Summary of the argument
Jay argues that a singular government speaking for all states would serve as a greater deterrent to military interference by foreign nations than a system of government where each state is given complete control over its affairs. He opens the essay by talking about why wars are fought at all. Jay compels the reader to observe that not all wars are fought for a just cause. Many nations fight whenever they see that they stand to gain from a victory. Absolute monarchs, Jay states, often go to war just for military glory, revenge or ambition. He follows this by talking about why countries like Britain, France and Spain would be wary of America's influence in global trade and how this could lead to "jealousies and uneasiness" in their cabinets. Having laid out situations in which war could occur between America and a foreign power, Jay goes on to discuss why a Union would be better equipped to defend the country in such a scenario. Comparing America to Great Britain, Jay notes that the individual fleets of England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland would never be as significant or threatening as the united fleet of Great Britain. He argues that a combined militia under a single commander would be far more effective than separate individual ones. An American militia could and would always protect any part of the country that was under threat by concentrating its resources there. This, Jay says, is not true of thirteen individual militias. Many states might not see a threat as too dangerous or simply might be unwilling to risk conflict and not take up arms in defense of their fellow States. He also warns against political interference from European powers. He warns that if America were split into three or four confederacies, they might each be supported by a different European nation, one by Britain, one by France and the other by Spain. These confederacies could then easily be motivated to fight each other on behalf of the European powers, essentially becoming a constant theatre of war. Lastly, Jay argues that war would be less likely to be waged against America if it were united:"If they see that our national government is efficient and well administered, our trade prudently regulated, our militia properly organized and disciplined, our resources and finances discreetly managed, our credit re-established, our people free, contented, and united, they .e. foreign nationswill be much more disposed to cultivate our friendship than provoke our resentment ..How liable would she mericabecome not only to their contempt but to their outrage, and how soon would dear-bought experience proclaim that when a people or family so divide, it never fails to be against themselves."
External links