The Constitution Limits and Distributes Power
397
Of paramount importance under the new scheme were the State legislatures. The President could not even be elected unless they acted. They
played a key role in his election. Moreover, they elected the members of
the Senate and would probably influence the election of members of the
House of Representatives as well. Both the legislative and executive
branches of the Federal government, in other words, owed their very
existence to the State legislatures. Added to this, the States would exercise far more influence in public affairs because more people were employed under their authority than under that of the general government.
‘‘The members of the legislative, executive and judiciary departments
of thirteen and more States; the justices of peace, officers of militia, ministerial officers of justice, with all the county corporation and townofficers, for three millions and more of people, intermixed and having
particular acquaintance with every class and circle of people, must exceed beyond all proportion, both in number and influence, those of
every description who will be employed in the administration of the
federal system.’’
Accustomed to their own State constitutions, which except in Massachusetts and a few other States generally failed to provide for sufficient
checks and balances, some Anti-Federalists also criticized the separation
of powers system of the Constitution. There was too much ‘‘blending,’’
they argued, and the departments ought to be kept wholly separate and
distinct. Not all Anti-Federalists shared this view, however, and many accepted the argument of Madison in Federalist 47 that some overlapping of
functions was necessary in order to prevent one branch from encroaching upon the functions of another. Hence the issue of separation of powers did not become a major bone of contention in the struggle over ratification of the Constitution. The Anti-Federalists were preoccupied with
the question of States’ Rights. This was the theme song of their campaign
against the Constitution.
In response to the many complaints that the proposed Constitution
not only redistributed power improperly but also failed to limit the powers that had now been shifted to the Federal government, the authors of
The Federalist assured their adversaries that such fears were unfounded.
‘‘The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal government,’’ said Madison in Federalist 45, ‘‘are few and defined. Those