John Locke is a predominate figure in the history of political theory and philosophy, among other things he is largely known for his work titled The Two Treaties of Government, which was published anonymously in December of 1689. His publication argued in favor of the Glorious Revolution, with intent to defend the Whig party, to which he had close ties. The Second Treatise in particular was written to justify resistance to king Charles II and it’s political theory and philosophy was enormously influential to later works, such a The Federalist Papers.
The Federalist Papers was series of essays, anonymously published defending the Constitution, written and published 1787-1788, the authors, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, not only provided historical arguments and philosophical theories about the nature of individuals and government, but also strong criticisms of the weaknesses inherent in the Articles of Confederation. With in his Second Treatise, Locke highlights the flaw in crowning Adam’s decedents, as well redefines political power, as to advocate for a new representative form of government.
Locke also discusses other ideas such as the necessity of checks and balances as well as limits of the judicial review, both ideas, which are reflected in The Federalist Papers. John Locke lived in a heavily faith influenced government, who had calmed control based off of being heir of Adam, an idea which Locke denounces, and by doing so suggests a change in the governing system. Locke begins his The Second Treaties with, “An Essay Concerning The True Original Extent And End Of Civil Government”.
Locke quickly gets to the point denouncing any person’s claim to the thrown based of relation to Adam for is “natural right of fatherhood” or his “donation from God” affirmed any such authority for his children to have “dominion over the world” (Sec. 1, Locke). Locke suggests, that in the case of multiple heirs stepping forward to clam power there is no “law of nature nor positive law of God” that could determine the correct heir, and thus there would be no way of determining the proper owner of the thrown (Sec. 1, Locke).
Lastly, Locke argues that even if a dominate heir had some how been determined, the “eldest line of Adam’s posterity” would have been lost in the races of mankind and families of the world”, leaving no one person above another (Sec. 1, Locke). God and the decedents of Adam was used as an excuse for royal family ruling had been used a soul reason for the continuation of a royal family government, but within Locke’s argument that it would be “impossible” that the current rulers could “derive any the least shadow of authority” from claiming to be in “Adam’s private dominion and paternal jurisdiction” (Sec. , Locke).
Locke, starting his treaty with an attack on the foundation of the current government, introduces the question of “Who is to rule? , essentially giving context for the rest of his paper. To further advocate for a new form of government Locke discusses “the state of nature”, as a way to redefine political power. Locke writes, men are in “a state of perfect freedom to order their actions.. as they think fit” and with no dependence “upon the will of any other man”, therefore there is “nothing more evident” than the ideal that we all should be equal “without subordination or subjection” (Sec. , Locke).
He continues, the practice of equality between all men, or consider for a moment, all men under one governing body: each person, n parallel to their rights given by them because the state of nature, equally contributes to their own managing of each other as a whole, or in other words, something along the lines of a republic. Locke continues to explain, every one’s goal is to preserve themselves, as well as to “preserve the rest of mankind”, such, with this fundamental rule “all men may be restrained from invading others rights” (Sec. 4, Locke).
However, some may have the power to execute [the law of nature]” and under mutual agreement “one man may lawfully do harm to another” (Sec. 8, Locke). Locke’s new definition of political power, which puts the power into the hands of each individual, undermines the English regime of his time. Even though the federalist papers started to be published about 98 years after John Locke’s anonymous publication of the Second Treatise of Government, the influence can be seen riddled throughout, particularly in James Madison’s discussion of checks and balances in essay No. 51 and essay No. 8, in which Alexander Hamilton discusses the limits of judicial review.
Federalist essay No. 51 essentially addresses means by which appropriate hecks and balances can be created in government and also advocates a separation of powers within the national government. It emphasizes that “all hands be essential to the preservation of liberty” and that each department “should have a will of its own” (No. 51, Madison). That being said, the document does addresses the fact that “in a republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates” (No. 51, Madison).
The view that the legislative branch holds dominate power is also evident in chapter thirteen of the Second Treaties of Government, where it is written that legislative is the supreme power”, but the branch should “consist of several persons”, which the “power of assembling and dismissing” the legislative positions are “placed in the executive”, not with the intent of giving the “executive superiority over it”, but to act as a “fiduciary trust” essentially creating a system of checks and balances (Sec. 150, 153 and 156, Locke).
The system of simple checks and balances demonstrated in Locke’s treaty is an evident influence in No. 1 essay of the federalist papers, who, uses the idea of restricting aturally dominate parts of government, by “[dividing and arranging]. subordinate powers” to keep, each division “sentinel over the public rights” (No. 51, Madison). Other documents that make up the Federalist pamphlets, such as Hamilton’s No. 78, describes the restriction placed on the judiciary department. Hamilton writes that within judiciary action no legislative act “contrary to the constitution can be valid”, an idea first proposed in chapter 11, of Locke’s work: “the supreme power cannot take from any man any part of his property without the consent of he [law]” (Sec. 38, Locke, No. 78, Hamilton).
An idea of following a set of rules isn’t original to Locke’s work, but it is original when placed in the context of judicial review, where the rules followed are determined based on societal consent and determination. Overall, The Second Treatise Of Government not only attacks the old beliefs of divine right to rule, and introduces a different order to political power, with intention to advocate for a new representative form of government, but its incites later influenced important works such as the Federalist Papers.
With inspiration form John Locke; Hamilton, Madison, and Jay’s writings successfully urged the ratification of the Constitution, which successfully got nine of the thirteen states approval and went in to effect June 21st 1788. We can presume that without the influential political theory and philosophy of John Locke, the U. S. constitution would look slightly, if not drastically, different, but thankfully with the brain power of, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay and, most importantly, John Locke, America would not be the same that it is today.