Antifederalist No. 74 

THE PRESIDENT AS MILITARY KING 


"PHILADELPHIENSIS," who was influenced by Thomas Paine (in 
"Common Sense), wrote the following selection.  It is taken from 
3 essays which appearing February 6 & 20, and April 9 of 1788 in 
either The Freeman's Journal or, The North-American 
Intelligencer. 



     Before martial law is declared to be the supreme law of the 
land, and your character of free citizens be changed to that of 
the subjects of a military king-which are necessary consequences 
of the adoption of the proposed constitution - let me admonish 
you in the name of sacred liberty, to make a solemn pause. Permit 
a freeman to address you, and to solicit your attention to a 
cause wherein yourselves and your posterity are concerned.  The 
sun never shone upon a more important one.  It is the cause of 
freedom@f a whole continent@f yourselves and of your fellow men. 
. . . 
     A conspiracy against the freedom of America, both deep and 
dangerous, has been formed by an infernal junto of demagogues. 
Our thirteen free commonwealths are to be consolidated into one 
despotic monarchy. Is not this position obvious?  Its evidence is 
intuitive . . . . Who can deny but the president general will be 
a king to all intents and purposes, and one of the most dangerous 
kind too-a king elected to command a standing army.  Thus our 
laws are to be administered by this tyrant; for the whole, or at 
least the most important part of the executive department is put 
in his hands. 
     A quorum of 65 representatives, and of 26 senators, with a 
king at their head, are to possess powers that extend to the 
lives, the liberties, and property of every citizen of America.  
This novel system of government, were it possible to establish 
it, would be a compound of monarchy and aristocracy, the most 
accursed that ever the world witnessed. About 50 (these being a 
quorum) of the well born, and a military king, with a standing 
army devoted to his will, are to have an uncontrolled power. . . 
. 
     There is not a tincture of democracy in the proposed 
constitution, except the nominal elections of the president 
general and the illustrious Congress be supposed to have some 
color of that nature.  But this is a mere deception, invented to 
gull the people into its adoption.  Its framers were well aware 
that some appearance of election ought to be observed, especially 
in regard to the first Congress; for without such an appearance 
there was not the smallest probability of their having it 
organized and set in operation.  But let the wheels of this 
government be once cleverly set in motion, and I'll answer for 
it, that the people shall not be much troubled with future 
elections, especially in choosing their king-the standing army 
will do that business for them. 
     The thoughts of a military officer possessing such powers, 
as the proposed constitution vests in the president general, are 
sufficient to excite in the mind of a freeman the most alarming 
apprehensions; and ought to rouse him to oppose it at all events.  
Every freeman of America ought to hold up this idea to himself: 
that he has no superior but God and the laws.  But this tyrant 
will be so much his superior, that he can at any time he thinks 
proper, order him out in the militia to exercise, and to march 
when and where he pleases.  His officers can wantonly inflict the 
most disgraceful punishment on a peaceable citizen, under 
pretense of disobedience, or the smallest neglect of militia 
duty. . . . 
     The President-general, who is to be our king after this 
government is established, is vested with powers exceeding those 
of the most despotic monarch we know of in modern times.  What a 
handsome return have these men [the authors of the Constitution 
made to the people of America for their confidence! Through the 
misconduct of these bold conspirators we have lost the most 
glorious opportunity that any country ever had to establish a 
free system of government.  America under one purely 
democratical, would be rendered the happiest and most powerful 
nation in the universe.  But under the proposed one composed of 
an elective king and a standing army, officered by his 
sycophants, the starvelings of the Cincinnati, and an 
aristocratical Congress of the well-born-an iota of happiness, 
freedom, or national strength cannot exist.  What a pitiful 
figure will these ungrateful men make in history; who, for the 
hopes of obtaining some lucrative employment, or of receiving a 
little more homage from the rest of their fellow creatures, 
framed a system of oppression that must involve in its 
consequences the misery of their own offspring.... 
     Some feeble attempts have been made by the advocates of this 
system of tyranny, to answer the objections made to the smallness 
of the number of representatives and senators, and the improper 
powers delegated to them.  But, as far as I recollect, no one has 
been found bold enough to stand forth in defense of that 
dangerous and uncontrolled officer, the President-General, or 
more properly, our new King. 
     A few pieces under the signature of An American Citizen' 
were published immediately after the Constitution broke the 
shell, and the hydra made its way from the dark conclave into the 
open light.  In the first number the writer, in touching on the 
President, endeavored to conceal his immense powers, by 
representing the King of Great Britain as possessed of many 
hereditary prerogatives, rights and powers that he was not 
possessed of; that is, he shows what he is not, but neglects to 
show what he really is.  But so flimsy a palliative could scarce 
escape the censure of the most ignorant advocate for such an 
officer; and since [then] we hear of no further attempts to prove 
the necessity of a King being set over the freemen of America. 
     The writer of these essays has clearly proven, that the 
President is a King to all intents and purposes, and at the same 
time one of the most dangerous kind too - an elective King, the 
commander in chief of a standing army, etc.  And to those add, 
that he has a negative power over the proceedings of both 
branches of the legislature.  And to complete his uncontrolled 
sway, he is neither restrained nor assisted by a privy council, 
which is a novelty in government. I challenge the politicians of 
the whole continent to find in any period of history a monarch 
more absolute. . . . 
                                PHILADELPHIENSIS