THE present publication has been made to conform as nearly as possible to the twelfth edition of the original work, the latest which appeared at Paris under the direct supervision of the author. De Tocqueville appended to this edition, published in 1850, his essay, written three years before, for the Academy of the Moral and Political Sciences, on Democracy in Switzerland; a full report of his remarkable Speech in the Chamber of Deputies predicting the Revolution of 1848 just a month before its occurrence; and a feeling and eloquent Advertisement, addressed to his countrymen, pointing them to the example of the United States, and urging the study of American institutions as affording the most instructive lessons for the organization and conduct of the new French republic. These three additions are here for the first time translated, both because they have an intimate connection with the body of the work, and because they reflect much light upon the character and opinions of the writer towards the close of his life. The first of them is specially interesting to American readers, as it contains an able analysis and criticism of the republican institutions of Switzerland, illustrated by frequent comparison with the constitutions and laws of the American republics.
The writer’s confidence in the ultimate success and peaceful establishment of democracy, as the controlling principle in the government of all nations, seems to have been not only not impaired, but strengthened, in the latter part of his life, by the observations which he continued to make of the trial that it was undergoing in the United States, and of the progress and prosperity of this country in the years subsequent to the first publication of his great work. And if his life had been spared to witness the terrible ordeal to which the providence of God is now subjecting us, it may confidently be believed that this trust on his part would not have been shaken, even if he should have been compelled to admit, that the Federal tie which once bound our large family of democratic States together would probably never be reunited. He would clearly have seen, what most of the politicians of Europe seem at present incapable of perceiving, that it is not representative democracy, but the Federal principle, which is now on trial, and that the only question is, whether any bond is strong enough to hold together a confederacy so populous and extensive as to form in the aggregate the largest and most powerful empire that the world has ever known. He who would attempt to make up his own opinion on this great question can find no better guide than in the present work. De Tocqueville is the friend, but by no means the indiscriminate eulogist, of American institutions; and his criticisms, which are shrewd and searching, ought to be even more welcome than his commendations, for they are more instructive. He foresaw, if not the immmence, at least the probability, of the great convulsion which the country is now undergoing; and there can be no clearer indication of the causes which have at last induced it, than that which was made by this wise and impartial foreigner nearly thirty years ago.
The notes which I have made, though somewhat numerous, are generally very brief. They are notes, and not disquisitions, my object being only to elucidate or correct the text, and not to controvert or supplement it by foisting my own opinions upon the reader’s notice. Most of them are only corrections of slight errors on points of detail, such as a stranger who made but a short stay in the country could not be expected to avoid, or notices that some statements now require to be limited or modified, in consequence of the changes that have taken place during the last quarter of a century. An outline sketch of De Tocqueville’s life is designed only to satisfy curiosity as to the chief points in his career, without entering into any analysis of his character and labors. Those who seek further information can obtain it from the Memoirs and Correspondence that have recently been published by his life-long friend, M. de Beaumont.
In accepting an invitation to become the editor of this work, I supposed that it would only be necessary for me to translate the new matter that had been appended to the recent editions of the original, and to supply such brief annotations as a careful revision of the text might show to be necessary. It was intended to furnish an exact reprint of the English translation, which passed to a second edition in London, a year ago, under the respectable name of Mr. Henry Reeve. But a comparison of it with the original was hardly begun, before I found to my dismay that this translation was utterly inadequate and untrustworthy. As a pretty thorough exposure of its demerits has recently been made in an English periodical, where there can be no suspicion of an unfavorable bias, I can have no scruple in speaking of it as it deserves. It is generally feeble, inelegant, and verbose, and too often obscure and incorrect. On comparing every line of it with the original, the alterations which were found to be necessary were so numerous and sweeping, that perhaps the present edition, of the first volume at least, might more fitly be called a new translation than an amended one. The second volume, I ought to say, is somewhat better done; as it was published several years after the appearance of the first, forming in fact a distinct work, the translator had found time to increase his familiarity with the French language, and even to make some progress in his knowledge of English.
This is plain speaking, and I feel bound to vindicate it, by offering some specimens of the translation, both in its primitive and its amended state. The following extracts are taken almost at random from the body of the book, and the original is prefixed to facilitate the labor of comparison. The citations are all from the first volume, and the references for Mr. Reeve’s translation are to the second London edition, Longmans, 1862.
Des hommes sacrifient à une opinion religieuse leurs amis, leur famille et leur patrie; on peut les croire absorbés dans la poursuite de ce bien intellectuel qu’ils sont venus acheter à si haut prix. On les voit cependant rechercher d’une ardeur presque égale les richesses matérielles et les jouissances morales, le ciel dans l’autre monde, le bien-être et la liberté dans celui ci. Sous leur main les principes politiques, les lois et les institutions humaines semblent choses malléables, qui peuvent se tourner et se combiner à volonté Devant eux s’abaissent les barrières qui emprisonnaient la société au sein de laquelle ils sont nés; les vieilles opinions, qui depuis des siècles dirigeaient le monde, s’évanouissent; une carrière presque sans bornes, un champ sans horizon se découvre: l’esprit humain s’y précipite; il les parcourt en tous sens; mais, arrivé aux limites du monde politique, il s’arrête de lui-même; il dépose en tremblant l’usage de ses plus redoutables facultés; il abjure le doute; il renonce au besoin d’innover; il s’abstient même de soulever le voile du sanctuaire; il s’incline avec respect devant des vérités qu’il admet sans les discuter. — p. 52.
| REEVE’S TRANSLATION. | REVISED TRANSLATION. |
|
It might be imagined that men who sacrificed their friends, their family, and their native land to a religious conviction, were absorbed in the pursuit of the intellectual advantages which they purchased at so dear a rate. The energy, however, with which they strove for the acquirement of wealth, moral enjoyment, and the comforts as well as liberties of the world, is scarcely inferior to that with which they devoted themselves to Heaven. Political principles, and all human laws and institutions were moulded and altered at their pleasure; the barriers of the society in which they were born were broken down before them; the old principles which had governed the world for ages were no more; a path without a term, and a field without an horizon were opened to the exploring and ardent curiosity of man: but at the limits of the political world he checks his researches, he discreetly lays aside the use of his most formidable faculties, he no longer consents to doubt or to innovate, but carefully abstaining from raising the curtain of the sanctuary, he yields with submissive respect to truths which he will not discuss. — p. 33. |
One would think that men who had sacrificed their friends, their family, and their native land to a religious conviction would be wholly absorbed in the pursuit of the treasure which they had just purchased at so high a price. And yet we find them seeking with nearly equal zeal for material wealth and moral good, — for well-being and freedom on earth, and salvation in heaven. They moulded and altered at pleasure all political principles, and all human laws and institutions; they broke down the barriers of the society in which they were born; they disregarded the old principles which had governed the world for ages; a career without bounds, a field without a horizon, was opened before them: they precipitate themselves into it, and traverse it in every direction. But, having reached the limits of the political world, they stop of their own accord, and lay aside with awe the use of their most formidable faculties; they no longer doubt or innovate; they abstain from raising even the veil of the sanctuary, and bow with submissive respect before truths which they admit without discussion. — p. 54. |
Chez les petites nations, l’œil de la société pénètre partout; l’esprit d’amélioration descend jusque dans les moindres détails: l’ambition du peuple étant fort tempérée par sa faiblesse, ses efforts et ses ressources se tournent presque entièrement vers son bien-être intérieur, et ne sont point sujets à se dissiper en vaine fumée de gloire. De plus, les facultés de chacun y étant généralement bornées, les désirs le sont également. La médiocrité des fortunes y rend les conditions à peu près égales; les mœurs y ont une allure simple et paisible. Ainsi, à tout prendre et en faisant état des divers degrés de moralité et de lumière, on rencontre ordinairement chez les petites nations plus d’aisance, de population et de tranquillité que chez les grandes.— p. 190.
| REEVE’S TRANSLATION. | REVISED TRANSLATION. |
|
In small nations the scrutiny of society penetrates into every part, and the spirit of improvement enters into the most trifling details; as the ambition of the people is necessarily checked by its weakness, all the efforts and resources of the citizens are turned to the internal benefit of the community, and are not likely to evaporate in the fleeting breath of glory. The desires of every individual are limited, because extraordinary faculties are rarely to be met with. The gifts of an equal fortune render the various conditions of life uniform; and the manners of the inhabitants are orderly and simple. Thus, if one estimate the gradations of popular morality and enlightenment, we shall generally find that in small nations there are more persons in easy circumstances, a more numerous population, and a more tranquil state of society, than in great empires. — p. 176. |
In small states, the watchfulness of society penetrates into every part, and the spirit of improvement enters into the smallest details; the ambition of the people being necessarily checked by its weakness, all the efforts and resources of the citizens are turned to the internal well-being of the community, and are not likely to evaporate in the fleeting breath of glory. The powers of every individual being generally limited, his desires are proportionally small. Mediocrity of fortune makes the various conditions of life nearly equal, and the manners of the inhabitants are orderly and simple. Thus, all things considered, and allowance being made for the various degrees of morality and enlightenment, we shall generally find in small nations more ease, population, and tranquillity than in large ones. — p. 202. |
On ne rencontrera jamais, quoi qu’on fasse, de véritable puissance parmi les hommes, que dans le concours libre des volontés. Or, il n’y a au monde que le patriotisme, ou la religion, qui puisse faire marcher pendant longtemps vers un même but l’universalité des citoyens.
Il ne dépend pas des lois de ranimer des croyances qui s’éteignent; mais il dépend des lois d’intéresser les hommes aux destinées de leur pays. Il dépend des lois de réveiller et de diriger cet instinct vague de la patrie qui n’abandonne jamais le cœur de l’homme, et, en le liant aux pensées, aux passions, aux habitudes de chaque jour, d’en faire un sentiment réfléchi et durable. Et qu’on ne dise point qu’il est trop tard pour le tenter; les nations ne vieillissent point de la même manière que les hommes. Chaque génération qui naît dans leur sein est comme un peuple nouveau qui vient s’offrir à la main du législateur. — pp. 113, 114.
| REEVE’S TRANSLATION. | REVISED TRANSLATION. |
|
Whatever exertions may be made, no true power can be founded among men which does not depend upon the free union of their inclinations; and patriotism or religion are the only two motives in the world which can permanently direct the whole of a body politic to one end. Laws cannot succeed in rekindling the ardor of an extinguished faith; but men may be interested in the fate of their country by the laws. By this influence, the vague impulse of patriotism, which never abandons the human heart, may be directed and revived; and if it be connected with the thoughts, the passions, and the daily habits of life, it may be consolidated into a durable and rational sentiment. Let it not be said that the time for the experiment is already past; for the old age of nations is not like the old age of men, and every fresh generation is a new people ready for the care of the legislator. — p. 95. |
Do what you may, there is no true power among men except in the free union of their will; and patriotism or religion are the only two motives in the world which can long unge all the people towards the same end. Laws cannot rekindle an extinguished faith; but men may be interested by the laws in the fate of their country. It depends upon the laws to awaken and direct the vague impulse of patriotism, which never abandons the human heart; and if it be connected with the thoughts, the passions, and the daily habits of life, it may be consolidated into a durable and rational sentiment. Let it not be said that it is too late to make the experiment; for nations do not grow old as men do, and every fresh generation is a new people ready for the care of the legislator. — p. 118. |
La commune, prise en masse et par rapport au gouvernement central, n’est qu’un individu comme un autre, auquel s’applique la théorie que je viens d’indiquer.
La liberté communale découle done, aux États-Unis, du dogme même de la souveraineté du peuple; toutes les républiques américaines ont plus ou moins reconnu cette indépendance; mais chez les peuples de la Nouvelle-Angleterre, les circonstances en ont particulièrement favorisé le développe ment.
Dans cette partie de l’Union, la vie politique a pris naissance au sein même des communes; on pourrait presque dire qu’à son origine chacune d’elles était une nation indépendante. Lorsque ensuite les rois d’Angleterre réclamèrent leur part de la souveraineté, ils se bornèrent à prendre la puissance centrale. Ils laissèrent la commune dans l’état où ils la trouvèrent; maintenant les communes de la Nouvelle-Angleterre sont sujettes; mais dans le principe elles ne l’étaient point ou l’étaient à peine. Elles n’ont done pas reçu leurs pouvoirs; ce sont elles au contraire qui semblent s’être des-saissies, en faveur de l’État, d’une portion de leur indépendance: distinction importante, et qui doit rester présente à l’esprit du lecteur.
Les communes ne sont en général soumises à l’État que quand il s’agit d’un intérêt que j’appellerai social, c’est-à-dire qu’elles partagent avec d’autres. Pour tout ce qui n’a rapport qu’à elles seules, les communes sont restées des corps indépendants; et parmi les habitants de la Nouvelle-Angleterre, il ne s’en rencontre aucun, je pense, qui reconnaisse au gouvernement de l’État le droit d’intervenir dans la direction des intérêts purement communaux.
On voit done les communes de la Nouvelle-Angleterre vendre et acheter, attaquer et se défendre devant les tribunaux, charger leur budget ou le dégrever, sans qu’aucune autorité administrative quelconque songe à s’y opposer.
Quant aux devoirs sociaux, elles sont tenues d’y satisfaire. Ainsi, l’État a-t-il besoin d’argent, la commune n’est pas libre de lui accorder ou de lui refuser son concours. L’Etat veut-il ouvrir une route, la commune n’est pas maîtresse de lui fermer son territoire. Fait-il un réglement de police, la commune doit l’exécuter. Veut-il organiser l’instruction sur un plan uniforme dans toute l’étendue du pays, la commune est tenue de créer les écoles voulues par la loi. — pp. 77, 78.
| REEVE’S TRANSLATION. | REVISED TRANSLATION. |
|
The township, taken as a whole, and in relation to the government of the country, may be looked upon as an individual to whom the theory I have just alluded to is applied, Municipal independence is therefore a natural consequence of the principle of the sovereignty of the people in the United States: all the American republics recognize it more or less; but circumstances have peculiarly favored its growth in New England. In this part of the Union, the impulsion of political activity was given in the townships; and it may almost be said that each of them originally formed an independent nation. When the kings of England asserted their supremacy, they were contented to assume the central power of the State. The townships of New England remained as they were before; and although they are now subject to the State, they were at first scarcely dependent upon it. It is important to remember that they have not been invested with privileges, but that they have, on the contrary, forfeited a portion of their independence to the State. The townships are only subordinate to the State in those interests which I shall term social, as they are common to all the citizens. They are independent in all that concerns themselves; and amongst the inhabitants of New England I believe that not a man is to be found who would acknowledge that the State has any right to interfere in their local interests. The towns of New England buy and sell, prosecute or are indicted, augment or diminish their rates, without the slightest opposition on the part of the administrative authority of the State. They are bound, however, to comply with the demands of the community. If the State is in need of money, a town can neither give nor withhold the supplies. If the State projects a road, the township cannot refuse to let it cross its territory; if a police regulation is made by the State, it must be enforced by the town. A uniform system of instruction is organized all over the country, and every town is bound to establish the schools which the law ordains. — pp. 60, 61. |
The township, taken as a whole, and in relation to the central government, is only an individual like any other to whom the theory I have just described is applicable. Municipal independence in the United States is, therefore, a natural consequence of this very principle of the sovereignty of the people. All the American republics recognize it more or less; but circumstances have peculiarly favored its growth in New England. In this part of the Union, political life has its origin in the townships; and it may almost be said that each of them originally formed an independent nation. When the kings of England afterwards asserted their supremacy, they were content to assume the central power of the State. They left the townships where they were before; and although they are now subject to the State, they were not at first, or were hardly so. They did not receive their powers from the central authority, but, on the contrary, they gave up a portion of their independence to the State. This is an important distinction, and one which the reader must constantly recollect. The townships are generally subordinate to the State only in those interests which I shall term social, as they are common to all the others. They are independent in all that concerns themselves alone; and amongst the inhabitants of New England I believe that not a man is to be found who would acknowledge that the State has any right to interfere in their town affairs. The towns of New England buy and sell, prosecute or are indicted, augment or diminish their rates, and no administrative authority ever thinks of offering any opposition. There are certain social duties, however, which they are bound to fulfil. If the State is in need of money, a town cannot withhold the supplies; if the State projects a road, the township cannot refuse to let it cross its territory; if a police regulation is made by the State, it must be enforced by the town; if a uniform system of public instruction is enacted, every town is bound to establish the schools which the law ordains. — pp. 80, 81. |
D’une autre part, je doute fort qu’un vêtement particulier porte les hommes publics à se respecter eux-mêmes, quand ils ne sont pas naturellement disposés à le faire; car je ne saurais croire qu’ils aient plus d’égard pour leur habit que pour leur personne.
Quand je vois, parmi nous, certains magistrats brusquer les parties ou leur adresser des bons mots, lever les épaules aux moyens de la défense et sourire avec complaisance à l’énumération des charges, je voudrais qu’on essayât de leur ôter leur robe, afin de découvrir si, se trouvant vêtus comme les simples citoyens, cela ne les rappellerait pas à la dignité naturelle de l’espèce humaine.
Aucun des fonctionnaires publics des États-Unis n’a de costume, mais tous reçoivent un salaire.
Ceci découle, plus naturellement encore que ce qui précède, des principes démocratiques. Une démocratie peut environner de pompe ses magistrats et les couvrir de soie et d’or sans attaquer directement le principe de son existence. De pareils priviléges sont passagers; ils tiennent à la place, et non à l’homme. Mais établir des fonctions gratuites, c’est créer une classe de fonctionnaires riches et indépendants, c’est former le noyau d’une aristocratie. Si le peuple conserve encore le droit du choix, l’exercice de ce droit a done des bornes nécessaires.
Quand on voit une république démocratique rendre gratuites les fonctions rétribuées, je crois qu’on peut en conclure qu’elle marche vers la monarchie. Et quand une monarchie commence à rétribuer les fonctions gratuites, c’est la marque assurée qu’on s’avance vers un état despotique ou vers un état républicain. — pp. 245, 246.
| REEVE’S TRANSLATION. | REVISED TRANSLATION. |
|
On the other hand, it is very doubtful whether a peculiar dress contributes to the respect which public characters ought to have for their own position, at least when they are not otherwise inclined to respect it. When a magistrate (and in France such instances are not rare) indulges his trivial wit at the expense of the prisoner, or derides the predicament in which a culprit is placed, it would be well to deprive him of his robes of office, to see whether he would recall some portion of the natural dignity of mankind when he is reduced to the apparel of a private citizen. A democracy may, however, allow a certain show of magisterial pomp, and clothe its officers in silks and gold, without seriously compromising its principles. Privileges of this kind are transitory; they belong to the place, and are distinct from the individual: but if public officers are not uniformly remunerated by the State, the public charges must be intrusted to men of opulence and independence, who constitute the basis of an aristocracy; and if the people still retains its right of election, that election can only be made from a certain class of citizens. When a democratic republic renders offices which had formerly been remunerated, gratuitous, it may safely be believed that that state is advancing to monarchical institutions; and when a monarchy begins to remunerate such officers as had hitherto been unpaid, it is a sure sign that it is approaching towards a despotic or a republican form of government. — pp. 238, 239. |
On the other hand, it is very doubtful whether a peculiar dress induces public men to respect themselves, when they are not otherwise inclined to do so. When a magistrate (and in France such instances are not rare) snubs the parties before him, or indulges his wit at their expense, or shrugs his shoulders at their pleas of defence, or smiles complacently as the charges are enumerated, I should like to deprive him of his robes of office, to see whether, when he is reduced to the garb of a private citizen, he would not recall some portion of the natural dignity of mankind. No public officer in the United States has an official costume, but every one of them receives a salary. And this, also, still more naturally than what precedes, results from democratic principles. A democracy may allow some magisterial pomp, and clothe its officers in silks and gold, without seriously compromising its principles. Privileges of this kind are transitory; they belong to the place, and not to the man: but if public officers are unpaid, a class of rich and independent public functionaries will be created, who will constitute the basis of an aristocracy; and if the people still retain their right of election, the choice can be made only from a certain class of citizens. When a democratic republic renders gratuitous offices which had formerly been remunerated, it may safely be inferred that the state is advancing towards monarchy. And when a monarchy begins to remunerate such officers as had hitherto been unpaid, it is a sure sign that it is approaching a despotic or a republican form of government. — pp. 263, 264. |
Ce qu’ils apercevaient d’abord, c’est que le conseil d’Etat, en France, étant un grand tribunal fixé au centre du royaume, il y avait une sorte de tyrannie à renvoyer préliminairement devant lui tous les plaignants. — p. 126.
| REEVE’S TRANSLATION. | REVISED TRANSLATION. |
|
They were at once led to conclude that the Conseil d’Etat in France was a great tribunal, established in the centre of the kingdom, which exercised a preliminary and somewhat tyrannical jurisdiction in all political causes. — p. 108. |
They at once perceived that, the Council of State in France being a great tribunal established in the centre of the kingdom, it was a sort of tyranny to send all complainants before it as a preliminary step. — p. 131. |
Les peuples entre eux ne sont que des individus. C’est surtout pour paraître avec avantage vis-à-vis des étrangers qu’une nation a besoin d’un gouvernement unique. — pp. 137, 138.
| REEVE’S TRANSLATION. | REVISED TRANSLATION, |
|
The external relations of a people may be compared to those of private individuals, and they cannot be advantageously maintained without the agency of the single head of a Government.— p. 121. |
The people in themselves are only individuals; and the special reason why they need to be united under one government is, that they may appear to advantage before foreigners.— p. 144. |
Il y a des gens en France qui considèrent les institutions républicaines comme l’instrument passager de leur grandeur. Ils mesurent des yeux l’espace immense qui sépare leurs vices et leurs misères de la puissance et des richesses, et ils voudraient entasser des ruines dans cet abîme pour essayer de le combler. Ceux-là sont à la liberté ce que les compagnies franches du moyen âge étaient aux rois; ils font la guerre pour leur propre compte, alors même qu’ils portent ses couleurs: la république vivra toujours assez longtemps pour les tirer de leur bassesse présente. Ce n’est pas à eux que je parle. — p. 356.
| REEVE’S TRANSLATION. | REVISED TRANSLATION. |
|
There are persons in France who look upon republican institutions as a temporary means of power, of wealth, and distinction; men who are the condottieri of liberty, and who fight for their own advantage, whatever be the colors they wear: it is not to these that I address myself. — p. 364. |
There are persons in France who look upon republican institutions only as a means of obtaining grandeur; they measure the immense space which separates their vices and misery from power and riches, and they aim to fill up this gulf with ruins, that they may pass over it. These men are the condottieri of liberty, and fight for their own advantage, whatever be the colors they wear. The republic will stand long enough, they think, to draw them up out of their present degradation. It is not to these that I address myself. — p. 393. |
Perhaps it is not too much to say of a work which has hitherto been before the English and American public only in such a translation as this, that it still remains to be perused by them for the first time in a form in which it can be understood and appreciated. I have bestowed a good deal of labor upon it, in the hope of aiding the circulation of a book of which it has been justly said by the highest living authority on the science of general politics, Mr. John Stuart Mill, that it is “such as Montesquieu might have written, if to his genius he had superadded good sense, and the lights which mankind have since gained from the experiences of a period in which they may be said to have lived centuries in fifty years.” Especially ought it to be generally studied here in the United States, where no thinking man who exercises the privileges of a voter can fail to derive from it profitable information respecting the nature of the institutions under which he lives, together with friendly warnings and wise counsels to aid him in the proper discharge of his political duties.
CAMBRIDGE, August 5, 1862.