CHARLES A. BEARD.
Washington, D.C.,
February, 1913.
CONTENTS
| CHAPTER | PAGE | |
|---|---|---|
| I. | Historical Interpretation in the United States | [1] |
| II. | A Survey of Economic Interests in 1787 | [19] |
| III. | The Movement for the Constitution | [52] |
| IV. | Property Safeguards in the Election of Delegates | [64] |
| V. | The Economic Interests of the Members of the Convention | [73] |
| VI. | The Constitution as an Economic Document | [152] |
| VII. | The Political Doctrines of the Members of the Convention | [189] |
| VIII. | The Process of Ratification | [217] |
| IX. | The Popular Vote on the Constitution | [239] |
| X. | The Economics of the Vote on the Constitution | [253] |
| XI. | The Economic Conflict over Ratification as viewed by Contemporaries | [292] |
AN ECONOMIC INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
CHAPTER I
HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION IN THE UNITED STATES
Broadly speaking, three schools of interpretation have dominated American historical research and generalization. The first of these, which may be justly associated with the name of Bancroft, explains the larger achievements in our national life by reference to the peculiar moral endowments of a people acting under divine guidance; or perhaps it would be more correct to say, it sees in the course of our development the working out of a higher will than that of man. There is to be observed in the history of the struggle for the Constitution, to use Bancroft’s words, “the movement of the divine power which gives unity to the universe, and order and connection to events.”[[1]]
Notwithstanding such statements, scattered through Bancroft’s pages, it is impossible to describe in a single phrase the ideal that controlled his principles of historical construction, because he was so often swayed by his deference to the susceptibilities of the social class from which he sprang and by the exigencies of the public life in which he played a by no means inconspicuous part. Even telling the whole truth did not lie upon his conscience, for, speaking on the question of the number of Americans who were descendants from transported felons and indented servants, he said that “Having a hand full, he opened his little finger.”[[2]]
Nevertheless, Bancroft constantly recurs in his writings to that “higher power” which is operating in human affairs, although he avoids citing specific events which may be attributed to it. It appears to him to be the whole course of history, rather than any event or set of events, which justifies his theory. “However great,” he says, “may be the number of those who persuade themselves that there is in man nothing superior to himself, history interposes with evidence that tyranny and wrong lead inevitably to decay; that freedom and right, however hard may be the struggle, always prove resistless. Through this assurance ancient nations learn to renew their youth; the rising generation is incited to take a generous part in the grand drama of time; and old age, staying itself upon sweet Hope as its companion and cherisher, not bating a jot of courage, nor seeing cause to argue against the hand or the will of a higher power, stands waiting in the tranquil conviction that the path of humanity is still fresh with the dews of morning, that the Redeemer of the nations liveth.”[[3]]