HKB

← back

The Federalist Papers

Alexander Hamilton; John Jay; James Madison · 1787-10-1788-08 primary

passage 228 of 360 · (216/342)

↪ you wandered here via “Massachusetts county conventions” — the connecting lines are tinted below

in brief
Madison argues that state-level election practices—where cities, counties, and whole-state constituencies choose officials—have not increased corruption, so diffusive election methods do not inherently elevate traitors or undermine liberty.

as will be necessary for her representatives in the Congress. Those of Massachusetts are larger than will be necessary for that purpose; and those of New York still more so.

In the last State the members of Assembly for the cities and counties of New York and Albany are elected by very nearly as many voters as will be entitled to a representative in the Congress, calculating on the number of sixty-five representatives only. It makes no difference that in these senatorial districts and counties a number of representatives are voted for by each elector at the same time. If the same electors at the same time are capable of choosing four or five representatives, they cannot be incapable of choosing one. Pennsylvania is an additional example. Some of her counties, which elect her State representatives, are almost as large as her districts will be by which her federal representatives will be elected. The city of Philadelphia is supposed to contain between fifty and sixty thousand souls. It will therefore form nearly two districts for the choice of federal representatives. It forms, however, but one county, in which every elector votes for each of its representatives in the State legislature. And what may appear to be still more directly to our purpose, the whole city actually elects a SINGLE MEMBER for the executive council. This is the case in all the other counties of the State. Are not these facts the most satisfactory proofs of the fallacy which has been employed against the branch of the federal government under consideration? Has it appeared on trial that the senators of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and New York, or the executive council of Pennsylvania, or the members of the Assembly in the two last States, have betrayed any peculiar disposition to sacrifice the many to the few, or are in any respect less worthy of their places than the representatives and magistrates appointed in other States by very small divisions of the people? But there are cases of a stronger complexion than any which I have yet quoted.

One branch of the legislature of Connecticut is so constituted that each member of it is elected by the whole State. So is the governor of that State, of Massachusetts, and of this State, and the president of New Hampshire. I leave every man to decide whether the result of any one of these experiments can be said to countenance a suspicion, that a diffusive mode of choosing representatives of the people tends to elevate traitors and to undermine the public liberty.

PUBLIUS.

THE FEDERALIST. No. LVIII.

Objection That The Number of Members Will Not Be Augmented as the Progress of Population Demands Considered

MADISON

To the People of the State of New York:

← previous passage read in the full work → next passage →

topics: corruption, patronage, and bribery · custom and unwritten law · elections and representation

The Federalist Papers · Alexander Hamilton; John Jay; James Madison · 1787–1788