It is probably the longest one yet encountered so the opposition to the subject must have been considerable. He Picks up the discussion from the fourth paragraph of the last paper. Being attentive to the judgment of other nations will ensure that our plans are perceived as wise and honorable policy and if debate on internal policy is unresolved, the opinions of impartial nations might be a prudent guide to follow. He now departs from the discussion of the circumstances that necessitate a well-constructed senate to provide a few additional reasons to have a cool and deliberate body of government.
History tells us that there were no long lived republics that did not have a senate. Only Sparta, Rome, and Carthage fit that characteristic of having a senate and a long life. This demonstrates that it is necessary to have some institution that will blend stability with liberty. Having this second body dissimilar from another will protect the people better than having the whole legislative trust in the hands of one body of men who may betray the people.
Returning to the main question of whether the senate will transform itself into a tyrannical aristocracy, he gives several examples of senates designed similarly to the federal proposal that have shown no such tendency. The first is Maryland with a senate very much like the federal senate.
Then the British example where the senate instead of being elected for six years is actually an hereditary assembly of opulent nobles and the house is elected for seven years by a small portion of the population.
Here we should have seen the aristocratic usurpation and tyranny but instead the senate has barely been able to defend itself against the encroachments of the house elected by the people.
The American people, "after an unequivocal experience of the inefficacy of the subsisting Federal Government," were not being called on to consider the adoption of an entirely new United States constitution, a subject of paramount importance.
Anticipating sharp criticism of the proposed constitution, and active opposition to it, Hamilton grouped dissidents into several categories. There were those constitutionally opposed to any change, no matter what. There were those who feared that a change might cost them their jobs.
There were those who liked to fish in troubled waters. The largest body consisted of men of "upright intentions" whose opposition arose "from sources, blameless at least, if not respectable, the honest errors of minds led astray by preconceived jealousies and fears. The debate on both sides should be conducted with moderation, for "nothing could be more ill judged than that intolerant spirit, which has, at all times, characterised political parties.
Hamilton then clearly outlined what was going to be discussed in succeeding essays, particularly the "utility of Union. The most interesting thing here is Hamilton's analysis of the groups opposing the proposed constitution.
There were those congenitally opposed to any change, no matter what. There were those who feared losing status and their jobs under a new arrangement. There were those who always liked to fish in troubled waters, hoping to come up with something. No one denied any of this. But Hamilton was on more questionable and highly dubious ground when he characterized the main opposition as a lot of well-intentioned men, "blameless at least, if not respectable," who had been led astray "by preconceived jealousies and fears.
Having blasted the opposition as ignorant, self-seeking, or wrong-headed, Hamilton urged that the debate be conducted with "moderation.
The Federalist Papers study guide contains a biography of Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison, literature essays, a complete e-text, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.
Federalist #10 is Madison’s first essay in The healtlife.tk contains 23 paragraphs. The “violence of faction” is the “mortal disease” of popular governments.
Summary & Analysis of Federalist #10 Summary: Madison begins perhaps the most famous of the Federalist papers by stating that one of the strongest arguments in favor of the Constitution is the fact that it establishes a government capable of controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. Exclusive Summary and Analysis of the Federalist Paper Number 10 Madison's Paper No. 10 of the Federalist Papers was formulated to defend the proposition of the constitution, which advocated the formation of a Republican government.
Federalist Paper 10 is one of the most popular and recognizable of the collection. It is one of history's most highly praised pieces of American political writing. The paper itself was written by. Get free homework help on The Federalist: book summary, chapter summary and analysis and original text, quotes, essays, and character analysis courtesy of CliffsNotes. First published in , The Federalist is a collection of 85 newspaper articles, written by the mysterious Publius, that argued swift ratification of the U.S. Constitution.