Calvin Coolidge's speech for the ages

A brilliant explication of the Declaration of Independence; a persuasive takedown of progressivism

Next year, America will celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The Calvin Coolidge Presidential Foundation, a wonderful organization that’s working tirelessly under the inspired leadership of Amity Shlaes to correct the historical record regarding our 30th president, is off to a head start.

In January, it held a conference on the Declaration called “The Declaration: Continuity and Commerce.” It featured distinguished historians and public figures. You can read the conference’s program here.

America was fortunate that Calvin Coolidge, having been elected in a genuine landslide (382-136-14) , was president when we celebrated the Declaration’s 150th anniversary. That’s because as president, Coolidge was in a position to deliver a speech about the Declaration that George Will rates as “one of the half dozen best speeches ever given by an American president.”

Coolidge gave the speech in Philadelphia on July 5, 1926. Here is some of what he said:

Whatever may have been the impression created by the news which went out from this city on that summer day in 1776, there can be no doubt as to the estimate which is now placed upon it. At the end of 150 years the four corners of the earth unite in coming to Philadelphia as to a holy shrine in grateful acknowledgement of a service so great, which a few inspired men here rendered to humanity, that it is still the preeminent support of free government throughout the world.

Although a century and a half measured in comparison with the length of human experience is but a short time, yet measured in the life of governments and nations it ranks as a very respectable period. Certainly enough time has elapsed to demonstrate with a great deal of thoroughness the value of our institutions and their dependability as rules for the regulation of human conduct and the advancement of civilization. They have been in existence long enough to become very well seasoned. They have met, and met successfully, the test of experience.

It is not so much then for the purpose of undertaking to proclaim new theories and principles that this annual celebration is maintained, but rather to reaffirm and reestablish those old theories and principles which time and the unerring logic of events have demonstrated to be sound. Amid all the clash of conflicting interests, amid all the welter of partisan politics, every American can turn for solace and consolation to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States with the assurance and confidence that those two great charters of freedom and justice remain firm and unshaken. Whatever perils appear, whatever dangers threaten, the Nation remains secure in the knowledge that the ultimate application of the law of the land will provide an adequate defense and protection.

(Emphasis added)

The portions I’ve highlighted should be understood in the context of the rise of progressivism and of Woodrow Wilson’s critique of the Constitution. Like many progressives, Wilson viewed the Constitution as an impediment to progress — the dead hand of the past thwarting attempts to remedy urgent problems of the present.

Coolidge called out this erroneous, hubristic mindset.

He then emphasized the thoughtful and orderly process that produced the Declaration:

Th[e] obedience of the delegates to the wishes of their constituents, which in some cases caused them to modify their previous positions, is a matter of great significance. It reveals an orderly process of government in the first place; but more than that, it demonstrates that the Declaration of Independence was the result of the seasoned and deliberate thought of the dominant portion of the people of the Colonies.

Adopted after long discussion and as the result of the duly authorized expression of the preponderance of public opinion, it did not partake of dark intrigue or hidden conspiracy. It was well advised. It had about it nothing of the lawless and disordered nature of a riotous insurrection. It was maintained on a plane which rises above the ordinary conception of rebellion. It was in no sense a radical movement but took on the dignity of a resistance to illegal usurpations. It was conservative and represented the action of the colonists to maintain their constitutional rights which from time immemorial had been guaranteed to them under the law of the land.

(Emphasis added)

This point was emphasized at the Coolidge Foundation event. Revolutions often begin in a lawless, disordered, and riotous fashion. Ours begin in reasoned consensus expressed in a brilliantly written defense. This goes a long way towards explaining why, unlike the French Revolution for example, the American Revolution gave rise to so much happiness and success thereafter.

Coolidge drove home the point:

We can not escape the conclusion that [the Declaration] had a much broader and deeper significance than a mere secession of territory and the establishment of a new nation. Events of that nature have been taking place since the dawn of history. One empire after another has arisen, only to crumble away as its constituent parts separated from each other and set up independent governments of their own. Such actions long ago became commonplace. . . .

It was not because it was proposed to establish a new nation, but because it was proposed to establish a nation on new principles, that July 4, 1776, has come to be regarded as one of the greatest days in history.

(Emphasis added)

Coolidge then turned to the three core principles of the Declaration:

Three very definite propositions were set out in its preamble regarding the nature of mankind and therefore of government. These were the doctrine that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with certain inalienable rights, and that therefore the source of the just powers of government must be derived from the consent of the governed.

If no one is to be accounted as born into a superior station, if there is to be no ruling class, and if all possess rights which can neither be bartered away nor taken from them by any earthly power, it follows as a matter of course that the practical authority of the Government has to rest on the consent of the governed. While these principles were not altogether new in political action, and were very far from new in political speculation, they had never been assembled before and declared in such a combination

Coolidge concluded by tying these three principles to the sub silentio critique of progressive dogma with which he began the speech:

About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.

(Emphasis added)

Coolidge is remembered as a man of few words. But this speech shows that he was also a man capable of considerable eloquence. And, even more importantly, a man of great wisdom.