| 
			
				|  |  
				| 
					
						| If History Interests You, then This Section of the 
						Site is For You |  |  
				| 
					
						| Back | Federalist 
						No. 20 The Same Subject Continued: 
						The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to 
						Preserve the Union
 From the New York Packet. Tuesday, December 11, 1787.
 | Next |  |  
				| Authors: Alexander Hamilton and James Madison 
 To the People of the State of New York:
 
 THE United Netherlands are a confederacy of republics, or rather 
				of aristocracies of a very remarkable texture, yet confirming 
				all the lessons derived from those which we have already 
				reviewed.
 
 The union is composed of seven coequal and sovereign states, and 
				each state or province is a composition of equal and independent 
				cities. In all important cases, not only the provinces but the 
				cities must be unanimous.
 
 The sovereignty of the Union is represented by the 
				States-General, consisting usually of about fifty deputies 
				appointed by the provinces. They hold their seats, some for 
				life, some for six, three, and one years; from two provinces 
				they continue in appointment during pleasure.
 
 The States-General have authority to enter into treaties and 
				alliances; to make war and peace; to raise armies and equip 
				fleets; to ascertain quotas and demand contributions. In all 
				these cases, however, unanimity and the sanction of their 
				constituents are requisite. They have authority to appoint and 
				receive ambassadors; to execute treaties and alliances already 
				formed; to provide for the collection of duties on imports and 
				exports; to regulate the mint, with a saving to the provincial 
				rights; to govern as sovereigns the dependent territories. The 
				provinces are restrained, unless with the general consent, from 
				entering into foreign treaties; from establishing imposts 
				injurious to others, or charging their neighbors with higher 
				duties than their own subjects. A council of state, a chamber of 
				accounts, with five colleges of admiralty, aid and fortify the 
				federal administration.
 
 The executive magistrate of the union is the stadtholder, who is 
				now an hereditary prince. His principal weight and influence in 
				the republic are derived from this independent title; from his 
				great patrimonial estates; from his family connections with some 
				of the chief potentates of Europe; and, more than all, perhaps, 
				from his being stadtholder in the several provinces, as well as 
				for the union; in which provincial quality he has the 
				appointment of town magistrates under certain regulations, 
				executes provincial decrees, presides when he pleases in the 
				provincial tribunals, and has throughout the power of pardon.
 
 As stadtholder of the union, he has, however, considerable 
				prerogatives.
 
 In his political capacity he has authority to settle disputes 
				between the provinces, when other methods fail; to assist at the 
				deliberations of the States-General, and at their particular 
				conferences; to give audiences to foreign ambassadors, and to 
				keep agents for his particular affairs at foreign courts.
 
 In his military capacity he commands the federal troops, 
				provides for garrisons, and in general regulates military 
				affairs; disposes of all appointments, from colonels to ensigns, 
				and of the governments and posts of fortified towns.
 
 In his marine capacity he is admiral-general, and superintends 
				and directs every thing relative to naval forces and other naval 
				affairs; presides in the admiralties in person or by proxy; 
				appoints lieutenant-admirals and other officers; and establishes 
				councils of war, whose sentences are not executed till he 
				approves them.
 
 His revenue, exclusive of his private income, amounts to three 
				hundred thousand florins. The standing army which he commands 
				consists of about forty thousand men.
 
 Such is the nature of the celebrated Belgic confederacy, as 
				delineated on parchment. What are the characters which practice 
				has stamped upon it? Imbecility in the government; discord among 
				the provinces; foreign influence and indignities; a precarious 
				existence in peace, and peculiar calamities from war.
 
 It was long ago remarked by Grotius, that nothing but the hatred 
				of his countrymen to the house of Austria kept them from being 
				ruined by the vices of their constitution.
 
 The union of Utrecht, says another respectable writer, reposes 
				an authority in the States-General, seemingly sufficient to 
				secure harmony, but the jealousy in each province renders the 
				practice very different from the theory.
 
 The same instrument, says another, obliges each province to levy 
				certain contributions; but this article never could, and 
				probably never will, be executed; because the inland provinces, 
				who have little commerce, cannot pay an equal quota.
 
 In matters of contribution, it is the practice to waive the 
				articles of the constitution. The danger of delay obliges the 
				consenting provinces to furnish their quotas, without waiting 
				for the others; and then to obtain reimbursement from the 
				others, by deputations, which are frequent, or otherwise, as 
				they can. The great wealth and influence of the province of 
				Holland enable her to effect both these purposes.
 
 It has more than once happened, that the deficiencies had to be 
				ultimately collected at the point of the bayonet; a thing 
				practicable, though dreadful, in a confedracy where one of the 
				members exceeds in force all the rest, and where several of them 
				are too small to meditate resistance; but utterly impracticable 
				in one composed of members, several of which are equal to each 
				other in strength and resources, and equal singly to a vigorous 
				and persevering defense.
 
 Foreign ministers, says Sir William Temple, who was himself a 
				foreign minister, elude matters taken ad referendum, by 
				tampering with the provinces and cities. In 1726, the treaty of 
				Hanover was delayed by these means a whole year. Instances of a 
				like nature are numerous and notorious.
 
 In critical emergencies, the States-General are often compelled 
				to overleap their constitutional bounds. In 1688, they concluded 
				a treaty of themselves at the risk of their heads. The treaty of 
				Westphalia, in 1648, by which their independence was formerly 
				and finally recognized, was concluded without the consent of 
				Zealand. Even as recently as the last treaty of peace with Great 
				Britain, the constitutional principle of unanimity was departed 
				from. A weak constitution must necessarily terminate in 
				dissolution, for want of proper powers, or the usurpation of 
				powers requisite for the public safety. Whether the usurpation, 
				when once begun, will stop at the salutary point, or go forward 
				to the dangerous extreme, must depend on the contingencies of 
				the moment. Tyranny has perhaps oftener grown out of the 
				assumptions of power, called for, on pressing exigencies, by a 
				defective constitution, than out of the full exercise of the 
				largest constitutional authorities.
 
 Notwithstanding the calamities produced by the stadtholdership, 
				it has been supposed that without his influence in the 
				individual provinces, the causes of anarchy manifest in the 
				confederacy would long ago have dissolved it. ``Under such a 
				government,'' says the Abbe Mably, ``the Union could never have 
				subsisted, if the provinces had not a spring within themselves, 
				capable of quickening their tardiness, and compelling them to 
				the same way of thinking. This spring is the stadtholder.'' It 
				is remarked by Sir William Temple, ``that in the intermissions 
				of the stadtholdership, Holland, by her riches and her 
				authority, which drew the others into a sort of dependence, 
				supplied the place.''
 
 These are not the only circumstances which have controlled the 
				tendency to anarchy and dissolution. The surrounding powers 
				impose an absolute necessity of union to a certain degree, at 
				the same time that they nourish by their intrigues the 
				constitutional vices which keep the republic in some degree 
				always at their mercy.
 
 The true patriots have long bewailed the fatal tendency of these 
				vices, and have made no less than four regular experiments by 
				EXTRAORDINARY ASSEMBLIES, convened for the special purpose, to 
				apply a remedy. As many times has their laudable zeal found it 
				impossible to UNITE THE PUBLIC COUNCILS in reforming the known, 
				the acknowledged, the fatal evils of the existing constitution. 
				Let us pause, my fellow-citizens, for one moment, over this 
				melancholy and monitory lesson of history; and with the tear 
				that drops for the calamities brought on mankind by their 
				adverse opinions and selfish passions, let our gratitude mingle 
				an ejaculation to Heaven, for the propitious concord which has 
				distinguished the consultations for our political happiness.
 
 A design was also conceived of establishing a general tax to be 
				administered by the federal authority. This also had its 
				adversaries and failed.
 
 This unhappy people seem to be now suffering from popular 
				convulsions, from dissensions among the states, and from the 
				actual invasion of foreign arms, the crisis of their distiny. 
				All nations have their eyes fixed on the awful spectacle. The 
				first wish prompted by humanity is, that this severe trial may 
				issue in such a revolution of their government as will establish 
				their union, and render it the parent of tranquillity, freedom 
				and happiness: The next, that the asylum under which, we trust, 
				the enjoyment of these blessings will speedily be secured in 
				this country, may receive and console them for the catastrophe 
				of their own.
 
 I make no apology for having dwelt so long on the contemplation 
				of these federal precedents. Experience is the oracle of truth; 
				and where its responses are unequivocal, they ought to be 
				conclusive and sacred. The important truth, which it 
				unequivocally pronounces in the present case, is that a 
				sovereignty over sovereigns, a government over governments, a 
				legislation for communities, as contradistinguished from 
				individuals, as it is a solecism in theory, so in practice it is 
				subversive of the order and ends of civil polity, by 
				substituting VIOLENCE in place of LAW, or the destructive 
				COERCION of the SWORD in place of the mild and salutary COERCION 
				of the MAGISTRACY.
 
 PUBLIUS.
 |  
				|  |  
				|  |  
				|  |  |