Federalist No. 23

Federalist No. 23
Alexander Hamilton, author of Federalist No. 23

Author	Alexander Hamilton
Original title	The Necessity of a Government as Energetic as the One Proposed to the Preservation of the Union
Country	United States
Language	English
Series	The Federalist
Publisher	New York Packet
Publication date	December 18, 1787
Media type	Newspaper
Preceded by	Federalist No. 22
Followed by	Federalist No. 24

Federalist No. 23, titled "The Necessity of a Government as Energetic as the One Proposed to the Preservation of the Union", is a political essay written by Alexander Hamilton and the twenty-third of The Federalist Papers. It was first published in New York newspapers on December 18, 1787, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist Papers were published. This entry shifted the focus of the series, beginning an extended analysis of the proposed constitution and its provisions regarding commerce and national defense.

Federalist No. 23 argued against all forms of restriction on the federal government's ability to raise armies. It proposed that any federal government without the power to raise armies would not be able to fulfill its purpose. The unforeseeable nature of threats require the ability for the government to respond. A centralized means of defense is more effective than entrusting individual states with national defense. Since the publication of Federalist No. 23 and the ratification of the U. S. Constitution, the federal government of the United States has expanded significantly in scope, and the debate over governmental power regarding national defense has persisted throughout American history.

Summary

Publius identifies the principal purposes of the federal government as the common defense, preservation of peace, regulation of commerce, and foreign affairs. He argued that the ability of the government to raise armies and navies should not be restrained. Circumstances that demand the military are unforeseeable and those who are tasked with ends of national defense must be given the proper means to carry out those ends. No limitations should be placed on the government's power to fulfill this responsibility. Publius argued that under the Articles of Confederation the Congress had "an unlimited discretion to make requisitions of men and money; to govern the army and navy; to direct their operations." While their requisitions were constitutionally binding and the presumption was that the states would would act in good faith to fulfill this responsibility, it did not work. He called this expectation "ill-founded and illusory." He called for a change in approach to replace the system of quotas and requisitions. Instead, he argued that the "Government of the Union" should have the power to raise funds from the people to raise armies and navies. The federal government must have the power commensurate with its duty for national defense.

Publius argued that it is inconsistent to give the federal government responsibility for the national defense while the effective power resides with the states. He called the lack of cooperation within this system an "infallible consequence." It only led to weakness and disorder. He went on to argue that there are benefits to empowering the federal government regarding defense. It allows a centralized organization and defends the entire nation rather than individual states. He took on the anti-Federalists who opposed a strong central government. He thought that in their opposition it would have been better if they had claimed that the proposed government under the new constitution was unworthy of the peoples' confidence rather than engaging in what he called "inflammatory declarations." His argument largely rested on his claim that it is inconsistent to give the federal government the responsibility for defense but to give the state governments the means to fund the nation's defense. Publius concluded by warning that the arguments of the anti-Federalists would simply repeat the problems of the current system (of the Articles of Confederation.) He believed that if the Constitution did not provide the federal government with the means necessary to defend the country it wwould remain unable to fulfill its purpose.

Background and publication

Federalist No. 23 was written by Alexander Hamilton. Following the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Hamilton together with James Madison and John Jay wrote a series of essays to explain the provisions of the Constitution of the United States and persuade New York to ratify it. They published these essays in New York newspapers under the shared pseudonym Publius. It was first published in the New-York Journal and the Independent Journal on December 18, 1787. It was then published in the Daily Advertiser and the New-York Packet on December 19. By the time The Federalist Papers were written, North America had been in a state of perpetual conflict for hundreds of years, including the American Indian Wars, the French and Indian War, and the American Revolutionary War, making national security a major concern for the United States.

Analysis

Federalist No. 23 provided a review of the first 22 essays of The Federalist Papers explaining the nature of the arguments that would follow. While the previous essays argued that the Articles of Confederation were insufficient, Federalist No. 23 shifted focus to the potential benefits of the proposed constitution.

Hamilton considered four issues to be the "principal purposes" for forming a federal government: national defense, internal security, regulation of commerce, and foreign relations. He concerned himself with practical considerations over theoretical ones, arguing against any restriction on governmental power that might prevent it from fulfilling these purposes. Hamilton believed that this power should be unrestrained because the types of threats that a nation may face are unpredictable and that the United States would need the ability to adapt its defense to respond to unforeseen challenges.

Hamilton's approach argued that political power should be allocated by the ends it is meant to achieve rather than simply as enumerated powers, and that the restrictions desired by the Anti-Federalists, who were concerned about a federal government that would overpower the states, would deprive the government of the means it needed to achieve the stated ends. Hamilton's position in Federalist No. 23 deviated from the view of enumerated powers that the constitution that previous essays in The Federalist Papers championed. His position would be somewhat ameliorated by the adoption of Bill of Rights, which upon its enactment codified specific powers that the federal government did not have.

Compared to the earlier essays, Hamilton took a stronger stance on federal powers on defense in Federalist No. 23. While The Federalist Papers had previously argued in favor of separation of powers and limited government, Hamilton used this essay to argue that in the area of national defense there should be no constitutional restrictions on the government's ability to fulfill its obligations. These powers were to include not only defense but the power of taxation in order to fund it. Hamilton underscored the seriousness of the matter by writing it in all caps and boldface.

Hamilton's insistence that the federal government, as the body charged with overseeing the nation's defense, should also be the body that has the means to exercise that power, was a reaction to the failures of the system of the existing confederation. Hamilton believed that of the failure of shared power under the prevailing system argued the need for central control of defense. He believed that over time, the federal government would naturally become more powerful than local governments. Hamilton disagreed with the notion that the United States should try to invent some new form of government. Instead, it should utilize the traditional means that were already proven. The arguments in Federalist No. 23 invoked the ideas of Thomas Hobbes, arguing that the government must be given as much power as is necessary to carry out its duties.

Legacy

In the next 13 essays of The Federalist Papers, Nos. 24–36, Hamilton detailed the military and economic powers that he described in Federalist No. 23 and justified their use. In Federalist No. 34, Hamilton revisited his argument against restraining the government's defensive powers.

Brutus quoted Federalist No. 23 in his sixth entry of the Anti-Federalist Papers to prove that some federalists admit to the unrestrained power of the government under the proposed constitution. However, he altered the quotation of Hamilton's words, changing the conditional "if" to the declarative "that.". Political philosopher Michael Zuckert described Federalist No. 23 as "one of the most probing discussions of constitutionalism in the history of political thought.".

Since the ratification of the constitution, the role of the federal government has expanded significantly in scope. By the end of the nineteenth century, a civil service was established to regulate the exercise of government powers, and the federal government absorbed many responsibilities of state governments during the Great Depression in the 1930s. The extent of governmental power to ensure security has remained a major issue throughout American history, including defense from the United Kingdom in the War of 1812, continued conflict in the American Indian Wars, the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, the threat of nuclear warfare during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and national security measures in response to the September 11 attacks among others.

Federalist No. 23 has been cited by several Supreme Court justices, including Hugo Black in United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Ass'n (1944), Harold H. Burton in Lichter v. United States (1948), Charles Evans Whittaker in Kinsella v. United States (1960), William Rehnquist in Solorio v. United States (1988), and John Paul Stevens in Perpich v. Department of Defense (1990).

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Barber, Sotirios A. "Judicial Review and 'The Federalist'." The University of Chicago Law Review 55(3) (1988): 836–887. Retrieved April 24, 2026.
• Durchslag, Melvyn R. "The Supreme Court and the Federalist Papers: Is There Less Here Than Meets the Eye?" William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal 14:1 (2005): 336–337, 342.
• Edling, Max M. "A Vigorous National Government": Hamilton on Security, War, and Revenue," in The Cambridge Companion to the Federalist Papers, edited by Jack N. Rakove and Colleen A. Sheehan. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2020. ISBN 978-1316501849. Retrieved April 24, 2026.
• Epstein, David F. The Political Theory of The Federalist. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2007. ISBN 978-0226213002. Retrieved April 24, 2026.
• Levinson, Sanford. An Argument Open to All: Reading “The Federalist” in the 21st Century. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2015. ISBN 978-0300199598
• Millican, Edward. One United People: The Federalist Papers and the National Idea. Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 2014. ISBN 978-0813160337
• Newcomer, Kathryn E., and James Edwin Kee. "Federalist No. 23: Can the Leviathan Be Managed?" Public Administration Review 71 (2011): S37–S46.
• Potter, Kathleen O. The Federalist's Vision of Popular Sovereignty in the New American Republic. New York, NY: LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2002. ISBN 978-1931202442
• Scott, Kyle. The Federalist Papers: A Reader's Guide. London, U.K.: A&C Black, 2013. ISBN 1441185860
• Zuckert, Michael. “The Federalist's New Federalism” in The Cambridge Companion to the Federalist Papers. edited by Jack N. Rakove and Colleen A. Sheehan. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2020. ISBN 978-1107136397

External links

All links retrieved April 16, 2026.

• Full text of Federalist No. 23 Avalon Project
• "Federalist Essays in Historic Newspapers" U. S. Library of Congress.
• "Federalist Papers: Primary Documents in American History,' U. S. Library of Congress.
• The Federalist (Dawson)/23 Wikisource

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

• Federalist No. 23  ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

• History of "Federalist No. 23"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.