The Federalist Papers - Alexander Hamilton [0]
* The League of Cambray, comprehending the Emperor, the King of France, the King of Aragon, and most of the Italian princes and states.
† The Duke of Marlborough.
*Vide Principes des Négociations par l’Abbé de Mably.
* Divide and command.
* This objection will be fully examined in its proper place, and it will be shown that the only rational 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.
*Spirit of Laws, Vol. I., Book IX., Chap. I.
* "Recherches philosophiques sur les Américains."
* "I mean for the Union."
* This was but another name more specious for the independence of the members on the federal head.
*Pfeffel, "Nouvel Abrég. Chronol. de l’Hist., etc., d’Allemagne," says the pretext was to indemnify himself for the expense of the expedition.
* Aspasia, vide Plutarch’s Life of Pericles.
* This, as nearly as I can recollect, was the sense of his speech in introducing the last bill.
†Encyclopedia article "Empire."
* 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.
* Add New York and Connecticut to the foregoing seven, and they will be less than a majority.
* This statement of the matter is taken from the printed collections 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 authority of the legislature. New York has no bill of her 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.
* 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.
* Its full efficacy will be examined hereafter.
* The New England States.
* Connecticut and Rhode Island.
* Declaration of Independence.
†Ibid.
* Burgh’s Political Disquisitions.
* 1st clause, 4th section, of the 1st article.
* Particularly in the Southern States and in this State.
* In that of New Jersey, also, the final judiciary authority is in a branch of the legislature. In New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina, one branch of the legislature is the court for the trial of impeachments.
* See CATO, No. V.
† Article 1, Section 3, Clause 1.
*Vide Federal Farmer.
* A writer in a Pennsylvania paper, under the signature of T AMONY, has asserted that the king of Great Britain owes his prerogative as commander-in-chief to an annual mutiny bill. The truth is, on the contrary, that his prerogative in this respect is immemorial, and was only disputed "contrary to all reason and precedent," as Blackstone, vol. I, page 262, expresses it, by the Long Parliament of Charles I; but by the statute the 13th of Charles II, chap. 6, it was declared to be in the king alone, for that the sole supreme government and command of the militia within his Majesty’s realms and dominions, and of all forces by sea and land, and of all forts