war and the giving of aid and comfort to enemies. Thisnrestraint is a marked departure from the British legalntraditions in which the Framers were educated. The treasonnstatutes of Britain included not only such obvious crimes asnany intent to kill, wound, or imprison the king or his heirs,nand any attempt to depose him or levy war against him, butnalso the use of force to overawe the king and/or hisnparliament in order to change policies. Those who plannednand led riots, if (like Lord George Gordon’s) their demonstrationsnhad a political objective, could find themselvesncondemned as traitors. The alternative was a death sentencenunder the Riot Act.nThe most obvious motive for the Framers’ moderation isntheir own consciousness of having participated in a treasonablenconspiracy against king and parliament. The weaknessnof our treason law is manifest in the failure to get anconviction in the case of Aaron Burr, who asked the Britishngovernment for $500,000 and a squadron of ships to benused in the conquest of New Orleans. True, not all thenevidence was available, and Chief Justice John Marshall didnnot help matters by openly siding with the defendant as anpolitical move against Jefferson, but in any other countrynAaron Burr and his confederates would have been speedilynput to death. Burr was at least brought to trial, but nothingnwas done to the New England Federalists who not onlynconspired to secede during the War of 1812, but —nworse — also entered into negotiations with the Britishnduring the most serious crisis our nation has ever faced. Thendelegates to the Hartford Convention had to suffer only thenridicule from their colleagues in the Congress, but nonformal charges were made even against such ringleaders asnTimothy Pickering, who had held regular meetings with anBritish agent and had gone so far as to arrange a letter dropnin London to facilitate his treasonable correspondence.nPickering is an interesting case, because there is no doubtnabout his knowledge of the law. As secretary of state undernJohn Adams, he was largely responsible for the passage ofnthe Logan Act (1799), which makes it a crime for citizens tonenter into peace negotiations with foreign nations. Significantly,nthe act was titled “An Act to Prevent Usurpation ofnExecutive Functions.” While the Logan Act has never beennenforced — even against the man who demanded itsnpassage — it has never been repealed either. It remains ournonly official proclamation on the subject of citizen diplomacy.nWhen Henry Wallace used his position as former VicenPresident to stir up foreign opposition to the TrumannDoctrine, the Act was remembered. The threat to invoke itnmay well have warned off imitators, that is, until recently. Innhis defense, we ought to concede that Jesse Jackson hadnprobably never heard of either the Logan Act or HenrynWallace.nSupporters of private peace initiatives are impatient withnthe legal niceties. There is an ethical point at stake, theynclaim, and cite Dwight Eisenhower — that great cold warriornwho gave peace to Korea and security to Hungary — whononce declared that ‘Teople want peace so much that one ofnthese days government had better get out of their way andngive it to them.” Why didn’t he and John Foster Dulles justnresign or turn over the State Department to the JuniornChamber of Commerce?nAfter a century’s worth of Presidents like WoodrownWilson and Warren Harding, Franklin Roosevelt and HerbertnHoover, it is small wonder if many Americans arenbeginning to suspect that private citizens could do a betternjob in foreign affairs; but the democratic quality of ournhighest leadership — men of mediocre education, commonnvision, and average ethical standards — does not suggest thatnwhat we really need is more democracy in the conduct ofnforeign policy. The Athenians tried mob rule as a substitutenfor government and destroyed themselves.nIf our governors have become impossibly corrupt andnunbelievably stupid, then we may need to rethink thenmechanisms by which they are selected. Too much democracynwas the great fear of the Framers, and they designed ansystem that could resist some of the follies of popularngovernment — the electoral college, the indirect election ofnsenators, a national government limited in the scope of itsnmischief-making. We dismantled all those safeguards andnare now faced with a choice between Gary Hart andnGeorge Bush, at best. It makes one long for the days ofnMillard Fillmore or that much-maligned gentleman, FranklinnPierce. The Democrats could not construct even half anman out of all their announced candidates, and three of thenRepublicans’ best men — Robertson, Dupont, Haig — donnot stand the slightest chance.nThere are deep and serious problems in a system thatncould propel a Jimmy Carter into any high office, and therenare deep and serious flaws in the character of a nation thatnwill tolerate such incompetents and impostors as fill thenSenate and the governors’ mansions of the several states. Wenface an enormous crisis in our international position:ndeteriorating relations with our European allies, a wilynSoviet adversary who knows how to manipulate the Americannpress, and an impending economic recession; and wenare forced—at this time of national emergency—to rely onnthe talents of men who might have staffed the administrationsnof Romulus Augustulus or the Byzantine Emperorsnwho let their country fall into the hands of the Latins.nWhen any regime is falling apart — Rome in the 5 thncentury, Byzantium in the 12th, France in the 18th, thenWeimar Republic — there is a scramble for power in a gamenthat is open to anyone willing to play. In Byzantium it wasnthe feudal military leaders and the civil bureaucrats; innFrance it was the liberal nobility and the lawyers; in the U.S.nit is anybody’s game. The executive, legislative, and judicialnleaders are all so busy increasing their own power, theynhave little time — supposing they had the talent and inclination—nfor governing the nation.nImagine Moe, Larry, and Curly presiding over the threenbranches of government. Dressed in the solemn regalia ofntheir offices, they chase each other around the Capitol,npoking each other in the eye as they slap wallpaper over allnthe doors and windows. While the boys are pulling nosesnand sticking heads in vices, any number of outsiders arenlearning how to set up their own versions of government:nmultinational corporations, lobbying groups, lunatic fringenpolitical movements — racists and feminists, primarily —nand the countless religious and secular organizations currentlynpromoting citizen diplomat tours to the SovietnUnion. The way things are going, we may as well vote fornJesse Jackson and get it over with.nnnMARCH 1988 / 7n