# XXVI: The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered explained — The Federalist Papers

> Chapter companion for The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton.

## What happens

Hamilton argues against restricting the legislature's power to provide for national defense, warning that such restraints stem from an overly ardent but unenlightened zeal for liberty. He traces the historical origin of opposition to standing armies to English precedents, particularly the Bill of Rights of 1688, and contends that the proposed Constitution's provision limiting military appropriations to two years is a more effective safeguard than absolute prohibitions. He maintains that a united government is less likely to require a dangerous military force than disunited states.

## Themes in this chapter

### National Security and Foreign Relations

Hamilton argues that legislative discretion is essential for providing for the common defense against foreign threats and rebellions.

### Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances

The chapter examines the proper balance between legislative authority and executive power in military matters, advocating for legislative control rather than absolute prohibitions.

### Human Nature and the Capacity for Self-Government

Hamilton warns that overly restrictive measures stem from a zeal for liberty more ardent than enlightened, and trusts the discernment of American citizens to avoid anarchy.

## Character check-ins

### Publius

Author of the essay, addressing the people of New York on the necessity of legislative discretion in military matters.

### Alexander Hamilton

Writes as Publius, arguing against restrictions on legislative authority for common defense.

### Charles II

Cited as having kept a standing army of 5,000 troops in peacetime by his own authority.

### The Judicious Blackstone

Referenced implicitly through the discussion of English legal traditions regarding standing armies.

## Key lines

> It was a thing hardly to be expected that in a popular revolution the minds of men should stop at that happy mean which marks the salutary boundary between power and privilege, and combines the energy of government with the security of private rights.

In a popular revolution, it is unlikely that people will find the perfect balance between governmental power and individual rights.

_Hamilton introduces the central challenge of balancing energy in government with protection of liberties._

> The idea of restraining the legislative authority, in the means of providing for the national defense, is one of those refinements which owe their origin to a zeal for liberty more ardent than enlightened.

Proposals to limit the legislature's power to fund national defense come from an excessive but misguided passion for liberty.

_Hamilton dismisses restrictions on legislative defense powers as unwise and extreme._

> The former, by aiming at too much, is calculated to effect nothing; the latter, by steering clear of an imprudent extreme, and by being perfectly compatible with a proper provision for the exigencies of the nation, will have a salutary and powerful operation.

Absolute prohibitions achieve nothing, while the two-year appropriation limit avoids extremes and works effectively.

_Hamilton contrasts ineffective state prohibitions with the Constitution's practical two-year military funding limit._

## Links

- HTML: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/the_federalist_papers_se/chapters/xxvi-the-idea-of-restraining-the-legislative-authority-in-regard-to-the-common-defense-considered
- Book: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/the_federalist_papers_se
- All chapters: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/the_federalist_papers_se/chapters