capital in its midst; and, for the same reason, there seems to be much force in the argument for placing the capital, wherever it should be, under the national control, and depriving it of the elective franchise.

If we consider the extent to which party feeling was carried in the canvass that immediately preceded Mr. Jefferson's election, when private social relations were, in some instances, almost entirely suspended between families of different political parties, we can realize what serious evil such a state of things would be at the capital, should it again recur, and be fostered by continual local elections, accompanied with all the excitement and misrepresentation which we now see every four years in the principal cities of the Union, and in the midst of which it is not too much to suppose that the position of public officers might subject them to annoyance and insult in a thousand ways, even without actual violence. And, from similar experience, it is obvious that the votes of those in the public employ might be directly or indirectly controlled by the Government, so that there would be, in reality, but little freedom of choice. Indeed, the necessity of absolute control in Congress has never been questioned, and few have ever contended for giving the elective franchise.

These two things, the absolute control of congress, and the absence of the elective franchise would probably in any community, go far to insure protection against mob influence; and just as far in the commercial capital as in any other large city; under such checks, a great metropolis, with the opportunities it furnishes for the contact of mind with mind, and for acquiring information in every department, would certainly seem likely to exercise a good influence on the legislators, and to prove, in most cases, a strong bulwark in the cause of freedom," rather than "a powerful engine in the hands of the oppressor," to borrow the language before quoted of Sir James Macintosh.

In London, or rather in Westminster, and in Paris, the local control has always been substantially in the Government; but both places have the right of electing members of the legislature, which could not well be denied to cities of such immense importance; yet in neither country has the great influence of these capitals excited that jealousy which would have existed had the nation been composed of a number of smaller States, each claiming in certain things to be independent, and a rival of the others. Every Englishman looks from his country home upon London as the centre of everything. Liverpool and Manchester are

content to acknowledge the supremacy of the great metropolis. So in France, every Frenchman, however highly he may estimate his native city in the provinces, points with pride to Paris as indeed the concentration of all that is grand and glorious in France. It has indeed been the focus from which every revolution has begun, but, in most cases, those revolutions have represented the sentiment of the provinces, and, where that was not the case, it is probable that, with similar misgovernment, or ambitious military chiefs, they would have taken place, had the seat been anywhere else than in Paris; but, even admitting that the leaders of the émeutes found stronger allies in the half-starved mobs than they would have found elsewhere, it is questionable whether the centralization of power at Paris, has not been, on the whole, of benefit to the nation, in insuring a more efficient Government for the time being.

In America we see a very different state of things. Not only is the country many times larger than France, but every section, not to say every State, has from the earliest period had some different city as its centre. New York is rapidly becoming, if it is not already, the great centre of finance and commerce for all; but its progress has been viewed with a jealous eye by the neighboring cities, whose trade it

has been gradually taking away. What New Englander who does not take most of his ideas along with his newspapers, from Boston? Will the inhabitants of Pennsylvania or Delaware ever cease to enlarge upon the clean streets, the good butter, and the supremacy in all manufactures of Philadelphia? The Western man will dwell in like manner upon the wonderful facilities for continued growth of St. Louis; and the Southerners have always felt that Charleston and New Orleans were destined to take the lead, with the cotton and rice of the one, and the outlet of the Mississippi at the other. Does it need any argument to show how difficult it would be to reconcile these different and contending interests to the concentration in any one of the places named of the immense number of offices and the enormous patronage of the Government?

Some of these considerations apply to State capitals, which have too frequently been selected with reference rather to centre of territory than of convenience. The residence of State officers and of the Legislature at such a town as Harrisburg or Lansing, is of great advantage to the place, but would add very little to the influence of Philadelphia or Detroit, while the State at large would be benefited by the change. The executive departments of the State Govern

ments, in ordinary times, are so simple in their operations, and the number of officers so small, that their influence or power in a large city cannot be an object of jealousy to smaller places; while the member from the country who passes a few weeks there during the session of the Legislature, cannot fail to have his knowledge enlarged, so as to legislate with more discrimination.

While, therefore, we can find but little weight in the arguments against a commercial capital for a consolidated nation, or for a State, we do not well see how a commercial capital could have been selected for the United States, without either giving it undue influence, or depriving it of privileges enjoyed by others.

X.

WHETHER A CITY SHOULD BE FOUNDED.

ANOTHER argument urged by the advocates of the Potomac site was that it was highly expedient that a city should be laid out expressly for this purpose, so that there would be ample provision for all public edifices for centuries to It is true that abundance of ground for the public buildings could have been at that. time obtained in or about Philadelphia or Baltimore, but they would have then been either all concentrated in one point, and somewhat cir

come.