their trusts, or refuse to follow the public will? The very state of the country forbade the supposition. They would be watched with the jealousy and the power of the state legislatures.[1] They would have the highest inducements to perform their duty. And to suppose, that the possession of power for so short a period could blind them to a sense of their own interests, or tempt them to destroy the public liberties, was as improbable, as any thing, which could be within the scope of the imagination.[2] At all events, if they were guilty of misconduct, their removal would be inevitable; and their successors would be above all false and corrupt conduct. For to reason otherwise would be equivalent to a declaration of the universal corruption of all mankind, and the utter impracticability of a republican government. The congress, which conducted us through the revolution, was a less numerous body, than their successors will be.[3] They were not chosen by, nor responsible to, the people at large;[4] and though appointed from year to year, and liable to be recalled at pleasure, they were generally continued for three years. They held their consultations in secret. They transacted all our foreign affairs. They held the fate of their country in their hands during the whole war. Yet they never betrayed our rights, or our interests. Nay, calumny itself never ventured to whisper any thing against their purity or patriotism.[5]
- ↑ The Federalist, No. 55; 1 Elliot's Debates, 238, 239.
- ↑ The Federalist, No. 55; 1 Elliot's Debates, 252, 253, 254.
- ↑ The Federalist. No. 55; 1 Elliot's Debates, 206, 223, 249.
- ↑ Generally they were chosen by the state legislatures; but in two states, viz. Rhode-Island and Connecticut, they were chosen by the people.[a 1]
- ↑ The Federalist, No. 55; 1 Elliot's Debates, 254.
- ↑ The Federalist, No. 40.
vol. ii.16
