The Federalist: a collection/by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay & . Thomas Jefferson to David Humphreys, March 18, , in Papers of Thomas Jeffer- son, ed. other mode could this be more effectually done than by including in precedent to the Federalist-certain papers from his pen, which have hitherto had . Free site book and epub digitized and proofread by Project Gutenberg.

The Federalist Papers Pdf

Language:English, French, Arabic
Published (Last):08.06.2016
ePub File Size:16.64 MB
PDF File Size:8.49 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Registration needed]
Uploaded by: DOLLIE

Beginning on October 27, the Federalist Papers were first published in the New York press under the signature of "Publius". These papers are generally. The Federalist Papers. No. 1 · No. 2 · No. 3 · No. 4 · No. 5 · No. 6 · No. 7 · No. 8 · No. 9 · No. 10 · No. 11 · No. 12 · No. 13 · No. 14 · No. 15 · No. 16 · No. 17 · No. Hamilton, Alexander, James Madison and John Jay]. The Federalist: A Collection of Essays, Written in Favour of the New Constitution, As Agreed Upon by the.

The States which did not pay their proportions of money might at least be charged with their deficiencies; but no account could be formed of the deficiencies in the supplies of men.

We shall not, however, see much reason to reget the want of this hope, when we consider how little prospect there is, that the most delinquent States will ever be able to make compensation for their pecuniary failures.

The system of quotas and requisitions, whether it be applied to men or money, is, in every view, a system of imbecility in the Union, and of inequality and injustice among the members. The right of equal suffrage among the States is another exceptionable part of the Confederation. Every idea of proportion and every rule of fair representation conspire to condemn a principle, which gives to Rhode Island an equal weight in the scale of power with Massachusetts, or Connecticut, or New York; and to Deleware an equal voice in the national deliberations with Pennsylvania, or Virginia, or North Carolina.

About this book

Its operation contradicts the fundamental maxim of republican government, which requires that the sense of the majority should prevail. Sophistry may reply, that sovereigns are equal, and that a majority of the votes of the States will be a majority of confederated America. But this kind of logical legerdemain will never counteract the plain suggestions of justice and common-sense.

It may happen that this majority of States is a small minority of the people of America; 3 and two thirds of the people of America could not long be persuaded, upon the credit of artificial distinctions and syllogistic subtleties, to submit their interests to the management and disposal of one third.

The larger States would after a while revolt from the idea of receiving the law from the smaller. To acquiesce in such a privation of their due importance in the political scale, would be not merely to be insensible to the love of power, but even to sacrifice the desire of equality.

It is neither rational to expect the first, nor just to require the last. The smaller States, considering how peculiarly their safety and welfare depend on union, ought readily to renounce a pretension which, if not relinquished, would prove fatal to its duration. It may be objected to this, that not seven but nine States, or two thirds of the whole number, must consent to the most important resolutions; and it may be thence inferred that nine States would always comprehend a majority of the Union.

But this does not obviate the impropriety of an equal vote between States of the most unequal dimensions and populousness; nor is the inference accurate in point of fact; for we can enumerate nine States which contain less than a majority of the people; 4 and it is constitutionally possible that these nine may give the vote.

Besides, there are matters of considerable moment determinable by a bare majority; and there are others, concerning which doubts have been entertained, which, if interpreted in favor of the sufficiency of a vote of seven States, would extend its operation to interests of the first magnitude.

In addition to this, it is to be observed that there is a probability of an increase in the number of States, and no provision for a proportional augmentation of the ratio of votes.

Federalist Papers Full Text PDF

But this is not all: what at first sight may seem a remedy, is, in reality, a poison. To give a minority a negative upon the majority which is always the case where more than a majority is requisite to a decision , is, in its tendency, to subject the sense of the greater number to that of the lesser.

Congress, from the nonattendance of a few States, have been frequently in the situation of a Polish diet, where a single veto has been sufficient to put a stop to all their movements. A sixtieth part of the Union, which is about the proportion of Delaware and Rhode Island, has several times been able to oppose an entire bar to its operations.

This is one of those refinements which, in practice, has an effect the reverse of what is expected from it in theory.

The necessity of unanimity in public bodies, or of something approaching towards it, has been founded upon a supposition that it would contribute to security. But its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of the government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent, or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority.

In those emergencies of a nation, in which the goodness or badness, the weakness or strength of its government, is of the greatest importance, there is commonly a necessity for action.

The Federalist Papers

The public business must, in some way or other, go forward. If a pertinacious minority can control the opinion of a majority, respecting the best mode of conducting it, the majority, in order that something may be done, must conform to the views of the minority; and thus the sense of the smaller number will overrule that of the greater, and give a tone to the national proceedings.

Hence, tedious delays; continual negotiation and intrigue; contemptible compromises of the public good.

And yet, in such a system, it is even happy when such compromises can take place: for upon some occasions things will not admit of accommodation; and then the measures of government must be injuriously suspended, or fatally defeated. It is often, by the impracticability of obtaining the concurrence of the necessary number of votes, kept in a state of inaction. Its situation must always savor of weakness, sometimes border upon anarchy. It is not difficult to discover, that a principle of this kind gives greater scope to foreign corruption, as well as to domestic faction, than that which permits the sense of the majority to decide; though the contrary of this has been presumed.

The mistake has proceeded from not attending with due care to the mischiefs that may be occasioned by obstructing the progress of government at certain critical seasons. When the concurrence of a large number is required by the Constitution to the doing of any national act, we are apt to rest satisfied that all is safe, because nothing improper will be likely to be done, but we forget how much good may be prevented, and how much ill may be produced, by the power of hindering the doing what may be necessary, and of keeping affairs in the same unfavorable posture in which they may happen to stand at particular periods.

The Federalist papers

Suppose, for instance, we were engaged in a war, in conjunction with one foreign nation, against another. Suppose the necessity of our situation demanded peace, and the interest or ambition of our ally led him to seek the prosecution of the war, with views that might justify us in making separate terms.

In such a state of things, this ally of ours would evidently find it much easier, by his bribes and intrigues, to tie up the hands of government from making peace, where two thirds of all the votes were requisite to that object, than where a simple majority would suffice. In the first case, he would have to corrupt a smaller number; in the last, a greater number.

Upon the same principle, it would be much easier for a foreign power with which we were at war to perplex our councils and embarrass our exertions. And, in a commercial view, we may be subjected to similar inconveniences. A nation, with which we might have a treaty of commerce, could with much greater facility prevent our forming a connection with her competitor in trade, though such a connection should be ever so beneficial to ourselves.

Evils of this description ought not to be regarded as imaginary.

One of the weak sides of republics, among their numerous advantages, is that they afford too easy an inlet to foreign corruption. An hereditary monarch, though often disposed to sacrifice his subjects to his ambition, has so great a personal interest in the government and in the external glory of the nation, that it is not easy for a foreign power to give him an equivalent for what he would sacrifice by treachery to the state.

The world has accordingly been witness to few examples of this species of royal prostitution, though there have been abundant specimens of every other kind. In republics, persons elevated from the mass of the community, by the suffrages of their fellow-citizens, to stations of great pre-eminence and power, may find compensations for betraying their trust, which, to any but minds animated and guided by superior virtue, may appear to exceed the proportion of interest they have in the common stock, and to overbalance the obligations of duty.

Hence it is that history furnishes us with so many mortifying examples of the prevalency of foreign corruption in republican governments. How much this contributed to the ruin of the ancient commonwealths has been already delineated. It is well known that the deputies of the United Provinces have, in various instances, been downloadd by the emissaries of the neighboring kingdoms.


Learn more at Login to Fave. Description Comments Ungluers 8 More The Federalist: M'Lean, Two volumes. Reprinted by The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. LCCN ISBN IANA, Hc. The views of Hamilton, Madison and Jay expressed in this landmark work have had a lasting effect on U.

You might also like: THE BOOK OF ELI GANOOL

Constitutional law. Eighty-five of the essays were almost entirely written by Hamilton and Madison, and probably only five were written by Jay.

Most of the individual essays appeared under the collective pseudonym "Publius" in New York newspapers and journals from October 27, to early June The first edition was published anonymously and printed by the M'Lean brothers, who collected and published the first 36 essays as Volume I in March, , with the final 49 essays in Volume II in May of the same year, along with the text of the Constitution.

The essays were intended to encourage ratification of the proposed constitution by New York State, but were immediately recognized as the most compelling commentary on the most radical form of government the world had seen. Hamilton's essays especially express a strong concern for the rights of property over the natural rights of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," as outlined by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence.

Printing and the Mind of Man My use of the Cooke edition signiies nothing.

Add to Cart About The Federalist Papers A selection of nineteen essential essays from The Federalist Papers in their original lengths by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, with notes by Richard Beeman Penguin presents a series of six portable, accessible, and—above all—essential reads from American political history, selected by leading scholars. In the compound republic of America the power surrendered by the people is irst divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each, subdivided among distinct and separate departments.

Something analogous can be said of the judiciary and its willingness to stand against constitutionally suspect measures or actions. It begins with the problem of interpreting Federalist no.

Consequently, the Federalist model of the system of separations and balances is an implicit theory of institutional power and change as we shall see at the end of the chapter.