5000 Year Leap

by Skousen, W. Cleon

  5. Primary responsibility for resolving problems rested first of all with the individual, then the family, then the tribe or community, then the region, and finally, the nation.

  6. They were organized into small, manageable groups where every adult had a voice and a vote. They divided the people into units of ten families who elected a leader; then fifty families who elected a leader; then a hundred families who elected a leader; and then a thousand families who elected a leader.

  7. They believed the rights of the individual were considered unalienable and could not be violated without risking the wrath of divine justice as well as civil retribution by the people's judges.

  8. The system of justice was structured on the basis of severe punishment unless there was complete reparation to the person who had been wronged. There were only four "crimes" or offenses against the whole people. These were treason, by betraying their own people; cowardice, by refusing to fight or failing to fight courageously; desertion; and homosexuality. These were considered capital offenses. All other offenses required reparation to the person who had been wronged.

  9. They always attempted to solve problems on the level where the problem originated. If this was impossible they went no higher than was absolutely necessary to get a remedy. Usually only the most complex problems involving the welfare of the whole people, or a large segment of the people, ever went to the leaders for solution.

  The contrast between Ruler's Law (all power in the ruler) and People's Law (all power in the people) is graphically illustrated below. Note where the power base is located under each of these systems. Also compare the relationship between the individual and the rest of society under these two systems.

  The Founders Note the Similarities Between Anglo-Saxon Common Law

  and the People's Law of Ancient Israel

  As the Founders studied the record of the ancient Israelites they were intrigued by the fact that they also operated under a system of laws remarkably similar to those of the Anglo-Saxons. The two systems were similar both in precept and operational structure. In fact, the Reverend Thomas Hooker wrote the "Fundamental Orders of Connecticut" based on the principles recorded by Moses in the first chapter of Deuteronomy. These "Fundamental Orders" were adopted in 1639 and constituted the first written constitution in modern times. This constitutional charter operated so successfully that it was adopted by Rhode Island. When the English colonies were converted over to independent states, these were the only two states which had constitutional documents which readily adapted themselves to the new order of self-government. All of the other states had to write new constitutions.

  Here are the principal characteristics of the People's Law in ancient Israel which were almost identical with those of the Anglo-Saxons:

  1. They were set up as a commonwealth of freemen. A basic tenet was: "Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof." (Leviticus 25:10)

  This inscription appears on the American Liberty Bell.

  Whenever the Israelites fell into the temptation to have slaves or bond-servants, they were reprimanded. Around 600 B.C., a divine reprimand was given through Jeremiah: "Ye have not hearkened unto me, in proclaiming liberty every one to his brother, and every man to his neighbor: behold, I proclaim a liberty for you, saith the Lord." (Jeremiah 34:17)

  2. All the people were organized into small manageable units where the representative of each family had a voice and a vote. This organizing process was launched after Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, saw him trying to govern the people under Ruler's Law. (See Exodus 18:13-26.)

  When the structure was completed the Israelites were organized as follows:

  Moses

  V.P. (Aaron) And V.P. (Joshua)

  A Senate or Council of 70

  A Congress of Elected Representatives

  1000 Families

  100 Families

  50 Families

  10 Families

  Single family

  3. There was specific emphasis on strong, local self-government.

  Problems were solved to the greatest possible extent on the level where they originated.

  The record says: "The hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves." (Exodus 18:26)

  4. The entire code of justice was based primarily on reparation to the victim rather than fines and punishment by the commonwealth. (Reference to this procedure will be found in Exodus, chapters 21 and 22.) The one crime for which no "satisfaction" could be given was first-degree murder. The penalty was death. (See Numbers 35:31.)

  5. Leaders were elected and new laws were approved by the common consent of the people. (See 2 Samuel 2:4; 1 Chronicles 29:22; for the rejection of a leader, see 2 Chronicles 10:16; for the approval of new laws, see Exodus 19:8.)

  6. Accused persons were presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Evidence had to be strong enough to remove any question of doubt as to guilt. Borderline cases were decided in favor of the accused and he was released. It was felt that if he were actually guilty, his punishment could be left to the judgment of God in the future life.

  Memorializing These Two Examples of People's Law on the U.S. Seal

  It was the original intent of the Founders to have both the ancient Israelites and the Anglo-Saxons represented on the official seal of the United States. The members of the committee were Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin.

  They recommended that one side of the seal show the profiles of two Anglo-Saxons representing Hengist and Horsa. These brothers were the first Anglo-Saxons to bring their people to England around 450 A.D. and introduce the institutes of People's Law into the British Isles. On the other side of the seal this committee recommended that there be a portrayal of ancient Israel going through the wilderness led by God's pillar of fire. In this way the Founders hoped to memorialize the two ancient peoples who had practiced People's Law and from whom the Founders had acquired many of their basic ideas for their new commonwealth of freedom. 5

  As it turned out, all of this was a little complicated for a small seal, and therefore a more simple design was utilized.

  However, here is a modern artist's rendition of the original seal as proposed by Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin.

  Artist's version of the original proposal for the American seal

  Obviously, this is a segment of America's rich heritage of the past which has disappeared from most history books.

  The Founders' Struggle to Establish People's Law in the Balanced Center

  In the Federalist Papers, No. 9, Hamilton refers to the "sensations of horror and disgust" which arise when a person studies the histories of those nations that are always "in a state of perpetual vibration between the extremes of tyranny and anarchy." 6

  Washington also refers to the human struggle wherein "there is a natural and necessary progression, from the extreme of anarchy to the extreme of tyranny." 7

  Franklin noted that "there is a natural inclination in mankind to kingly government." He said it gives people the illusion that somehow a king will establish "equality among citizens; and that they like." Franklin's great fear was that the states would succumb to this gravitational pull toward a strong central government symbolized by a royal establishment. He said: "I am apprehensive, therefore -- perhaps too apprehensive -- that the Government of these States may in future times end in a monarchy. But this catastrophe, I think, may be long delayed, if in our proposed system we do not sow the seeds of contention, faction, and tumult, by making our posts of honor places of profit." 8

  The Founders' task was to somehow solve the enigma of the human tendency to rush headlong from anarchy to tyranny -- the very thing which later happened in the French Revolution. How could the American people be constitutionally structured so that they would take a fixed position at the balanced center of the political spectrum and forever maintain a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people," which would not perish from the earth?


  It took the Founding Fathers 180 years (1607 to 1787) to come up with their American formula. In fact, just eleven years before the famous Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia, the Founders wrote a constitution which almost caused them to lose the Revolutionary War. Their first attempt at constitutional writing was called "The Articles of Confederation."

  The Founders' First Constitution Ends Up Too Close to Anarchy

  The American Revolutionary War did not commence as a war for independence but was originally designed merely to protect the rights of the people from the arrogant oppression of a tyrannical king. Nevertheless, by the spring of 1776 it was becoming apparent that a complete separation was the only solution.

  It is interesting that even before the Declaration of Independence, the Continental Congress appointed a committee on June 11, 1776, to write a constitution. John Dickinson served as chairman of the committee and wrote a draft based on a proposal made by Benjamin Franklin in 1775. However, the states felt that Dickinson's so-called "Articles of Confederation" gave too much power to the central government. They therefore hacked away at the draft until November 15, 1777, when they proclaimed that the new central government would have no powers whatever except those "expressly" authorized by the states. And the states did not expressly authorize much of anything.

  Under the Articles of Confederation as finally adopted, there was no executive, no judiciary, no taxing power, and no enforcement power. The national government ended up being little more than a general "Committee of the States." It made recommendations to the states and then prayed they would respond favorably. Very often they did not.

  On the Founders' political spectrum the Articles of Confederation would appear as follows:

  The suffering and death at Valley Forge and Morristown were an unforgettable demonstration of the abject weakness of the central government and its inability to provide food, clothes, equipment, and manpower for the war. At Valley Forge the common fare for six weeks was flour, water, and salt, mixed together and baked in a skillet -- fire cakes, they were called. Out of approximately 8,000 soldiers, around 3,000 abandoned General Washington and went home. Approximately 200 officers resigned their commissions. Over 2,000 soldiers died of starvation and disease. Washington attributed this near-disaster at Valley Forge to the constitutional weakness of the central government under the Articles of Confederation.

  The Genius of the Constitutional Convention in 1787

  Not one of the Founding Fathers could have come up with the much-needed Constitutional formula by himself, and the delegates who attended the Convention knew it. At that very moment the states were bitterly divided. The Continental dollar was inflated almost out of existence. The economy was deeply depressed, and rioting had broken out. New England had threatened to secede, and both England and Spain were standing close by, ready to snatch up the disUnited States at the first propitious opportunity.

  Writing a Constitution under these circumstances was a frightening experience. None of the delegates had expected the Convention to require four tedious months. In fact, within a few weeks many of the delegates, including James Madison, were living on borrowed funds.

  From the opening day of the Convention it was known that the brain-storming discussions would require frequent shifting of positions and changing of minds. For this reason the Convention debates were held in secret to avoid public embarrassment as the delegates made concessions, reversed earlier positions, and moved gradually toward some kind of agreement.

  A Special Device Employed to Encourage Open Discussion

  To encourage the delegates to freely express themselves without the usual formalities of a convention, the majority of the discussions were conducted in what they called "the Committee of the Whole." This committee consisted of all the members of the Convention, but, as a committee, decisions were always tentative and never binding in the same way they would have been if voted upon by the Convention. Only after a thorough ventilating of the issues would the Committee of the Whole turn themselves back into a sitting of the Convention and formally approve what they had just discussed in the Committee.

  The object of the Founders was to seek a consensus or general agreement on what the Constitution should provide. After four months of debate they were able to reach general agreement on just about everything except the issues of slavery, proportionate representation, and the regulation of commerce. All three of these issues had to be settled by compromise.

  It is a mistake however, to describe the rest of the Constitution as a "conglomerate of compromises," because extreme patience was used to bring the minds of the delegates into agreement rather than simply force the issue to finality with a compromise. This is demonstrated in the fact that over 60 ballots were taken before they resolved the issue of how to elect the President. They could have let the matter lie after the first ballot, but they did not. They were anxious to talk it out until the vast majority felt good about the arrangement. That is why it took 60 ballots to resolve the matter.

  When the Founders had finished their work on September 17, 1787, President Washington attached a letter to the signed draft and sent it to the Congress. The Congress ratified the Constitution without any changes and sent it to the states. When several of the larger states threatened to reject the Constitution, they were invited to ratify the main body of the Constitution but attach suggested amendments. They submitted 189! At the first session of Congress, these suggested amendments were reduced to 12 by James Madison, and 10 of them were finally approved and ratified by the states. Thus was born America's famous Bill of Rights.

  The Balanced Center

  This was the polemic process by which the Founders struggled to get the American eagle firmly planted in the balanced center of the political spectrum. James Madison later described the division of labor between the states and the federal government as follows:

  "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State." 9

  The fixing of the American eagle in the center of the spectrum was designed to maintain this political equilibrium between the people in the states and the federal government. The idea was to keep the power base close to the people. The emphasis was on strong local self-government. The states would be responsible for internal affairs and the federal government would confine itself to those areas which could not be fairly or effectively handled by the individual states. This made the Founders' political spectrum look approximately like this:

  America's Three-Headed Eagle

  Although Polybius, John Locke, and Baron Charles de Montesquieu had all advocated the separation of the governmental functions into three departments -- legislative, executive, and judicial -- the American Founders were the first to carefully structure what might be described as a three-headed eagle.

  The central head was the law-making or legislative function with two eyes -- the House and the Senate -- and these must both see eye-to-eye on any piece of legislation before it can become law. A second head is the administrative or Executive Department with all authority centered in a single, strong President, operating within a clearly defined framework of limited power. The third head is the judiciary, which was assigned the task of acting as guardian of the Constitution and the interpretation of its principles as originally designed by the Founders.

  The genius of this three-headed eagle was not only the separation of powers but the fact that all three heads operated through a single neck. By this means the Founders carefully integrated these three departments so that each one was coordinated with the others and could not function independently of them. It was an ingeniously structured pattern of political power which might be described as "coordination without c
onsolidation."

  The Two Wings of the Eagle

  The Founder's view of their new form of government can be further demonstrated by using the symbol of the eagle and referring to its two wings:

  Wing #1 of the eagle might be referred to as the problem solving wing or the wing of compassion. Those who function through this dimension of the system are sensitive to the unfulfilled needs of the people. They dream of elaborate plans to solve these problems.

  Wing #2 has the responsibility of conserving the nation's resources and the people's freedom. Its function is to analyze the programs of wing #1 with two questions. First, can we afford it? Secondly, what will it do to the rights and individual freedom of the people?

  Now, if both of these wings fulfill their assigned function, the American eagle will fly straighter and higher than any civilization in the history of the world. But if either of these wings goes to sleep on the job, the American eagle will drift toward anarchy or tyranny. For example, if wing #1 becomes infatuated with the idea of solving all the problems of the nation regardless of the cost, and wing #2 fails to bring its power into play to sober the problem-solvers with a more realistic approach, the eagle will spin off toward the left, which is tyranny.

  On the other hand, if wing #1 fails to see the problems which need solving and wing #2 becomes inflexible in its course of not solving problems simply to save money, or not disturb the status quo, then the machinery of government loses its credibility and the eagle drifts over toward the right where the people decide to take matters into their own hands. This can eventually disintegrate into anarchy.