Federalist No. 39 — Mr. Rogers AP Gov

ON THIS PAGE

I. What Is a Republic? II. Federal or National? III. The Amendment Process

Unit 1

Federalist No. 39

James Madison · Publius · January 16, 1788

How Madison Tells the Difference

Madison does not give the whole system one label. He examines each feature separately and asks whether it treats the states as political units or the American people as one nation.

Federal Feature

The states matter as separate political units. Each state participates as a state rather than being combined into one nationwide total.

Ratification happens state by state.
Every state has equal representation in the Senate.
States must approve constitutional amendments.

National Feature

The national government represents or acts directly on people across the country rather than working only through state governments.

House representation is based on population.
Federal laws, courts, and taxes can apply directly to individuals.
The president is chosen through a system partly based on population.

Historical Context

By January 1788 the Constitution had been drafted but not yet ratified. Nine states were needed; only three had signed on. Critics — led by Brutus in the New York press — were hammering the Constitution from two directions simultaneously: it was either too national (destroying state sovereignty) or too federal (just another failed league like the Articles of Confederation). Madison, writing as "Publius" in the New York press, needed to answer both criticisms at once.

Federalist 39 is his answer. He argues the Constitution fits no existing template — it is deliberately both federal and national, a compound republic that borrows the best features of each. Read this document as a rebuttal to Brutus No. 1 and as Madison's most precise constitutional taxonomy.

I. What Is a Republic?

Madison begins by defining the term at stake: "a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure, for a limited period, or during good behavior." Any government meeting this definition is a republic — size and structural details are secondary.

The Definition That Matters

Madison is correcting Antifederalist critics who argued the Constitution created something other than a republic. By defining republic as popular sovereignty + limited terms, he shows the Constitution qualifies — and that Athens and Venice (often called republics) do not because they excluded most citizens.

Madison surveys existing state governments and finds every one already meets his definition of a republic — mixed features, indirect elections, appointed officials. The new Constitution, he argues, follows the same pattern rather than departing from it. The republican principle is "not less applicable to a large than to a small republic."

State Precedent

This is Madison's answer to Brutus No. 1 — Brutus argued a large republic couldn't work. Madison says it's already working at the state level and the logic extends nationally.

II. Federal or National? Madison's Answer: Both

"The Constitution is, in strictness, neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composition of both." Madison identifies five dimensions: the foundation (federal — states ratify), the sources of power (partly federal, partly national), the Senate (federal — equal state representation), the House and presidency (national — population basis), and amendment (federal — supermajority of states required).

The Compound Republic

This is the core concept of Federalist 39. Madison deliberately refuses to call the new government purely 'national' (one people) or purely 'federal' (league of states). It's a deliberate hybrid — a compound republic. This framing was politically essential: it reassured states they weren't being abolished while also establishing national supremacy in its proper sphere.

On the foundation: the Constitution is ratified by the people of each state — acting as states, not as one national people. "It is to be the assent and ratification of the several States, derived from the supreme authority in each State — the authority of the people themselves." This makes the founding act federal, not national.

Ratification = Federal Act

The Antifederalists feared the Constitution would swallow the states. Madison answers: the very act of ratification — done state by state, not by a national vote — is proof the states remain sovereign actors in this system.

On the scope of power: "The difference between a federal and national government, as it relates to the operation of the government, is supposed to consist in this, that in the former the powers operate on the political bodies composing the confederacy... in the latter, on the individual citizens composing the nation." The new government has both kinds of power — federal (operates through states) and national (operates directly on individuals).

Who Does It Govern?

This distinction between governing states vs. governing individuals is essential. The Articles of Confederation could only govern states — which is why it couldn't enforce anything. The new Constitution could reach individuals directly (federal courts, federal taxes) while still leaving states as meaningful units. Both/and, not either/or.

III. The Amendment Process — Final Proof

Madison's last piece of evidence: the amendment process requires ratification by three-fourths of the states — not a simple national majority, and not unanimity (as required under the Articles). This is federal in character because the states as units must approve changes, but the unanimity requirement is dropped, making it more national than the Articles.

Neither Purely Federal Nor National

Under the Articles, any single state could block amendments — purely federal. A pure national government would amend by simple majority vote of citizens. The Constitution's three-fourths requirement is a deliberate middle point, reflecting the compound character of the whole document.

What to remember

Madison answers the fear that the Constitution would destroy the states. The system is partly federal—states retain power and equal Senate representation—and partly national—the government acts directly on people and the House reflects population.

Quick Facts

PublishedJanuary 16, 1788

SeriesThe Federalist Papers

FocusFederalism and republican government

Pairs WithBrutus No. 1 · Federalist 51

Common Mistakes

✗Saying the Constitution is purely national — Madison explicitly argues it is a compound of both federal AND national features.

✗Forgetting that the ratification process (state by state, not national popular vote) is itself evidence of the federal character.

✗Confusing Federalist 39 (what kind of government) with Federalist 51 (how the government controls itself).

Brutus No. 1 (1787)The counterargument Federalist 39 rebuts Federalist No. 51 (1788)Separation of powers and checks Federalist No. 10 (1787)Factions and the large republic