for want of the device of representation. In later times it was put into
operation, with permanent success, on a small scale by the Swiss, and on
a great scale by our forefathers in England. The coalescence of shires
into the kingdom of England, effected as it was by means of a
representative assembly, and accompanied by the general retention of
local self-government, afforded a distinct precedent for such a gigantic
federal union as men of English race have since constructed in America.
The principle of federation was there, though not the name. And here we
hit upon the fundamental contrast between the history of England and
that of France. The method by which the modern French nation has been
built up has been the Roman method of conquest with incorporation. As
the ruler of Paris gradually overcame his vassals, one after another, by
warfare or diplomacy, he annexed their counties to his royal domain, and
governed them by lieutenants sent from Paris. Self-government was thus
crushed out in France, while it was preserved in England. And just as
Rome achieved its unprecedented dominion by adopting a political method
more effective than any that had been hitherto employed, so England,
employing for the first time a still higher and more effective method,
has come to play a part in the world compared with which even the part
played by Rome seems insignificant. The test of the relative strength of
the English and Roman methods came when England and France contended for
the possession of North America. The people which preserved its
self-government could send forth self-supporting colonies; the people
which had lost the very tradition of self-government could not. Hence
the dominion of the sea, with that of all the outlying parts of the
earth, fell into the hands of men of English race; and hence the
federative method of political union--the method which contains every
element of permanence, and which is pacific in its very conception--is
already assuming a sway which is unquestionably destined to become
universal.