Evan R. & Ryan O.
THE FEDERALIST PAPERS
No. LXVII:
The Executive Department
From the New York Packet.
Tuesday, March 11, 1788.
HAMILTON
To the People of the State of New York:
THE constitution of the executive
department of the proposed government,
claims next our attention.
There is hardly any part of the system
which could have been attended with
greater difficulty in the arrangement of it
than this; and there is, perhaps, none which
has been inveighed against with less candor
or criticised with less judgment.
Here the writers against the Constitution
seem to have taken pains to signalize their
talent of misrepresentation. Calculating
upon the aversion of the people to
monarchy, they have endeavored to enlist
all their jealousies and apprehensions in
opposition to the intended President of the
United States; not merely as the embryo,
but as the full-grown progeny, of that
detested parent. To establish the pretended
affinity, they have not scrupled to draw
resources even from the regions of fiction.
The authorities of a magistrate, in few
instances greater, in some instances less,
than those of a governor of New York,
have been magnified into more than royal
prerogatives. He has been decorated with
attributes superior in dignity and splendor
to those of a king of Great Britain. He has
been shown to us with the diadem
sparkling on his brow and the imperial
purple flowing in his train. He has been
seated on a throne surrounded with minions
and mistresses, giving audience to the
envoys of foreign potentates, in all the
supercilious pomp of majesty. The images
of Asiatic despotism and voluptuousness
have scarcely been wanting to crown the
Red = syntax
Green= diction
Blue= schemes
Orange= tropes
Violet= rhetorical appeals
Hamilton opens the paper with a direct address to
his intended audience, the citizens of New York,
and sets a formal and businesslike tone with his use
of a colon. He then clearly states his subject and
emphasizes the importance of the executive
department’s powers by capitalizing the article
adjective to “constitution” , repeating “of the”
instead of saying “the proposed government’s
executive department”, and by employing
anastrophe at the end of the paragraph.
Hamilton then uses a long sentence with a
semicolon to express both the care put into the
constitution and the undue anger towards it, without
breaking off the reader’s train of thought like he
could by breaking this sentence into two. Hamilton
also chooses words that indicate a lack of
enthusiasm and intelligence in both the efforts
against the constitution and those that would make
such efforts. Hamilton takes a sardonic tone when
speaking of the writers’ actions and then makes
mention of appeals against monarchy, which are so
effective in post-Revolutionary America, before
forming a metaphor of the President being the
spawn of the English King, Hamilton expresses his
disgust at such an idea by referring to that
suggestion as a “pretended affinity” and refers to
their sources as “fiction”. He keeps the scope of the
issue realistic by saying that a government official
in the executive office is usually about as powerful
as a state governor, and then exposes the
ridiculousness of comparing such men to monarchs.
Anaphora of “He has been” offsets each image of
monarchial excess for an added, pummeling effect.
exaggerated scene. We have been taught to
tremble at the terrific visages of murdering
janizaries, and to blush at the unveiled
mysteries of a future seraglio.
Attempts so extravagant as these to
disfigure or, it might rather be said, to
metamorphose the object, render it
necessary to take an accurate view of its
real nature and form: in order as well to
ascertain its true aspect and genuine
appearance, as to unmask the disingenuity
and expose the fallacy of the counterfeit
resemblances which have been so
insidiously, as well as industriously,
propagated.
In the execution of this task, there is no
man who would not find it an arduous
effort either to behold with moderation, or
to treat with seriousness, the devices, not
less weak than wicked, which have been
contrived to pervert the public opinion in
relation to the subject. They so far exceed
the usual though unjustifiable licenses of
party artifice, that even in a disposition the
most candid and tolerant, they must force
the sentiments which favor an indulgent
construction of the conduct of political
adversaries to give place to a voluntary and
unreserved indignation. It is impossible not
to bestow the imputation of deliberate
imposture and deception upon the gross
pretense of a similitude between a king of
Great Britain and a magistrate of the
character marked out for that of the
President of the United States. It is still
more impossible to withhold that
imputation from the rash and barefaced
expedients which have been employed to
give success to the attempted imposition.
In one instance, which I cite as a sample of
the general spirit, the temerity has
proceeded so far as to ascribe to the
President of the United States a power
which by the instrument reported is
EXPRESSLY allotted to the Executives of
the individual States. I mean the power of
To bring the third paragraph to a close, Hamilton
employs vivid diction that conjures images of royal
excess and abuse of power. Hamilton also uses
“We” as the subject of the sentence in order to
appeal to a common execration of royal power.
The fourth paragraph is one long sentence with
many breaks and shifts in thought—a necessary
structure for the complex idea being expressed.
Hamilton wrestles with appropriate word choice to
describe the anti-federalist railings against the
Constitution. He fist says that they “disfigure” the
issue, but appropriately chooses “metamorphose” to
suggest that they offer a feasible, but invalid view of
the issue. He contrast the “genuine” nature of the
issue and the “disingenuity” of its portrayal. He
reinforces his assertion that the propaganda is
“counterfeit” and that its methods of exposition are
“insidiously” and “industriously” done. No doubt
Hamilton intends those two words to also reflect the
character of his opponents. Also, he personifies the
opinion of anti-federalists as an evil that must be
“unmasked” and scrutinized like a traitor in the
midst of patriots.
Hamilton uses a double-negative in the apposition
of the subject ,“devices,” and also uses alliteration
of “weak” and “wicked” to enhance his description
and make it stand out. Hamilton then makes a logos
appeal to the general public by appealing to their
rational review of the issue and of the naysayers. He
strengthens his appeal by suggesting that antifederalists would “pervert” their minds with their
opinions.
Although a typical construction of this clause would
be “It is possible to bestow…” Hamilton uses a
double negative to attribute an imperative tone to
the verb “bestow.” He also keeps his tirade focused
by referring to the anti-federalist actions as
“deliberate” At the end of the sentence he uses
deliberately awkward sentence structure (“of the” is
repeated three times) to emphasize the importance
of character in a head of state.
The appeal against the anti-federalists gains strength
as Hamilton chides their methods as “rash and
barefaced” and then logically cites a
counterexample to the assertion that the President
overrides the state executives in appointments to
filling casual vacancies in the Senate.
This bold experiment upon the discernment
of his countrymen has been hazarded by a
writer who (whatever may be his real
merit) has had no inconsiderable share in
the applauses of his party[1]; and who,
upon this false and unfounded suggestion,
has built a series of observations equally
false and unfounded. Let him now be
confronted with the evidence of the fact,
and let him, if he be able, justify or
extenuate the shameful outrage he has
offered to the dictates of truth and to the
rules of fair dealing.
The second clause of the second section of
the second article empowers the President
of the United States "to nominate, and by
and with the advice and consent of the
Senate, to appoint ambassadors, other
public ministers and consuls, judges of the
Supreme Court, and all other OFFICERS
of United States whose appointments are
NOT in the Constitution OTHERWISE
PROVIDED FOR, and WHICH SHALL
BE ESTABLISHED BY LAW."
Immediately after this clause follows
another in these words: "The President
shall have power to fill up all
VACANCIES that may happen DURING
THE RECESS OF THE SENATE, by
granting commissions which shall EXPIRE
AT THE END OF THEIR NEXT
SESSION." It is from this last provision
that the pretended power of the President to
fill vacancies in the Senate has been
deduced. A slight attention to the
connection of the clauses, and to the
obvious meaning of the terms, will satisfy
us that the deduction is not even colorable.
The first of these two clauses, it is clear,
only provides a mode for appointing such
officers, "whose appointments are NOT
OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR in the
vacant Senate seats, emphasizing via capitals that
such power is firmly in the hands of the latter. The
short sentence at the end of the paragraph
dramatically transitions to the next paragraph.
Hamilton quotably refers to the anti-federalist effort
as an “experiment,” which is intended to incite
feelings of anger in the audience at the prospect that
they are being toyed with. The unnamed “writer”
was likely an obvious figure at the time, and would
be defamed by Hamilton’s use of anonymity and
condescension in naming him. A connection
between this writer’s “suggestions” and
“observations” is drawn by the repetition of “false
and unfounded” immediately before each term.
Anaphora of “let him” in the last sentence presents
an urgent, confrontational tone to complement the
imperative sentence. An isocolon of the objects of
the writer’s “shameful outrage” effectively links
“truth” and “fair dealing.”
The placement of prepositional phrases within one
another at the beginning of the seventh paragraph
sets the methodical tone used in his appeal.
Hamilton quotes the Constitution to provide support
to his argument and his appeal to logos. Words and
phrases that are crucial to his point are written in all
capitals (they do not appear this way in the
Constitution) to drive his ideas into his audience
with the weight of the nation’s central document.
“Pretended” is the operative word in the next
sentence, because of Hamilton’s disagreement with
the portrayed power of the president.
Hamilton closes this thought process with a
restatement of his thesis, but he uses “us” instead of
“I” to appeal to the public.
Hamilton hastily employs artful syntax (scheme) in
the form of parenthesis, which serves to state his
purpose in this first of two explanatory paragraphs.
He then follows up with the word only, which
Constitution, and which SHALL BE
ESTABLISHED BY LAW"; of course it
cannot extend to the appointments of
senators, whose appointments are
OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR in the
Constitution[2], and who are
ESTABLISHED BY THE
CONSTITUTION, and will not require a
future establishment by law. This position
will hardly be contested.
The last of these two clauses, it is equally
clear, cannot be understood to comprehend
the power of filling vacancies in the Senate,
for the following reasons: First. The
relation in which that clause stands to the
other, which declares the general mode of
appointing officers of the United States,
denotes it to be nothing more than a
supplement to the other, for the purpose of
establishing an auxiliary method of
appointment, in cases to which the general
method was inadequate. The ordinary
power of appointment is confined to the
President and Senate JOINTLY, and can
therefore only be exercised during the
session of the Senate; but as it would have
been improper to oblige this body to be
continually in session for the appointment
of officers and as vacancies might happen
IN THEIR RECESS, which it might be
necessary for the public service to fill
without delay, the succeeding clause is
evidently intended to authorize the
President, SINGLY, to make temporary
appointments "during the recess of the
Senate, by granting commissions which
shall expire at the end of their next
session." Second. If this clause is to be
considered as supplementary to the one
which precedes, the VACANCIES of
which it speaks must be construed to relate
to the "officers" described in the preceding
one; and this, we have seen, excludes from
its description the members of the Senate.
Third. The time within which the power is
implies that the first clause is easily summarized
and explained. Through quotation of the
Constitution itself, Hamilton establishes an
incredibly powerful appeal to ethos or credibility.
This establishment of credibility supports his
subsequent appeals to logos, or logic by
demonstrating that the words of the Constitution
refute the claims made against it (by the “writers
against the Constitution”). His choice of diction in
using “of course” helps him to manipulate the
readers into supporting his views by making them
(his views) seem startlingly obvious.
The parallel structure of this penultimate paragraph
and the previous serves to link the two in rhetorical
function: refutation of arguments (false, exaggerated
arguments) against the constitution. Hamilton once
again applies parenthesis which, in this case,
supports his logical claims. This also supports the
tone of Federalist #67, which can be described as
defensive, contemptuous, persuasive, and realistic.
Hamilton’s use of “comprehend,” combined with
diction: “understood,” is an allusion to the lack of
comprehension (of the Constitution) shown by the
“writers against the Constitution” and their libelous
criticisms. However, “comprehend” is also used
sylleptically in that the word also means “to
encompass.”
This demonstration is further supported by the
antithesis of “auxiliary methods” supporting
“general methods.” Such antithesis is quite
effective because it serves to illustrate how the
constitution works, and that it has many backup
systems in place.
Hamilton begins again to use phrases and words in
all capital letters. Again, The use of capitalization
makes his main points of argument stand out from
the rest of the paper. They also allow him to quote
the constitution without the use of quotation marks.
Hamilton uses these capitalized words and phrases
to support his hordes of appeals to logos and ethos.
Hamilton uses the word “supplement” (in contrast
with “complement”) to show that the Constitution is
complete, and to show that it considers all things.
The parenthesis of “we have seen” stresses the fact
that Hamilton is walking his audience through this
section of the constitution. The use of “we” reminds
the audience that Hamilton is clarifying for their
to operate, "during the recess of the
Senate," and the duration of the
appointments, "to the end of the next
session" of that body, conspire to elucidate
the sense of the provision, which, if it had
been intended to comprehend senators,
would naturally have referred the
temporary power of filling vacancies to the
recess of the State legislatures, who are to
make the permanent appointments, and not
to the recess of the national Senate, who
are to have no concern in those
appointments; and would have extended
the duration in office of the temporary
senators to the next session of the
legislature of the State, in whose
representation the vacancies had happened,
instead of making it to expire at the end of
the ensuing session of the national Senate.
The circumstances of the body authorized
to make the permanent appointments
would, of course, have governed the
modification of a power which related to
the temporary appointments; and as the
national Senate is the body, whose situation
is alone contemplated in the clause upon
which the suggestion under examination
has been founded, the vacancies to which it
alludes can only be deemed to respect those
officers in whose appointment that body
has a concurrent agency with the President.
But last, the first and second clauses of the
third section of the first article, not only
obviate all possibility of doubt, but destroy
the pretext of misconception. The former
provides, that "the Senate of the United
States shall be composed of two Senators
from each State, chosen BY THE
LEGISLATURE THEREOF for six years";
and the latter directs, that, "if vacancies in
that body should happen by resignation or
otherwise, DURING THE RECESS OF
THE LEGISLATURE OF ANY STATE,
the Executive THEREOF may make
temporary appointments until the NEXT
MEETING OF THE LEGISLATURE,
benefit.
Hamilton strategically arranges his summations of
separate elements of the second clause (of the
previously mentioned Constitutional clauses) into
easily understandable bullets. This allows him to
disprove falsified claims one at a time, making them
more logically appealing.
Hamilton appeals often to ethos and logos by
quoting the words of the constitution
Hamilton repeats his sylleptic use of “comprehend”
within a parenthetical scheme to make concrete the
facts that the “writers against the constitution” have
falsified information.
Hamilton antithesizes State legislatures and the
national Senate to establish them as separate
entities, for it is important that the audience
understands the differences between the two.
Parenthesis adds complexity and clarification to
Hamilton’s statements.
Hamilton places “of course” in parenthesis to make
the constitution seem clearer, as if there is no other
way for it to be interpreted than the way he has.
Parenthesis adds further complexity and
clarification to Hamilton’s statements.
“But last,”: Hamilton has employed a climactic
structure to his organization of arguments, making
them
Before concluding his penultimate paragraph, which
is of central importance to Federalist #67, Hamilton
unleashes a final, furious barrage of quotations
directly from the Constitution. This builds up his
audience with ethos and logos before he crushes
them with nearly intolerable amounts of pathos.
which shall then fill such vacancies." Here
is an express power given, in clear and
unambiguous terms, to the State
Executives, to fill casual vacancies in the
Senate, by temporary appointments; which
not only invalidates the supposition, that
the clause before considered could have
been intended to confer that power upon
the President of the United States, but
proves that this supposition, destitute as it
is even of the merit of plausibility, must
have originated in an intention to deceive
the people, too palpable to be obscured by
sophistry, too atrocious to be palliated by
hypocrisy.
Hamilton here employs a scheme of parenthesis to
support his interpretations of the constitution.
It is important for the audience to understand that
any appointments the president makes to fill vacated
slots, are, in fact, temporary.
The extended length of the penultimate paragraph
indicates its importance. The paragraph, like the
previous, serves to summarize and clear up any
misunderstanding of the Constitution concerning the
temporary appointment of Senators.
In his fourth and final section (of the penultimate
paragraph), Hamilton integrates ethos, or emotional
appeal into his paper by making members of the
audience feel like victims (of “deception”,
“sophistry”, and “atrocity”). This appeal further
manipulates the readers, turning them against the
“writers against the constitution”, whom Hamilton
refers to as obscured hypocrites.
I have taken the pains to select this instance
of misrepresentation, and to place it in a
clear and strong light, as an unequivocal
proof of the unwarrantable arts which are
practiced to prevent a fair and impartial
judgment of the real merits of the
Constitution submitted to the consideration
of the people. Nor have I scrupled, in so
flagrant a case, to allow myself a severity
of animadversion little congenial with the
general spirit of these papers. I hesitate not
to submit it to the decision of any candid
and honest adversary of the proposed
government, whether language can furnish
epithets of too much asperity, for so
shameless and so prostitute an attempt to
impose on the citizens of America.
In the final paragraph Hamilton builds on the
emotions of the readers to turn them against the
opposition of the Constitution.
He mentions misrepresentation to instill
anxiousness and fear in his audience; the United
States of America was identified with representation
of the masses, and had a profound fear of
developing a monarchy or dictatorship within its
borders.
Hamilton also states that he would never stoop to
such a low level, as the opponents of the
constitution had done in spreading their outrageous
fabrications. He believes that this paper is no place
to initiate criticism (animadversion) and argument.
He employs further use of parenthesis in order to
further illustrate his shocked reaction to the claim
made against the constitution.
Hamilton demonstrates that he is extremely
confident in his response to Constitutional criticisms
and fabrications. This confidence adds a new level
of appeal to the ethos which Hamilton has been
building on throughout the entire paper.
Hamilton concludes Federalist #67 with a final
powerful appeal to logos, pathos, and ethos by
reminding his audience that they were shamelessly
being taken advantage of.
PUBLIUS
1. See CATO, No. V.
2. Article I, section 3, clause 1.