JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL
Davy Crockett, Libertarian
The king of the wild frontier was also a champion of limited government.
Monday, April 12, 2004 12:01 a.m.
The new Disney film "The Alamo" has revived interest in
Davy Crockett, the frontiersman-turned-celebrity who then entered
politics and thus became an early American version of Arnold Schwarzenegger
before he died fighting Santa Anna's legions in 1836.
Crockett is the main hero in the new film, but he also comes in for
some debunking. Billy Bob Thornton plays Crockett as neither a homespun
hero (Fess Parker's TV portrayal) or a laconic he-man (John Wayne's
take on the legend in a 1960 film). Instead, he appears as a rejected
candidate and relentless self-promoter who seeks a fresh start running
for office in a new, independent Texas.
The revisionist historian Jeff Long has gone further and declared
that the Crockett who died at the Alamo was an "aging, semiliterate
squatter of average talent" who had "accomplished nothing"
in his six years in Congress. That's much too harsh. David Crockett
(he shunned his nickname) was an American archetype--the self-made
man who always championed the commoner. "He knew instinctively
the right combination of backwoods person and gentleman politician
to adopt," says historian William C. Davis. His success inspired
Abraham Lincoln in his rise from backwoods lawyer to the White House,
and his celebrity attracted the notice of Alexis de Tocqueville.
In Congress he championed the rights of squatters, poor settlers
who claimed and built on undeveloped Western land but were barred
from buying it if they didn't already own property. In 1830, he broke
with President Andrew Jackson and opposed his Indian Removal Act because
it uprooted 60,000 members of peaceful tribes and brutally forced
them across the Mississippi River. "Several of my colleagues
got around me, and told me how well they loved me, and that I was
ruining myself," Crockett recounted in his autobiography. "I
told them it was a wicked, unjust measure, and that I should go against
it, let the cost to myself be what it might."
Indeed,
his growing opposition to what he considered the headstrong policies
of "King Andrew the First," cost him dearly. President Jackson,
a fellow Tennesseean, urged Crockett's constituents to "not disgrace
themselves" by re-electing him. Jackson's allies crafted a blatant
gerrymander to drive Crockett from office, but he nonetheless survived.
Then in 1834 he stumbled badly when he took time away from a congressional
session to promote his book in a three-week tour of the Northeast.
He lost his re-election bid, 51% to 49%, to a war hero with a wooden
leg. He then famously told his constituents, "You may all go
to hell, and I will go to Texas." He did just that and his death
the next year at the Alamo ensured his place among America's heroes.
Almost forgotten in the mystique of his legend is Crockett's commitment
to the principles of limited government. An 1884 biography of Crockett
by Edward Sylvester Ellis published an account of a speech Crockett
gave on his views on government called "Not Yours to Give."
Rep. Ron Paul, a Republican of libertarian bent, whose district includes
some of the historic sites in the battle for Texas independence, recommends
it as a guide for how elected officials should interpret the Constitution.
Crockett's heroism at the Alamo is matched by the good common sense
that he exhibits in this excerpt from the Ellis book:
One day in the House, a bill was taken up appropriating money for
the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful
speeches had been made in its support. The speaker was just about
to put the question when Rep. David Crockett arose:
"Mr. Speaker--I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased,
and as much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if there be,
as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the
dead or our sympathy for part of the living to lead us into an act
of injustice to the balance of the living.
"I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has not
the power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member
on this floor knows it. We have the right as individuals, to give
away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members
of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of the public
money. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this
bill, but I will give one week's pay to the object, and if every member
of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill
asks."
Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation,
Crockett said: "Several years ago, I was one evening standing
on the steps of the Capitol with some members of Congress when our
attention was attracted by a great light over in Georgetown. It was
evidently a large fire. In spite of all that could be done, many houses
were burned and many families made houseless. . . . The weather was
very cold, and when I saw so many children suffering, I felt that
something ought to be done. A bill was introduced appropriating $20,000
for their relief. We rushed it through.
"The next summer, when riding one day in a part of my district.
I saw a man in a field plowing. I spoke to the man. He replied politely,
but rather coldly.
" 'You are Colonel Crockett. I shall not vote for you again.'
"
"I begged him tell me what was the matter."
"'Well Colonel, you gave a vote last winter which shows that
either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution or that
you are wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. You
voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by fire
in Georgetown.
" 'Certainly nobody will complain that a great and rich country
like ours should give $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children,
particularly with a full and overflowing treasury,' I replied."
"'It is not the amount, Colonel, it is the principle. The power
of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous
power that can be entrusted to man. . . . You will very easily perceive
what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism,
on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. The people
have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain
things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and
for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation
of the Constitution.'
" 'You have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital
point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when
Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the
Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people.'
"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made
that speech yesterday. . . . You remember that I proposed to give
a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men--men who
think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a
dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it.
Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is
nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people."
Following his death at the Alamo, the voters of Tennessee came to
regret their rejection of David Crockett. Indeed, they elected his
son, John Wesley Crockett, to his old congressional seat in the very
next election. His father's life story is not just one of sacrifice
on the battlefield of the Alamo but also one of courage and principle
in the political arena.
Copyright © 2004 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.