282
In my opinion the main evil of the present democratic institutions of the United States does not arise, as is often asserted in Europe, from their weakness, but from their overpowering strength; and I am not so much alarmed at the excessive liberty which reigns in that country, as at the very inadequate securities which exist against tyranny.
When an individual or a party is wronged in the United States, to whom can he apply for redress? If to public opinion, public opinion constitutes the majority; if to the legislature, it represents the majority, and implicitly obeys its instructions; if to the executive power, it is appointed by the majority and is a passive tool in its hands; the public troops consist of the majority under arms; the jury is the majority invested with the right of hearing judicial cases; and in certain states even the judges are elected by the majority. However iniquitous or absurd the evil of which you complain may be, you must submit to it as well as you can.[1]
- ↑
A striking instance of the excesses which may be occasioned by the despotism of
the majority occurred at Baltimore in the year 1812. At that time the war was very
popular in Baltimore. A journal which had taken the other side of the question
excited the indignation of the inhabitants by its opposition. The populace assembled,
broke the printing-presses, and attacked the houses of the newspaper editors. The
militia was called out, but no one obeyed the call; and the only means of saving the
poor wretches who were threatened by the phrensy of the mob, was to throw them
mto prison as common malefactors. But even this precaution was ineffectual; the
mob collected again during the night; the magistrates again made a vain attempt to
call out the militia; the prison was forced, one of the newspaper editors was killed
upon the spot, and the others were left for dead: the guilty parties were acquitted by
the jury when they were brought to trial.
I said one day to an inhabitant of Pennsylvania: “Be so good as to explain to me how it happens, that in a state founded by quakers, and celebrated for its toleration, freed blacks are not allowed to exercise civil rights. They pay the taxes: is it not fair that they should have a vote.”
“You insult us,” replied my informant, “if you imagine that our legislators could have committed so gross an act of injustice and intolerance.”
“What, then, the blacks possess the right of voting in this country?”
“Without the smallest doubt.”
“How comes it, then, that at the polling-booth this morning I did not perceive a single negro in the whole meeting?”
“This is not the fault of the law; the negroes have an undisputed right of voting; but they voluntarily abstain from making their appearance.”
“A very pretty piece of modesty on their parts,” rejoined I.
“Why, the truth is, that they are not disinclined to vote, but they are afraid of being maltreated; in this country the law is sometimes unable to maintain its authority without the support of the majority. But in this case the majority entertains very strong prejudices against the blacks, and the magistrates are unable to protect them in the exercise of their legal privileges.”
“What, then, the majority claims the right not only of making the laws, but of breaking the laws it has made?”
