-Caveat Lector-

Concerning the Militia


FEDERALIST PAPERS

Federalist No. 29

>From the Daily Advertiser.
Thursday, January 10, 1788


Author: Alexander Hamilton

To the People of the State of New York:

THE power of regulating the militia, and of commanding its services in times
of insurrection and invasion are natural incidents to the duties of
superintending the common defense, and of watching over the internal peace of
the Confederacy.

It requires no skill in the science of war to discern that uniformity in the
organization and discipline of the militia would be attended with the most
beneficial effects, whenever they were called into service for the public
defense. It would enable them to discharge the duties of the camp and of the
field with mutual intelligence and concert an advantage of peculiar moment in
the operations of an army; and it would fit them much sooner to acquire the
degree of proficiency in military functions which would be essential to their
usefulness. This desirable uniformity can only be accomplished by confiding
the regulation of the militia to the direction of the national authority. It
is, therefore, with the most evident propriety, that the plan of the
convention proposes to empower the Union ``to provide for organizing, arming,
and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be
employed in the service of the United States, RESERVING TO THE STATES
RESPECTIVELY THE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS, AND THE AUTHORITY OF TRAINING
THE MILITIA ACCORDING TO THE DISCIPLINE PRESCRIBED BY CONGRESS.''

Of the different grounds which have been taken in opposition to the plan of
the convention, there is none that was so little to have been expected, or is
so untenable in itself, as the one from which this particular provision has
been attacked. If a well-regulated militia be the most natural defense of a
free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the
disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national
security. If standing armies are dangerous to liberty, an efficacious power
over the militia, in the body to whose care the protection of the State is
committed, ought, as far as possible, to take away the inducement and the
pretext to such unfriendly institutions. If the federal government can command
the aid of the militia in those emergencies which call for the military arm in
support of the civil magistrate, it can the better dispense with the
employment of a different kind of force. If it cannot avail itself of the
former, it will be obliged to recur to the latter. To render an army
unnecessary, will be a more certain method of preventing its existence than a
thousand prohibitions upon paper.

In order to cast an odium upon the power of calling forth the militia to
execute the laws of the Union, it has been remarked that there is nowhere any
provision in the proposed Constitution for calling out the POSSE COMITATUS, to
assist the magistrate in the execution of his duty, whence it has been
inferred, that military force was intended to be his only auxiliary. There is
a striking incoherence in the objections which have appeared, and sometimes
even from the same quarter, not much calculated to inspire a very favorable
opinion of the sincerity or fair dealing of their authors. The same persons
who tell us in one breath, that the powers of the federal government will be
despotic and unlimited, inform us in the next, that it has not authority
sufficient even to call out the POSSE
COMITATUS. The latter, fortunately, is as much short of the truth as the
former exceeds it. It would be as absurd to doubt, that a right to pass all
laws NECESSARY AND PROPER to execute its declared powers, would include that
of requiring the assistance of the citizens to the officers who may be
intrusted with the execution of those laws, as it would be to believe, that a
right to enact laws necessary and proper for the imposition and collection of
taxes would involve that of varying the rules of descent and of the alienation
of landed property, or of abolishing the trial by jury in cases relating to
it. It being therefore evident that the supposition of a want of power to
require the aid of the POSSE COMITATUS is entirely destitute of color, it will
follow, that the conclusion which has been drawn from it, in its application
to the authority of the federal government over the militia, is as uncandid as
it is illogical. What reason could there be to infer, that force was intended
to be the sole instrument of authority, merely because there is a power to
make use of
it when necessary? What shall we think of the motives which could induce men
of sense to reason in this manner? How shall we prevent a conflict between
charity and judgment?

By a curious refinement upon the spirit of republican jealousy, we are even
taught to apprehend danger from the militia itself, in the hands of the
federal government. It is observed that select corps may be formed, composed
of the young and ardent, who may be rendered subservient to the views of
arbitrary power. What plan for the regulation of the militia may be pursued by
the national government, is impossible to be foreseen. But so far from viewing
the matter in the same light with those who object to select corps as
dangerous, were the Constitution ratified, and were I to deliver my sentiments
to a member of the federal legislature from this State on the subject of a
militia establishment, I should hold to him, in substance, the following
discourse:

``The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as
futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into
execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that
requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice
for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the
other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going
through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to
acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of
a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a
serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from
the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the
present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense
of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would
abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be
unwise: and the
experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured.
Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large,
than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this
be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the
course of a year.

``But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as
mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that
a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper
establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought
particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate
extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of
need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an
excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the
defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for
military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the
government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable
to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens,
little, if at all, inferior to them in
discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and
those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that
can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it,
if it should exist.''

Thus differently from the adversaries of the proposed Constitution should I
reason on the same subject, deducing arguments of safety from the very sources
which they represent as fraught with danger and perdition. But how the
national legislature may reason on the point, is a thing which neither they
nor I can foresee.

There is something so far-fetched and so extravagant in the idea of danger to
liberty from the militia, that one is at a loss whether to treat it with
gravity or with raillery; whether to consider it as a mere trial of skill,
like the paradoxes of rhetoricians; as a disingenuous artifice to instil
prejudices at any price; or as the serious offspring of political fanaticism.
Where in the name of common-sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust
our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow-citizens? What shadow of
danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their
countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments,
habits and interests? What reasonable cause of apprehension can be inferred
from a power in the Union to prescribe regulations for the militia, and to
command its services when necessary, while the particular States are to have
the SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE APPOINTMENT OF THE OFFICERS? If it were possible
seriously to indulge a jealousy of the militia upon any conceivable
establishment under the federal government, the circumstance of the officers
being in the appointment of the States ought at once to extinguish it. There
can be no doubt that this circumstance will always secure to them a
preponderating influence over the militia.

In reading many of the publications against the Constitution, a man is apt to
imagine that he is perusing some ill-written tale or romance, which instead of
natural and agreeable images, exhibits to the mind nothing but frightful and
distorted shapes ``Gorgons, hydras, and chimeras dire''; discoloring and
disfiguring whatever it represents, and transforming everything it touches
into a monster.

A sample of this is to be observed in the exaggerated and improbable
suggestions which have taken place respecting the power of calling for the
services of the militia. That of New Hampshire is to be marched to Georgia, of
Georgia to New Hampshire, of New York to Kentucky, and of Kentucky to Lake
Champlain. Nay, the debts due to the French and Dutch are to be paid in
militiamen instead of louis d'ors and ducats. At one moment there is to be a
large army to lay prostrate the liberties of the people; at another moment the
militia of Virginia are to be dragged from their homes five or six hundred
miles, to tame the republican contumacy of
Massachusetts; and that of Massachusetts is to be transported an equal
distance to subdue the refractory haughtiness of the aristocratic Virginians.
Do the persons who rave at this rate imagine that their art or their eloquence
can impose any conceits or absurdities upon the people of America for
infallible truths?

If there should be an army to be made use of as the engine of despotism, what
need of the militia? If there should be no army, whither would the militia,
irritated by being called upon to undertake a distant and hopeless expedition,
for the purpose of riveting the chains of slavery upon a part of their
countrymen, direct their course, but to the seat of the tyrants, who had
meditated so foolish as well as so wicked a project, to crush them in their
imagined intrenchments of power, and to make them an example of the just
vengeance of an abused and incensed people? Is this the way in which usurpers
stride to dominion over a numerous and enlightened nation? Do they begin by
exciting the detestation of the very instruments of their intended
usurpations? Do they usually commence their career by wanton and disgustful
acts of power, calculated to answer no end, but to draw upon themselves
universal hatred and execration? Are
suppositions of this sort the sober admonitions of discerning patriots to a
discerning people? Or are they the inflammatory ravings of incendiaries or
distempered enthusiasts? If we were even to suppose the national rulers
actuated by the most ungovernable ambition, it is impossible to believe that
they would employ such preposterous means to accomplish their designs.

In times of insurrection, or invasion, it would be natural and proper that the
militia of a neighboring State should be marched into another, to resist a
common enemy, or to guard the republic against the violence of faction or
sedition. This was frequently the case, in respect to the first object, in the
course of the late war; and this mutual succor is, indeed, a principal end of
our political association. If the power of affording it be placed under the
direction of the Union, there will be no danger of a supine and listless
inattention to the dangers of a neighbor, till its near aoproach had
superadded the incitements of selfpreservation to the too feeble impulses of
duty and sympathy.

PUBLIUS.


=================================
Robert F. Tatman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remove "nospam" from the address to reply.

NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed 
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included 
information for research and educational purposes. For
more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

POSTING THIS MESSAGE TO THE INTERNET DOES NOT IMPLY PERMISSION TO SEND UNSOLICITED 
COMMERCIAL E-MAIL (SPAM) TO THIS OR ANY OTHER INTERNET ADDRESS. RECEIPT OF SPAM WILL 
RESULT IN IMMEDIATE NOTIFICATION OF THE SENDER'S ISP.

____________________________________________________________________
More than just email--Get your FREE Netscape WebMail account today at 
http://home.netscape.com/netcenter/mail

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to