Federalist No. 26

Federalist No. 26
Alexander Hamilton, author of Federalist No. 26

Author	Alexander Hamilton
Language	English
Series	The Federalist
Publisher	The Independent Journal
Publication date	December 22, 1787
Media type	Newspaper
Preceded by	Federalist No. 25
Followed by	Federalist No. 27

Federalist No. 26, titled "The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered", is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton, the twenty-sixth of the The Federalist Papers. It was published on December 22, 1787, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. Federalist No. 26 expands upon the arguments of a federal military Hamilton made in No. 24 and No. 25, and continued in No. 27 and No. 28.

Federalist No. 26 addresses the power of the legislature to maintain a standing army during peacetime, making an argument in favor of the constitution's provisions regulating this power and criticizing anti-federalists who opposed granting this power to Congress. These arguments reflect Hamilton's views of creating a stronger central government than had been the case under the Articles of Confederation. He rejected the criticism of the anti-federalists that government power necessarily constrains civil liberties. The arguments surrounding legislative power over the military would go on to influence the Second and Third amendments to the constitution. Legislative maintenance of a standing army has since become standard practice in the United States.

Summary

Hamilton addressed the issue of "the boundary power and privilege," arguing that strong government and private rights can exist together. He describes the legislature's power over the military as one such example, describing the importance of this power and explaining why he believes the representative government is able to prevent a military coup. He cites historical precedent for his proposed system by describing how the English Bill of Rights 1689 empowered the Parliament of England to regulate peacetime armies. He also criticizes North Carolina and Pennsylvania for provisions in their constitutions that discourage but do not prohibit standing armies in peacetime.

Hamilton expressed support instead for the proposed restriction in the new constitution. The legislature would be required to renew or abolish the army every two years. He considered the political process and challenge by the opposition, as well as that of the state governments, to be a sufficient check on the standing army. He also rebutted the concern that the military could be used in a coup, arguing that military plots require time to develop and are impossible to keep secret. Party control over the government would allow for plots to be broken or for the government to be reformed. He concluded that the states will be easier to defend as a united government rather than as separate states.

Background and publication

Federalist No. 26 was written by Alexander Hamilton. Following the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Hamilton worked with James Madison and John Jay to write 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 first appeared in the Independent Journal on December 22, 1787, followed by the Daily Advertiser on December 24, and the New-York Journal and the New-York Packet on December 25. Federalist No. 26 continued the discussion of a standing army during peacetime that Hamilton began in No. 24 and No. 25 of the Federalist Papers. While No. 24 argued for the benefits of such an army and No. 25 argued that a federal standing army is superior to state armies, No. 26 argued against restricting the federal government's power to create such an army.

The debate over a standing army in peacetime had existed since the English Bill of Rights 1689 following the Glorious Revolution that effectively made the Kingdom of England a constitutional monarchy, in part by transferring power over peacetime armies to the British Parliament. The proposed constitution emulated the British system by empowering the legislature to authorize funding of the military every two years. Hamilton's defense of a peacetime army under congressional regulation drew from political philosophy and from the experiences of the American Revolution. Opponents of a standing military during peacetime feared a reprisal of the military subjugation of state governments and American civilians that had occurred under the colonial rule of the British.

Analysis

Federalist No. 26 takes up again the concern over national defense. The anti-federalists argued against allowing a standing army during peacetime under the control of the national legislature. He believed that restricting the legislature's ability to provide for defense was based on "a zeal for liberty more ardent than enlightened." Based on the recent experience, he expressed the concern that liberty had been given too much emphasis in the American Revolution. He argued that "greater energy of Government is essential to the welfare and prosperity of the community." Imbuing the federal government with too few powers made it impotent, concerns that were shared by fellow Federalist Papers authors James Madison and John Jay. It was the central failing of the Articles of Confederation that the new Constitution sought to replace.

The English example removed the power of the monarch to control the army and placed it under the power of the Parliament. It also required the renewal of military appropriations every two years, as was mandated by the proposed constitution. He believed it would be sufficient to protect from any risks associated with a standing military. The anti-federalists were primarily concerned that the legislature was given too much power by the Constitution. There was relatively little concern at the time that the President would have significant control of the military. Hamilton addresses a potential concern about the executive misuse, dismissing the likelihood that in times of peace there would be opportunity for the executive to wrest power away from the legislature. Hamilton was more concerned about the threat to public safety and national security by restricting the legislature than the threat of abuse of power.

Hamilton challenged the notion that such a government is likely to restrict civil liberties by using a standing military. He considered it highly unlikely that such a thing could occur without being discovered early enough to respond to it. In case the army were abused by the legislature, he believed that state governments could address the problem. Central to Hamilton's argument was his belief that the federal government would be representative of the people and that a federal legislature could be trusted with a standing military.

Federalist No. 26 was one of the more populist of the Federalist Papers, contrasting with the elitism that is present in many others. Hamilton identifies the commoner as generally resistant to the "zeal for liberty" that leads to anarchy, noting that only two of the 13 state governments (North Carolina and Pennsylvania) mention standing armies during peacetime in their respective constitutions. They do not prohibit them, but express the view that they "ought not" be kept. He then praises the state government of New York as a good example of governance, pointing out that their constitution contains no such clause. He also believed that citizens were generally capable of discerning good leaders from bad ones and that citizens can be trusted to remove bad leaders from power when they do arise. This was the only one of the Federalist Papers to give credence to the idea of political parties. While he speaks of them dismissively, saying that they "must be expected to infect all political bodies," Hamilton acknowledges their role in challenging the power of the majority.

Legacy

Hamilton continued his argument in favor of a standing federal army in No. 27 and No. 28 of the Federalist Papers. He argues in No. 27 that a federal army will bring more stability than state armies, and he argues in No. 28 that a federal army may be necessary to prevent insurgency. The legislature's power to maintain a standing army remained contested during the ratification process of the Constitution and the drafting of the Bill of Rights. The relevant clauses of the Constitution were ratified without amendment, but the debate contributed to the ratification of the Second Amendment to guarantee the right to keep and bear arms and the Third Amendment to prohibit the quartering of soldiers in peacetime.

In the 1957 Supreme Court case Reid v. Covert, Federalist No. 26 was one of the works cited by Justice Hugo Black. His plurality opinion reaffirmed the principle that the founding fathers intended for civilian control of the military. The federal maintenance of a standing army during peacetime eventually became a widely accepted idea in the United States, with a volunteer military and production of arms consistently maintained during peacetime since World War II. No military coup has ever occurred in the United States.

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Banks, William C., and Peter Raven-Hansen. National Security Law and the Power of the Purse. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1994. ISBN 978-0195085389
• Dietze, Gottfried. The Federalist: A classic on federalism and free government. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2019. ISBN 978-1421434704
• 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
• Rakove, Jack N., and Colleen A. Sheehan (eds.). The Cambridge Companion to the Federalist Papers. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2020. ISBN 978-1107136397
• Scott, Kyle. The Federalist Papers: A Reader's Guide. London, U.K.: A&C Black, 2013. ISBN 1441185860
• White, Morton, Philosophy, The Federalist, and the Constitution. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1989. ISBN 978-0195059489

External links

All links retrieved May 28, 2026.

• Full text of Federalist No. 26 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)/26 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. 26  ^history

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

• History of "Federalist No. 26"

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