Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mouton
Nice. Gives me a tingle just reading it. I'll bet Hamilton's knickers got all twisted when he read it.
64 posted on 02/07/2010 7:09:25 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: Bloody Sam Roberts
Hamilton actually wrote that a militia could defend a State from the standing army of a federal government. See this excerpt from his Federalist Paper 29.

By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."

74 posted on 02/07/2010 7:18:40 AM PST by Solitar ("My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them." -- Barry Goldwater)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

His elloqution is a bit hard to get through and sometimes to follow. However, his notions were the Federal government would not do any of these oppressive things some would argue they would do because, and primarily because, the power is with the people the states, not the other way around.

IMO, the greatest tragedy of the War Between the States is the Confederacy lost. Yeah, it was over slavery but the over riding issue was whether the Federal government could over power states rights in an area NOT proscribed to them by the constitution. In fact, the constitution legislated for slavery in its count of the population. Now then, would it have gone away in time anyway, most likely yes and probably before 1900, on its own due to industrialization or by constitution amendment as the country was growning especially in the non slave holding states.

Vince


85 posted on 02/07/2010 7:27:19 AM PST by Mouton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson