The Federalist Papers - Alexander Hamilton [4]
In fact, Publius quickly became accepted as the best guide not only to how the framers had understood the Constitution when they wrote it, but also to how the people of the United States had understood the Constitution when they ratified it. Thomas Jefferson described The Federalist in 1788 as "the best commentary on the principles of government, which ever was written." In 1825, he recommended it as an authority on the "distinctive principles" of the governments of Virginia and the United States, second in importance only to the Declaration of Independence. Writing then almost forty years after its first publication, Jefferson endorsed The Federalist as "an authority to which appeal is habitually made by all, and rarely declined or denied by any as evidence of the general opinion of those who framed, and of those who accepted the Constitution of the United States, on questions as to its genuine meaning." In this case, in fact, he recommended The Federalist as a guide to the Constitution without bothering to recommend the Constitution itself!6 Little wonder, then, that the political scientist Clinton Rossiter, writing in 1961, acknowledged The Federalist as "the most important work in political science that has ever been written, or is likely ever to be written, in the United States. It is, indeed, the one product of the American mind that is rightly counted among the classics of political theory."
Yoked together then as "Publius," Hamilton and Madison were encouraged not only to downplay their sense of the Constitution’s inadequacies, but to review in a new light the Constitution as a whole and to construct the strongest possible argument on its behalf, stretching "the chance of good to be expected from the plan" (Hamilton’s words) into an account of the consistent good that would result from it—if only it were properly understood and administered.7
The Federalist appeared in New York newspapers beginning on October 27, 1787. Addressed "To the People of the State of New York"—the popular salutation reflected the fact that the state legislature had decreed universal male suffrage for the election to the state ratifying convention, whereas voting for state offices had property qualifications attached—the first essay joined a debate already in progress. Hamilton had himself published two letters in July and September attacking Governor George Clinton, the leader of the state’s Anti-Federalists. Essays by the Anti-Federalist writer "Cato" had begun appearing on September 27, followed by the first of the powerful Anti-Federalist "Brutus" papers on October 18. Probably disappointed with the rather petulant tone of his own letters, and impressed with the seriousness of these new Anti-Federalist sallies, Hamilton resolved to launch a new, extensive series of essays under a pen name and with the help of collaborators.8
As a title for the series, The Federalist stole a march on its opponents by claiming the good name of federalism for the new Constitution and its supporters. This usage was not novel, for those who earlier in the 1780s had wanted to strengthen the powers of the federal Congress established by the Articles of Confederation had often called themselves "federalists" and their opponents "antifederalists." Still, the Constitution’s opponents—now the defenders of the Articles of Confederation against the much stronger central government proffered in the Constitution—thought themselves entitled to be called "federalists." After all, they were advocates of loose con-federal government, and (as they saw it) the Constitution’s supporters were pushing consolidated or centralized government. Hamilton beat them to it, however, and