①Clinton Rossiter,Seedtime of the Republic:The Origin of the American Tradition of Political Liberty,New York:Harcourt Brace,1953,p.375;Michael P.Zuckert,The Natural Rights Republic:Studies in the Foundation of the American Political Tradition,Notre Dame,Indiana:University of Notre Dame Press,1996.Political TraditionNotre DameIndianaUniversity of Notre Dame Press1996.
②将洛克式政治哲学当作单一的渊源,进而在美国革命同自由主义之间建立起简单而直接的联系,这是美国史学界解释美国革命思想的传统范式。上世纪六七十年代之后,这种长期占据统治地位的范式遭到了挑战。例如,以伯纳德·贝林和戈登·伍德为代表的共和修正派提出,美国革命的思想渊源是18世纪英国辉格党人的共和思想,而非洛克式政治哲学;加里·威尔斯从研究《独立宣言》入手,将杰弗逊的思想归结为苏格兰启蒙学派的影响,目的也是在于切断美国革命和洛克之间的思想联系。相关内容可参考Bernard Bailyn,The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution,Cambridge,Mass.:The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,1967;Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787,Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1969;Garry Wills,Inventing America:Jeffersons Declaration of Independence,New York:Doubleday&Company,1978.但是,这种过分弱化,甚至完全抹杀洛克影响的做法也遭到了很多学者的批评。近年来,学者们普遍达成了这样一个共识:任何试图为美国革命找到某种单一思想渊源的做法,都是片面的;洛克式政治哲学即使不是唯一的思想渊源,其在美国革命中的作用也是不可否认的。伊萨克·克拉尼克提出的18世纪晚期英国辉格党思想发生的“洛克式转向”,以及迈克尔·扎克特提出的“自然权利的共和主义”的说法等,都代表了美国革命史研究中再度重视洛克的趋势。相关内容可参考:Isaac Kramnick,“Republican Revisionism Revisited,”The American Historical Review,Vol.87,No.3,Jun.1982,pp.629-664;Michael P.Zuckert,Natural Rights and the New Republicanism,Princeton,N.J.:Princeton University Press,1994.
①Daniel T.Rodgers,Contested Truths:Keywords in American Politics since Independence,Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1987,pp.45-79.
②Willi Paul Adams,The First American Constitutions:Republican Ideology and the Making of the State Constitutions in the Revolutionary Era,Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1980,pp.187-215.
③Briscoe G.Baldwin,“The Memorial of the Non-Freeholders of the City of Richmond,”in Virginia Constitutional Convention,Proceedings and Debates of the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830,Richmond:S.Shepherd&Company,1830,pp.25-31,101-102.
①Nathaniel H.Carter,William L.Stone and Marcus T.C.Gould,Reports of the Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of 1821,Assembled for the Purpose of Amending the Constitution of the State of New York,Albany:E.&E.Hosford,1821,pp.178-180.
②“Majority Report,”in Edmond Burke,Interference of Executive in Affairs of Rhode Island,Report No.546,28thCong.,1stSession,1844(Burkes Report),Washington:Blair&River,Printers,1845,p.41;Rhode Island American,Apr.5,1825.
③Statement of Thomas Earle,Statement of Walter Forward,in Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention,Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,to Propose Amendments to the Constitution,Commenced and Held at Harrisburg,1837,Harrisburg:Packer,Barrett and Parke,1837,Vol.2,p.501;Vol.3,pp.126-127.
④Virginia Constitutional Convention,Proceedings and Debates of the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830,p.27.
⑤“Majority Report,”p.44.
⑥“Constitution of Delaware,1831,”“Constitution of Maine,1821,”“Constitution of Massachusetts,1821,”“Constitution of New Hampshire,1847,”“Constitution of New Jersey,1807,”“Constitution of Connecticut,1818,”“Constitution of New York,1821,”“Constitution of Rhode Island,1842,”“Constitution of New York,1846,”in Francis Newton Thorpe,ed.,The Federal and State Constitutions,Colonial Charters,and Other Organic Laws of the States,Territories,and Colonies,7vols.,Washington D.C.:Scholarly Press,1909.
①Massachusetts Constitutional Convention,Journal of Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of Delegates,Chosen to Revise the Constitution of Massachusetts,Boston:Boston Daily Advertiser,1853,p.250.
②Virginia Constitutional Convention,Proceedings and Debates of the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830,p.92.
③Benjamin Hazard,“Report of the Committee on the Subject of an Extension of Suffrage to the General Assembly of Rhode Island,Providence,1829,”in Burke,Burkes Report,p.382.
④Providence Journal,Aug.21,1841.
⑤Statement of Lucas P.Thompson,in Virginia Constitutional Convention,Proceedings and Debates of the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830,p.410.
⑥NilesRegister,Oct.21,1820,p.115.
⑦Statement of John R.Cook,in Virginia Constitutional Convention,Proceedings and Debates of the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830,pp.55-56.
⑧“Majority Report,”pp.44-45;Rhode Island Constitutional Convention,An Address to the People of Rhode Island,from the Convention Assembled at Providence,on the 22d day of February,and Again on the 12th day of March,1834,to Promote the Establishment of a State Constitution,Providence:Cranston&Hammond,Printers,1834,pp.31-32.
①关于“两分领域”的概念,可参考Nancy F.Cott,The Bonds of Womanhood:“Womans Sphere”in New England,1780-1835,New Haven:Yale University Press,1977.
②“白人共和国”的说法,可参考Rogers M.Smith,Civic Ideas:Conflicting Visions of Citizenship in U.S.History,New Haven:Yale University Press,1997;Alexander Saxton,The Rise and Fall of the White Republic:Class Politics and Mass Culture in Nineteenth-Century America,New York:Verso,1990.
③“Constitution of Delaware,1792,”“Constitution of Maryland,1801,”“Constitution of New Jersey,1807,”“Constitution of Connecticut,1818,”in Thorpe,ed.,The Federal and State Constitutions.
④1846年纽约州全民表决结果是:赞成票207426张,反对票74379张。参见“Constitution of New York,1846.”
⑤1776年和1790年宾州宪法对选举权的资格要求只有纳税、居住时限和年龄,参见“Constitution of Pennsylvania,1776,”“Constitution of Pennsylvania,1790,”in Thorpe,ed.,The Federal and State Constitutions,Vol.6.
⑥1837年夏天宾州制宪会议休会之前,自由黑人的选举权问题并不是大会的核心议题。然而休会之后举行的地方选举让这个问题迅速成为全州关注的焦点。在这次地方选举中,巴克斯县的几名民主党候选人向县法院起诉,说自己输掉选举是因为当地有几十名黑人投票给了对手辉格党的候选人,而他们认为黑人的选票是非法的、无效的。福克斯法官对该案的裁决,很快成为州制宪会议考察黑人选举权的依据。关于福克斯法官的裁决,参见John Fox,The Opinion of the Honorable John Fox against the Exercise of Negro Suffrage in Pennsylvania,Harrisburg:Packer,Barrett and Parke,1838,p.13。关于1837—1838年宾州制宪会议的情况,可参考Eric Ledell Smith,“The End of Black Voting Rights in Pennsylvania:African Americans and the Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention of 1837-1838,”Pennsylvania History,Vol.65,1998;Dr.Christopher Malone,“Rethinking the End of Black Voting Rights in Antebellum Pennsylvania:Racial Ascriptivism,Partisanship and Political Development in the Keystone State,”Pennsylvania History,Vol.72,2005;Edward Raymond Turner,The Negro in Pennsylvania,1639-1861,Washington:The American Historical Association,1911,Chapter XII.
⑦Leon F.Litwack,North of Slavery:The Negro in the Free States,1790-1860,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1961,pp.74-75;Alexander Keyssar,The Right to Vote:The Contested History of Democracy in the United States,New York:Basic Books,2000,Appendix,Table A5,“Chronology of Race Exclusions:1790-1855.”
⑧Alexis De Tocqueville,Democracy in America,New York:Alfred A.Knopf,1976,Vol.I,pp.359-360.
①关于这一时期北方各州的种族主义和黑人选举权的情况,可参考Litwack,North of Slavery,Chapter 3;Emil Olbrich,The Development of Sentiment on Negro Suffrage to 1860,New York:Negro Universities Press,1969,Chapter 2;Charles Wesley,“Negro Suffrage in the Period of Constitution-Making,1787-1865,”Journal of Negro History,Vol.32,No.2,1947,pp.143-168.
②Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention,Proceedings and Debates on the Convention of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,Vol.9,1838,p.357;The Pennsylvanian,Jan.20,1838.
③James Truslow Adams,“Disfranchisement of Negroes in New England,”The American Historical Review,Vol.30,No.3,Apr.1925,p.546.
④Providence Journal,Oct.11,1841.
⑤根据美国人口普查的数据,1840年罗得岛全部人口有108837人,其中只有3238名黑人,普罗维登斯一地的白人有18054人,而黑人只有1223人。可参考Julian Rammelkamp,“The Providence Negro Community,1820-1842,”Rhode Island History,Vol.7,Jan.1948,p.21;J.Stanley Lemons and Michael A.McKenna,“Re-enfranchisement of Rhode Island Negroes,”Rhode Island History,Vol.30,Feb.1971,p.3.
⑥Statement of Dr.Brown,in Providence Journal,Oct.11,1841.
①Providence Journal,Oct.11,1841.
②Providence Journal,Oct.11,1841.
③在新宪法提交全民批准之前,1841年12月,“罗得岛反奴隶制协会”派弗里德里克·道格拉斯和其他5名代表去普罗维登斯,号召民众反对宪法,但没有成功。参见Frederick Douglass,Life and Times of Frederick Douglass,Hartford:Park Publishing Co.,1882,p.221;“Resolutions of the Boston Liberty Association,”“Rhode Island Affairs,”“The Civil War in Rhode Island,”in Liberator,Dec.10,1841;Aug.19,1842;Aug.26,1842.
④相关内容参见Walter Fairleigh Dodd,The Revision and Amendment of State Constitutions,Union,New Jersey:The Lawbook Exchange,Ltd.,pp.39-43.
①Southern Recorder,May 31,1832,in Fletcher M.Green,Constitutional Development in the South Atlantic States,1776-1860:A Study in the Evolution of Development,New York:W.W.Norton&Company,Inc.,1966,pp.176-177,209.
②North Carolina Constitutional Convention,Proceedings of the Friends of a Convention,at a Meeting Held in Raleigh,December,1822,Raleigh:Thomas Henderson,1822;North Carolina Constitutional Convention,Proceedings of a Meeting of Members of the Legislature Held in Raleigh,January 11,1834,with an Address to the People of North Carolina,on the Subject of Amending the Constitution of the State,Raleigh:Jos.Gales&Son,1834.
③“Proceedings of the Harrisburg Convention,”Hazards Register of Pennsylvania,XII,No.11,September 14,1833,pp.169-170;Roy H.Akagi,“The Pennsylvania Constitution of 1838,”The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography,Vol.48,1924,pp.301-333.
④“Reform or Revolution in Maryland,”in Niles Weekly Register,LI,1836,pp.52,95.
⑤“Address of the State Suffrage Committee,Setting forth the Principles of the Suffrage Movement,July 1841,”in Burke,Burkes Report,pp.263,264.
①Virginia Constitutional Convention,Proceedings and Debates of the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830,pp.69,160.
②O.A.Brownson,“Origin and Ground of Government,”The United States Magazine and Democratic Review,Vol.13,1843,pp.137,138.布朗森的“政府的起源和依据”系列文章共有三篇,发表在同一期杂志上。在这三篇文章中,布朗森从批评罗得岛改革派出发,对自然权利话语、社会契约理论、多数人的统治、少数人的权利、美国民主制度的性质等一系列问题提出了自己的见解。这三篇文章是布朗森政治哲学的重要代表作。
③关于自然权利理论在近代所遭到的批判,可参考亨利·梅因:《古代法》,高敏、瞿慧虹译,北京:中国社会科学出版社,2009年,第42-52页。
①1842年6月,在平定了多尔等人的武力进攻之后,罗得岛政府颁布了《战时法》,并以此为依据在全州范围内搜捕多尔分子。其中有一位名叫马丁·路德(Martin Luther)的鞋匠,因为在选举“人民政府”的村镇会议中担任协调人,遭到了政府民兵队的搜捕,并被罗得岛法庭判处了监禁。1843年,他向罗得岛地区联邦第一巡回法庭上诉,起诉以路德·博登(Luther Borden)为首的民兵队“非法闯入和侵占民宅”。这个案件的关键在于判定政府颁布的《战时法》是否有效力,也就等于是要判定多尔等人的“法外行为”是否是正当的。联邦巡回法庭驳回了路德的上诉,维持原判。路德不服,继续上诉到联邦最高法院,这就是著名的“路德诉博登案”。在最高法院的辩论中,丹尼尔·韦伯斯特作为被告博登的律师,对多尔等人的“法外行为”进行了激烈的驳斥。参见Daniel Webster,“The Rhode Island Question,”in The Works of Daniel Webster,Vol.6,Boston:Charles C.Little and James Brown,1851,p.231.
②在武力进攻失败之后,多尔一直试图找到其他申诉的平台。1844年2月,他起草了一份请愿书,抗议联邦政府协助罗得岛政府的行为是干涉地方事务,要求国会调查总统在这个问题上是否越权。这份请愿书得到了来自新罕布什尔的国会众议员、多尔的忠实拥护者埃德蒙·伯克(Edmund Burke)的支持。2月19日,请愿书经伯克之手被递交到众议院,随后被交给一个由5人组成的特别委员会处理。1844年6月3日,由伯克起草的报告在委员会内部以多数票通过,即“多数派报告”或“伯克报告”。以约翰·科森为首的两位持不同意见的委员,站在反对“法外行为”的立场上,提交了另外一份报告,即“少数派报告”或“科森报告”。参见John M.S.Causin,Minority Report of Congress Appointed to Inquire into the Interference of the President in the Affairs of Rhode Island in 1842,Washington D.C.,1844,p.22.
③Dexter Randell,Democracy Vindicated and Dorrism Unveiled,Providence:H.H.Brown,1846,pp.42,49,7,34.
①Green,Constitutional Development in the South Atlantic States,pp.209,225.
②Akagi,“The Pennsylvania Constitution of 1838,”pp.310-311;George P.Parkinson,Antebellum State ConstitutionMaking:Retention,Circumvention,Revision,PhD.Dissertation,University of Wisconsin,1972,pp.43-57.
③Parkinson,Antebellum State Constitution-Making,pp.103-113.
④Paul M.Thompson,“Is There Anything‘Legal’about Extralegal Action?The Debate over Dorrs Rebellion,”New England Law Review,Vol.36,2002,pp.430-431.
⑤Arthur May Mowry,The Dorr War:The Constitutional Struggle in Rhode Island,Providence:Preston&Rounds Co.,1901,Appendix D,“Constitution of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations.”
⑥Providence Express,June 27,1842;Republican Herald,June 28,1842;NilesNational Register,July 2,1842.
①很多学者在研究19世纪前期美国历史时,都把关注点集中在这些具有激进面貌的政治事件上,相关论著可参考:Arthur Schlesinger,Jr.,The Age of Jackson,New York:Little Brown&Company,1945;Mervin Meyers,The Jacksonian Persuasion:Politics and Belief,Stanford:Stanford University Press,1957;Harry L.Watson,Liberty and Power:The Politics of Jacksonian America,New York:Hill and Wang,1990;Sean Wilentz,The Rise of American Democracy,New York:W.W.Norton&Company,2005.
②Green,Constitutional Development in the South Atlantic States;Parkinson,Antebellum State Constitution-Making.
