Brutus (Antifederalist)

Last updated

Brutus was the pen name of an Anti-Federalist in a series of essays designed to encourage New Yorkers to reject the proposed Constitution. His essays are considered among the best of those written to oppose adoption of the proposed constitution. [1] They paralleled and confronted The Federalist Papers during the ratification fight over the Constitution. Brutus published 16 essays in the New-York Journal, and Weekly Register, beginning shortly before The Federalist started appearing in New York newspapers. The essays were widely reprinted and commented on throughout the American states. All 16 of the essays were addressed to "the Citizens of the State of New York."

Contents

The true identity of Brutus is unknown. For many years, Robert Yates was seen as the most likely writer, but more recent scholarship has suggested either Melancton Smith of Poughkeepsie [2] or John Williams of Salem. [3] A computational analysis of the known writings of Smith suggests that either he or an associate was the author of the Brutus papers, though there are also strong similarities between the works of Williams and Brutus. The pen name is in honor of either Lucius Junius Brutus, who led the overthrow of the last Roman King Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, or Marcus Junius Brutus, who was one of Julius Caesar's assassins.

Arguments against the Constitution

The people's liberties

Like other Anti-Federalist writers, he argued that a bill of rights was necessary to protect the people from the government. He urged the people of New York not to ratify the Constitution and therefore give up powers to the government because "when the people once part with power, they can seldom or never resume it again but by force." [4] In his view, Americans believe "that all men by nature are free" and the new Constitution requires them to give up too many rights which "counteracts the very end of government." [5] To alleviate this issue, a bill of rights that considers criminal rights, free elections, and freedom of press must be included.

Legislative branch

Powers

Brutus writes that Congress possesses far too much power, especially over the states. He prefers a true confederation, which would be: a number of independent states entering, for conducting certain general concerns, in which they have a common interest, leaving the management of their internal and local affairs to go and their separate governments.” [6]

He believes the power to hold a standing army in peacetime as evil and highly dangerous to public liberty. [7] Congress’ unlimited power to collect revenue and to "borrow money on the credit of the United States" as well as the Necessary and Proper Clause, are highly dangerous to the states, and Brutus believes they will eventually be dissolved if the Constitution is adopted.

Representation

Brutus argues that a free republic cannot exist in such a large territory as the United States. He uses the examples of the Greek and Roman republics that became tyrannical as their territory grew. [4] He states that a true free republic comes from the people, not representatives of the people. With the population and geographical size of the United States, he warns that citizens "will have very little acquaintance with those who may be chosen to represent them; a great part of them will, probably, not know the characters of their own members, much less that of a majority of those who will compose the federal assembly; they will consist of men, whose names they have never heard, and whose talents and regard for the public good, they are total strangers to." [8] He also sees danger in giving Congress the power to modify the election of its own members.

Brutus also questions the validity of the Three-fifths Compromise and asks "If [slaves] have no share in government. why is the number of members in the assembly, to be increased on their account?" [9] He sees this as one example of the corruption of the branch. The fact that each state, regardless of size, will have the same number of senators "is the only feature of any importance in the constitution of a confederated government" and, is one of the few aspects of the legislature that Brutus approves of (16). He disagrees with the method of electing senators as well as the six-year term they are given as he believes spending that much time away from his constituents will make him less in touch with their interests (16). He advocates for a rotation in government to avoid the problem of men serving in the Senate for life. He also objects to Congress taking part in appointing officers and impeachment as it gives them both executive and judicial powers and he deems such blurring of the branches as dangerous (16).

Judiciary branch

Brutus argues that the power given to the judiciary will extend legislative authority, increase the jurisdiction of the courts, and diminish and destroy both the legislative and judiciary powers of the states. [10] He believes that their ability to declare what the powers of the legislature will lead to revision of legislative power, especially because the Supreme Court can interpret the Constitution according to its "spirit and reason" and will not be bound by its words alone. [10] Like in Britain, this will allow them to "mold the government into almost any shape they please." [11] Their ability to deem the validity of state legislation overrides the state judiciaries and will eventually make them so "trifling and unimportant, as not to be worth having." [10] He also thinks there should be more checks on the branch and judges should not only be removed on the basis of crime. He writes that "no way is left to control them but with a high hand and an outstretched arm." [12]

Notes

  1. Ann Stuart Diamond, "The Anti-Federalist "Brutus," Political Science Reviewer 6 (Fall 1976). p. 249
  2. Zuckert and Webb. The Anti-Federalist Writings of the Melancton Smith Circle p. xxviii-xxix (2009).
  3. Johnson, Joel. "'Brutus' and 'Cato' Unmasked: General John Williams's Role in the New York Ratification Debate",(American Antiquarian Society, 2009).
  4. 1 2 "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #1". Constitution.org.
  5. "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #2". Constitution.org.
  6. "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #5". Constitution.org.
  7. "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #8". Constitution.org.
  8. "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #4". Constitution.org.
  9. "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #3". Constitution.org.
  10. 1 2 3 "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #12". Constitution.org.
  11. "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #11". Constitution.org.
  12. "Anti-Federalist Papers: Brutus #15". Constitution.org.

Related Research Articles

<i>The Federalist Papers</i> 1788 essay collection promoting ratification of the US Constitution

The Federalist Papers is a collection of 85 articles and essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay under the collective pseudonym "Publius" to promote the ratification of the Constitution of the United States. The collection was commonly known as The Federalist until the name The Federalist Papers emerged in the twentieth century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-Federalism</span> 1780s political movement in the U.S.

Anti-Federalism was a late-18th-century political movement that opposed the creation of a stronger U.S. federal government and which later opposed the ratification of the 1787 Constitution. The previous constitution, called the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, gave state governments more authority. Led by Patrick Henry of Virginia, Anti-Federalists worried, among other things, that the position of president, then a novelty, might evolve into a monarchy. Though the Constitution was ratified and supplanted the Articles of Confederation, Anti-Federalist influence helped lead to the passage of the Bill of Rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Melancton Smith</span> American politician

Melancton Smith was a merchant, lawyer and a New York delegate to the Continental Congress. Praised for his intelligence, liberality, and reasonableness, Smith had attained considerable respect in the State of New York by 1787 and he has been described by modern scholars as the most important Anti-Federalist theorist and spokesman. Additionally, Smith played an active and central role in the ratification of the United States Constitution.

Anti-Federalist Papers is the collective name given to the works written by the Founding Fathers who were opposed to, or concerned with, the merits of the United States Constitution of 1787. Starting on 25 September 1787 and running through the early 1790s, these Anti-Federalists published a series of essays arguing against the ratification of the new Constitution. They argued against the implementation of a stronger federal government without protections on certain rights. The Anti-Federalist papers failed to halt the ratification of the Constitution but they succeeded in influencing the first assembly of the United States Congress to draft the Bill of Rights. These works were authored primarily by anonymous contributors using pseudonyms such as "Brutus" and the "Federal Farmer." Unlike the Federalists, the Anti-Federalists created their works as part of an unorganized group.

Federalist No. 10 is an essay written by James Madison as the tenth of The Federalist Papers, a series of essays initiated by Alexander Hamilton arguing for the ratification of the United States Constitution. It was first published in The Daily Advertiser on November 22, 1787, under the name "Publius". Federalist No. 10 is among the most highly regarded of all American political writings.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 23</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton

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.

<i>Federalist No. 78</i> Most-cited Federalist Paper; by Alexander Hamilton and about the Supreme Court

Federalist No. 78 is an essay by Alexander Hamilton, the seventy-eighth of The Federalist Papers. Like all of The Federalist papers, it was published under the pseudonym Publius.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 2</span> Federalist Paper by John Jay

Federalist No. 2, titled "Concerning Dangers From Foreign Force and Influence", is a political essay written by John Jay. It was the second of The Federalist Papers, a series of 85 essays arguing for the ratification of the United States Constitution. The essay was first published in The Independent Journal on October 31, 1787, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist Papers were published. Federalist No. 2 established the premise of nationhood that would persist through the series, addressing the issue of political union.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 3</span> Federalist Paper by John Jay

Federalist No. 3, titled "The Same Subject Continued: Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence", is a political essay by John Jay, the third of The Federalist Papers. It was first published in The Independent Journal on November 3, 1787, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. It is the second of four essays by Jay on the benefits of political union in protecting Americans against foreign adversaries, preceded by Federalist No. 2 and followed by Federalist No. 4 and Federalist No. 5.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 14</span> Federalist Paper by James Madison

Federalist No. 14 is an essay by James Madison titled "Objections to the Proposed Constitution From Extent of Territory Answered". This essay is the fourteenth of The Federalist Papers. It was first published in The New York Packet on November 30, 1787 under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. It addresses a major objection of the Anti-Federalists to the proposed United States Constitution: that the sheer size of the United States would make it impossible to govern justly as a single country. Madison touched on this issue in Federalist No. 10 and returns to it in this essay.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 26</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton regarding a standing army

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 as the twenty-sixth of 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 it is directly continued in No. 27 and No. 28.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 41</span> Federalist Paper by James Madison

Federalist No. 41, titled "General View of the Powers Conferred by the Constitution", is an essay written by James Madison as the forty-first of The Federalist Papers. These essays were published by Alexander Hamilton, with John Jay and James Madison serving as co-authors, under the pseudonym "Publius." No. 41 was first published by The New York Packet on January 19, 1788 and argues about the necessity of the powers the Constitution vested upon the general government as well as the meaning of the phrase "general welfare".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 47</span> Federalist Paper by James Madison

Federalist No. 47 is the forty-seventh paper from The Federalist Papers. It was first published by The New York Packet on January 30, 1788, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist Papers were published, but its actual author was James Madison. This paper examines the separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government under the proposed United States Constitution due to the confusion of the concept at the citizen level. It is titled "The Particular Structure of the New Government and the Distribution of Power Among Its Different Parts".

<i>Federalist No. 66</i> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton

Federalist No. 66 is an essay by Alexander Hamilton, the sixty-sixth of The Federalist Papers. It was published on March 8, 1788, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. The title is "Objections to the Power of the Senate To Set as a Court for Impeachments Further Considered".

<i>Federalist No. 67</i> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton about the Executive Department

Federalist No. 67 is an essay by Alexander Hamilton, the sixty-seventh of The Federalist Papers. This essay's title is "The Executive Department" and begins a series of eleven separate papers discussing the powers and limitations of that branch. Federalist No. 67 was published under the pseudonym Publius, like the rest of the Federalist Papers. It was published in the New York Packet on Tuesday, March 11, 1788.

The Federal Farmer was the pseudonym used by an Anti-Federalist who wrote a methodical assessment of the proposed United States Constitution that was among the more important documents of the ratification debate. The assessment appeared in the form of two pamphlets, the first published in November 1787 and the second in December 1787.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial review in the United States</span> Power of courts to review laws

In the United States, judicial review is the legal power of a court to determine if a statute, treaty, or administrative regulation contradicts or violates the provisions of existing law, a State Constitution, or ultimately the United States Constitution. While the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly define the power of judicial review, the authority for judicial review in the United States has been inferred from the structure, provisions, and history of the Constitution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Bill of Rights</span> First ten amendments to the US Constitution

The United States Bill of Rights comprises the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. Proposed following the often bitter 1787–88 debate over the ratification of the Constitution and written to address the objections raised by Anti-Federalists, the Bill of Rights amendments add to the Constitution specific guarantees of personal freedoms and rights, clear limitations on the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and explicit declarations that all powers not specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution are reserved to the states or the people. The concepts codified in these amendments are built upon those in earlier documents, especially the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776), as well as the Northwest Ordinance (1787), the English Bill of Rights (1689), and Magna Carta (1215).

The New York Circular Letter was a solution reached in a controversy between Federalists and Anti-Federalists over ratification of the United States Constitution. The compromise built on earlier deals like the Massachusetts Compromise to call for the use of the Convention provision written into the newly ratified Constitution in order to get the amendments demanded by New York and other states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">James Madison as Father of the Constitution</span> 4th president of the United States from 1809 to 1817

James Madison was an American statesman, diplomat, and Founding Father who served as the 4th president of the United States from 1809 to 1817. He is hailed as the "Father of the Constitution" for his pivotal role in drafting and promoting the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights. Disillusioned by the weak national government established by the Articles of Confederation, he helped organize the Constitutional Convention, which produced a new constitution. Madison's Virginia Plan served as the basis for the Constitutional Convention's deliberations, and he was one of the most influential individuals at the convention. He became one of the leaders in the movement to ratify the Constitution, and he joined with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay in writing The Federalist Papers, a series of pro-ratification essays that was one of the most influential works of political science in American history.