Title: The Federalist Papers
Author: Publius
Number of Essays: 85
Original Published Date: 1787
Favorite quote(s):
Federalist 15: “Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of men will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice without constraint.”
Federalist 1: “It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.”
Quick Summary of Why the Federalist Papers were Drafted:
The Federalist Papers were written between the fall of 1787 and spring of 1788 during the period of ratification for the Constitution of the United States. The collection of 85 essays, written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay under the pseudonym Plubius, were drafted to solicit support from the voters so the states would codify the newly-drafted Constitution of the United States.
The Constitution of the United States was written to replace the Articles of Confederation which had been serving as the regulating power for the federal government during the Revolutionary War. The Articles of Confederation were purposely drafted with a weak federal government and strong state rights, but after the war ended it had become apparent that the Articles of Confederation were too weak to govern the United States because the federal powers it provided were too limited to be effective.
To avoid a collapse of the young republic of the United States, the states sent representatives to the Constitutional Convention in 1787 to revise the Articles of Confederation. However, not long after the convention commenced the delegates decided the Articles of Confederation had to be replaced and the U.S. Constitution was to be its replacement.
After the Constitution of the United States had been submitted to the thirteen states for ratification, some critics denounced its adoption because of the stronger central government it proposed and its lack of assurances of certain rights and began writing articles and open letters denouncing it and encouraging the voters and states to reject its ratification. These critics were called Anti-Federalists.
In response, Alexander Hamilton wrote Federalist No. 1 and enlisted John Jay and James Madison to write additional essays in support of the constitution that were published in New York newspapers.
My Takeaways from Reading The Federalist Papers:
Federalist No. 6, Federalist No. 7, and Federalist No. 8: Concerning Dangers from Dissensions Between the States
Much was written about what the future of the American continent if the individual states were not united under one union. Examples from history going back to ancient Greece, Rome and current and past hostilities and wars in Europe, are given as evidence in The Federalist Papers. A warning is also articulated that if the states were to separate or join small confederacies, America could become like another Europe with neighbor states fighting or multiple states joining forces and going to war with other states. There was also fear that other nations such as Britain and France would encourage this behavior by supporting or funding different confederacies of states. If that were to happen, America may never know peace on its continent.
The forming of one United States did prevent such infighting for 80+ years until Lincoln was elected President. When Lincoln wouldn’t call slavery “good”, the southern states realized that if they stayed with the union, slavery and their way of life would eventually be abolished. It’s interesting to note that following the Civil War, no state has gone to war against another.
Federalist No. 10: The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection
“Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm”. James Madison, writing under Publius, argues against the assumption that there will always be a knowledgeable, honorable, or self-disinterested representative that will prevent injustices or calm the waters for cooler heads to prevail. It’s obvious that human nature has, and always will be, self-serving for those who want to gain power and the constitution was written to prevent a usurpation of power of one person or group over another.
He goes to write that a republic instead of a direct democracy was created to prevent the majority from overruling and stepping on the rights of the minority. “A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole…and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual.” By having representatives, the goal would be that those representing the masses will “by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations.”
Madison believed having a union of separate states would prevent the spread of bad ideas or at least prevent those ideas from infecting the entire nation. “A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it, in the same proportion such a malady is more likely to taint a particular country or district than an entire State.” His hypothesis seems to have worked in many respects which is why we have such distinctions and different “flavors” of politics and thinking across the states. In a nation of 300 plus millions of people, there would be no way to get everyone to agree, but having fifty unique states allows an individual to move without the hassle of immigration of permission from any authorities to some other place they may identify more strongly with.
Publius and the other forefathers of America recognized man’s ability to create chaos or self-serve to the determent of others and set up safeguards to prevent a despot or tyrant from gaining power. However, they may have given the average voter too much credit when we’ve often failed to elect representatives “whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations.”
Federalist No. 57: The Alleged Tendency of the New Plan to Elevate the Few at the Expense of the Many Considered in Connection with Representation
“The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society, and in the next place to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.”
Madison’s words above should be what we, as voters, seek in our representatives, but we haven’t always been up to that task. Unfortunately, a strong moral character and virtue are little discussed in election campaigns and the “common good of society” can be defined in diametrically opposing opinions depending on the individual voter.
He goes on to list out a definition of qualifications for our representatives:
“Every citizen whose merit may recommend him to the esteem and confidence of his country. No qualification of wealth, of birth, of religious faith, or of civil profession is permitted to fetter the judgement or disappoint the inclination of the people”.
Madison had high hopes for the people who would seek election and to represent their peers, but he does acknowledge that selfish motives could be a reason some would seek election. He states “whatever hopes or projects might be entertained by a few aspiring characters, it must generally happen that a great proportion of the men deriving their advancement from their influence with the people would have more to hope from a preservation of the favor than from innovations in the government subversive of the authority of the people.”
Neither Madison nor any of the other drafters of the U.S. Constitution were blind to bad men and false intentions as human nature has, and always will be, filled with liars, cheats, and grifters, but they probably assumed that restricting the years each representative could serve for their term would prevent most swindlers from causing too much damage since every reelection they’d have to face their voters.
The House of Representatives were to only serve two-year terms to “support in the members an habitual recollection of their dependence on the people”. The drafters to the constitution believed that frequent elections would keep the elected representatives from straying from the promises made during their campaign for election.
The problem is us voters don’t hold our representatives accountable enough. It sometimes takes a grievous offense to notice bad behavior and toss them out of office, and malicious actions can often go unnoticed for a lack of concern in what our representatives are doing or by an ignorance where we are purposely kept unawares.
Federalist No. 62 and Federalist No. 63: The Senate and the Senate Continued
When the Constitution of the United States was drafted and until the year 1913, state senators were elected by the state legislatures and not from the voters directly. However, when the 17th Amendment was codified, it changed the architecture of the constitution as senators would also be popularly elected in the same way as the House of Representatives.
When the constitution was originally drafted, the purpose of the Senate was to ensure the smaller states had equal representation with the more populous states and provide protection for states’ rights against the federal government. The rules for senators were also to be stricter, requiring “a more advanced age and a longer period of citizenship”, with the hope that a more established person would take those seats to provide stability and wisdom to prevent those “particular moments in public affairs when the people, stimulated by some irregular passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the artful misrepresentations of interested men, may call for measures which they themselves will afterwards be the most ready to lament and condemn”.
Prior to my reading of The Federalist Papers, I was unaware of the purpose of the 17th Amendment and the reasons behind why the forefathers developed the Senate in its original form. The 17th Amendment continues to be controversial as many argue that it took away power from the states and others arguing that it freed up the state legislatures to focus on other matters.
Federalist No. 72: The Duration in Office of the Executive and Re-eligibility of the Executive Considered
Publius argued against term limits for the U.S. President as it was believed no term limits would encourage good behavior, but an unofficial term limit of two was established after George Washington left office following two terms as America’s First President.
As the third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “If some termination to the services of the chief magistrate be not fixed by the Constitution, or supplied by practice, his office, nominally for years, will in fact, become for life; and history shows how easily that degenerates into an inheritance.”
Jefferson, and all other Presidents up to Franklin D. Roosevelt, served only two four-year terms though some Presidents did try to run for a third term unsuccessfully. However, following Roosevelt’s four terms as President, the 22nd Amendment was passed in 1947 thus establishing an official two-term limit for the President.
Federalist No. 84: Certain General and Miscellaneous Objections to the Constitutuion Considered and Answered
One of the most surprising things I learned when reading The Federalist Papers was found in Federalist No. 84. Hamilton, writing under Publius, argues against the need for a Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution. He believed the Constitution would serve as protecting those rights and was a Bill of Rights in itself. There was also fear that if a Bill of Rights existed, those rights may be seen as the only rights the citizens possess.
The lack of a Bill of Rights was one of the main criticisms to the constitution by the Anti-Federalists, but its later inclusion changed many of their minds. James Madison was also originally against the Bill of Rights but later changed his mind and was instrumental in drafting the amendments and pushed for their adoption.
In my opinion, the biggest flaw within the Federalist Papers was the argument against the Bill of Rights. The people of their time were taking a gamble with this new constitution and wanted guarantees that those first ten rights would forever be guaranteed. My theory is without the Bill of Rights, the Federal government would have encroached on them little by little throughout the years until we barely noticed they’d all but disappeared.
Random Facts I learned from The Federalist Papers:
- Most essays were not printed more than once outside NYC
- Hamilton switched positions on Presidential powers when dealing with foreign nations
- Madison switched from believing the Federal government should be able to “negative” any state law for any reason but in Federalist No. 45 he praised the new constitution because federal government powers were “few and defined”
- Publius used their knowledge of Greek and Roman history when drafting their papers
- The Federalist Papers are referenced still today in Judicial rulings
- The Anti-Federalists were successful in having the Bill of Rights created
- I’m not surprised, though I am disappointed, that The Federalist Papers, or at least some of the more relevant essays, are not required reading nor even encouraged to history students in U.S schools
- The essays are written in beautiful prose, but also perfectly define their purpose and arguments
Notable quotes from The Federalist Papers:
Federalist No. 51:
“But what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.”
“Justice if the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit.”
Federalist No. 62:
“A good government implies two things: first, fidelity to the object of government, which is the happiness of the people; secondly, a knowledge of the means by which that object can be best attained. Some governments are deficient in both these qualities; most governments are deficient in the first.”
“It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is today, can guess what it will be tomorrow.”
Leave a Reply