|
If History Interests You, then This Section of the
Site is For You |
|
Back |
Federalist
No. 27
The Same Subject Continued:
The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in
Regard to the Common Defense Considered - From the New
York Packet. Tuesday, December 25, 1787. |
Next |
|
Author: Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:
IT HAS been urged, in different shapes, that a Constitution of
the kind proposed by the convention cannot operate without the
aid of a military force to execute its laws. This, however, like
most other things that have been alleged on that side, rests on
mere general assertion, unsupported by any precise or
intelligible designation of the reasons upon which it is
founded. As far as I have been able to divine the latent meaning
of the objectors, it seems to originate in a presupposition that
the people will be disinclined to the exercise of federal
authority in any matter of an internal nature. Waiving any
exception that might be taken to the inaccuracy or
inexplicitness of the distinction between internal and external,
let us inquire what ground there is to presuppose that
disinclination in the people. Unless we presume at the same time
that the powers of the general government will be worse
administered than those of the State government, there seems to
be no room for the presumption of ill-will, disaffection, or
opposition in the people. I believe it may be laid down as a
general rule that their confidence in and obedience to a
government will commonly be proportioned to the goodness or
badness of its administration. It must be admitted that there
are exceptions to this rule; but these exceptions depend so
entirely on accidental causes, that they cannot be considered as
having any relation to the intrinsic merits or demerits of a
constitution. These can only be judged of by general principles
and maxims.
Various reasons have been suggested, in the course of these
papers, to induce a probability that the general government will
be better administered than the particular governments; the
principal of which reasons are that the extension of the spheres
of election will present a greater option, or latitude of
choice, to the people; that through the medium of the State
legislatures which are select bodies of men, and which are to
appoint the members of the national Senate there is reason to
expect that this branch will generally be composed with peculiar
care and judgment; that these circumstances promise greater
knowledge and more extensive information in the national
councils, and that they will be less apt to be tainted by the
spirit of faction, and more out of the reach of those occasional
ill-humors, or temporary prejudices and propensities, which, in
smaller societies, frequently contaminate the public councils,
beget injustice and oppression of a part of the community, and
engender schemes which, though they gratify a momentary
inclination or desire, terminate in general distress,
dissatisfaction, and disgust. Several additional reasons of
considerable force, to fortify that probability, will occur when
we come to survey, with a more critical eye, the interior
structure of the edifice which we are invited to erect. It will
be sufficient here to remark, that until satisfactory reasons
can be assigned to justify an opinion, that the federal
government is likely to be administered in such a manner as to
render it odious or contemptible to the people, there can be no
reasonable foundation for the supposition that the laws of the
Union will meet with any greater obstruction from them, or will
stand in need of any other methods to enforce their execution,
than the laws of the particular members.
The hope of impunity is a strong incitement to sedition; the
dread of punishment, a proportionably strong discouragement to
it. Will not the government of the Union, which, if possessed of
a due degree of power, can call to its aid the collective
resources of the whole Confederacy, be more likely to repress
the FORMER sentiment and to inspire the LATTER, than that of a
single State, which can only command the resources within
itself? A turbulent faction in a State may easily suppose itself
able to contend with the friends to the government in that
State; but it can hardly be so infatuated as to imagine itself a
match for the combined efforts of the Union. If this reflection
be just, there is less danger of resistance from irregular
combinations of individuals to the authority of the Confederacy
than to that of a single member.
I will, in this place, hazard an observation, which will not be
the less just because to some it may appear new; which is, that
the more the operations of the national authority are
intermingled in the ordinary exercise of government, the more
the citizens are accustomed to meet with it in the common
occurrences of their political life, the more it is familiarized
to their sight and to their feelings, the further it enters into
those objects which touch the most sensible chords and put in
motion the most active springs of the human heart, the greater
will be the probability that it will conciliate the respect and
attachment of the community. Man is very much a creature of
habit. A thing that rarely strikes his senses will generally
have but little influence upon his mind. A government
continually at a distance and out of sight can hardly be
expected to interest the sensations of the people. The inference
is, that the authority of the Union, and the affections of the
citizens towards it, will be strengthened, rather than weakened,
by its extension to what are called matters of internal concern;
and will have less occasion to recur to force, in proportion to
the familiarity and comprehensiveness of its agency. The more it
circulates through those channls and currents in which the
passions of mankind naturally flow, the less will it require the
aid of the violent and perilous expedients of compulsion.
One thing, at all events, must be evident, that a government
like the one proposed would bid much fairer to avoid the
necessity of using force, than that species of league contend
for by most of its opponents; the authority of which should only
operate upon the States in their political or collective
capacities. It has been shown that in such a Confederacy there
can be no sanction for the laws but force; that frequent
delinquencies in the members are the natural offspring of the
very frame of the government; and that as often as these happen,
they can only be redressed, if at all, by war and violence.
The plan reported by the convention, by extending the authority
of the federal head to the individual citizens of the several
States, will enable the government to employ the ordinary
magistracy of each, in the execution of its laws. It is easy to
perceive that this will tend to destroy, in the common
apprehension, all distinction between the sources from which
they might proceed; and will give the federal government the
same advantage for securing a due obedience to its authority
which is enjoyed by the government of each State, in addition to
the influence on public opinion which will result from the
important consideration of its having power to call to its
assistance and support the resources of the whole Union. It
merits particular attention in this place, that the laws of the
Confederacy, as to the ENUMERATED and LEGITIMATE objects of its
jurisdiction, will become the SUPREME LAW of the land; to the
observance of which all officers, legislative, executive, and
judicial, in each State, will be bound by the sanctity of an
oath. Thus the legislatures, courts, and magistrates, of the
respective members, will be incorporated into the operations of
the national government AS FAR AS ITS JUST AND CONSTITUTIONAL
AUTHORITY EXTENDS; and will be rendered auxiliary to the
enforcement of its laws. Any man who will pursue, by his own
reflections, the consequences of this situation, will perceive
that there is good ground to calculate upon a regular and
peaceable execution of the laws of the Union, if its powers are
administered with a common share of prudence. If we will
arbitrarily suppose the contrary, we may deduce any inferences
we please from the supposition; for it is certainly possible, by
an injudicious exercise of the authorities of the best
government that ever was, or ever can be instituted, to provoke
and precipitate the people into the wildest excesses. But though
the adversaries of the proposed Constitution should presume that
the national rulers would be insensible to the motives of public
good, or to the obligations of duty, I would still ask them how
the interests of ambition, or the views of encroachment, can be
promoted by such a conduct?
PUBLIUS |
|
|
|
|