| 
			
				|  |  
				| 
					
						| If History Interests You, then This Section of the 
						Site is For You |  |  
				| 
					
						| Back | Federalist 
						No. 27 The Same Subject Continued: 
						The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in 
						Regard to the Common Defense Considered - From the New 
						York Packet. Tuesday, December 25, 1787.
 | Next |  |  
				| Author: Alexander Hamilton 
 To the People of the State of New York:
 
 IT HAS been urged, in different shapes, that a Constitution of 
				the kind proposed by the convention cannot operate without the 
				aid of a military force to execute its laws. This, however, like 
				most other things that have been alleged on that side, rests on 
				mere general assertion, unsupported by any precise or 
				intelligible designation of the reasons upon which it is 
				founded. As far as I have been able to divine the latent meaning 
				of the objectors, it seems to originate in a presupposition that 
				the people will be disinclined to the exercise of federal 
				authority in any matter of an internal nature. Waiving any 
				exception that might be taken to the inaccuracy or 
				inexplicitness of the distinction between internal and external, 
				let us inquire what ground there is to presuppose that 
				disinclination in the people. Unless we presume at the same time 
				that the powers of the general government will be worse 
				administered than those of the State government, there seems to 
				be no room for the presumption of ill-will, disaffection, or 
				opposition in the people. I believe it may be laid down as a 
				general rule that their confidence in and obedience to a 
				government will commonly be proportioned to the goodness or 
				badness of its administration. It must be admitted that there 
				are exceptions to this rule; but these exceptions depend so 
				entirely on accidental causes, that they cannot be considered as 
				having any relation to the intrinsic merits or demerits of a 
				constitution. These can only be judged of by general principles 
				and maxims.
 
 Various reasons have been suggested, in the course of these 
				papers, to induce a probability that the general government will 
				be better administered than the particular governments; the 
				principal of which reasons are that the extension of the spheres 
				of election will present a greater option, or latitude of 
				choice, to the people; that through the medium of the State 
				legislatures which are select bodies of men, and which are to 
				appoint the members of the national Senate there is reason to 
				expect that this branch will generally be composed with peculiar 
				care and judgment; that these circumstances promise greater 
				knowledge and more extensive information in the national 
				councils, and that they will be less apt to be tainted by the 
				spirit of faction, and more out of the reach of those occasional 
				ill-humors, or temporary prejudices and propensities, which, in 
				smaller societies, frequently contaminate the public councils, 
				beget injustice and oppression of a part of the community, and 
				engender schemes which, though they gratify a momentary 
				inclination or desire, terminate in general distress, 
				dissatisfaction, and disgust. Several additional reasons of 
				considerable force, to fortify that probability, will occur when 
				we come to survey, with a more critical eye, the interior 
				structure of the edifice which we are invited to erect. It will 
				be sufficient here to remark, that until satisfactory reasons 
				can be assigned to justify an opinion, that the federal 
				government is likely to be administered in such a manner as to 
				render it odious or contemptible to the people, there can be no 
				reasonable foundation for the supposition that the laws of the 
				Union will meet with any greater obstruction from them, or will 
				stand in need of any other methods to enforce their execution, 
				than the laws of the particular members.
 
 The hope of impunity is a strong incitement to sedition; the 
				dread of punishment, a proportionably strong discouragement to 
				it. Will not the government of the Union, which, if possessed of 
				a due degree of power, can call to its aid the collective 
				resources of the whole Confederacy, be more likely to repress 
				the FORMER sentiment and to inspire the LATTER, than that of a 
				single State, which can only command the resources within 
				itself? A turbulent faction in a State may easily suppose itself 
				able to contend with the friends to the government in that 
				State; but it can hardly be so infatuated as to imagine itself a 
				match for the combined efforts of the Union. If this reflection 
				be just, there is less danger of resistance from irregular 
				combinations of individuals to the authority of the Confederacy 
				than to that of a single member.
 
 I will, in this place, hazard an observation, which will not be 
				the less just because to some it may appear new; which is, that 
				the more the operations of the national authority are 
				intermingled in the ordinary exercise of government, the more 
				the citizens are accustomed to meet with it in the common 
				occurrences of their political life, the more it is familiarized 
				to their sight and to their feelings, the further it enters into 
				those objects which touch the most sensible chords and put in 
				motion the most active springs of the human heart, the greater 
				will be the probability that it will conciliate the respect and 
				attachment of the community. Man is very much a creature of 
				habit. A thing that rarely strikes his senses will generally 
				have but little influence upon his mind. A government 
				continually at a distance and out of sight can hardly be 
				expected to interest the sensations of the people. The inference 
				is, that the authority of the Union, and the affections of the 
				citizens towards it, will be strengthened, rather than weakened, 
				by its extension to what are called matters of internal concern; 
				and will have less occasion to recur to force, in proportion to 
				the familiarity and comprehensiveness of its agency. The more it 
				circulates through those channls and currents in which the 
				passions of mankind naturally flow, the less will it require the 
				aid of the violent and perilous expedients of compulsion.
 
 One thing, at all events, must be evident, that a government 
				like the one proposed would bid much fairer to avoid the 
				necessity of using force, than that species of league contend 
				for by most of its opponents; the authority of which should only 
				operate upon the States in their political or collective 
				capacities. It has been shown that in such a Confederacy there 
				can be no sanction for the laws but force; that frequent 
				delinquencies in the members are the natural offspring of the 
				very frame of the government; and that as often as these happen, 
				they can only be redressed, if at all, by war and violence.
 
 The plan reported by the convention, by extending the authority 
				of the federal head to the individual citizens of the several 
				States, will enable the government to employ the ordinary 
				magistracy of each, in the execution of its laws. It is easy to 
				perceive that this will tend to destroy, in the common 
				apprehension, all distinction between the sources from which 
				they might proceed; and will give the federal government the 
				same advantage for securing a due obedience to its authority 
				which is enjoyed by the government of each State, in addition to 
				the influence on public opinion which will result from the 
				important consideration of its having power to call to its 
				assistance and support the resources of the whole Union. It 
				merits particular attention in this place, that the laws of the 
				Confederacy, as to the ENUMERATED and LEGITIMATE objects of its 
				jurisdiction, will become the SUPREME LAW of the land; to the 
				observance of which all officers, legislative, executive, and 
				judicial, in each State, will be bound by the sanctity of an 
				oath. Thus the legislatures, courts, and magistrates, of the 
				respective members, will be incorporated into the operations of 
				the national government AS FAR AS ITS JUST AND CONSTITUTIONAL 
				AUTHORITY EXTENDS; and will be rendered auxiliary to the 
				enforcement of its laws. Any man who will pursue, by his own 
				reflections, the consequences of this situation, will perceive 
				that there is good ground to calculate upon a regular and 
				peaceable execution of the laws of the Union, if its powers are 
				administered with a common share of prudence. If we will 
				arbitrarily suppose the contrary, we may deduce any inferences 
				we please from the supposition; for it is certainly possible, by 
				an injudicious exercise of the authorities of the best 
				government that ever was, or ever can be instituted, to provoke 
				and precipitate the people into the wildest excesses. But though 
				the adversaries of the proposed Constitution should presume that 
				the national rulers would be insensible to the motives of public 
				good, or to the obligations of duty, I would still ask them how 
				the interests of ambition, or the views of encroachment, can be 
				promoted by such a conduct?
 
 PUBLIUS
 |  
				|  |  
				|  |  
				|  |  |