Page:Essays in Historical Criticism.djvu/189

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

MADISON'S STUDIES IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 169

co-operation are incompatible with such an injudiciously con- structed system."

Of late the fanciful suggestion that the Federal Constitu- tion was imitated from the United Netherlands has here and there received favor. The indebtedness to Holland was of a far different kind in Madison's eyes. "The confederate Government of Holland," he proceeds, "is a further confir- mation of the characteristic imbecility of such governments. From the history of this Government we might derive lessons of the most important utility. Governments destitute of energy will ever produce anarchy. These facts are worthy the most serious consideration of every gentleman here. Does not the history of these confederacies coincide with the lessons drawn from our own experience ? I most earnestly pray that America may have sufficient wisdom to avail her- self of the instructive information she may derive from a con- templation of the sources of their misfortunes, and that she may escape a similar fate by avoiding the causes from which their infelicities sprang."

In short, for Madison, all his study of the history of federal government confirmed his diagnosis of the existing evils. Permanent peace, prosperity, and development could not be obtained under any type of confederacy known to history. All have fallen a prey to dissension and disintegration. Some- thing new must be devised in the form of a federal constitu- tion. From the debates in Philadelphia emerged our Constitution, to be recognized and classified as a new type : the Bundesstaat, or Federal State, the creation of Madison's thought more than of any one else's. The evils of the Con- federation were obvious, and history showed Madison that they were irremediable. When we realize fully Madison's part in the Constitution, the unsparing toil which he devoted to its formation and adoption, we can form some idea — although, of course, not an exact one — of the importance in our history of his studies in the history of federal government.