| 
			
				|  |  
				| 
					
						| If History Interests You, then This Section of the 
						Site is For You |  |  
				| 
					
						| Back | 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.
 | Next |  |  
				| 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.
 |  
				|  |  
				|  |  
				|  |  |