Checks And Balances In John Locke's Two Treaties Of Government
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
…show more content…
51 and essay No. 78, in which Alexander Hamilton discusses the limits of judicial review. Federalist essay No. 51 essentially addresses means by which appropriate checks 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. 51 essay of the federalist papers, who, uses the idea of restricting naturally 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
51 and essay No. 78, in which Alexander Hamilton discusses the limits of judicial review. Federalist essay No. 51 essentially addresses means by which appropriate checks 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. 51 essay of the federalist papers, who, uses the idea of restricting naturally 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