2002 Ron Paul 35:1
Mr.
PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues who
believe that the current war on terrorism justifies violating the
liberty of millions of young men by reinstating a military draft will consider the
eloquent argument against conscription in the attached speech by Daniel
Webster. Then-representative Webster delivered his remarks on the floor
of the House in opposition to a proposal to institute a
draft during the War of 1812. Websters speech
remains one of the best statements of the Constitutional and moral case
against conscription.
2002 Ron Paul 35:2
Despite the threat posed to the very existence of
the young republic by the invading British Empire,
Congress ultimately rejected the proposal to institute a draft. If the
new nation of America could defeat what was then
the most powerful military empire in the world without
a draft, there is no reason why we cannot address our current military
needs with a voluntary military.
2002 Ron Paul 35:3
Webster
was among the first of a long line of
prominent Americans, including former President
Ronald Reagan and Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, to recognize
that a draft violates the fundamental principles of
liberty this country was founded upon.
2002 Ron Paul 35:4
In order to
reaffirm support for individual liberty and an effective military, I
have introduced H. Con. Res. 368, which expresses the
sense of Congress against reinstating a military
draft. I urge my colleagues to read Daniel Websters explanation of why
the draft is incompatible with liberty government
and cosponsor H. Con. Res. 368.
During Americas first great war, waged against
Great Britain, the Madison Administration tried
to introduce a conscription bill into Congress. This bill called forth
one of Daniel Websters most eloquent efforts, in a
powerful opposition to conscription. The speech was delivered
in the House of Representatives on December 9, 1814; the following is a
condensation:
2002 Ron Paul 35:6
This
bill indeed is less undisguised in its object,
and less direct in its means, than some of the
measures proposed. It is an attempt to exercise the power of forcing
the free men of this country into the ranks of an
army, for the general purposes of war, under color of a military
service. It is a distinct system, introduced for new purposes, and not connected
with any power, which the Constitution has conferred on
Congress.
2002 Ron Paul 35:7
But, Sir, there is another consideration. The
services of the men to be raised under this act are
not limited to those cases in which alone this Government is entitled
to the aid of the militia of the States. These cases are
particularly stated in the Constitution--to repel invasion,
suppress insurrection, or execute the laws.
2002 Ron Paul 35:8
The question is nothing less, than whether the most
essential rights of personal liberty shall be
surrendered, and despotism embraced in its worst form. When the present
generation of men shall be swept away, and
that this Government ever existed shall be a matter of history only,
I desire that it may then be known, that you have not proceeded in your
course unadmonished and unforewarned. Let it then be known,
that there were those, who would have stopped
you, in the career of your measures, and held you back, as by the
skirts of your garments, from the precipice, over which you
are plunging, and drawing after you the Government
of your Country.
2002 Ron Paul 35:9
Conscription is chosen as the most promising
instrument, both of overcoming reluctance to the
Service, and of subduing the difficulties which arise from the
deficiencies of the Exchequer. The administration asserts the
right to fill the ranks of the regular army by compulsion.
It contends that it may now take one out of every twenty-five men, and
any part or the whole of the rest, whenever its occasions
require. Persons thus taken by force, and put into an army, may be
compelled to serve there, during the war, or for life.
They may be put on any service, at home or abroad, for defense or for
invasion, according to the will and pleasure of Government.
This power does not grow out of any invasion
of the country, or even out of a state of war. It belongs to Government
at all times, in peace as well as in war, and is to
be exercised under all circumstances, according to its mere
discretion. This, Sir, is the amount of the principle contended for by
the Secretary of War (James Monroe).
2002 Ron Paul 35:10
Is this, Sir, consistent with the character of a
free Government? Is this civil liberty? Is this the
real character of our Constitution? No, Sir, indeed it is not. The
Constitution is libeled, foully libeled. The people of
this country have not established for themselves such a fabric of
despotism. They have not purchased at a vast expense of their own
treasure and their own blood a Magna Carta to be slaves.
Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article
or section is it contained, that you may take children from their
parents, and parents from their children, and compel them
to fight the battles of any war, in which the folly or the
wickedness of Government may engage it? Under what concealment has this
power lain hidden, which now for the first time
comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample
down and destroy the dearest rights of personal liberty? Sir,
I almost disdain to go to quotations and
references to prove that such an abominable doctrine has no foundation
in the Constitution of the country. It is enough to
know that that instrument was intended as the basis
of a free Government, and that the power contended for is incompatible
with any notion of personal liberty. An attempt to maintain
this doctrine upon the provisions of the Constitution
is an exercise of perverse ingenuity to extract slavery from the
substance of a free Government. It is an attempt to show, by proof
and argument, that we ourselves are subjects
of despotism, and that we have a right to chains and bondage, firmly
secured to us and our children, by the provisions of our
Government.
2002 Ron Paul 35:11
The supporters of the measures before us act on the
principle that it is their task to raise arbitrary
powers, by construction, out of a plain written charter of National
Liberty. It is their pleasing duty to free us of the
delusion, which we have fondly cherished, that we are the
subjects of a mild, free and limited Government, and to demonstrate by
a regular chain of premises and conclusions, that
Government possesses over us a power more tyrannical, more
arbitrary, more dangerous, more allied to blood and murder, more full
of every form of mischief, more productive of every
sort and degree of misery, than has been exercised by
any civilized Government in modern times.
2002 Ron Paul 35:12
But it is said, that it might happen that any army
would not be raised by voluntary enlistment,
in which case the power to raise armies would be granted in vain,
unless they might be raised by compulsion. If this reasoning
could prove any thing, it would equally show,
that whenever the legitimate powers of the Constitution should be so
badly administered as to cease to answer the great ends
intended by them, such new powers may be
assumed or usurped, as any existing administration may deem expedient.
This is a result of his own reasoning, to which the
Secretary does not profess to go. But it is a true result. For
if it is to be assumed, that all powers were granted, which might by
possibility become necessary, and that Government itself
is the judge of this possible necessity, then the powers
of Government are precisely what it chooses they should be.
2002 Ron Paul 35:13
The tyranny of Arbitrary Government consists as much in its means as in its end; and
it would be a ridiculous and absurd constitution which should be less cautious
to guard against abuses in the one case than in the other.
All the means and instruments which a free Government
exercises, as well as the ends and objects which it pursues, are to
partake of its own essential character, and to be conformed to
its genuine spirit. A free Government with
arbitrary means to administer it is a contradiction; a free Government
without adequate provision for personal security is an
absurdity; a free Government, with an uncontrolled power of military
conscription, is a solecism, at once the most ridiculous and abominable
that ever entered into the head of man.
2002 Ron Paul 35:14
Into the paradise of domestic life you enter, not
indeed by temptations and sorceries, but by open
force and violence.
2002 Ron Paul 35:15
Nor is it, Sir, for the defense of his own house
and home, that he who is the subject of military
draft is to perform the task allotted to him. You will put him upon a
service equally foreign to his interests and abhorrent to
his feelings. With his aid you are to push your
purposes of conquest. The battles which he is to fight are the battles
of invasion; battles which he detests perhaps
and abhors, less from the danger and the death that gather over
them, and the blood with which they drench the plain, than from the
principles in which they have their origin. If, Sir, in
this strife he fall — if, while ready to obey every rightful
command of Government, he is forced from home against right, not to
contend for the defense of his country, but to prosecute a
miserable and detestable project of invasion, and
in that strife he fall, tis murder. It may stalk above the cognizance
of human law, but in the sight of Heaven it is murder;
and though millions of years may roll away, while his ashes
and yours lie mingled together in the earth, the day will yet come,
when his spirit and the spirits of his children must
be met at the bar of omnipotent justice. May God, in his compassion,
shield me from any participation in the enormity of this guilt.
2002 Ron Paul 35:16
A military force cannot be raised, in this manner,
but by the means of a military force. If administration
has found that it can not form an army without conscription, it will
find, if it venture on these experiments, that it can not
enforce conscription without an army. The Government was not
constituted for such purposes. Framed in the spirit of liberty, and in the
love of peace, it has no powers which render it able to enforce such
laws. The attempt, if we rashly make it, will fail; and
having already thrown away our peace, we may thereby throw
away our Government.
2002 Ron Paul 35:17
I express these sentiments here, Sir, because I
shall express them to my constituents. Both they
and myself live under a Constitution which teaches us, that the
doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and
oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of
the good and happiness of mankind. With the same earnestness with
which I now exhort you to forbear from these measures, I
shall exhort them to exercise their unquestionable right
of providing for the security of their own liberties.
This chapter appeared in Ron Pauls Congressional website at http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr050902.htm