Today's post is extremely impromptu and unorthodox. I do not heavily analyze this text, nor do I tell a story with this post. I wish to let this speech speak largely for itself - both because I think study of history should be an interaction directly between the reader and primary sources, and because I have no time to provide a researched piece for Constitution Day 2020. Regardless, I do not want to let the opportunity to say something quickly on such an interesting Harding speech pass me by. Therefore, I leave you with this short introduction and an excerpt of Harding's "The Federal Constitution":
On Constitution Day in 1920, Harding gave the speech found in part below. It is a long one, so I have elected to post part of it and provide the link to the rest at the end if anyone should feel inspired to read the complete address. I am particularly drawn to his reminder of the diversity of thought among the founders. Harding reminds us that things have always been divisive, but we have made things work when it counts. It is also curious to note his views on the Declaration versus the Constitution. He emphasizes the independence put forth by the Declaration apart from the nationality put forth uniquely in the Constitution, making it special in its own right. This sentiment had been stated similarly in his January 20, 1920 "Americanism" speech. Both historical sources are looking glasses into Harding's nationalist appeal. It was a fairly consistent doctrine that he used to great effect in campaigning, but it differs from the Jeffersonian conception of one "American mind" pulling the nation together or the view Americans often hold of the Constitution as a continuation or a fulfillment of the Declaration.
"America uncovers in observance of the 133rd anniversary of the birthday of the nation. I do not say the birthday of American freedom, which we celebrate variously, though always patriotically, on July 4, in reverence for the Declaration of Independence, but this day is the anniversary of the literal birthday of our American nation.
I can never forget that, in the beginning, independence was one thing and nationality quite another. The Declaration of Independence was the proclamation of the representatives of the colonies, animated by a common purpose and aroused by a common oppression. They were brought into a comradeship of suffering, privation and war, and the magnificent Declaration of Independence was the bold, clear statement of human rights by an association of fearless men who knew they were speaking for liberty. It might have been the declaration of any people anywhere who had equal reasons and like aspirations, because it is the most comprehensive bill of rights in all the annals of civilized government. Under the Declaration, the colonies fought for freedom, and then in the chaos of victory they turned to nationality as the necessary means of its preservation. In short, freedom inspired and nationality was invoked in order to preserve.
We take it all so much as a matter of course now, that we little appreciate the marvel of the beginning. One may well wonder that the colonists succeeded in their warfare for independence, because they were battling against the commanding power of the Old "World. They were little prepared, they were lacking in resources and they knew nothing of concord, except in the universal desire for freedom. It is well to remember that the colonies were not imbued with any thought of a common purpose except for freedom itself. There was no distinctly American spirit which was common to them all. They were strung along the shores of the Atlantic Ocean and widely separated by miles of distance and by leagues of primeval forests and they were much more separated by the diversity of the origin of their population, by differences in religion, in ideals and manners of life. The whole thought of their association was that of an offensive and defensive alliance against foreign aggression, and there was no suggestion of a national feeling or aspiration before, during or immediately following the successful War for Independence.
Indeed, there were conflicting interests of sections and states, there were wide diversities of opinion, especially with respect to the merits of royalism and democracy, there were envies and jealousies, there were differences of methods and varieties of practises — all making a situation in which it was difficult to commit the free colonies to anything more than the futile articles of confederation.
Almost a decade passed before the dream of erecting upon this new continent a great and strong nation "dedicated to liberty" became a compelling vision, and forced its way upon the waking, active hours of the more progressive and thoughtful men of the colonies. It is even true that a fundamental federal law was not in contemplation by most of the delegates who assembled in the first convention, and many of those who attended would not have been present had they known that such a work was to be undertaken. Surely a supreme federal government was not in the minds of a majority of the delegates. In that convention were men of every type of mind. There were Puritan and Cavalier, Quaker and atheist, autocrat and peasant, Yankee and slave-holder. Among them there were, even as there are now, the extremists who favored autocracy or the commune. Under other names, but easily identified with present-day prototypes, they had the reactionary, Bolshevik, Socialist, Republican, Democrat, Prohibitionist, Liberal and what-not.
It was difficult timber out of which to erect the enduring temple of the Republic, and I think it worth our while to recall this to lead us to greater appreciation. I can well believe that the hand of destiny must have directed them; and the supreme accomplishment was wrought because God Himself had a purpose to serve in the making of the new Republic."
(Click HERE for the transcript of the entire speech; pages 279-303)