I've considered it and found it wanting.
Your Farmer doesn't understand the difference between a federal and a national (a better term would be unitary, like modern France, where all power is concentrated in the national government and the departments are just creatures of that national government. That is not the government the Framers of our Constitution put together, although Mr. Farmer doesn't seem to be aware of that.
That it is necessary, to prevent foreigners from dividing us, or interfering in our government, I deny positively; ...
Total and utter cluelessness. Of course with a multitude of autonomous states an outside power or many outside powers can set one against the others. The British did that in India and turned themselves into the arbiters amongst the native states. The Romans conquered the Mediterranean world by doing so among the other Mediterranean states. I am supposed to take seriously the ideas of someone who does not understand the axiom “divide et impera”?
Alas! I see nothing in my fellow-citizens, that will permit my still fostering the delusion, that they are now capable of sustaining the weight of SELF-GOVERNMENT: a burden to which Greek and Roman shoulders proved unequal.
Well, Mr. Farmer, time to send a nice letter to His Britannic Majesty King George and humbly request that he resume his benevolent rule over his former North American colonies.
Oh, Mr. Farmer, you were being sarcastic? My mistake. But then why are you opposing the vehicle by which you and your fellow Americans will rule themselves in peace and prosperity?
The honor of supporting the dignity of the human character, seems reserved to the hardy Helvetians alone....
Blaat! Wrong, Mr. Farmer. The Swiss Confederation of the time you wrote was a amalgamation of petty monarchies and oligarchies with a few democratic (relatively) city-states thrown in, who quarrelled amongst themselves. It only looks good from somewhere beyond the ocean. The Swiss had the benefit of the poor real estate that they occupied - no one really wanted it that badly but the Swiss themselves. And while it's still in your future (although not ours) this house of cards was to be kicked over by the French revolutionaries in just a short few years from when you were writing. The Swiss Confederation of the post-Napoleonic world will be much different from that of your day, Mr. Farmer. Most people are ignorant of history, and they are even more ignorant of the history of foreign countries. Especially small ones.
Whether national government will be productive of internal peace, is too uncertain to admit of decided opinion....
In a few short years you will have to admit the decided opinion that the FEDERAL (stop this national b.s. Mr. Farmer) government is productive of internal peace. I hope you lived to see that day.
I could go on, but I see no need. This guy's wrong, I don't see any reason to continue beating his poor dead horse. And this drivel makes my brain hurt.
The Anti-federalists were wrong, as they learned when the Constitution was ratified and put into operation. It's too bad that the writers of the various Anti-federalist screeds that have survived were not forced to sit down and publicly admit, “Well, I was wrong...” and describe exactly how they misunderstood how the Constitution would work. But that is life, people who make mistakes prefer to let them slide into oblivion.
Please don't ever throw some monstrosity like this at me and force me to read through it ever again. Ever. Because I won't. Life is too short to spend much time pointing out how the clueless were clueless when said clueless are some 200 years(plus or minus) dead.