Brian Carnell's Wiki

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
<html>
<h2>A LETTER</h2>

<h5>TO</h5>

<h1>THOMAS F. BAYARD</h1>

<p class="center">CHALLENGING HIS RIGHT&mdash;AND THAT OF ALL THE
OTHER SO-CALLED SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES
IN CONGRESS&mdash;<br /><br />

TO EXERCISE ANY LEGISLATIVE POWER WHATEVER
OVER THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.</p>


<div class="bbt">
<h2>B<small>Y</small> LYSANDER SPOONER.</h2>
</div>

<p class="center"><small>BOSTON, MASS.:</small><br />
PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR.<br />
1882.</p>




<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><span class="pagenum">[62]</span></p>
<h1>A Letter to<br />
Thomas F. Bayard</h1>

<div class="blockquot">
<p class="noidt">"<i>Challenging his right&mdash;and that of all the other so-called
senators and representatives in Congress&mdash;to exercise any
legislative power whatever over the people of the United
States.</i>"</p></div>

<p class="center"><big>by Lysander Spooner</big></p>


<p class="noidt">To Thomas F. Bayard, of Delaware:</p>

<p>Sir&mdash;I have read your letter to Rev. Lyman Abbott, in which you
express the opinion that it is at least possible for a man to be a
legislator (under the Constitution of the United States) and yet be
an honest man.</p>

<p>This proposition implies that you hold it to be at least possible
that some four hundred men should, by some process or other,
become invested with the right to make laws of their own&mdash;that is,
<i>laws wholly of their own device</i>, and therefore necessarily distinct
from the law of nature, or the principles of natural justice; and that
these laws of their own making shall be really and truly obligatory
upon the people of the United States; and that, therefore, the people
may rightfully be compelled to obey them.</p>

<p>All this implies that you are of the opinion that the Congress of
the United States, of which you are a member, has, by some process
or other, become possessed of some right <i>of arbitrary dominion</i>
over the people of the United States; which right of arbitrary
dominion is not given by, and is, therefore, necessarily in conflict
with, the law of nature, the principles of natural justice, and the
natural rights of men, as individuals. All this is necessarily implied
in the idea that the Congress now possesses any right whatever to
make any laws whatever, <i>of its own device</i>&mdash;that is, any laws that
shall be either more, less, or other than that natural law, which it
can neither make, unmake, nor alter&mdash;and cause them to be enforced
upon the people of the United States, or any of them, against
their will.<span class="pagenum">[63]</span></p>

<p>You assume that the right of arbitrary dominion&mdash;that is, the
right of making laws of their own device, and compelling obedience
to them&mdash;is a "trust" that has been delegated to those who now
exercise that power. You call it "the trust of public power."</p>

<p>But, Sir, you are mistaken in supposing that any such power has
ever been delegated, or ever can be delegated, by any body, to any
body.</p>

<p>Any such delegation of power is naturally impossible, for these
reasons, viz:</p>

<p>1. No man can delegate, or give to another, any right of arbitrary
dominion over himself; for that would be giving himself away as a
slave. And this no one can do. Any contract to do so is necessarily
an absurd one, and has no validity. To call such a contract a "constitution,"
or by any other high-sounding name, does not alter its
character as an absurd and void contract.</p>

<p>2. No man can delegate, or give to another, any right of arbitrary
dominion over a third person; for that would imply a right in the
first person, not only to make the third person his slave, but also
a right to dispose of him as a slave to still other persons. Any contract
to do this is necessarily a criminal one, and therefore invalid.
To call such a contract a "constitution" does not at all lessen its
criminality, or add to its validity.</p>

<p>These facts, that no man can delegate, or give away, his own
natural right to liberty, nor any other man's natural right to liberty,
prove that he can delegate no right of arbitrary dominion whatever&mdash;or,
what is the same thing, no legislative power whatever&mdash;over himself
or anybody else, to any man, or body of men.</p>

<p>This impossibility of any man's delegating any legislative power
whatever, necessarily results from the fact that the law of nature
has drawn the line, and the only line&mdash;and that, too, a line that can
never be effaced nor removed&mdash;between each man's own interest
and inalienable rights of person and property, and each and every
other man's inherent and inalienable rights of person and property.
It, therefore, necessarily fixes the unalterable limits, within which
every man may rightfully seek his own happiness, in his own way,
free from all responsibility to, or interference by, his fellow men,
or any of them.</p>

<p>All this pretended delegation of legislative power&mdash;that is, of a
power, on the part of the legislators, so-called, to make any laws
of their own device, distinct from the law of nature&mdash;is therefore
<span class="pagenum">[64]</span>
an entire falsehood; a falsehood whose only purpose is to cover and
hide a pure usurpation, by one body of men, of arbitrary dominion
over other men.</p>

<p>That this legislative power, or power of arbitrary dominion, is
a pure usurpation, on the part of those who now exercise it, and not
a "trust" delegated to them, is still further proved by the fact that
the only delegation of power, that is even professed or pretended
to be made, is made <i>secretly</i>&mdash;that is, by <i>secret ballot</i>&mdash;and not in
any open and authentic manner; and therefore not by any men, or
body of men, who make themselves personally responsible, as principals,
for the acts of those to whom they profess to delegate the
power.</p>

<p>All this pretended delegation of power having been made secretly&mdash;that
is, only by secret ballot&mdash;not a single one of all the legislators,
so-called, who profess to be exercising only a delegated
power, has himself any legal knowledge, or can offer any legal
proof, as to who the particular individuals were who delegated it
to him. And having no power to identify the individuals who professed
to delegate the power to him, he cannot show any legal proof
that anybody ever even attempted or pretended to delegate it to
him.</p>

<p>Plainly, a man who exercises any arbitrary dominion over other
men and who claims to be exercising only a delegated power, but
cannot show who his principals are, nor, consequently, prove that
he has any principals, must be presumed, both in law and reason,
to have no principals; and therefore to be exercising no power but
his own. And having, of right, no such power of his own, he is,
both in law and reason, a naked usurper.</p>

<p>Sir, a secret ballot makes a secret government; and a secret
government is a government by conspiracy; in which the people at
large can have no rights. And that is the only government we now
have. It is the government of which you are a voluntary member
and supporter, and yet you claim to be an honest man. If you are
an honest man, is not your honesty that of a thoughtless, ignorant
man, who merely drifts with the current, instead of exercising any
judgment of his own?</p>

<p>For still another reason, all legislators, so-called, under the Constitution
of the United States, are exercising simply an arbitrary
and irresponsible dominion of their own; and not any authority that
has been delegated, or pretended to have been delegated, to them.
<span class="pagenum">[65]</span>
And that reason is that the Constitution itself (Art. I, Sec. 6) prescribes
that:</p>

<blockquote><p>"For any speech or debate (or vote) in either house, they (the
Senators and Representatives) shall not be questioned (held to any
legal responsibility) in any other place."</p></blockquote>

<p>This provision makes the legislators constitutionally irresponsible
to anybody; either to those on whom they exercise their power, or
to those who may have, either openly or secretly, attempted or pretended
to delegate power to them. And men who are legally responsible
to nobody for their acts, cannot truly be said to be the
agents of any body, or to be exercising any power but their own;
for all real agents are necessarily responsible both to those <i>on</i>
whom they act, and to those <i>for</i> whom they act.</p>

<p>To say that the people of this country ever have bound, or ever
could bind, themselves by any contract whatever&mdash;the Constitution,
or any other&mdash;to thus give away all their natural rights of property,
liberty, and life, into the hands of a few men&mdash;a mere conclave&mdash;and
that they should make it a part of the contract itself that these few
men should be held legally irresponsible for the disposal they
should make of those rights, is an utter absurdity. It is to say that
they have bound themselves, and that they could bind themselves,
by an utterly idiotic and suicidal contract.</p>

<p>If such a contract had ever been made by one private individual
to another, and had been signed, sealed, witnessed, acknowledged,
and delivered, with all possible legal formalities, no decent court
on earth&mdash;certainly none in this country&mdash;would have regarded it, for
a moment, as conveying any right, or delegating any power, or as
having the slightest legal validity, or obligation.</p>

<p>For all the reasons now given, and for still others that might be
given, the legislative power now exercised by Congress is, in both
law and reason, a purely personal, arbitrary, irresponsible, usurped
dominion on the part of the legislators themselves, and not a power
delegated to them by anybody.</p>

<p>Yet under the pretense that this instrument gives them the right
of an arbitrary and irresponsible dominion over the whole people
of the United States, Congress has now gone on, for ninety years
and more, filling great volumes with laws of their own device,
which the people at large have never read, nor even seen, nor ever
will read or see; and of whose legal meanings it is morally impossible
<span class="pagenum">[66]</span>
that they should ever know anything. Congress has never
dared to require the people even to read these laws. Had it done
so, the oppression would have been an intolerable one; and the
people, rather than endure it, would have either rebelled, and overthrown
the government, or would have fled the country. Yet these
laws, which Congress has not dared to require the people even to
read, it has compelled them, at the point of the bayonet, to obey.</p>

<p>And this moral, and legal, and political monstrosity is the kind
of government which Congress claims that the Constitution authorizes
it to impose upon the people.</p>

<p>Sir, can you say that such an arbitrary and irresponsible dominion
as this, over the properties, liberties, and lives of fifty millions of
people&mdash;or even over the property, liberty, or life of any one of
those fifty millions&mdash;can be justified on any reason whatever? If
not, with what color of truth can you say that you yourself, or anybody
else, can act as a legislator, under the Constitution of the
United States, and yet be an honest man?</p>

<p>To say that the arbitrary and irresponsible dominion, that is
exercised by Congress, has been delegated to it by the Constitution,
<i>and not solely by the secret ballots of the voters for the time being</i>,
is the height of absurdity; for what is the Constitution? It is, at best,
a writing that was drawn up more than ninety years ago; was assented
to at the time only by a small number of men; generally
those few white male adults who had prescribed amounts of property;
probably not more than two hundred thousand in all; or one
in twenty of the whole population.</p>

<p>Those men have been long since dead. They never had any
right of arbitrary dominion over even their contemporaries; and
they never had any over us. Their wills or wishes have no more
rightful authority over us, than have the wills or wishes of men
who lived before the flood. They never personally signed, sealed,
acknowledged, or delivered, or dared to sign, seal, acknowledge, or
deliver, the instrument which they imposed upon the country as
law. They never, in any open and authentic manner, bound even
themselves to obey it, or made themselves personally responsible
for the acts of their so-called agents under it. They had no natural
right to impose it, as law, upon a single human being. The whole
proceeding was a pure usurpation.</p>

<p>In practice, the Constitution has been an utter fraud from the
beginning. Professing to have been "ordained and established" by
<span class="pagenum">[67]</span>
"<i>we, the people of the United States</i>," it has never been submitted
to them, as individuals, for their voluntary acceptance or rejection.
They have never been asked to sign, seal, acknowledge, or deliver
it, as their free act and deed. They have never signed, sealed, acknowledged,
or delivered it, or promised, or laid themselves under
any kind of obligation, to obey it. Very few of them have ever read,
or even seen it; or ever will read or see it. Of its legal meaning (if
it can be said to have any) they really know nothing; and never did,
nor ever will, know anything.</p>

<p>Why is it, Sir, that such an instrument as the Constitution, for
which nobody has been responsible, and of which few persons have
ever known anything, has been suffered to stand, for the last ninety
years, and to be used for such audacious and criminal purposes?
It is solely because it has been sustained by the same kind of conspiracy
as that by which it was established; that is, by the wealth
and the power of those few who were to profit by the arbitrary
dominion it was assumed to give them over others. While the poor,
the weak, and the ignorant, who were to be cheated, plundered, and
enslaved by it, have been told, and some of them doubtless made to
believe, that it is a sacred instrument, designed for the preservation
of their rights.</p>

<p>These cheated, plundered, and enslaved persons have been made
to feel, if not to believe, that the Constitution had such miraculous
power, that it could authorize the majority (or even a plurality) of
the male adults, for the time being&mdash;a majority numbering at this
time, say, five millions in all&mdash;to exercise, through their agents, secretly
appointed, an arbitrary and irresponsible dominion over the
properties, liberties, and lives of the whole fifty millions; and that
these fifty millions have no rightful alternative but to submit all
their rights to this arbitrary dominion, or suffer such confiscation,
imprisonment, or death as this secretly appointed, irresponsible
cabal, of so-called legislators, should see fit to resort to for the maintenance
of its power.</p>

<p>As might have been expected, and as was, to a large degree, at
least, intended, this Constitution has been used from the beginning
by ambitious, rapacious, and unprincipled men, to enable them to
maintain, at the point of the bayonet, an arbitrary and irresponsible
dominion over those who were too ignorant and too weak to protect
themselves against the conspirators who had thus combined
to deceive, plunder, and enslave them.</p>

<p><span class="pagenum">[68]</span>Do you really think, Sir,
that such a constitution as this can avail to justify those
who, like yourself, are engaged in enforcing it? Is
it not plain, rather, that the members of Congress, as a legislative
body, whether they are conscious of it or not, are, in reality, a mere
cabal of swindlers, usurpers, tyrants and robbers? Is it not plain
that they are stupendous blockheads, if they imagine that they are
anything else than such a cabal? or that their so-called laws impose
the least obligation upon anybody?</p>

<p>If you have never before looked at this matter in this light, I ask
you to do so now. And in the hope to aid you in doing so candidly,
and to some useful purpose, I take the liberty to mail for you a
pamphlet entitled:</p>

<blockquote><p>"NATURAL LAW; OR THE SCIENCE OF JUSTICE; a Treatise
on Natural Law, Natural Justice, Natural Rights, Natural Liberty,
and Natural Society; Showing That All Legislation Whatsoever Is
an Absurdity, a Usurpation, and a Crime. Part I."</p></blockquote>

<p>In this pamphlet, I have endeavored to controvert distinctly the
proposition that, by any possible process whatever, any man, or
body of men, can become possessed of any right of arbitrary dominion
over other men, or other men's property; or, consequently,
any right whatever to make any law whatever, of their own&mdash;distinct
from the law of nature&mdash;and compel any other men to obey
it.</p>

<p>I trust I need not suspect you, as a legislator under the Constitution,
and claiming to be an honest man, of any desire to evade the
issue presented in this pamphlet. If you shall see fit to meet it, I
hope you will excuse me for suggesting that&mdash;to avoid verbiage, and
everything indefinite&mdash;you give at least a single specimen of a law
that either heretofore has been made, or that you conceive it possible
for legislators to make&mdash;that is, some law of their own device&mdash;that
either has been, or shall be, really and truly obligatory upon
other persons, and which such other persons have been, or may be,
rightfully compelled to obey.</p>

<p>If you can either find or devise any such law, I trust you will
make it known, that it may be examined, and the question of its
obligation be fairly settled in the popular mind.</p>

<p>But if it should happen that you can neither find such a law in
the existing statute books of the United States, nor, in your own
mind, conceive of such a law as possible under the Constitution, I
<span class="pagenum">[69]</span>
give you leave to find it, if that be possible, in the constitution or
statute book of any other people that now exist, or ever have existed,
on the earth.</p>

<p>If, finally, you shall find no such law, anywhere, nor be able to
conceive of any such law yourself, I take the liberty to suggest that
it is your imperative duty to submit the question to your associate
legislators; and, if they can give no light on the subject, that you
call upon them to burn all the existing statute books of the United
States, and then to go home and content themselves with the exercise
of only such rights and powers as nature has given to them in
common with the rest of mankind.</p>
</html>