation of these truths that the fathers made their
declaration and adopted their Constitution. It was to establish a free
government, which must not be permitted to degenerate into the unrestrained
authority of a mere majority or the unbridled weight of a mere influential few.
They undertook to balance these interests against each other and provide the
three separate independent branches, the executive, the legislative, and the
judicial departments of the Government, with checks against each other in order
that neither one might encroach upon the other. These are our guarantees of
liberty. As a result of these methods enterprise has been duly protected from
confiscation, the people have been free from oppression, and there has been an
ever-broadening and deepening of the humanities of life.
Under a system of popular government there will always be those who will seek
for political preferment by clamoring for reform. While there is very little of
this which is not sincere, there is a large portion that is not well informed.
In my opinion very little of just criticism can attach to the theories and
principles of our institutions. There is far more danger of harm than there is
hope of good in any radical changes. We do need a better understanding and
comprehension of them and a better knowledge of the foundations of government in
general Our forefathers came to certain conclusions and decided upon certain
courses of action which have been a great blessing to the world. Before we can
understand their conclusions we must go back and review the course which they
followed. We must think the thoughts which they thought. Their intellectual life
centered around the meetinghouse. They were intent upon religious worship. While
there were always among them men of deep learning, and later those who had
comparatively large possessions, the mind of the people was not so much
engrossed in how much they knew, or how much they had, as in how they were going
to live. While scantily provided with other literature, there was a wide
acquaintance with the Scriptures. Over a period as great as that which measures
the existence of our independence they were subject to this discipline not only
in their religious life and educational training, but also in their political
thought. They were a people who came under the influence of a great spiritual
development and acquired a great moral power.
No other theory is adequate to explain or comprehend the Declaration of
Independence. It is the product of the spiritual insight of the people. We live
in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did
not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them. The things of the
spirit come first. Unless we cling to that, all our material prosperity,
overwhelming though it may appear, will turn to a barren scepter in our grasp.
If we are to maintain the great heritage which has been bequeathed to us, we
must be like-minded as the fathers who created it. We must not sink into a pagan
materialism. We must cultivate the reverence which they had for the things that
are holy. We must follow the spiritual and moral leadership which they showed.
We must keep replenished, that they may glow with a more compelling flame, the
altar fires before which they worshiped.
Citation: Calvin
Coolidge: "Address at the Celebration of the 150th
Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, Philadelphia, Pa.," July 5,
1926.
No comments:
Post a Comment