Anti-Federalist writing · Brutus
The Essays of Brutus (I–XVI)
Who wrote it? The essays were signed “Brutus.” Many historians have attributed them to Robert Yates, a New York judge who left the Constitutional Convention early in protest, but there is no direct proof. Others have suggested Melancton Smith or John Williams. The author is not known for certain.
Before you read
Brutus wrote to the citizens of New York in the New-York Journal, starting three weeks after the Constitution was published and a week before the first Federalist paper. Many scholars consider Brutus the ablest Anti-Federalist writer. Hamilton answered him directly in the judiciary papers (Nos. 78 to 83), and Brutus’s warning about the courts is still discussed in debates about judicial review.
The main argument
Brutus argues that the Constitution would create one consolidated national government, not a federation, because its powers to tax, to make all “necessary and proper” laws, and to establish courts whose decisions are supreme would leave the states little to do. A free republic, he says, cannot work over so large and varied a country; representatives would be too few and too far from the people, and laws would have to be enforced by soldiers. He calls for a bill of rights, limits on peacetime armies, and a judiciary that answers to someone.
Questions
- Brutus says a free republic cannot extend over a large territory. Compare his reasons with Madison’s answer in Federalist 10.
- Brutus warned that federal judges, interpreting the Constitution by its “spirit,” would be above any control. Read Federalist 78 and 81. Who has the stronger argument? Has history settled the question?
- Which of Brutus’s fears were answered by the Bill of Rights, and which were not?
Why there is no full text here. We could not reach a public-domain printing of the Brutus essays from the libraries we use, so this page gives a careful summary of each essay and links to full texts elsewhere. Read them there; they are worth it.
| No. | Date (1787–88) | What Brutus argues |
|---|---|---|
| I | Oct. 18 | The plan would merge the states into one government. Its powers to tax, to make all “necessary and proper” laws, and its supreme courts would leave the states nothing. A free republic cannot cover a country this large and varied. |
| II | Nov. 1 | A bill of rights is needed. People give up some natural rights to form a government, so the rights they keep must be written down. The Constitution’s own short list of protections (habeas corpus, no ex post facto laws) shows such lists matter. |
| III | Nov. 15 | Representation is badly arranged: the rule counting three-fifths of enslaved people adds to some states’ seats, and equal votes in the Senate are unfair to large states. |
| IV | Nov. 29 | The House is too small to know or reflect the people, and too small to resist bribery. Congress’s power over elections could be abused. |
| V | Dec. 13 | The taxing power, read with the General Welfare and Necessary and Proper clauses, has no real limit. |
| VI | Dec. 27 | Unlimited federal taxing power would leave the states without revenue and so without real power. |
| VII | Jan. 3 | More on taxes: the nation’s needs do not require power over every source of revenue, and the states need sources of their own. |
| VIII | Jan. 10 | The powers to borrow money and to raise armies without limit are dangerous. |
| IX | Jan. 17 | Standing armies in peacetime have destroyed liberty in other countries. |
| X | Jan. 24 | More on armies: history from Rome to Cromwell. Peacetime armies should need a two-thirds vote of Congress. |
| XI | Jan. 31 | The federal courts will read the Constitution by its “spirit” and steadily enlarge federal power. |
| XII | Feb. 7 and 14 | More on how the courts’ reasoning will extend national power over the states. |
| XIII | Feb. 21 | States should not be sued in federal court by individuals. |
| XIV | Feb. 28 and Mar. 6 | Appeals “both as to law and fact” endanger trial by jury and burden people with distant courts. |
| XV | Mar. 20 | Judges serving for life, whose rulings no one can correct, would be independent of the people and above the legislature. |
| XVI | Apr. 10 | The Senate’s six-year terms, its share in executive power and the lack of rotation or recall are dangerous. |
Dates follow the list kept by the Historical Society of the New York Courts, except Brutus II, which is not on that list and appeared on November 1, 1787. Summaries are our own.