James Madison's arguments for controlling factions in Federalist No. 10

Federalist No.

Primary Source Analysis

On September 17, 1787 the Constitution of the United States was signed by 39 delegates from 12 states in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, after spending the summer debating the final form in the first Constitutional Convention. The Constitution represented in part an attempt to prevent the dissolution of the confederacy of states formed by the shared goal of independence, by forming a strong federal government (Rhodenhamel, 1987, p. 6).

Once the Constitution had been signed it had to be ratified by at least nine states before the federal government could be formed. To urge the states to ratify, a series of influential essays were published in New York newspapers by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay, under the pseudonym Publius (Rhodenhamel, 1987, p. 45). This collection of essays was called The Federalist Papers (Genovese, 2009).

Historians have since recognized that the most influential of the essays, The Federalist No. 10 (1787), was written by James Madison of Virginia, a life-long scholar of politics. This essay was published in the newspaper New York Packet on November 23, 1787 and presents arguments concerning the emergence of ill-intentioned political factions and how a republican form of government can best control them.

Factions: The Greatest Threat to the Nation

Madison viewed ill-intentioned political factions as probably the greatest threat facing the new nation. The Anti-federalists agreed, arguing that the nation was too large and contained too many opposing opinions to be governable by a federal government. Undaunted in his support of a federal government, Madison describes the value of a Republican form of government in controlling factions while preserving individual liberty in The Federalist No. 10 (1787). On the one hand, a majority in a republican form of government controls the impact of ill-intentioned factions by majority rule. On the other hand, should the majority become ill-intentioned against a minority then the larger and more fractious the Republic is the less likely self-interest will rule the day. From Madison's perspective, the large the population of a nation, the greater the diversity of opposing voices, and the less likely a few 'bad apples' will be able to control majority opinion. The minority members of a large republic would therefore find security in its size and many opposing voices.

Madison also expressed his faith in representation through a large body of duly elected representatives, which became the lower house of Congress. He argued that a large enough body would inherently contain enough people of merit to make it "… difficult for unworthy candidates to practice with success the vicious arts & #8230;," but small enough to avoid the "… confusion of the multitude."

Primary Source

Source verification was performed by comparing multiple references containing the primary material. The main limitation of the source material was in relation to the form of English used during that period of history, which made it more difficult to understand.

Secondary Sources

The secondary sources were invaluable for providing the historical context within which this document was written and why. If the Madison's essay had been read in isolation, so much of its meaning and import would have been lost otherwise.