This combination helps to protect our freedom. The House, however, is elected by a direct vote of the people.
The Senate is elected by the states themselves through the legislatures , and the states are equally represented in that body. In the other States the election is annual. In several of the States, however, no constitutional provision is made for the impeachment of the chief magistrate. And in Delaware and Virginia he is not impeachable till out of office. The President of the United States is impeachable at any time during his continuance in office.
The tenure by which the judges are to hold their places, is, as it unquestionably ought to be, that of good behavior. The tenure of the ministerial offices generally, will be a subject of legal regulation, conformably to the reason of the case and the example of the State constitutions.
And so, if we use the above standard to measure the Constitution planned by the convention, we can see that the proposed plan is indeed, wholly republican in nature. The House of Representatives is directly elected by the people, as is at least one branch of all State legislatures. The Senate, like the current Congress, and the state Senate of Maryland, is appointed indirectly by the people. The President is also indirectly derived from the choice of the people, per the example of most of the States.
The federal judicary also follows the model described above for republican governance. Judges hold office for life, as is proper, based on good behavior. Members of the House of Representatives serve two-year terms as in South Carolina, and must stand for re-election as in all the States.
Senators serve six-year terms, which is one year more than in Maryland and only two more than in that of the Senates for New York and Virginia. The president is to hold office for four years. The other states hold annual gubernatorial elections, but no constitutional provision is made for impeachment of the chief magistrate.
In Delaware and Virginia the executive is not subject to impeachment until he is out of office. The President of the United States is impeachable at any time while he is in office. Other offices will be subject to legal regulation in conformance with the best practices established by the States in their constitutions.
Could any further proof be required of the republican complexion of this system, the most decisive one might be found in its absolute prohibition of titles of nobility, both under the federal and the State governments; and in its express guaranty of the republican form to each of the latter.
And if any further proof were necessary, what could be more decisive than that of the absolute prohibition against titles of nobility? Both federal and State governments do this as an express guaranty of republican governance. They ought, with equal care, to have preserved the federal form, which regards the Union as a Confederacy of sovereign states; instead of which, they have framed a national government, which regards the Union as a consolidation of the States.
The handle which has been made of this objection requires that it should be examined with some precision. Instead they designed a national government, under which all the states are consolidated. This objection requires precise analysis. Without inquiring into the accuracy of the distinction on which the objection is founded, it will be necessary to a just estimate of its force, first, to ascertain the real character of the government in question; secondly, to inquire how far the convention were authorized to propose such a government; and thirdly, how far the duty they owed to their country could supply any defect of regular authority.
Only then can we see the accuracy of this objection. The fact that States votes are required makes it federal but since a unanimous vote is not required that is a national characteristic.
So in summary the proposed Constitution is neither a national nor a federal constitution but a composition of both. After examinations and consultations, the doctors agree on what should be done in an increasingly dangerous situation. As soon as some of the patient's friends hear of this, they come in and, without any knowledge of medicine, warn the sick man that the doctors' prescription will poison his constitution and probably cause his death.
America was "sensible of her malady" and had called for advice from knowledgeable men of its choice. Yet this advice was being challenged and rejected by some. Madison then briefly considered the main objections to the proposed constitution.
Some did not want it because it was not a confederation of states but a government of individuals. Others agreed that it should be a government over individuals, but not to the extent proposed. The split personality of the Federalist can be considered the root of the dualism that became so characteristic of American constitutional development. The disagreement over the nature of the Union may have contributed to nullification and succession or, for that matter, to the fight against these institutions.
Likewise, Hamilton's and Madison's differing opinions on federalism were used when the Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution and largely account for that Court's oscillation between dual federalism and nationalism.
Also, the authors different conceptions of the separation of powers seem to mark the beginning of a struggle between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government, evident throughout American history. The originality of the Federalist papers, and the Constitution itself, means that these men were confronted with a genuinely democratic problem and succeeded in solving that problem, as Madison denotes here.
This alone constitutes enormous progress in the theory and practice of government, as it existed up to their time. This was not viewed the same way in the Madisonian Republic: there, everyone is treated equally and has a say.
For instance, if we examine how disputes between the States are to be resolved, we can see that the government will deal with the states as political entities.
And so, this is assent and ratification will come from the supreme authority in each State as indicated by the people themselves. Eventually, James Madison lost faith in a one party system, and helped organize which political party to compete with the Federalists? After examinations and consultations, the doctors agree on what should be done in an increasingly dangerous situation. Anti-Federalists said No. If the proposed constitution was not perfect, "no man would refuse to give brass for silver or gold, because the latter had some alloy in it.
Many objected that the new government would not be federal in form, based on the sovereignty of the states, but rather a national government based on a "consolidation" of the states. A republican form of government is one which derives its powers either directly or indirectly from the people and is administered by persons who hold public office for a limited period of time or during good behavior. Among a people consolidated into one nation, this supremacy is completely vested in the national legislature. If we had only a Senate, one might consider the government Federal rather than national.
It is true that in controversies relating to the boundary between the two jurisdictions, the tribunal which is ultimately to decide is to be established under the general government. The government of England, which has one republican branch only, combined with an hereditary aristocracy and monarchy, has, with equal impropriety, been frequently placed on the list of republics. Neither of these rules have been adopted. For instance, if we examine how disputes between the States are to be resolved, we can see that the government will deal with the states as political entities.
It is true that the national government has authority over individuals as national citizens, but in many important respects the new plan of government is clearly federal in its form. Seeking to establish a more adequate central government, they had found that no mere revision of the Articles of Confederation would do.
The people will be represented in the same proportions and principles as they are in the legislatures of the particular states. Side note: Enactment of the 17th Amendment turned the Senate into less of a federal body and more of a national one, like the House. It is sufficient for such a government that the persons administering it be appointed, either directly or indirectly, by the people; and that they hold their appointments by either of the tenures just specified; otherwise every government in the United States, as well as every other popular government that has been or can be well organized or well executed, would be degraded from the republican character. But if the government be national with regard to the operation of its powers, it changes its aspect again when we contemplate it in relation to the extent of its powers.
The handle which has been made of this objection requires that it should be examined with some precision. Conversely, among communities united for a particular purpose, authority is vested partly in the general and partly under the municipal legislature. So in summary the proposed Constitution is neither a national nor a federal constitution but a composition of both. No other form is suited to the particular genius of the American people; only a republican form of government can carry forward the principles fought for in the Revolution or demonstrate that self-government is both possible and practical. Antifederalists THE last paper having concluded the observations which were meant to introduce a candid survey of the plan of government reported by the convention, we now proceed to the execution of that part of our undertaking. On trying the Constitution by this criterion, it falls under the national not the federal character; though perhaps not so completely as has been understood.
It is sufficient for such a government that the persons administering it be appointed, either directly or indirectly, by the people; and that they hold their appointments by either of the tenures just specified; otherwise every government in the United States, as well as every other popular government that has been or can be well organized or well executed, would be degraded from the republican character.
On the one hand, the president is made by the States as political entitites. Seeking to establish a more adequate central government, they had found that no mere revision of the Articles of Confederation would do. A comparison of this definition to the individual State Constitutions shows that for the most part States have a form of republican government. This objection requires precise analysis.