Federalist Papers (1787-1788)

The Federalist, more commonly known as the Federalist Papers, is a series of 85 newspaper essays on the United States Constitution written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Written under the pseudonym “Publius,” a reference to the great defender of the ancient Roman Republic, Publius Valerius Publicola, the Federalist Papers were originally published in two New York City newspapers: the New York Packet and the Independent Journal. The first essay appeared on October 27, 1787, and the series continued until April 2, 1788. Later that year, the collection of essays appeared as a bound book, edited by Hamilton and published by J. and A. McLean. A second edition, with Madison as editor, was published in 1818.

The purpose of the essays was to urge the people of New York to ratify the new Constitution, which had been drafted by the Constitutional Convention and adopted on September 17, 1787. Because of its thriving commerce and central location, New York’s acceptance of the proposed document was deemed essential to the viability and success of a new government. The Federalist essays were reprinted in other newspapers across New York State and in several cities in other states.

Alexander Hamilton, a member of the Constitutional Convention who strongly supported the proposed government, was the originator of the work. In an effort to win over public opinion in favor of the Constitution, Hamilton decided to write a series of essays that would both defend the Constitution and explain its provisions. To complete the project, he enlisted the support of two prominent collaborators: Madison, a fellow Constitutional Convention delegate and brilliant scholar of political history, and Jay, the secretary of foreign affairs under the Articles of Confederation. Although the authorship of some of the essays was a subject of intense debate for well over a century, modern research suggests that of the 85 essays, Hamilton wrote 51, Madison wrote 29, and Jay wrote five. Collectively, the authors were experienced scholars on a variety of subjects, and their contributions tended to reflect their individual areas of expertise. Hamilton concentrated on military and financial affairs, while Madison addressed the historical experiences of confederacies, and Jay focused on foreign policy.

For the most part, the authors wrote independently, consulting each other infrequently due largely to time constraints imposed by newspaper deadlines. This loose collaboration was possible because despite some minor differences, the authors generally agreed on the fundamental principles concerning the nature of the new government. They believed in the need for a strong central authority to correct what they saw as the political weakness inherent in the Articles of Confederation and thought that a vertical division of power between the central and state governments would provide the best balance. They maintained that the separation of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions of government provided a further safeguard and would prevent any single branch from dominating the others.

Furthermore, Madison and Hamilton agreed about the fundamental question of human nature that underpinned all political systems. Like the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, they believed that humans were inherently wicked beings who lacked self-control; therefore, the purpose of government was to curb the wild passions of people. This defect in human nature provided a constant state of struggle in which men sought their own selfish desires rather than the common good. This human propensity constituted the foundation of faction, which Madison and Hamilton believed should be incorporated into the function of good government. They thought that a strong republican government would recognize the existence of factions and force them to compete against one another to prevent tyranny by the majority. These ideas, as expressed in Madison’s essay No. 10, constitute one of the most famous defenses of republican government.

The Federalist essays addressed almost every objection raised to the Constitution. In the first few numbers Hamilton argued that there was more to be feared from a weak central government than from a strong, since without a powerful union the United States would quickly divide into several regional confederations that would inevitably make war against each other. Hamilton defended the power of the president under the Constitution while denying that the position resembled a monarch, since he was to be elected every four years and Congress could override his veto. Moreover, if the president violated the Constitution he could be impeached. Federalist No. 62 defended the small size of the Senate as serving as “a constitutional recognition of the portion of sovereignty remaining in the individual states” and that it would double “the security of the people” since it served as a check to what otherwise would be a single house of legislature. It would also be immune from the “impulse of sudden and violent passions” exhibited by many of the state legislatures. Similarly, the election of the House of Representatives every two years by popular vote would guarantee that the people would have a constant voice in the government. Questions over the power of the Supreme Court were dismissed by asserting that lower courts retained the jury trial and that the higher court did not have juries since knowledge of law and the Constitution were central to its deliberations. Madison defended the “necessary and proper” clause in Federalist No. 44 with the assertion that without the ability to pass laws to put the powers of the Constitution into effect, “the whole Constitution would be a dead letter.” In Federalist No. 51 Madison discussed the nature of human existence, quipping “if men were angels, government would not be necessary.”

In the end, the authors of the Federalist Papers achieved their goal; the Constitution won eventual ratification in all 13 states. Since that time, the Federalist Papers has become an important treatise in U. S. history, evolving into a definitive treatise on government and providing modern scholars and statesmen alike with insight into the political minds of the founding era.

See also anti-Federalists; Constitution, ratification of the; republicanism.

Further reading: Allan Brinkley, New Federalist Papers: Essays in Defense of the Constitution; (New York: Norton, 1997); Albert Furtwangler, The Authority of Publius: A Reading of the Federalist Papers (Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Press, 1984); George Mace, Locke, Hobbes, and the Federalist Papers: An Essay on the Genesis of the American Political Heritage (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1974).