A nation without a national government is, in my view, an awful spectacle.
–Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers. No. 85
After the Revolutionary War, many Americans realized that the government established by the Articles of Confederation was not working. America needed a fresh form of government. It had to be strong enough to maintain national unity over a large geographic area, but not so strong as to become a terror. Incapable to find an exact model in history to fit America’s unique situation, delegates met at Philadelphia in 1787 to create their own solution to the problem. Their creation was the United States Constitution.
Before the Constitution could become “the supreme law of the land,” it had to be ratified or approved by at least nine of the thirteen states. When the delegates to the Philadelphia Convention signed the Constitution on September 17, 1787, they knew ratification would not be effortless. Many people were bitterly opposed to the proposed fresh system of government. A public debate soon erupted in each of the states over whether the fresh Constitution should be accepted. More significant, it was a crucial debate on the future of the United States.
The Federalist Papers
Nowhere was the furor over the proposed Constitution more intense than in Fresh York. Within days after it was signed, the Constitution became the subject of widespread criticism in the Fresh York newspapers. Many commentators charged that the Constitution diminished the rights Americans had won in the Revolution.
Fearful that the cause for the Constitution might be lost in his home state, Alexander Hamilton devised a plan to write a series of letters or essays rebutting the critics. It is not surprising that Hamilton, a brilliant lawyer, came forward at this moment to defend the fresh Constitution. At Philadelphia, he was the only Fresh Yorker to have signed the Constitution. The other Fresh York delegates had angrily left the Convention coaxed that the rights of the people were being abandoned.
Hamilton himself was very much in favor of strengthening the central government. Hamilton’s Constitution would have called for a president elected for life with the power to appoint state governors. Hamilton soon backed away from these ideas, and determined that the Constitution, as written, was the best one possible.
Hamilton published his very first essay in the Fresh York Independent Journal on October 27, 1787. He signed the articles with the Roman name “Publius.” (The use of pseudonyms by writers on public affairs was a common practice.) Hamilton soon recruited two others, James Madison and John Jay, to contribute essays to the series. They also used the pseudonym “Publius.”
James Madison, sometimes called the Father of the Constitution, had played a major role during the Philadelphia Convention. As a delegate from Virginia, he participated actively in the debates. He also kept detailed notes of the proceedings and drafted much of the Constitution.
Unlike Hamilton and Madison, John Jay of Fresh York had not been a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. A judge and diplomat, he was serving as secretary of foreign affairs in the national government.
Inbetween October 1787 and August 1788, “Publius” wrote 85 essays in several Fresh York newspapers. Hamilton wrote over 60 percent of these essays and helped with the writing of others. Madison most likely wrote about a third of them with Jay composing the rest.
The essays had an instant influence on the ratification debate in Fresh York and in the other states. The request for reprints was so good that one Fresh York newspaper publisher printed the essays together in two volumes entitled The Federalist, A Collection of Essays, written in favor of the Fresh Constitution, By a Citizen of Fresh York. By this time the identity of “Publius,” never a well-kept secret, was pretty well known.
The Federalist. also called The Federalist Papers. has served two very different purposes in American history. The 85 essays succeeded by helping to persuade doubtful Fresh Yorkers to ratify the Constitution. Today, The Federalist Papers helps us to more clearly understand what the writers of the Constitution had in mind when they drafted that amazing document 200 years ago.
The accomplish text of The Federalist Papers
A Guide for Government
What go after are quotations from several essays in The Federalist Papers. After each selection are two kinds of activities. The very first activity includes questions that should be discussed and answered by the entire class or in petite groups. If necessary, refer to a dictionary or your government textbook. The 2nd activity after each selection is intended as an individual or homework assignment.
Federalist Paper 23–Alexander Hamilton
The principle purposes to be answered by Union are these — The common defense of the members — the preservation of the public peace as well as against internal convulsions as outer attacks — the regulation of commerce with other nations and inbetween the States — the superintendence of our intercourse, political and commercial, with foreign countries.
1. According to Hamilton, what are the main purposes of forming a Union under the Constitution? Make a list in your own words.
Two. Do the majority of Hamilton’s purposes relate to domestic or to foreign affairs?
Which one of Hamilton’s purposes do you think is the most significant for the United States today? Explain your reaction in about 100 words.
Federalist Paper 47–James Madison
The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same forearms, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of despotism.
1. According to this excerpt, do you think Madison supported or opposed the principle of “separation of powers”? (Refer to your government textbook if you are not familiar with this term.)
Two. Why do you think Madison held this view of the “separation of powers”?
In about 100 words, describe a government in which all legislative, executive and judicial power is in the forearms of one person or a single petite group.
Federalist Paper 51–James Madison
If dudes were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern fellows, neither outer nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by studs over fellows, the superb difficulty lies in this: You must very first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.
1. Which of the following statements would Madison agree with based on his views in the above excerpt?
a. Government is necessary.
b. The people should elect government leaders who act like angels.
c. Elected government officials should be managed by a system of “checks and balances.” (Refer to your government textbook if you are not familiar with this term. Two. What would you say was Madison’s general opinion of people in government: angels? demons? something else?
Find and describe five examples of “checks and balances” in the Constitution (refer to your government textbook).
Federalist Paper 72–Alexander Hamilton
The original intent of the Constitution was to place no limit on the number of times an individual could be elected president. However, after Franklin D. Roosevelt won four presidential elections in a row, a constitutional amendment (the 22nd) was passed limiting a person to two terms as president. In the following selection, Hamilton argues against limiting the number of presidential terms.
[An] ill effect of the exclusion would be depriving the community of the advantage of the practice gained by the chief magistrate in the exercise of his office. That practice is the parent of wisdom is an adage, the truth of which is recognized by the wisest as well as the simplest of mankind. What more desirable or more essential than this quality in the government of nations?
1. What argument does Hamilton give against limiting the number of times a person may be elected president?
Two. What could have been one of the arguments used by those who proposed the 22nd Amendment?
President Reagan remarked that there should not be a limit on the number of times a person may serve as president. Do you agree we should go back to the original intent of the Constitution and permit individuals to be elected for any number of presidential terms? Explain your response in about 100 words.
Federalist Paper 78–Alexander Hamilton
“If then the courts of justice are to be considered as the bulwarks of a limited constitution against legislative encroachments, this consideration will afford a strong argument for the permanent tenure of judicial offices, since nothing will contribute so much as this to that independent spirit in the judges, which must be essential to the faithful spectacle of so arduous a duty.
This independence of the judges is identically requisite to guard the constitution and the rights of individuals from the effects of. designing boys.”
1. What does Hamilton mean by “the permanent tenure of judicial offices”? Does Hamilton support or oppose this idea?
Two. What does Hamilton mean when he says that an “independent spirit in the judges” is essential for them to do their duty?
Write a letter of about 100 words to the editor of a newspaper agreeing or disagreeing with the view that the U.S. Supreme Court justices should be elected for limited terms of office.
For Further Reading
Cooke, Jacob E. ed. The Federalist. Middletown, Conn. Wesleyan University Press, 1961.
Van Doren, Carl. The Excellent Rehearsal: The Story of the Making and Ratifying of the Constitution of the United States. Fresh York: The Viking Press, 1948.
© 2002, Constitutional Rights Foundation, 601 South Kinglsey Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90005, (213) 487-5590 Fax (213) 386-0459