DISCLAIMER: I am not a historian nor a political scientist. I do have a fascination and interest in the Constitution and so I started reading the Federalist Papers and posting my interpretation on my own blog. I thought it might be of some interest here. Your interpretations and thoughts are greatly appreciated in the comments!
You can find the Federalist Papers in their entirety at The Library of Congress website.
Federalist No. 15 and links to previous Federalist Papers entries below the fold and previously posted at LiveJournal
Federalist No. 1 here
Federalist No. 2 here
Federalist No. 3 here
Federalist No. 4 here
Federalist No. 5 here
Federalist No. 6 here
Federalist No. 7 here
Federalist No. 8 here
Federalist No. 9 here
Federalist No. 10 here
Federalist No. 11 here
Federalist No. 12 here
Federalist No. 13 here
Federalist No. 14 here
The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to Preserve the Union
For the Independent Journal.
Hamilton begins this paper with a brief summary of his points from previous writings. He admits that some of the issues may seem "tedious or irksome" but that knowledge of these subjects is necessary to resolve the dispute at hand with regards to the need for a federal government.
This paper deals with the insufficiency of the current confederation to preserve the union. Hamilton then asks why one would even need to consider that question as all seem to agree on the point, even the opponents of the Constitution.
It must in truth be acknowledged that, however these may differ in other respects, they in general appear to harmonize in this sentiment, at least, that there are material imperfections in our national system, and that something is necessary to be done to rescue us from impending anarchy. The facts that support this opinion are no longer objects of speculation. They have forced themselves upon the sensibility of the people at large, and have at length extorted from those, whose mistaken policy has had the principal share in precipitating the extremity at which we are arrived, a reluctant confession of the reality of those defects in the scheme of our federal government, which have been long pointed out and regretted by the intelligent friends of the Union.
In the next paragraphs, Hamilton then paints a dire picture of the state of the union. He says that the country is at "the last stage of national humiliation". The country was in debt to both citizens and foreign nations from the Revolutionary War - debts for which there was no method for payment. The United States had territory which was under the control of foreign nations and the country had no army nor government to assert its rights to this territory. Spain was prohibiting the navigation of the Mississippi River. The nation's commerce was almost nonexistent. Foreign governments did not respect the new nation. Out standing was so low that other countries did not feel the need to make treaties with us. US Ambassadors were treated as clowns. The value of land was artificially low, and in short the economy was a wreck.
To shorten an enumeration of particulars which can afford neither pleasure nor instruction, it may in general be demanded, what indication is there of national disorder, poverty, and insignificance that could befall a community so peculiarly blessed with natural advantages as we are, which does not form a part of the dark catalogue of our public misfortunes?
In other words, how did we get into this mess?
The answer, according to Hamilton, is that the forces that got us into that mess were the very ones advocating for the rejection of the Constitution. According to him, they, "not content with having conducted us to the brink of a precipice, seem resolved to plunge us into the abyss that awaits us below."
Ah, the more things change... Sounds much like the current Conservatives who think that no regulation of the financial sector and cutting taxes to nothing is the way out of the current economic crisis.
Hamilton provides wise counsel then and now - we must resist with every fiber of our being the notion that continuing the policies that got us there in the first place is the solution to the problems.
He then goes on to admit that there are problems with the current government - and says that everyone agrees to that fact. However, the opponents of the Constitution are against the very principles that would allow it to succeed.
While they admit that the government of the United States is destitute of energy, they contend against conferring upon it those powers which are requisite to supply that energy. They seem still to aim at things repugnant and irreconcilable; at an augmentation of federal authority, without a diminution of State authority; at sovereignty in the Union, and complete independence in the members.
Hamilton then states that the problems faced by the new nation are not the result of petty defects but are the result of fundamental flaws of the Confederation and only a change in the foundation of the government will remedy the current situation.
The principal flaw of the Confederation according to Hamilton is the impotence of the government to effectively enforce laws as a result of the inherent weak nature of the federal government under the Articles of Confederation.
The great and radical vice in the construction of the existing Confederation is in the principle of LEGISLATION for STATES or GOVERNMENTS, in their CORPORATE or COLLECTIVE CAPACITIES, and as contradistinguished from the INDIVIDUALS of which they consist. Though this principle does not run through all the powers delegated to the Union, yet it pervades and governs those on which the efficacy of the rest depends. Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States has an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either, by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America. The consequence of this is, that though in theory their resolutions concerning those objects are laws, constitutionally binding on the members of the Union, yet in practice they are mere recommendations which the States observe or disregard at their option.
He then states that it is irrational given the experiences with the current system that anyone could oppose the new Constitution. Hamilton says that the Confederation system is incompatible with the very notion of GOVERNMENT.
In the next paragraph Hamilton points out that there is a place for loose confederations amongst the states and even nations "for certain defined purposes precisely stated in a treaty regulating all the details of time, place, circumstance, and quantity; leaving nothing to future discretion; and depending for its execution on the good faith of the parties." He points out that such alliances existed throughout Europe, but didn't deliver what was hoped for in their formation. Creation of such confederations usually resulted in the creation of multiple alliances with conflicting goals that led to their dissolution shortly after they were formed "giving an instructive but afflicting lesson to mankind, how little dependence is to be placed on treaties which have no other sanction than the obligations of good faith, and which oppose general considerations of peace and justice to the impulse of any immediate interest or passion."
Hamilton proposes that if the States agreed that all are of equal standing, they would still be susceptible to all of the previously described vulnerabilities, but at least they would have abandoned the principles of a confederate government. However, under such a situation, the states would only be concerned with defense and offense resulting in the same loose alliances seen in Europe. Such a situation would arouse jealousies, suspicions and put the states at the mercy of foreign powers. The solution to such a situation is a strong federal government:
But if we are unwilling to be placed in this perilous situation; if we still will adhere to the design of a national government, or, which is the same thing, of a superintending power, under the direction of a common council, we must resolve to incorporate into our plan those ingredients which may be considered as forming the characteristic difference between a league and a government; we must extend the authority of the Union to the persons of the citizens, --the only proper objects of government.
This is perhaps the most important paragraph in the paper. The power of the government must be held by the CITIZENS as the only proper objects of government.
The power of government, according to Hamilton is in the making of laws. However, laws must have a penalty to have any real power. The enforcement of laws lies either through the courts (with respect to citizens) or through military force (with respect to states/nations). Hamilton says that in the case of a confederation, all disputes concerning laws would necessarily be remedied by the power of the sword. Such a situation Hamilton says, cannot be called a government and no rational person would make their happiness dependent on such a system.
Hamilton then revisits an idea from an earlier paper. It was thought that states would defer to the federal authority for the greater good of the nation. This was one of the arguments against the need for a federal government and the Constitution. However, Hamilton says that experience tells us otherwise. He then reiterates that human nature gives rise to factions.
It at all times betrayed an ignorance of the true springs by which human conduct is actuated, and belied the original inducements to the establishment of civil power. Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of men will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice, without constraint. Has it been found that bodies of men act with more rectitude or greater disinterestedness than individuals? The contrary of this has been inferred by all accurate observers of the conduct of mankind; and the inference is founded upon obvious reasons. Regard to reputation has a less active influence, when the infamy of a bad action is to be divided among a number than when it is to fall singly upon one. A spirit of faction, which is apt to mingle its poison in the deliberations of all bodies of men, will often hurry the persons of whom they are composed into improprieties and excesses, for which they would blush in a private capacity.
As if that weren't enough, there is the age old proverb of absolute power absolutely corrupts. Hamilton notes this conundrum of how power feeds upon itself and this is a threat to the nation.
From this spirit it happens, that in every political association which is formed upon the principle of uniting in a common interest a number of lesser sovereignties, there will be found a kind of eccentric tendency in the subordinate or inferior orbs, by the operation of which there will be a perpetual effort in each to fly off from the common centre. This tendency is not difficult to be accounted for. It has its origin in the love of power. Power controlled or abridged is almost always the rival and enemy of that power by which it is controlled or abridged.
It is then foolish to expect that ruling members of a faction within a confederacy will subvert their own interests to the general welfare. The so-called "rulers" of factions within a confederacy will then take the power to judge issues for themselves sometime without regard to the general will of the people. Such a system is doomed to produce agreement. In the young nation, it would require the agreement of the factions within all 13 states to produce resolution to issues. Hamilton then says that anyone who has participated in such proceedings of popular assemblies realizes what a difficult task this is.
He then closes by stating that the current sorry state of affairs is exactly the result of such a system - 13 states are required to "execute every important measure that proceeds from the Union." The results are as stated at the beginning of the paper - a state of national humiliation.
The causes which have been specified produced at first only unequal and disproportionate degrees of compliance with the requisitions of the Union. The greater deficiencies of some States furnished the pretext of example and the temptation of interest to the complying, or to the least delinquent States. Why should we do more in proportion than those who are embarked with us in the same political voyage? Why should we consent to bear more than our proper share of the common burden? These were suggestions which human selfishness could not withstand, and which even speculative men, who looked forward to remote consequences, could not, without hesitation, combat. Each State, yielding to the persuasive voice of immediate interest or convenience, has successively withdrawn its support, till the frail and tottering edifice seems ready to fall upon our heads, and to crush us beneath its ruins.
The problem is that human nature puts self-interest above that of the general good.