The Federalist No. 2 - Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence

Federalist No. 2

Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence

Author: John JayTo the People of the State of New York:

When the people of America consider that they are now called upon to decide a question which, in its consequences, must prove to be one of the most important that has ever engaged their attention, it becomes evident that they should take a very comprehensive and serious view of it.

Nothing is more certain than the indispensable necessity of government, and it is equally undeniable that whenever and however it is established, the people must give up some of their natural rights to it in order to grant it the necessary powers. It is therefore well worth considering whether it would better serve the interests of the people of America to be, for all general purposes, one nation under one federal government, or to divide themselves into separate confederacies and give to the head of each the same kind of powers they are advised to place in one national government.

Until lately, it has been a widely accepted and unchallenged opinion that the prosperity of the people of America depended on their remaining firmly united, and the wishes, prayers, and efforts of our best and wisest citizens have consistently been directed toward that goal. But now, politicians have appeared who insist that this opinion is mistaken, and that instead of seeking safety and happiness in union, we ought to find it in a division of the states into distinct confederacies or sovereignties. However extraordinary this new doctrine may seem, it nonetheless has its advocates; and certain individuals who were much opposed to it in the past are now among their number. Whatever the arguments or motivations that have brought about this change in the sentiments and declarations of these gentlemen, it certainly would not be wise for the people at large to adopt these new political beliefs without being fully convinced that they are founded in truth and sound policy.

It has often given me pleasure to observe that independent America is not composed of detached and distant territories, but that one connected, fertile, widespread country is the portion of our western sons of liberty. Providence has particularly blessed it with a variety of soils and productions and watered it with innumerable streams for the delight and accommodation of its inhabitants. A succession of navigable waters forms a kind of chain around its borders, as if to bind it together; while some of the most noble rivers in the world, running at convenient distances, present them with highways for the easy communication of friendly assistance and the mutual transportation and exchange of their various commodities.

With equal pleasure, I have often noticed that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people—a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsel, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.

This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence that an inheritance so suitable and convenient for a band of brothers, united by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties.

Similar sentiments have prevailed among all groups and denominations of people among us until now. For all general purposes, we have uniformly been one people, each individual citizen everywhere enjoying the same national rights, privileges, and protection. As a nation, we have made peace and war; as a nation, we have vanquished our common enemies; as a nation, we have formed alliances, made treaties, and entered into various agreements and conventions with foreign states.

A strong sense of the value and blessings of union led the people, at a very early period, to establish a federal government to preserve and perpetuate it. They formed it almost as soon as they had a political existence; indeed, at a time when their homes were in flames, when many of their citizens were bleeding, and when the progress of hostility and destruction left little room for the calm and mature inquiries and reflections that must always precede the formation of a wise and well-balanced government for a free people. It is not surprising that a government established in such unfavorable times should, upon experience, be found greatly deficient and inadequate to the purpose it was intended to serve.

This intelligent people perceived and regretted these defects. Still remaining as committed to union as they were enamored with liberty, they observed the danger that immediately threatened the former and more remotely the latter; and being persuaded that ample security for both could only be found in a national government more wisely designed, they, as with one voice, convened the recent convention in Philadelphia to take that important subject under consideration.

This convention, composed of men who possessed the confidence of the people and many of whom had become highly distinguished by their patriotism, virtue, and wisdom in times that tested the minds and hearts of men, undertook the arduous task. In the peaceful season, with minds unoccupied by other subjects, they spent many months in calm, uninterrupted, and daily consultation; and finally, without being intimidated by power or influenced by any passions except love for their country, they presented and recommended to the people the plan produced by their joint and nearly unanimous deliberations.

Admit, for it is the fact, that this plan is only recommended, not imposed; yet let it be remembered that it is neither recommended for blind approval nor blind rejection, but for that calm and candid consideration which the magnitude and importance of the subject demand and which it certainly ought to receive. But this (as was remarked in the previous number of this paper) is more to be wished for than expected—that it may be so considered and examined. Experience on a former occasion teaches us not to be too hopeful in such expectations. It is not yet forgotten that well-founded fears of imminent danger led the people of America to form the memorable Congress of 1774. That body recommended certain measures to their constituents, and the outcome proved their wisdom; yet it is fresh in our memories how soon the press began to fill with pamphlets and weekly papers against those very measures. Not only many of the government officers, who followed the dictates of personal interest, but others, from a mistaken estimate of consequences or the undue influence of former attachments, or whose ambition aimed at objectives that did not align with the public good, were tireless in their efforts to persuade the people to reject the advice of that patriotic Congress. Many, indeed, were deceived and misled, but the great majority of the people reasoned and decided wisely; and they are happy in reflecting that they did so.

They considered that the Congress was composed of many wise and experienced men; that, being convened from different parts of the country, they brought with them and shared a variety of useful information; that, during the time they spent together in inquiring into and discussing the true interests of their country, they must have acquired very accurate knowledge on that matter; that they were individually interested in the public liberty and prosperity, and therefore it was not less their inclination than their duty to recommend only such measures as, after the most careful deliberation, they genuinely thought prudent and advisable.

These and similar considerations then led the people to rely greatly on the judgment and integrity of the Congress; and they took their advice, despite the various tactics and efforts used to deter them from it. But if the people at large had reason to trust in the men of that Congress, few of whom had been fully tested or generally known, they have even greater reason now to respect the judgment and advice of the convention, for it is well known that some of the most distinguished members of that Congress, who have since been tested and justly approved for patriotism and abilities, and who have grown old in acquiring political knowledge, were also members of this convention and brought into it their accumulated knowledge and experience.

It is noteworthy that not only the first but every succeeding Congress, as well as the recent convention, have invariably agreed with the people in thinking that the prosperity of America depended on its Union. Preserving and perpetuating it was the great objective of the people in forming that convention, and it is also the great objective of the plan which the convention has advised them to adopt. With what justification, therefore, or for what good purposes, are attempts being made at this particular time by some men to diminish the importance of the Union? Or why is it suggested that three or four confederacies would be better than one? I am convinced in my own mind that the people have always thought correctly on this subject, and that their universal and consistent attachment to the cause of the Union rests on significant and weighty reasons, which I shall endeavor to develop and explain in some upcoming papers. Those who promote the idea of substituting a number of distinct confederacies in place of the plan of the convention seem clearly to foresee that its rejection would put the continuance of the Union in the utmost danger. That certainly would be the case, and I sincerely wish it may be as clearly foreseen by every good citizen that whenever the dissolution of the Union arrives, America will have reason to exclaim, in the words of the poet: “Farewell! A long farewell to all my greatness.”

PUBLIUS