{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_36161/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_36161","id":"gutenberg_36161","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/36161","summary":null,"tags":["Category: American Literature","Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Politics","Legislative power -- United States"],"text":"</pre>\n\n\n\nProduced by Katie Hernandez, Susan Goble, Curtis Weyant\nand the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at\nhttps://www.pgdp.net\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n    A LETTER\n\n    TO\n\n    THOMAS F. BAYARD\n\n    CHALLENGING HIS RIGHT--AND THAT OF ALL THE\n    OTHER SO-CALLED SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES\n    IN CONGRESS--\n\n    TO EXERCISE ANY LEGISLATIVE POWER WHATEVER\n    OVER THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.\n\n\n    BY LYSANDER SPOONER.\n\n\n    BOSTON, MASS.:\n    PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR.\n    1882.\n\n\n\n\nA Letter to Thomas F. Bayard\n\n    \"_Challenging his right--and that of all the other so-called senators\n    and representatives in Congress--to exercise any legislative power\n    whatever over the people of the United States._\"\n\n    by Lysander Spooner\n\n\nTo Thomas F. Bayard, of Delaware:\n\nSir--I have read your letter to Rev. Lyman Abbott, in which you express\nthe opinion that it is at least possible for a man to be a legislator\n(under the Constitution of the United States) and yet be an honest man.\n\nThis proposition implies that you hold it to be at least possible that\nsome four hundred men should, by some process or other, become invested\nwith the right to make laws of their own--that is, _laws wholly of their\nown device_, and therefore necessarily distinct from the law of nature,\nor the principles of natural justice; and that these laws of their own\nmaking shall be really and truly obligatory upon the people of the\nUnited States; and that, therefore, the people may rightfully be\ncompelled to obey them.\n\nAll this implies that you are of the opinion that the Congress of the\nUnited States, of which you are a member, has, by some process or other,\nbecome possessed of some right _of arbitrary dominion_ over the people\nof the United States; which right of arbitrary dominion is not given by,\nand is, therefore, necessarily in conflict with, the law of nature, the\nprinciples of natural justice, and the natural rights of men, as\nindividuals. All this is necessarily implied in the idea that the\nCongress now possesses any right whatever to make any laws whatever, _of\nits own device_--that is, any laws that shall be either more, less, or\nother than that natural law, which it can neither make, unmake, nor\nalter--and cause them to be enforced upon the people of the United\nStates, or any of them, against their will.\n\nYou assume that the right of arbitrary dominion--that is, the right of\nmaking laws of their own device, and compelling obedience to them--is a\n\"trust\" that has been delegated to those who now exercise that power.\nYou call it \"the trust of public power.\"\n\nBut, Sir, you are mistaken in supposing that any such power has ever\nbeen delegated, or ever can be delegated, by any body, to any body.\n\nAny such delegation of power is naturally impossible, for these reasons,\nviz:\n\n1. No man can delegate, or give to another, any right of arbitrary\ndominion over himself; for that would be giving himself away as a slave.\nAnd this no one can do. Any contract to do so is necessarily an absurd\none, and has no validity. To call such a contract a \"constitution,\" or\nby any other high-sounding name, does not alter its character as an\nabsurd and void contract.\n\n2. No man can delegate, or give to another, any right of arbitrary\ndominion over a third person; for that would imply a right in the first\nperson, not only to make the third person his slave, but also a right to\ndispose of him as a slave to still other persons. Any contract to do\nthis is necessarily a criminal one, and therefore invalid. To call such\na contract a \"constitution\" does not at all lessen its criminality, or\nadd to its validity.\n\nThese facts, that no man can delegate, or give away, his own natural\nright to liberty, nor any other man's natural right to liberty, prove\nthat he can delegate no right of arbitrary dominion whatever--or, what\nis the same thing, no legislative power whatever--over himself or\nanybody else, to any man, or body of men.\n\nThis impossibility of any man's delegating any legislative power\nwhatever, necessarily results from the fact that the law of nature has\ndrawn the line, and the only line--and that, too, a line that can never\nbe effaced nor removed--between each man's own interest and inalienable\nrights of person and property, and each and every other man's inherent\nand inalienable rights of person and property. It, therefore,\nnecessarily fixes the unalterable limits, within which every man may\nrightfully seek his own happiness, in his own way, free from all\nresponsibility to, or interference by, his fellow men, or any of them.\n\nAll this pretended delegation of legislative power--that is, of a power,\non the part of the legislators, so-called, to make any laws of their own\ndevice, distinct from the law of nature--is therefore an entire\nfalsehood; a falsehood whose only purpose is to cover and hide a pure\nusurpation, by one body of men, of arbitrary dominion over other men.\n\nThat this legislative power, or power of arbitrary dominion, is a pure\nusurpation, on the part of those who now exercise it, and not a \"trust\"\ndelegated to them, is still further proved by the fact that the only\ndelegation of power, that is even professed or pretended to be made, is\nmade _secretly_--that is, by _secret ballot_--and not in any open and\nauthentic manner; and therefore not by any men, or body of men, who make\nthemselves personally responsible, as principals, for the acts of those\nto whom they profess to delegate the power.\n\nAll this pretended delegation of power having been made secretly--that\nis, only by secret ballot--not a single one of all the legislators,\nso-called, who profess to be exercising only a delegated power, has\nhimself any legal knowledge, or can offer any legal proof, as to who the\nparticular individuals were who delegated it to him. And having no power\nto identify the individuals who professed to delegate the power to him,\nhe cannot show any legal proof that anybody ever even attempted or\npretended to delegate it to him.\n\nPlainly, a man who exercises any arbitrary dominion over other men and\nwho claims to be exercising only a delegated power, but cannot show who\nhis principals are, nor, consequently, prove that he has any principals,\nmust be presumed, both in law and reason, to have no principals; and\ntherefore to be exercising no power but his own. And having, of right,\nno such power of his own, he is, both in law and reason, a naked\nusurper.\n\nSir, a secret ballot makes a secret government; and a secret government\nis a government by conspiracy; in which the people at large can have no\nrights. And that is the only government we now have. It is the\ngovernment of which you are a voluntary member and supporter, and yet\nyou claim to be an honest man. If you are an honest man, is not your\nhonesty that of a thoughtless, ignorant man, who merely drifts with the\ncurrent, instead of exercising any judgment of his own?\n\nFor still another reason, all legislators, so-called, under the\nConstitution of the United States, are exercising simply an arbitrary\nand irresponsible dominion of their own; and not any authority that has\nbeen delegated, or pretended to have been delegated, to them. And that\nreason is that the Constitution itself (Art. I, Sec. 6) prescribes that:\n\n     \"For any speech or debate (or vote) in either house, they (the\n     Senators and Representatives) shall not be questioned (held to\n     any legal responsibility) in any other place.\"\n\nThis provision makes the legislators constitutionally irresponsible to\nanybody; either to those on whom they exercise their power, or to those\nwho may have, either openly or secretly, attempted or pretended to\ndelegate power to them. And men who are legally responsible to nobody\nfor their acts, cannot truly be said to be the agents of any body, or to\nbe exercising any power but their own; for all real agents are\nnecessarily responsible both to those _on_ whom they act, and to those\n_for_ whom they act.\n\nTo say that the people of this country ever have bound, or ever could\nbind, themselves by any contract whatever--the Constitution, or any\nother--to thus give away all their natural rights of property, liberty,\nand life, into the hands of a few men--a mere conclave--and that they\nshould make it a part of the contract itself that these few men should\nbe held legally irresponsible for the disposal they should make of those\nrights, is an utter absurdity. It is to say that they have bound\nthemselves, and that they could bind themselves, by an utterly idiotic\nand suicidal contract.\n\nIf such a contract had ever been made by one private individual to\nanother, and had been signed, sealed, witnessed, acknowledged, and\ndelivered, with all possible legal formalities, no decent court on\nearth--certainly none in this country--would have regarded it, for a\nmoment, as conveying any right, or delegating any power, or as having\nthe slightest legal validity, or obligation.\n\nFor all the reasons now given, and for still others that might be given,\nthe legislative power now exercised by Congress is, in both law and\nreason, a purely personal, arbitrary, irresponsible, usurped dominion on\nthe part of the legislators themselves, and not a power delegated to\nthem by anybody.\n\nYet under the pretense that this instrument gives them the right of an\narbitrary and irresponsible dominion over the whole people of the United\nStates, Congress has now gone on, for ninety years and more, filling\ngreat volumes with laws of their own device, which the people at large\nhave never read, nor even seen, nor ever will read or see; and of whose\nlegal meanings it is morally impossible that they should ever know\nanything. Congress has never dared to require the people even to read\nthese laws. Had it done so, the oppression would have been an\nintolerable one; and the people, rather than endure it, would have\neither rebelled, and overthrown the government, or would have fled the\ncountry. Yet these laws, which Congress has not dared to require the\npeople even to read, it has compelled them, at the point of the bayonet,\nto obey.\n\nAnd this moral, and legal, and political monstrosity is the kind of\ngovernment which Congress claims that the Constitution authorizes it to\nimpose upon the people.\n\nSir, can you say that such an arbitrary and irresponsible dominion as\nthis, over the properties, liberties, and lives of fifty millions of\npeople--or even over the property, liberty, or life of any one of those\nfifty millions--can be justified on any reason whatever? If not, with\nwhat color of truth can you say that you yourself, or anybody else, can\nact as a legislator, under the Constitution of the United States, and\nyet be an honest man?\n\nTo say that the arbitrary and irresponsible dominion, that is exercised\nby Congress, has been delegated to it by the Constitution, _and not\nsolely by the secret ballots of the voters for the time being_, is the\nheight of absurdity; for what is the Constitution? It is, at best, a\nwriting that was drawn up more than ninety years ago; was assented to at\nthe time only by a small number of men; generally those few white male\nadults who had prescribed amounts of property; probably not more than\ntwo hundred thousand in all; or one in twenty of the whole population.\n\nThose men have been long since dead. They never had any right of\narbitrary dominion over even their contemporaries; and they never had\nany over us. Their wills or wishes have no more rightful authority over\nus, than have the wills or wishes of men who lived before the flood.\nThey never personally signed, sealed, acknowledged, or delivered, or\ndared to sign, seal, acknowledge, or deliver, the instrument which they\nimposed upon the country as law. They never, in any open and authentic\nmanner, bound even themselves to obey it, or made themselves personally\nresponsible for the acts of their so-called agents under it. They had no\nnatural right to impose it, as law, upon a single human being. The whole\nproceeding was a pure usurpation.\n\nIn practice, the Constitution has been an utter fraud from the\nbeginning. Professing to have been \"ordained and established\" by \"_we,\nthe people of the United States_,\" it has never been submitted to them,\nas individuals, for their voluntary acceptance or rejection. They have\nnever been asked to sign, seal, acknowledge, or deliver it, as their\nfree act and deed. They have never signed, sealed, acknowledged, or\ndelivered it, or promised, or laid themselves under any kind of\nobligation, to obey it. Very few of them have ever read, or even seen\nit; or ever will read or see it. Of its legal meaning (if it can be said\nto have any) they really know nothing; and never did, nor ever will,\nknow anything.\n\nWhy is it, Sir, that such an instrument as the Constitution, for which\nnobody has been responsible, and of which few persons have ever known\nanything, has been suffered to stand, for the last ninety years, and to\nbe used for such audacious and criminal purposes? It is solely because\nit has been sustained by the same kind of conspiracy as that by which it\nwas established; that is, by the wealth and the power of those few who\nwere to profit by the arbitrary dominion it was assumed to give them\nover others. While the poor, the weak, and the ignorant, who were to be\ncheated, plundered, and enslaved by it, have been told, and some of them\ndoubtless made to believe, that it is a sacred instrument, designed for\nthe preservation of their rights.\n\nThese cheated, plundered, and enslaved persons have been made to feel,\nif not to believe, that the Constitution had such miraculous power, that\nit could authorize the majority (or even a plurality) of the male\nadults, for the time being--a majority numbering at this time, say, five\nmillions in all--to exercise, through their agents, secretly appointed,\nan arbitrary and irresponsible dominion over the properties, liberties,\nand lives of the whole fifty millions; and that these fifty millions\nhave no rightful alternative but to submit all their rights to this\narbitrary dominion, or suffer such confiscation, imprisonment, or death\nas this secretly appointed, irresponsible cabal, of so-called\nlegislators, should see fit to resort to for the maintenance of its\npower.\n\nAs might have been expected, and as was, to a large degree, at least,\nintended, this Constitution has been used from the beginning by\nambitious, rapacious, and unprincipled men, to enable them to maintain,\nat the point of the bayonet, an arbitrary and irresponsible dominion\nover those who were too ignorant and too weak to protect themselves\nagainst the conspirators who had thus combined to deceive, plunder, and\nenslave them.\n\nDo you really think, Sir, that such a constitution as this can avail to\njustify those who, like yourself, are engaged in enforcing it? Is it not\nplain, rather, that the members of Congress, as a legislative body,\nwhether they are conscious of it or not, are, in reality, a mere cabal\nof swindlers, usurpers, tyrants and robbers? Is it not plain that they\nare stupendous blockheads, if they imagine that they are anything else\nthan such a cabal? or that their so-called laws impose the least\nobligation upon anybody?\n\nIf you have never before looked at this matter in this light, I ask you\nto do so now. And in the hope to aid you in doing so candidly, and to\nsome useful purpose, I take the liberty to mail for you a pamphlet\nentitled:\n\n     \"NATURAL LAW; OR THE SCIENCE OF JUSTICE; a Treatise on Natural\n     Law, Natural Justice, Natural Rights, Natural Liberty, and\n     Natural Society; Showing That All Legislation Whatsoever Is an\n     Absurdity, a Usurpation, and a Crime. Part I.\"\n\nIn this pamphlet, I have endeavored to controvert distinctly the\nproposition that, by any possible process whatever, any man, or body of\nmen, can become possessed of any right of arbitrary dominion over other\nmen, or other men's property; or, consequently, any right whatever to\nmake any law whatever, of their own--distinct from the law of\nnature--and compel any other men to obey it.\n\nI trust I need not suspect you, as a legislator under the Constitution,\nand claiming to be an honest man, of any desire to evade the issue\npresented in this pamphlet. If you shall see fit to meet it, I hope you\nwill excuse me for suggesting that--to avoid verbiage, and everything\nindefinite--you give at least a single specimen of a law that either\nheretofore has been made, or that you conceive it possible for\nlegislators to make--that is, some law of their own device--that either\nhas been, or shall be, really and truly obligatory upon other persons,\nand which such other persons have been, or may be, rightfully compelled\nto obey.\n\nIf you can either find or devise any such law, I trust you will make it\nknown, that it may be examined, and the question of its obligation be\nfairly settled in the popular mind.\n\nBut if it should happen that you can neither find such a law in the\nexisting statute books of the United States, nor, in your own mind,\nconceive of such a law as possible under the Constitution, I give you\nleave to find it, if that be possible, in the constitution or statute\nbook of any other people that now exist, or ever have existed, on the\nearth.\n\nIf, finally, you shall find no such law, anywhere, nor be able to\nconceive of any such law yourself, I take the liberty to suggest that it\nis your imperative duty to submit the question to your associate\nlegislators; and, if they can give no light on the subject, that you\ncall upon them to burn all the existing statute books of the United\nStates, and then to go home and content themselves with the exercise of\nonly such rights and powers as nature has given to them in common with\nthe rest of mankind.","title":"A Letter to Thomas F. Bayard","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":3032}