Federalist No. 46

Last updated

Federalist No. 46
Gilbert Stuart, James Madison, c. 1821, NGA 56914.jpg
James Madison, author of Federalist No. 46
Author James Madison
Original titleThe Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
Series The Federalist
PublisherNew York Packet
Publication date
January 29, 1788
Media typeNewspaper
Preceded by Federalist No. 45  
Followed by Federalist No. 47  

Federalist No. 46 is an essay by James Madison, the forty-sixth of The Federalist Papers . It was first published by The New York Packet on January 29, 1788, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. This essay examines the relative strength of the state and federal governments under the proposed United States Constitution. It is titled "The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared".

Contents

Madison reaffirmed the arguments made in previous papers by Alexander Hamilton. In this paper, Madison asserts the advantages that state governments have over the federal government in terms of securing the support of the people and resisting encroachments.

In previous papers Madison labored to convince his readers that the system proposed by the constitution would lead to stable and energetic government. However, he describes at length in this paper a series of hypothetical conflicts between state and federal government. Madison does not expect or hope the constitution to lead to the kind of conflict between state and federal authority described here. Rather, he seeks to rebut the arguments that he anticipates from opponents of the constitution by asserting that their "chimerical" predictions of the federal government crushing state governments are unfounded.

Madison reminds his audience that the American people are the common superior of both the federal and state governments. He stresses that the Federal and State governments have differing powers, and are both subjected to the ultimate control of the voters. [1]

Background

The functions of the state government are similar but on different scales to pertain to the correct groups of people. State government is typically more focused on the issues of their state constituents and their legislation deals more with people on a personal level. Some problems that the state deals with for citizens are criminals who break state regulations; divorce and family matters; real estate; and medical issues from work, road accidents, or medical malpractice. As for the federal government, they have a large spectrum of citizens so they control larger affairs such as federal taxes, immigration, bankruptcy, social security, and patent/copyright laws. There is a separation between the two governments when it comes to responsibilities because of how far their influences spread. This separation was the original design for the U.S. government but over time as its responsibilities remained virtually the same, its interactions increased.

Although federal government has more power, it relies on state government. Further explaining the dependency federal and state governments have on each other, Madison stated in Federalist Paper No.46, "...I propose to compare the federal and state governments, are the disposition and the faculty they may respectively possess, to resist and frustrate the measures of each other. It has been already proved that the members of the federal will be more dependent on the members of the State governments, than the latter will be on the former."

The general population of the 1780s, as mentioned prior, favored state government. As explained, "It is also assumed that the lives and interests of the people will be provided for by the States and therefore the people will be more friendly and conversant with those in the State Government." Even though the federal government was supposed to be a mold for the foundation of state government, the people would still be biased to the liking of the state and its roles.

Once it became time to begin creating new republics, the people feared going back to the monarchy they once lived under by Great Britain. The Declaration of Independence describes that "free and Independent States they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all the other things which independent States may of right do." It is understood why monarchy was such a large concern considering the freedoms gained from being set apart from it.

The military and militia were also discussed greatly in Federalist Paper 46. Because of the people leaning away from the federal government and towards the state government, the military and militia were used as a security for civilians. The restriction of the military and the excessive buffer of militia gave an upper hand towards the state government to defend themselves from the potentially more powerful federal government if they ever chose to step over their boundaries, into the states territory of power.

Military and militia

During the ratification debate, many feared that the federal government would become too powerful and too similar to the monarchy in Great Britain. Madison calculated while writing Federalist Paper 46 that the standing military, controlled by the federal government, should be kept under a maximum of 30,000 troops, enough to defend the United States of America against other nations' intrusions, in conjunction with the several states' militia, so to counter hostile foreign invasions when required for national security and as called forth under the control of the President of the United States; when acting in its office's capacity as Commander in Chief. This was to insure the federal military of the United States of America was to be restricted in size, enough to preclude oppression of the several states during times of peace. The people themselves, in conjunction with state cooperation, seen as a more likely alliance than the people allying with the federal government vs. a rogue state, in order to protect themselves from the hostile foreign governments overpowering them with the threat of their standing army; like Great Britain did when King George III sent his battalion to America. Thus, the combined states were encouraged to constitute an aggregate militia of at least 500,000 people toward protection of the general welfare.

Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. [2]

Anti-Federalist views

The Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution would only ruin America and their view of what it could be. Their fears manifested off of the belief that the Constitution would give the federal government too much power, take away their rights as American born citizens, as well as give the federal government complete control over the judicial system, making it less personal.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalism</span> Political concept

Federalism is a combined and compound mode of government that combines a general government with regional governments in a single political system, dividing the powers between the two. Federalism in the modern era was first adopted in the unions of states during the Old Swiss Confederacy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Second Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1791 amendment protecting the right to keep and bear arms

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the right to keep and bear arms. It was ratified on December 15, 1791, along with nine other articles of the Bill of Rights. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court affirmed for the first time that the right belongs to individuals, for self-defense in the home, while also including, as dicta, that the right is not unlimited and does not preclude the existence of certain long-standing prohibitions such as those forbidding "the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill" or restrictions on "the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons". In McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) the Supreme Court ruled that state and local governments are limited to the same extent as the federal government from infringing upon this right. New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022) assured the right to carry weapons in public spaces with reasonable exceptions.

<i>The Federalist Papers</i> 85 essays arguing in favor of the ratification of the US Constitution

The Federalist Papers is a collection of 85 articles and essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay under the collective pseudonym "Publius" to promote the ratification of the Constitution of the United States. The collection was commonly known as The Federalist until the name The Federalist Papers emerged in the 20th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anti-Federalism</span> 1780s political movement against the creation of a strong U.S. federal government and Constitution

Anti-Federalism was a late-18th-century political movement that opposed the creation of a stronger U.S. federal government and which later opposed the ratification of the 1787 Constitution. The previous constitution, called the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, gave state governments more authority. Led by Patrick Henry of Virginia, Anti-Federalists worried, among other things, that the position of president, then a novelty, might evolve into a monarchy. Though the Constitution was ratified and supplanted the Articles of Confederation, Anti-Federalist influence helped lead to the passage of the Bill of Rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 10</span> Essay by James Madison against factions

Federalist No. 10 is an essay written by James Madison as the tenth of The Federalist Papers, a series of essays initiated by Alexander Hamilton arguing for the ratification of the United States Constitution. It was first published in The Daily Advertiser on November 22, 1787, under the name "Publius". Federalist No. 10 is among the most highly regarded of all American political writings.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 23</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton

Federalist No. 23 is an essay by Alexander Hamilton, the twenty-third of The Federalist Papers. It was first published by The New York Packet on December 18, 1787 under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. One of the more significant essays in the series, No. 23 attempts to justify the increased strength of the federal government under the proposed United States Constitution, compared to the then-active Articles of Confederation. The paper is entitled "The Necessity of a Government as Energetic as the One Proposed to the Preservation of the Union".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Civilian control of the military</span> Doctrine concerning authority over military decisions

Civilian control of the military is a doctrine in military and political science that places ultimate responsibility for a country's strategic decision-making in the hands of the civilian political leadership, rather than professional military officers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 8</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton

Federalist No. 8 is an essay by Alexander Hamilton, the eighth of The Federalist Papers. It was first published in The New York Packet on November 20, 1787 under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. In it, Hamilton argues for the utility of the Union to the well-being of Americans, specifically addressing the negative consequences if the Union were to collapse and conflict arise between the states. It is titled "Consequences of Hostilities Between the States".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 14</span> Federalist Paper by James Madison

Federalist No. 14 is an essay by James Madison titled "Objections to the Proposed Constitution From Extent of Territory Answered". This essay is the fourteenth of The Federalist Papers. It was first published in The New York Packet on November 30, 1787 under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. It addresses a major objection of the Anti-Federalists to the proposed United States Constitution: that the sheer size of the United States would make it impossible to govern justly as a single country. Madison touched on this issue in Federalist No. 10 and returns to it in this essay.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 16</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton

Federalist No. 16, titled "The Same Subject Continued: The Insufficiency of the Present Confederation to Preserve the Union", is an essay by Alexander Hamilton. It is one of the eighty-five articles collected in the document The Federalist Papers. The entire collection of papers was written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Federalist Paper No. 16 was first published on December 4, 1787 by The New York Packet under the pseudonym Publius. According to James Madison, "the immediate object of them was to vindicate and recommend the new Constitution to the State of [New York] whose ratification of the instrument, was doubtful, as well as important". In addition, the articles were written and addressed "To the People of New York".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 26</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton regarding a standing army

Federalist No. 26, titled "The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered", is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton as the twenty-sixth of The Federalist Papers. It was published on December 22, 1787, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. Federalist No. 26 expands upon the arguments of a federal military Hamilton made in No. 24 and No. 25, and it is directly continued in No. 27 and No. 28.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 27</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton

Federalist No. 27, titled "The Same Subject Continued: The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered", is an essay by Alexander Hamilton, the twenty-seventh of The Federalist Papers. It was published on December 25, 1787, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. Federalist No. 27 is the second of three successive essays covering the relationship between legislative authority and military force, preceded by Federalist No. 26, and succeeded by Federalist No. 28.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 28</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton

Federalist No. 28, titled "The Same Subject Continued: The Idea of Restraining the Legislative Authority in Regard to the Common Defense Considered", is a political essay by Alexander Hamilton and the twenty-eighth of The Federalist Papers. The essay was published on December 28, 1787, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist Papers were published. This is the last of the three essays discussing the powers of the federal government over a standing military, directly following Federalist No. 26 and Federalist No. 27. Its theme of defense would be continued for one more essay in Federalist No. 29.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federalist No. 29</span> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton "Concerning the Militia"

Federalist Paper No. 29 is an essay by Alexander Hamilton, the twenty-ninth of The Federalist Papers. It was first published in The Independent Journal on January 9, 1788 under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. It is titled "Concerning the Militia". Unlike the rest of the Federalist Papers, which were published more or less in order, No. 29 did not appear until after Federalist No. 36.

<i>Federalist No. 52</i> Federalist Paper by James Madison, or possibly Alexander Hamilton

Federalist No. 52, an essay by James Madison or Alexander Hamilton, is the fifty-second essay out of eighty-five making up The Federalist Papers, a collection of essays written during the Constitution's ratification process, most of them written either by Hamilton or Madison. It was published in the New York Packet on February 8, 1788, with the pseudonym Publius, under which all The Federalist papers were published. This essay is the first of two examining the structure of the United States House of Representatives under the proposed United States Constitution. It is titled The House of Representatives".

<i>Federalist No. 54</i> Federalist Paper by James Madison on Apportionment of Representatives

Federalist Paper No. 54 is an essay by James Madison, the fifty-fourth of The Federalist Papers. It was first published by The New York Packet on February 12, 1788 under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published.

<i>Federalist No. 55</i> Federalist Paper by James Madison

Federalist No. 55 is an essay by James Madison, the fifty-fifth of The Federalist Papers. It was first published by The New York Packet on February 13, 1788 under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist Papers were published. It is titled "The Total Number of House of Representatives". It is the first of four papers defending the number of members in the House of Representatives against the critics who believe the number of members to be inadequate. The critics presume that there aren't enough representatives to defend the country against the small group of legislators who are violating the rights of the people. In this paper, Madison examines the size of the United States House of Representatives.

<i>Federalist No. 66</i> Federalist Paper by Alexander Hamilton

Federalist No. 66 is an essay by Alexander Hamilton, the sixty-sixth of The Federalist Papers. It was published on March 8, 1788, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. The title is "Objections to the Power of the Senate To Set as a Court for Impeachments Further Considered".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Militia (United States)</span> US paramilitary force

The militia of the United States, as defined by the U.S. Congress, has changed over time. During colonial America, all able-bodied men of a certain age range were members of the militia, depending on each colony's rule. Individual towns formed local independent militias for their own defense. The year before the US Constitution was ratified, The Federalist Papers detailed the founders' paramount vision of the militia in 1787. The new Constitution empowered Congress to "organize, arm, and discipline" this national military force, leaving significant control in the hands of each state government.

National service in the United States has a long tradition, extending to the founding of the country. National service takes multiple forms in the U.S., including community service, military service, and other forms.

References

  1. "The Federalist Papers Essay 46 Summary and Analysis | GradeSaver".
  2. "The Avalon Project : Federalist No 46".