Skip to content
Founding Reader

A ratification question

Would the Constitution preserve a federal union or create one consolidated government?

Madison separates the Constitution's federal and national features and predicts that state authority will remain broad. The Federal Farmer argues that laws operating directly on people and property make the government consolidated in practice.

Selected readings

Federalist

Federalist No. 39

The Independent Journal, January 16, 1788

The proposed Constitution, therefore, is, in strictness, neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composition of both. In its foundation it is federal, not national; in the sources from which the ordinary powers of the government are drawn, it is partly federal and partly national; in the operation of these powers, it is national, not federal; in the extent of them, again, it is federal, not national; and, finally, in the authoritative mode of introducing amendments, it is neither wholly federal nor wholly national.

Federalist No. 39: 16, read the complete text.

Federalist No. 45

The Independent Journal, January 26, 1788

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

Federalist No. 45: 9, read the complete text.

Anti-Federalist

Federal Farmer, Letter I

October 8, 1787 (Pamphlet 1, Letters I-V)

It appears to be a plan retaining some federal features; but to be the first important step, and to aim strongly to one consolidated government of the United States. It leaves the powers of government, and the representation of the people, so unnaturally divided between the general and state governments, that the operations of our system must be very uncertain. My uniform federal attachments, and the interest I have in the protection of property, and a steady execution of the laws, will convince you, that, if I am under any biass at all, it is in favor of any general system which shall promise those advantages. The instability of our laws increases my wishes for firm and steady government; but then, I can consent to no government, which, in my opinion, is not calculated equally to preserve the rights of all orders of men in the community.

Federal Farmer, Letter I: 2, read the complete text.

Federal Farmer, Letter XVII

January 23, 1788 (Pamphlet 2, Letters VI-XVIII)

but in the other case the union, though the state legislatures should not meet for years together, proceeds immediately, by its own laws and officers, to levy and collect monies of individuals, to inlist men, form armies, &c. here the laws of the union operate immediately on the body of the people, on persons and property; in the same manner the laws of one entire consolidated government operate. — These two modes are very distinct, and in their operation and consequences have directly opposite tendencies: The first makes the existence of the state governments indispensable, and throws all the detail business of levying and collecting the taxes, &c. into the hands of those governments, and into the hands, of course, of many thousand officers solely created by, and dependent on the state. The last entirely excludes the agency of the respective states, and throws the whole business of levying and collecting taxes, &c. into the hands of many thousand officers solely created by, and dependent upon the union, and makes the existence of the state government of no consequence in the case.

Federal Farmer, Letter XVII: 3, read the complete text.

Why these readings?

Federal Farmer I predates both Federalist essays; Letter XVII postdates Federalist 39 but does not establish a direct reply.