The Federalist Papers - Alexander Hamilton (ebook pc reader txt) 📗

nations without their consent. The last war but two between Britain and Spain sprang from the attempts of the English merchants to prosecute an illicit trade with the Spanish main. These unjustifiable practices on their part produced severity on the part of the Spaniards toward the subjects of Great Britain which were not more justifiable, because they exceeded the bounds of a just retaliation and were chargeable with inhumanity and cruelty. Many of the English who were taken on the Spanish coast were sent to dig in the mines of Potosi; and by the usual progress of a spirit of resentment, the innocent were, after a while, confounded with the guilty in indiscriminate punishment. The complaints of the merchants kindled a violent flame throughout the nation, which soon after broke out in the House of Commons, and was communicated from that body to the ministry. Letters of reprisal were granted, and a war ensued, which in its consequences overthrew all the alliances that but twenty years before had been formed with sanguine expectations of the most beneficial fruits. ↩

Vide Principes des Négociations par l’Abbé de Mably. —⁠Publius ↩

Divide and command. —⁠Publius ↩

In order that the whole subject of these papers may as soon as possible be laid before the public, it is proposed to publish them four times a week⁠—on Tuesday in the New York Packet and on Thursday in The Daily Advertiser. —⁠Publius ↩

This objection will be fully examined in its proper place, and it will be shown that the only natural precaution which could have been taken on this subject has been taken; and a much better one than is to be found in any constitution that has been heretofore framed in America, most of which contain no guard at all on this subject. —⁠Publius ↩

In the revised text: “This inference, from the very form of the proposition, is, at best, problematical and uncertain.” ↩

Spirit of Laws, vol. i, book ix, chap. i. —⁠Publius ↩

Recherches Philosophiques sur les Américains. —⁠Publius ↩

If my memory be right they amount to twenty percent. —⁠Publius ↩

“I mean for the Union.” —⁠Publius ↩

This was but another name more specious for the independence of the members on the federal head. —⁠Publius ↩

Christian Pfeffel, Nouvel Abrégé Chronologique de l’Histoire et du Droit Public d’Allemagne, says the pretext was to indemnify himself for the expense of the expedition. —⁠Publius ↩

This, as nearly as I can recollect, was the sense of his speech on introducing the last bill. —⁠Publius ↩

Encyclopedia, article “Empire.” —⁠Publius ↩

New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, Georgia, South Carolina, and Maryland are a majority of the whole number of the states, but they do not contain one third of the people. —⁠Publius ↩

Add New York and Connecticut to the foregoing seven, and they will be less than a majority. —⁠Publius ↩

This statement of the matter is taken from the printed collection of state constitutions. Pennsylvania and North Carolina are the two which contain the interdiction in these words: “As standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up.” This is, in truth, rather a caution than a prohibition. New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Delaware, and Maryland have, in each of their bills of rights, a clause to this effect: “Standing armies are dangerous to liberty, and ought not to be raised or kept up without the consent of the Legislature”; which is a formal admission of the authority of the Legislature. New York has no bills of rights, and her constitution says not a word about the matter. No bills of rights appear annexed to the constitutions of the other states, except the foregoing, and their constitutions are equally silent. I am told, however, that one or two states have bills of rights which do not appear in this collection; but that those also recognize the right of the legislative authority in this respect. —⁠Publius ↩

The sophistry which has been employed to show that this will tend to the destruction of the state governments, will, in its proper place, be fully detected. —⁠Publius ↩

In the revised text, “or if there should be as many unconnected governments as there are states.” ↩

Its full efficacy will be examined hereafter. —⁠Publius ↩

This essay appeared as No. XXXV in the original publication in the newspapers, and therefore is here misplaced chronologically. In the first edition of 1788, however, it is printed as No. XXIX, which gives it its proper place according to subject, and for this reason the order of the first edition has been followed. ↩

This was the point at which No. XXXI of the original newspaper essays was divided, and this opening sentence appeared first in the McLean edition of 1788. ↩

In the revised text, “and from a greater disproportion between her population and territory is unlikely speedily to be, to any great extent.” ↩

The New England states. —⁠Publius ↩

Connecticut and Rhode Island. —⁠Publius ↩

Declaration of Independence. —⁠Publius ↩

In the revised text this sentence reads: “With regard to the regulation of the militia, there are scarcely any circumstances in reference to which local knowledge can be said to be necessary. The general face of the country, whether mountainous or level, most fit for the operations of infantry or cavalry, is almost the only consideration of this nature that can occur. The art