Pros And Cons Of Publius

Publius provides a convincing case for ratification by thoroughly addressing the Anti-Federalists’ two primary concerns including a potential consolidation of government, and the dangers of hastily ratifying the Constitution The Federal Farmer outlines his concerns with the following statements: “The plan proposed appears to be partly federal, but principally however, calculated ultimately to make the states one consolidated government. The first interesting question, therefore suggested, is, how far the states can be consolidated into one entire government on free principles” (111). This would manifest in blurred lines between the three branches of government. Potential consolidation of government potentially threatens the people’s liberty. Furthermore, he believes, “These aristocrats support and hasten the adoption of the proposed constitution,

It is not necessary that the former should be perfect; it is sufficient that the latter is more important” (130). Hamilton adds by claiming that he “should esteem it the extreme imprudence to prolong the precarious state of our national affairs, and to expose the Union to the jeopardy of successive experiments, in the chemical pursuit of a perfect plan. I never expect to see perfect work from an imperfect man” (132). Publius saw a greater threat to a prolonged experiment aiming at perfection, than a quickly adopted Constitution. In addition, the possibility was too slim that a second convention would produce another agreed upon Constitution. The Convention understands the sacrifice Americans made in the Revolutionary War, but waiting around for a perfect Constitution posed a greater threat to the people’s unalienable rights than what the antifederalists feared: a hasty