INTERPRETING THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AS WITH A SPECIAL INTRODUCTION BY FORMERLY REGIUS PROFESSOR OF MODERN HISTORY, OXFORD SPECIAL INTRODUCTION HE FEDERALIST was written to commend to the ac TH ceptance of the people of the Thirteen Colonies the constitution tendered them by the Federal Convention. The cardinal principles of that constitution it sets forth, advocates, and defends against objections. Though occasional and controversial, it treats its subject with a philosophic breadth and a general insight into political character which have made it a political classic. No constitution, according to Chancellor Kent, ever received a more masterly and successful vindication. Of the three authors, Alexander Hamilton, the soul of the work, the writer of sixty-three of the eighty-five numbers, and the joint author with Madison of three others, was so friendly to strong government and so much an admirer of British institutions as to be suspected of monarchical designs. He avowed his admiration not only of the British monarchy, but of the House of Lords. A native, not of America, but of the West Indies, he had thrown himself into the American Revolution perhaps as much under the influence of youthful ambition as from settled conviction in favour of popular government. He was henceforth leader of the Federal, which may be called. the centripetal, party in American politics, in opposition to the Republican, or centrifugal, party, the leader of which was Jefferson. As a member of the Convention, he had proposed a constitution more conservative than that which was adopted; but upon the rejection of his plan had heartily embraced the work of the Convention. Jay, who, being sick, was only able to contribute five numbers, was also a strong conservative, and afterwards, as Ambassador to England, made a treaty which brought on a democratic storm. Madison, the sole author of fourteen numbers and the part author of three others, had taken an important share in the framing of the Constitution. He belonged at this time to the same party as Hamilton, though he afterwards passed over to Jefferson and the democracy. Jefferson, however, approved in the main of the Constitution. The crisis was most serious, the Colonies having been left at the conclusion of the war in a state of anarchy, distraction, and financial repudiation. Rebellion amounting almost to civil war had broken out. Congress had sunk into impotence and contempt. The writers of The Federalist fell in with the belief that the work of the Convention was the first attempt to frame a constitution on rational principles. "It has been frequently remarked," they say, "that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country to decide by their conduct and example the important question whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice; or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force." This is not strictly in accordance with fact. Besides the constitutions framed by lawgivers such as Solon and Zaleucus for the little States of Greece, and the constitutions, mostly ephemeral, framed for Italian republics, there was the Instrument of Government, the outcome of the political ferment and speculation of the English Revolution. But this had been buried out of sight and notice under the ruins of a lost cause. Four courses presented themselves : I. Independent sovereignty of all the States. Of this, there seem to have been a few advocates among extreme politicians of the centrifugal type. II. Division of the States into groups, which it was supposed would be politically more manageable than a union of them all. The only valid argument in favour of this plan, that is to say, the antagonism between the free and slave States, had not as yet presented itself in force, no cotton-gin having yet been invented, while the abolition of slavery was expected in the near future. III. A true federation, each State retaining its sovereignty, and the Federal Government dealing, not with persons, but with |