|
Federalist No. 23
The Necessity of a Government as Energetic as the One Proposed
to the Preservation of the Union
From the New York Packet.
Tuesday, December 18, 1787.
Author: Alexander Hamilton
To the People of the State of New York:
THE necessity of a Constitution, at least equally energetic
with the one proposed, to the preservation of the Union, is the
point at the examination of which we are now arrived.
This inquiry will naturally divide itself into three branches
the objects to be provided for by the federal government, the
quantity of power necessary to the accomplishment of those objects,
the persons upon whom that power ought to operate. Its distribution
and organization will more properly claim our attention under
the succeeding head.
The principal purposes to be answered by union are these the
common defense of the members; the preservation of the public
peace as well against internal convulsions as external attacks;
the regulation of commerce with other nations and between the
States; the superintendence of our intercourse, political and
commercial, with foreign countries.
The authorities essential to the common defense are these:
to raise armies; to build and equip fleets; to prescribe rules
for the government of both; to direct their operations; to provide
for their support. These powers ought to exist without limitation,
BECAUSE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO FORESEE OR DEFINE THE EXTENT AND
VARIETY OF NATIONAL EXIGENCIES, OR THE CORRESPONDENT EXTENT AND
VARIETY OF THE MEANS WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY TO SATISFY THEM.
The circumstances that endanger the safety of nations are infinite,
and for this reason no constitutional shackles can wisely be
imposed on the power to which the care of it is committed. This
power ought to be coextensive with all the possible combinations
of such circumstances; and ought to be under the direction of
the same councils which are appointed to preside over the common
defense.
This is one of those truths which, to a correct and unprejudiced
mind, carries its own evidence along with it; and may be obscured,
but cannot be made plainer by argument or reasoning. It rests
upon axioms as simple as they are universal; the MEANS ought
to be proportioned to the END; the persons, from whose agency
the attainment of any END is expected, ought to possess the MEANS
by which it is to be attained.
Whether there ought to be a federal government intrusted with
the care of the common defense, is a question in the first instance,
open for discussion; but the moment it is decided in the affirmative,
it will follow, that that government ought to be clothed with
all the powers requisite to complete execution of its trust.
And unless it can be shown that the circumstances which may affect
the public safety are reducible within certain determinate limits;
unless the contrary of this position can be fairly and rationally
disputed, it must be admitted, as a necessary consequence, that
there can be no limitation of that authority which is to provide
for the defense and protection of the community, in any matter
essential to its efficacy that is, in any matter essential to
the FORMATION, DIRECTION, or SUPPORT of the NATIONAL FORCES.
Defective as the present Confederation has been proved to
be, this principle appears to have been fully recognized by the
framers of it; though they have not made proper or adequate provision
for its exercise. Congress have an unlimited discretion to make
requisitions of men and money; to govern the army and navy; to
direct their operations. As their requisitions are made constitutionally
binding upon the States, who are in fact under the most solemn
obligations to furnish the supplies required of them, the intention
evidently was that the United States should command whatever
resources were by them judged requisite to the ``common defense
and general welfare.'' It was presumed that a sense of their
true interests, and a regard to the dictates of good faith, would
be found sufficient pledges for the punctual performance of the
duty of the members to the federal head.
The experiment has, however, demonstrated that this expectation
was ill-founded and illusory; and the observations, made under
the last head, will, I imagine, have sufficed to convince the
impartial and discerning, that there is an absolute necessity
for an entire change in the first principles of the system; that
if we are in earnest about giving the Union energy and duration,
we must abandon the vain project of legislating upon the States
in their collective capacities; we must extend the laws of the
federal government to the individual citizens of America; we
must discard the fallacious scheme of quotas and requisitions,
as equally impracticable and unjust. The result from all this
is that the Union ought to be invested with full power to levy
troops; to build and equip fleets; and to raise the revenues
which will be required for the formation and support of an army
and navy, in the customary and ordinary modes practiced in other
governments.
If the circumstances of our country are such as to demand
a compound instead of a simple, a confederate instead of a sole,
government, the essential point which will remain to be adjusted
will be to discriminate the OBJECTS, as far as it can be done,
which shall appertain to the different provinces or departments
of power; allowing to each the most ample authority for fulfilling
the objects committed to its charge. Shall the Union be constituted
the guardian of the common safety? Are fleets and armies and
revenues necessary to this purpose? The government of the Union
must be empowered to pass all laws, and to make all regulations
which have relation to them. The same must be the case in respect
to commerce, and to every other matter to which its jurisdiction
is permitted to extend. Is the administration of justice between
the citizens of the same State the proper department of the local
governments? These must possess all the authorities which are
connected with this object, and with every other that may be
allotted to their particular cognizance and direction. Not to
confer in each case a degree of power commensurate to the end,
would be to violate the most obvious rules of prudence and propriety,
and improvidently to trust the great interests of the nation
to hands which are disabled from managing them with vigor and
success.
Who is likely to make suitable provisions for the public defense,
as that body to which the guardianship of the public safety is
confided; which, as the centre of information, will best understand
the extent and urgency of the dangers that threaten; as the representative
of the WHOLE, will feel itself most deeply interested in the
preservation of every part; which, from the responsibility implied
in the duty assigned to it, will be most sensibly impressed with
the necessity of proper exertions; and which, by the extension
of its authority throughout the States, can alone establish uniformity
and concert in the plans and measures by which the common safety
is to be secured? Is there not a manifest inconsistency in devolving
upon the federal government the care of the general defense,
and leaving in the State governments the EFFECTIVE powers by
which it is to be provided for? Is not a want of co-operation
the infallible consequence of such a system? And will not weakness,
disorder, an undue distribution of the burdens and calamities
of war, an unnecessary and intolerable increase of expense, be
its natural and inevitable concomitants? Have we not had unequivocal
experience of its effects in the course of the revolution which
we have just accomplished?
Every view we may take of the subject, as candid inquirers
after truth, will serve to convince us, that it is both unwise
and dangerous to deny the federal government an unconfined authority,
as to all those objects which are intrusted to its management.
It will indeed deserve the most vigilant and careful attention
of the people, to see that it be modeled in such a manner as
to admit of its being safely vested with the requisite powers.
If any plan which has been, or may be, offered to our consideration,
should not, upon a dispassionate inspection, be found to answer
this description, it ought to be rejected. A government, the
constitution of which renders it unfit to be trusted with all
the powers which a free people OUGHT TO DELEGATE TO ANY GOVERNMENT,
would be an unsafe and improper depositary of the NATIONAL INTERESTS.
Wherever THESE can with propriety be confided, the coincident
powers may safely accompany them. This is the true result of
all just reasoning upon the subject. And the adversaries of the
plan promulgated by the convention ought to have confined themselves
to showing, that the internal structure of the proposed government
was such as to render it unworthy of the confidence of the people.
They ought not to have wandered into inflammatory declamations
and unmeaning cavils about the extent of the powers. The POWERS
are not too extensive for the OBJECTS of federal administration,
or, in other words, for the management of our NATIONAL INTERESTS;
nor can any satisfactory argument be framed to show that they
are chargeable with such an excess. If it be true, as has been
insinuated by some of the writers on the other side, that the
difficulty arises from the nature of the thing, and that the
extent of the country will not permit us to form a government
in which such ample powers can safely be reposed, it would prove
that we ought to contract our views, and resort to the expedient
of separate confederacies, which will move within more practicable
spheres. For the absurdity must continually stare us in the face
of confiding to a government the direction of the most essential
national interests, without daring to trust it to the authorities
which are indispensible to their proper and efficient management.
Let us not attempt to reconcile contradictions, but firmly embrace
a rational alternative.
I trust, however, that the impracticability of one general
system cannot be shown. I am greatly mistaken, if any thing of
weight has yet been advanced of this tendency; and I flatter
myself, that the observations which have been made in the course
of these papers have served to place the reverse of that position
in as clear a light as any matter still in the womb of time and
experience can be susceptible of. This, at all events, must be
evident, that the very difficulty itself, drawn from the extent
of the country, is the strongest argument in favor of an energetic
government; for any other can certainly never preserve the Union
of so large an empire. If we embrace the tenets of those who
oppose the adoption of the proposed Constitution, as the standard
of our political creed, we cannot fail to verify the gloomy doctrines
which predict the impracticability of a national system pervading
entire limits of the present Confederacy.
PUBLIUS.
Federalist No. 24 -->
|