1. DEBATE OVER CONSTITUTION

ernment. It is not necessary that they should grant greater or new ones.
The only question with them is, in what manner the powers already
granted shall be distributed; into what receptacles; and in what pro-
portions. If they are represented in both, it will be immaterial to them,
so far as concerns their individual authority, independence, or liberty,
whether the principal share be deposited in the whole body, or in the
distinct members. The re-partition, or division, is a mere question of
expediency; for, by whatever scale it be made, their personal rights will
remain the same. If it be their interest to be united, it will be their
interest to bestow as large a portion upon the Union, as may be re-
quired to render it solid and effectual; and if experience has shewn,
that the portion heretofore conferred is inadequate to the object, it
will be their interest to take away a part of that which has been left in
the State reservoirs, to add it to the common stock.
But such a transfer of power, from the individual members to the
Union, however it may promote the advantage of the citizens at large,
may subtract not a little from the importance, and, what is with most
men less easily submitted to, from the emolument of those, who hold
a certain description of offices under the State establishments. These
have one interest as Citizens, and another as OFFICERS. In the latter
capacity, they are interested in the POWER and PROFIT of their offices,
and will naturally be unwilling to put either in jeopardy. That men love
power is no new discovery; that they are commonly attached to good
salaries does not need elaborate proof; that they should be afraid of
what threatens them with a loss of either, is but a plain inference from
plain facts. A diminution of State authority is, of course, a diminution
of the POWER of those who are invested with the administration of
that authority; and, in all probability, will in many instances produce
an eventual decrease of salary. In some cases it may annihilate the of-
fices themselves. But, while these persons may have to repine at the
loss of official importance or pecuniary emolument, the private citizen
may feel himself exalted to a more elevated rank. He may pride himself
in the character of a citizen of America, as more dignified than that of
a citizen of any single State. He may greet himself with the appellation
of an American, as more honorable than that of a New-Yorker, a Penn-
sylvanian, or a Virginian.
From the preceding remarks, the distinction alluded to, between the
private citizen and the citizen in office, will, I presume, be sufficiently
apparent. But it will be proper to observe, that its influence does not
reach near so far as might at first sight be imagined. The offices that
would be affected by the proposed change, though of considerable

150