1. Now, if you went to government school, and never picked up a book on your own, you probably don't know the difference between Michelob and Michelangelo.....or between the Federalist Papers and Fedex.
But, those who have studied the Federalist probably did so within the context of the ratification of the Constitution. And came away believing that those 85 articles are hallowed, some kind of political scripture.
Oh, nay, nay!
2. Actually, even in New York, where they were published, the articles didn't have much to do with ratification. And, remember, the Publius essays were pretty much unknown to anyone outside the range of New York papers.
a. Virginia, the wealthiest, and, arguably, most important of the 13 colonies, was the tenth state to ratify the Constitution, and its convention was already meeting when the final Federalist essay was first published.
3. It seems that not even in New York did the articles have a significant effect. When New York's convention met, near Vassar College, in Poughkeepsie, in 1788, ten states had already ratified! The main pressures on the Governor George Clinton-led Republicans, was a) to join Rhode Island and North Carolina, and skip joining the Union, and b) a warning from Alexander Hamilton that New York City would secede from the state and ratify on its own!
Even so...it was close: 27 to 30.
4. Although called 'The Federalist,' implying the desire to have a government in which the states retain most sovereignty, and play a major role, the authors were those favoring a strong nation government, nationalists, and a monarchist, Hamilton, who was opposed to strong state sovereignty. It should be said, that there was a lot of shifting, even from Madison, who originally supported the Virginia Plan of strong central government: he grew to support of the Constitution, as passed...sort of.
a. At times Madison, Jay and Hamilton describe the new government as federal, and at others, they make it 'national.'
b. At times they say that the states would retain a central role in the new government...but at other times they speak of broad grants of power to same.
5. In fact. based on the strange mixture of statements, one might believe that the nationalist/monarchist authors were attempting ...'obfuscation,' if you get my drift.
a. In Federalist 62 and 63, for example, Madison goes so far as to contradict his negative appraisal of the structure of the Senate that he wrote in correspondence with Jefferson. http://presspubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch17s22.html
6. It is difficult to actually gauge Madison's true feelings and intentions....one might imagine that he simply wanted the Constitution ratified....and intended to alter it's functions later. After all, that is what has happened.....
a. "Madison's views, however, did not always prevail at the Convention. Of the seventy-one suggestions he proposed or supported, forty were voted down. He was disappointed that the Convention delegates rejected proportional representation for the Senate in favor of equal representation of the states (the Great Compromise). He considered this a breach of republican principles of representative government. He also opposed giving the selection of senators to state legislatures."
James Madison and Executive Power
b. In Federalist 39, Madison argues that the Constitution is both nationalist and federalist....." He then demonstrates that the government established by the proposed Constitution was in every respect republican in nature. After establishing this point, Madison answers the charges of the critics of the Constitution proving that the Constitution did not intend to establish what its opponents called a consolidated government. Even though the Constitution applied some national features it retained plenty of federal features to protect against consolidation." Federalist 39 Paraphrase
Based on Kevin Gutzman's "Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution."
Of course, the final stake through the heart of federalism was hammered home by the Progressives, who, in the early 20th century, removed the selection of Senators from state legislatures......
Today, we have that national government, with the states merely 'agents' of a central authority.
BTW....same year they instituted the income tax......
But, those who have studied the Federalist probably did so within the context of the ratification of the Constitution. And came away believing that those 85 articles are hallowed, some kind of political scripture.
Oh, nay, nay!
2. Actually, even in New York, where they were published, the articles didn't have much to do with ratification. And, remember, the Publius essays were pretty much unknown to anyone outside the range of New York papers.
a. Virginia, the wealthiest, and, arguably, most important of the 13 colonies, was the tenth state to ratify the Constitution, and its convention was already meeting when the final Federalist essay was first published.
3. It seems that not even in New York did the articles have a significant effect. When New York's convention met, near Vassar College, in Poughkeepsie, in 1788, ten states had already ratified! The main pressures on the Governor George Clinton-led Republicans, was a) to join Rhode Island and North Carolina, and skip joining the Union, and b) a warning from Alexander Hamilton that New York City would secede from the state and ratify on its own!
Even so...it was close: 27 to 30.
4. Although called 'The Federalist,' implying the desire to have a government in which the states retain most sovereignty, and play a major role, the authors were those favoring a strong nation government, nationalists, and a monarchist, Hamilton, who was opposed to strong state sovereignty. It should be said, that there was a lot of shifting, even from Madison, who originally supported the Virginia Plan of strong central government: he grew to support of the Constitution, as passed...sort of.
a. At times Madison, Jay and Hamilton describe the new government as federal, and at others, they make it 'national.'
b. At times they say that the states would retain a central role in the new government...but at other times they speak of broad grants of power to same.
5. In fact. based on the strange mixture of statements, one might believe that the nationalist/monarchist authors were attempting ...'obfuscation,' if you get my drift.
a. In Federalist 62 and 63, for example, Madison goes so far as to contradict his negative appraisal of the structure of the Senate that he wrote in correspondence with Jefferson. http://presspubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch17s22.html
6. It is difficult to actually gauge Madison's true feelings and intentions....one might imagine that he simply wanted the Constitution ratified....and intended to alter it's functions later. After all, that is what has happened.....
a. "Madison's views, however, did not always prevail at the Convention. Of the seventy-one suggestions he proposed or supported, forty were voted down. He was disappointed that the Convention delegates rejected proportional representation for the Senate in favor of equal representation of the states (the Great Compromise). He considered this a breach of republican principles of representative government. He also opposed giving the selection of senators to state legislatures."
James Madison and Executive Power
b. In Federalist 39, Madison argues that the Constitution is both nationalist and federalist....." He then demonstrates that the government established by the proposed Constitution was in every respect republican in nature. After establishing this point, Madison answers the charges of the critics of the Constitution proving that the Constitution did not intend to establish what its opponents called a consolidated government. Even though the Constitution applied some national features it retained plenty of federal features to protect against consolidation." Federalist 39 Paraphrase
Based on Kevin Gutzman's "Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution."
Of course, the final stake through the heart of federalism was hammered home by the Progressives, who, in the early 20th century, removed the selection of Senators from state legislatures......
Today, we have that national government, with the states merely 'agents' of a central authority.
BTW....same year they instituted the income tax......
Last edited:
