The Basic Symbols of the American Political Tradition

VI. Constitutional Morality and The Federalist

CHAPTER VI Constitutional Morality and The Federalist To treat the Constitution and The Federalist1 separately is difficult. The two documents are closely associated in most people's minds, as well they should be, because they come before us in history one upon the other within a very short period of time. Also, as we know very well, The Federalist represents an attempt to justify the Constitution in the strongest possible terms in order to meet the objections of its critics and obtain the support necessary for ratification in New York State. For these reasons, treating the two documents together seems reasonable enough. But our reason for lumping them together is of a different order: The Constitution, while specifying the machinery and procedures of our government, gives us few clues as to how, in what manner, and according to what principles we should interpret it or operate under its forms.2 We know also that the Constitution is susceptible of alternative "readings," and so did the drafters, as we can easily discern from even a cursory reading of what are now fashionably termed the "Antifederalist" writings. The Antifederalists, not without justification, tended-most of them, at any rate-to 1 All Federalist quotations are from Jacob E. Cooke (ed.) The Federalist, (Cleveland and New York: Meridian Books, 1961) . 2 Kendall and Carey, Intro., The Federalist (New Rochelle: Arlington House, 1965) . In this introduction we set forth at some length the reasons for this contention. Also we explain why The Federalist is best read as being the product of a single individual, named "Publius." 96 97 draw a pretty extreme picture of what could happen under the proposed system: The senators, because of their mode of election and length of office, could well become the "noblemen " of our society and could intrigue among themselves to capture control of the system; the President might well use his control over our armed forces to intimidate both the people and the other branches of government into compliance with his will; and, among other things, the Supreme Court could become an oligarchy. The Antifederalist writings are in one sense understandable . Imagine this: If we were to present a ball and a bat to a teenager of the 1820's, he might be just a little more than perplexed about what to do with them, the more so as he sought to play any sort of game with the kids next door. However, armed with an instruction booklet on the rules of the game we now call baseball, some of the uncertainties would vanish, particularly with respect to (a) what the ball and bat are for and (b) what kind of interesting game could be played with them. With the adoption of the Constitution, the situation was somewhat analogous-only somewhat, because, as the fact that the Constitution was adopted so quickly and overwhelmingly attests, the people must have had a pretty fair notion about what the rules of the game were under the proposed Constitution . And this is not surprising because, as we have endeavored to show, the very tradition before us to the time of the Constitution served to make our constitutional structure meaningful. Indeed, most of the Antifederalist writings, though understandable, are absurd (to those, at least, who have taken the time to read them) simply because they are "brittle" and tend to interpret our constitutional system in a manner foreign to the context of the tradition. Yet, for all of this, there are questions (surprisingly few of the Antidederalists fixed upon them) that are not answered by the Constitution or the tradition of which it is but a part. The Federalist, 98 THE BASIC SYMBOLS and this fact is often overlooked in the official literature, provides us with answers to some of our more perplexing questions . In so doing, it urges upon us what can best be termed a "constitutional morality" or, that is, a way of looking at and interpreting the provisions of the Constitution so as to render it a viable instrument capable of fulfilling the purposes stated in the Preamble. Once accepted, such a morality assumes over time something of a binding character; we tend to look upon it as a part of the very Constitution itself which is binding both upon citizens and those who hold positions of authority within our government. And while there are many ways of looking at the Constitution, each with an accompanying...