FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE Representative Government Module
Founding Principles:
Representative Government Module
Representative government: Form of government where sovereignty lies with individuals who
authorize government action via representatives.
Lesson One: What is Representative
Government, and How Does it Protect
Freedom?
North Carolina Clarifying Objectives

Overview
The Founders believed that republican (or
representative) government, the form of
government in which the people are sovereign
and authorize representatives to make and carry
out laws, was the best option for the new nation.
However, in practice, they knew that majorities
could be just as tyrannical as a king. This lesson
explores the reasons the Founders believed that
republican government would correct the defects
associated with majority-rule systems, and how
the Constitution protected against mob rule.

Recommended Time
120 minutes

Objectives





Explain how representative government
protects freedom.
Compare the British and American political
systems.
Evaluate the concept of majority rule.
Appraise the significance of the right to vote
and fair and frequent elections.
Understand that the continuation of the
system of republican government is
dependent on the American people.
© The Bill of Rights Institute

CE.C&G.1.1: Explain how the tensions
over power and authority led America’s
founding fathers to develop a constitutional
democracy (e.g., mercantilism, salutary
neglect, taxation and representation, boycott
and protest, independence, American
Revolution, Articles of Confederation, Ben
Franklin, George Washington, John Adams,
Sons of Liberty, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.3: Evaluate how debates on
power and authority between Federalists
and Anti-Federalists have helped shape
government in the United States over
time (e.g., Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison,
Federalist Papers, strong central
government, protection of individual rights,
Elastic Clause, Bill of Rights, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.4:Analyze the principles and
ideals underlying American democracy in
terms of how they promote freedom (e.g.,
separation of powers, rule of law, limited
government, democracy, consent of the
governed, individual rights –life, liberty,
pursuit of happiness, self-government,
representative democracy, equal
opportunity, equal protection under the law,
diversity, patriotism, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.5: Evaluate the fundamental
principles of American politics in terms
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE of the extent to which they have been
used effectively to maintain constitutional
democracy in the United States (e.g., rule
of law, limited government, democracy,
consent of the governed, etc.).





CE.C&G.2.1: Analyze the structures of
national, state and local governments
in terms of ways they are organized to
maintain order, security, welfare of the
public and the protection of citizens (e.g.,
federalism, the three branches, court
system, jurisdictions, judicial process,
agencies, etc.).
CE.C&G.2.5: Compare United States
system of government within the framework
of the federal and state structures as well
as in how they relate with governmental
systems of other nations (e.g.,
Republicanism, federalism).
CE.C&G.4.1: Compare citizenship in the
American constitutional democracy to
membership in other types of governments
(e.g., right to privacy, civil rights,
responsibilities, political rights, right to due
process, equal protection under the law,
participation, freedom, etc.).
AH1.H.1.2: Use Historical Comprehension
to: 1. Reconstruct the literal meaning of a
historical passage. 2. Differentiate between
historical facts and historical interpretations.
3. Analyze data in historical maps. 4.
Analyze visual, literary and musical sources.
AH1.H.1.3: Use Historical Analysis and
Interpretation to: 1. Identify issues and
problems in the past. 2. Consider multiple
perspectives of various peoples in the past.
3. Analyze cause-and-effect relationships
and multiple causation. 4. Evaluate
competing historical narratives and debates
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Representative Government Module
among historians. 5. Evaluate the influence
of the past on contemporary issues.



AH1.H.1.4: Use Historical Research to: 1.
Formulate historical questions. 2. Obtain
historical data from a variety of sources.
3. Support interpretations with historical
evidence. 4. Construct analytical essays
using historical evidence to support
arguments.
AH1.H.4.1: Analyze the political issues
and conflicts that impacted the United
States through Reconstruction and the
compromises that resulted (e.g., American
Revolution, Constitutional Convention, Bill
of Rights, development of political parties,
nullification, slavery, states’ rights, Civil
War).
AH1.H.5.1: Summarize how the
philosophical, ideological and/or religious
views on freedom and equality contributed
to the development of American political and
economic systems through Reconstruction
(e.g., natural rights, First Great
Awakening, Declaration of Independence,
transcendentalism, suffrage, abolition,
“slavery as a peculiar institution”, etc.).
Lesson Two: Representative
Government and Faction
Overview
The Founders believed that a representative
government would be able to take the will of
the people and turn it into policy and laws;
however, they were aware that there were
many obstacles they had to overcome to make
a functioning representative system. In the
Federalist Papers, James Madison – writing
under the pseudonym Publius – responded to
common critiques of republican governance,
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE Representative Government Module
and demonstrated how a representative
government with a strong federal system would
be able to effectively operate.
terms of how they promote freedom (e.g.,
separation of powers, rule of law, limited
government, democracy, consent of the
governed, individual rights –life, liberty,
pursuit of happiness, self-government,
representative democracy, equal
opportunity, equal protection under the law,
diversity, patriotism, etc.).
Recommended Time
70 minutes
Objectives


Evaluate how a representative government
would handle selfish factions.
Explain why Madison thought a big
republican government would work better
than a small one.



Critically engage with this theory.
Understand how good republican
governance is tied to the overall structure of
government.

North Carolina Clarifying Objectives



CE.C&G.1.1: Explain how the tensions
over power and authority led America’s
founding fathers to develop a constitutional
democracy (e.g., mercantilism, salutary
neglect, taxation and representation, boycott
and protest, independence, American
Revolution, Articles of Confederation, Ben
Franklin, George Washington, John Adams,
Sons of Liberty, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.3: Evaluate how debates on
power and authority between Federalists
and Anti-Federalists have helped shape
government in the United States over
time (e.g., Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison,
Federalist Papers, strong central
government, protection of individual rights,
Elastic Clause, Bill of Rights, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.4: Analyze the principles and
ideals underlying American democracy in
© The Bill of Rights Institute


CE.C&G.1.5: Evaluate the fundamental
principles of American politics in terms
of the extent to which they have been
used effectively to maintain constitutional
democracy in the United States (e.g., rule
of law, limited government, democracy,
consent of the governed, etc.).
CE.C&G.2.1: Analyze the structures of
national, state and local governments
in terms of ways they are organized to
maintain order, security, welfare of the
public and the protection of citizens (e.g.,
federalism, the three branches, court
system, jurisdictions, judicial process,
agencies, etc.).
CE.C&G.3.6: Explain ways laws have been
influenced by political parties, constituents,
interest groups, lobbyists, the media and
public opinion (e.g., extension of suffrage,
labor legislation, civil rights legislation,
military policy, environmental legislation,
business regulation and educational policy).
CE.C&G.4.3: Analyze the roles of citizens
of North Carolina and the United States in
terms of responsibilities, participation, civic
life and criteria for membership or admission
(e.g., voting, jury duty, lobbying, interacting
successfully with government agencies,
organizing and working in civic groups,
volunteering, petitioning, picketing, running
for political office, residency, etc.)
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE 





CE.C&G.4.4: Analyze the obligations of
citizens by determining when their personal
desires, interests and involvement are
subordinate to the good of the nation or
state (e.g., Patriot Act, Homeland Security,
sedition, civil rights, equal rights under the
law, jury duty, Selective Services Act, rule of
law, eminent domain, etc.).
AH1.H.1.2: Use Historical Comprehension
to: 1. Reconstruct the literal meaning of a
historical passage. 2. Differentiate between
historical facts and historical interpretations.
3. Analyze data in historical maps. 4.
Analyze visual, literary and musical sources.
AH1.H.1.3: Use Historical Analysis and
Interpretation to: 1. Identify issues and
problems in the past. 2. Consider multiple
perspectives of various peoples in the past.
3. Analyze cause-and-effect relationships
and multiple causation. 4. Evaluate
competing historical narratives and debates
among historians. 5. Evaluate the influence
of the past on contemporary issues.
Representative Government Module
Revolution, Constitutional Convention, Bill
of Rights, development of political parties,
nullification, slavery, states’ rights, Civil
War).
Assessment
Overview
Students will evaluate how a representative
government balances the desires of the
citizenry with the judgment of elected
representatives.
Recommended Time
30 minutes
Assignment
“A representative owes the People not only his
industry, but his judgment, and he betrays them
if he sacrifices it to their opinion.” - Edmund
Burke

AH1.H.2.1: Analyze key political, economic,
and social turning points from colonization
through Reconstruction in terms of causes
and effects (e.g., conflicts, legislation,
elections, innovations, leadership,
movements, Supreme Court decisions, etc.)
AH1.H.2.2: Evaluate key turning points
from colonization through Reconstruction
in terms of their lasting impact (e.g.,
conflicts, legislation, elections, innovations,
leadership, movements, Supreme Court
decisions, etc.).
AH1.H.4.1: Analyze the political issues
and conflicts that impacted the United
States through Reconstruction and the
compromises that resulted (e.g., American
© The Bill of Rights Institute
The Founders believed that a representative
government would empower those with
the knowledge and skills necessary to
lead; however, there is a constant tension
between the desires of the public and the
desires of an individual representative.
Students should analyze and respond
critically to the questions/prompts below:



How do frequent and fair elections
ensure that representatives are pursuing
the public’s interest and not their own?
Provide a theoretical example where the
interests of a representative don’t align
with those of the public. What can be
done to prevent this type of scenario?
If a representative doesn’t sacrifice his
judgment for the public’s opinion (as
Edmund Burke put it) he/she is liable to be
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE Representative Government Module
voted out of office. Does this undermine
representative government? How did the
Founders seek to remedy this problem?


In your opinion is it more important for a
representative to do what the people want or
what he thinks is best? Justify your answer.
What did the Founders think?
An informed electorate is crucial to ensure
that the interests and desires of the people
and their representatives stay aligned. How
should we ensure there is an informed
electorate? Justify your answer.
These resources were created by the Bill of Rights Institute to help North Carolina high school teachers of civics and American History meet the
requirements of the Founding Principles Act.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE Representative Government Module
Representative Government Module:
What is Representative Government, and
How Does it Protect Freedom? Lesson
Overview
The Founders believed that republican (or representative) government, the form of government
in which the people are sovereign and authorize representatives to make and carry out laws, was
the best option for the new nation. However, in practice, they knew that majorities could be just
as tyrannical as a king. This lesson explores the reasons the Founders believed that republican
government would correct the defects associated with majority-rulesystems, and how the
Constitution protected against mob rule.
Recommended Time

120 minutes
Objectives





Explain how representative government
protects freedom.
Compare the British and American political
systems.
Evaluate the concept of majority rule.
Appraise the significance of the right to vote
and fair and frequent elections.
Understand that the continuation of the
system of republican government is
dependent on the American people.

North Carolina Clarifying Objectives

CE.C&G.1.1: Explain how the tensions
over power and authority led America’s
founding fathers to develop a constitutional
democracy (e.g., mercantilism, salutary
neglect, taxation and representation, boycott
and protest, independence, American
Revolution, Articles of Confederation, Ben
Franklin, George Washington, John Adams,
Sons of Liberty, etc.).
© The Bill of Rights Institute

CE.C&G.1.3: Evaluate how debates on
power and authority between Federalists
and Anti-Federalists have helped shape
government in the United States over
time (e.g., Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison,
Federalist Papers, strong central
government, protection of individual rights,
Elastic Clause, Bill of Rights, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.4: Analyze the principles and
ideals underlying American democracy in
terms of how they promote freedom (e.g.,
separation of powers, rule of law, limited
government, democracy, consent of the
governed, individual rights –life, liberty,
pursuit of happiness, self-government,
representative democracy, equal
opportunity, equal protection under the law,
diversity, patriotism, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.5: Evaluate the fundamental
principles of American politics in terms
of the extent to which they have been
used effectively to maintain constitutional
democracy in the United States (e.g., rule
of law, limited government, democracy,
consent of the governed, etc.).
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE 





CE.C&G.2.1: Analyze the structures of
national, state and local governments
in terms of ways they are organized to
maintain order, security, welfare of the
public and the protection of citizens (e.g.,
federalism, the three branches, court
system, jurisdictions, judicial process,
agencies, etc.).
CE.C&G.2.5: Compare United States
system of government within the framework
of the federal and state structures as well
as in how they relate with governmental
systems of other nations (e.g.,
Republicanism, federalism).
CE.C&G.4.1: Compare citizenship in the
American constitutional democracy to
membership in other types of governments
(e.g., right to privacy, civil rights,
responsibilities, political rights, right to due
process, equal protection under the law,
participation, freedom, etc.).
Representative Government Module
3. Support interpretations with historical
evidence. 4. Construct analytical essays
using historical evidence to support
arguments.


H1.H.4.1: Analyze the political issues
and conflicts that impacted the United
States through Reconstruction and the
compromises that resulted (e.g., American
Revolution, Constitutional Convention, Bill
of Rights, development of political parties,
nullification, slavery, states’ rights, Civil
War).
AH1.H.5.1: Summarize how the
philosophical, ideological and/or religious
views on freedom and equality contributed
to the development of American political and
economic systems through Reconstruction
(e.g., natural rights, First Great
Awakening, Declaration of Independence,
transcendentalism, suffrage, abolition,
“slavery as a peculiar institution”, etc.).
AH1.H.1.2: Use Historical Comprehension
to: 1. Reconstruct the literal meaning of a
historical passage. 2. Differentiate between
historical facts and historical interpretations.
3. Analyze data in historical maps. 4.
Analyze visual, literary and musical sources.
Materials
AH1.H.1.3: Use Historical Analysis and
Interpretation to: 1. Identify issues and
problems in the past. 2. Consider multiple
perspectives of various peoples in the past.
3. Analyze cause-and-effect relationships and
multiple causation. 4. Evaluate competing
historical narratives and debates among
historians. 5. Evaluate the influence of the
past on contemporary issues.
Handout D: Principles in Cartoons
AH1.H.1.4: Use Historical Research to: 1.
Formulate historical questions. 2. Obtain
historical data from a variety of sources.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Handout A: Focus Quotations
Handout B: Republican Government Essay
Handout C: Constitutional Principle:
Representative Government Viewing Guide
Day I Lesson Plan
Warm-up/Pre-assessment [15
minutes]
A. Begin the lesson by asking students to work
with a partner or two. They should imagine
they are creating a new government, and
begin to make some rules or laws for their
new society. Give students a few minutes to
craft some rules.
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE B. Ask a few volunteers to share some of
the rules they came up with. After a few
examples, ask students if anyone came up
with a “rule for the rules.” In other words,
did any groups come up with a framework
for making laws and rules?
C. Explain that such a meta-rule is the U.S.
Constitution. The Constitution requires
the federal government to guarantee a
republican (or representative) form of
government to each state. In addition, the
Constitution establishes that powers not
given to Congress remain with the states
and the people. Some (not all) of the limits
on government are spelled out in the Bill of
Rights
Activity: Readings and Documents
[30 minutes]
A. Distribute Handout A: Focus Quotations
and have students complete it individually
or in pairs. Call students’ attention to the
fact that statement #5 on Handout A is a
loose paraphrase of the Washington quote
B. Have students read Handout B:
Republican Government Essay and
discuss how the rules and frameworks they
created in the warm up are linked to the
idea of representative government. Point
out that the rules they created emerged
from the people, but also serve as a curb
on the people.
Wrap-Up [20 minutes]
A. Before wrapping up for the day, remind
students that representation has been
achieved throughout American history
through voting. The history of the suffrage
amendments demonstrates that the
principle of representative government
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Representative Government Module
is achieved through fair and frequent
elections. For homework, students
should use their history or government
textbooks, and/or sources available at
www.BillofRightsInstitute.org or other
online sources to find a quotation from an
individual who worked in support of one of
the following:
a. 15th Amendment
b. 19th Amendment
c. 24th Amendment
d. Voting Rights Act (1965)
e. 26th Amendment
Day II Lesson Plan
Warm-up [15 minutes]
A. Have a few students share the quotations
they located for homework. As a class,
discuss any themes that emerge in the
quotations. As a large group, discuss the
following questions:
a. Why has the right to vote been so
treasured throughout American history?
b. In what ways is the U.S. based on the
principle of majority rule?
c. In what ways is it based on the idea that
there are some things no majority can
do?
Activity: Multi-Media Resource [30
minutes]
A. Have students watch the video
Constitutional Principle: Representative
Government and complete the Handout C:
Constitutional Principle: Representative
Government Viewing Guide. The video can
be found here: http://billofrightsinstitute.org/
resources/student-resources/constitutionalprinciples-videos/.
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE Representative Government Module
B. After students complete the viewing guide,
conduct a large group discussion to answer
the question: Were the Founders wise to
avoid a direct democracy? Why or why not?
Wrap-up: Journaling [10 minutes]
A. Call students’ attention to the Washington
quotation on Handout B. Students should
write a journal response to two questions:
First, what are some ways that the principle
of republican government affects you as
an American? Second, is it still true that
the future success of representative (or
republican) government is entrusted to the
American people? If so, what is your role in
ensuring its success?
Assessment
A. Have students complete Handout D:
Principles in Cartoons.
B. Rubric for Handout D.
1
2
3
4
Visual
Representation
Cartoon does
not represent the
statement.
Cartoon somewhat
represents the
statement.
Cartoon represents
the statement, but it
lacks imagination.
Cartoon represents
the statement
imaginatively.
Themes
Cartoon fails to
convey the intent or
statement.
Cartoon conveys
some of the intent
or literal meaning of
the statement.
Cartoon expresses
the literal intent
OR the figurative
meaning of the
statement.
Cartoon expresses
the literal intent
as well as the
figurative meaning
of the statement.
Questions
Student fails
to answer the
questions correctly.
Student answers
some of the
questions correctly.
Student answers
the questions by
applying what they
leaned from the
lesson.
Student answers
the questions
correctly, applies
what they have
learned from
the lesson, and
includes their own
interpretations.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Handout A: Focus Quotations
Directions: Choose one quotation and write a concise paraphrase. Then answer the questions
that follow.
“The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the
rights of mankind.” – Thomas Jefferson
“We may define a republic to be…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.” – James Madison, 1787
“The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the republican model of
government, are justly considered deeply, perhaps as finally, staked on the experiment entrusted to
the hands of the American people.” - George Washington, 1789
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Eternally: forever
Derives: obtains
Destiny: a pre-determined course of events
Staked: invested in and dependent on
Questions to Consider
1. In his definition of a republic, why does Madison note that representatives hold office for limited
times or during good behavior?
2. On whom does the responsibility for the success of America depend, according to Washington?
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Handout B: Republican Government Essay
As Benjamin Franklin emerged from
Independence Hall at the close of the
Constitutional Convention in September 1787,
a woman approached and asked him what form
of government the Convention had produced.
Franklin responded, “A republic, madam – if
you can keep it.”
If you asked the average American today
the question posed to Franklin - what type
of government do we have? – odds are the
answer would be “a democracy,” and not
“a republic.” This language of democracy is
reinforced in the rhetoric of public officials and
within the media, and much of American society
currently sees no difference between the two.
Our Founders, however, did. In fact, many of
the Founders, such as James Madison, were
suspicious of that which modern Americans
seemingly embrace: “…democracies have ever
been spectacles of turbulence and contention;
[are] incompatible with personal security or the
rights of property; and have in general been as
short in their lives as they have been violent in
their deaths.” (Federalist No. 10)
Democracy is self-government through
popular sovereignty, based on the principle
of majority rule. Simply put, the people rule,
and what more than half of the people want
is what will be. A challenge, though, has long
plagued the very concept of democracy: how
can the principles of popular sovereignty be
implemented in a manner that also provides for
a stable society and preserves the rights and
liberties of all?
The unique American answer to this vexing
question has partial roots in an ancient source.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Examining the various types of government that
existed throughout the world during his time,
Greek philosopher Aristotle classified them into
three categories: rule by one (monarchy), rule
by a few (aristocracy) and rule by the many
(democracy). He noted that while all three types
began their rule in what he called their “good
form,” - ruling on the basis of the common good
– all three have a tendency to degenerate
into their “bad form,” in which the one, the few,
or the many rule on the basis of self interest.
Monarchies devolve to tyranny, aristocracies
to oligarchy, and democracies to mob rule. To
Aristotle, the best form of government blended
all three types into a “mixed regime.” This
mixed regime would combine the best features
of each and counterbalance their excesses and
tendency to devolve.
Aristotle’s mixed regime, which allowed for
- indeed advocated – both monarchy and
aristocracy, took hold in some European
countries by the 1600s. This was most
notably true in England, where the King,
House of Lords and the House of Commons
shared governmental power. Enlightenment
philosophers such as John Locke and
Montesquieu, however, challenged vigorously
the notion that either monarchy or aristocracy
were compatible with self-government. Locke’s
natural rights theory, in particular, was premised
upon the idea that all men are created equal,
born with rights bestowed by God, not man.
Further, Locke argued that the very purpose
of government was to protect these rights, and
that all government must be by consent of the
governed.
Locke did not rule out the possibility of some
kind of constitutional monarchy. However,
absent an effective process to establish
consent of the governed, he viewed both
rule by a king, and by an aristocratic elite, as
invalid. This reasoning reflected doubt upon the
legitimacy of Aristotle’s rule by one and rule by
a few. All power, in Locke’s view, must be held
by the many.
Pure democracy, however, has long been as
mistrusted as monarchy or aristocracy with
respect to the safety of liberty. Imagine, for
example, a scenario in which - if left to majority
rule - perfectly law abiding American Muslim
men retained any rights at all in the immediate
aftermath of September 11th , or the trial and
punishment of a heinous criminal, if left to a
simple vote of the community.
An alternative was needed to preserve the
power of the many, but curb the excesses of
majority rule. The answer was to be found in
republican government, and for over a century
various Enlightenment philosophers debated
the particular elements and structures that were
required, as well as the very nature of human
liberty and the purpose of government itself.
What, then, is a republic? A republican
government is one in which the people
– directly or indirectly - are the ultimate source
of authority, electing representatives to make
laws that serve their interests and advance
the common good. A republic, however,
also limits the power of the majority through
a constitutional framework that promotes
competent government, and affords protections
of fundamental rights.
Theoretical republicanism would get its first
genuine test in the founding of America.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Our Founders sought to implement a form
of democratic republicanism, not a pure
democracy, through our Constitution.
The most basic feature of the American
constitutional republic is the selection of
representatives directly or indirectly by the
people throughout all three branches of
government, preserving the philosophy that
all power must flow from the people. While the
direct election of representatives is reserved
only for Congress, Americans indirectly choose
our president (via an electoral college) and all
federal judges (via presidential appointment
and approval of Senators, all of whom are
chosen by the people, directly or indirectly).
Rule by the many is preserved, as regular
elections ensure the people maintain a
constant voice in their government and remain
the source of legitimate power.
Further, each branch represents distinctly
different interests and is given specific
powers to this end. The legislative branch,
for example, is intended to represent citizens
(House of Representatives) and the state
in which they reside (Senate), and is given
the power to make law, raise taxes, declare
war, and regulate commerce. The executive
branch is designed to represent the interests
of the nation, and as such is given the power
to veto legislation, make treaties, and appoint
ambassadors. Lastly, the purpose of the judicial
branch is to administer justice and interpret the
law in criminal cases and civil cases. While not
originally in the Constitution, the concept of
judicial review, established by the case Marbury
v. Madison (1803), allowed the Supreme Court
to determine the constitutionality of the actions
of the other two branches. This functional
separation of powers is reinforced through
a complex system of checks and balances
that allows each branch to limit the reach and
authority of the others, serving to limit both
majority rule and the power of the government
itself.
The Bill of Rights provides perhaps the
clearest example of the dichotomy between a
democracy and a republic. It is simultaneously
the most celebrated feature of our “democracy”
and the most anti-democratic feature of our
constitutional republic. The Bill of Rights carves
out specific liberties that are off-limits from the
reach of “the people,” unless the Constitution
itself is further amended. The Bill of Rights
includes both natural rights, such as freedom of
conscience, and civil rights, such as protection
against arbitrary search and seizure. No matter
how large the majority, one’s right to practice
the religion of choice, or to be free from
arbitrary search by government officials, cannot
be abridged or simply voted away.
Oddly, a key feature of America’s constitutional
republic also happens to run entirely counter
to what many Enlightenment philosophers
theorized was a necessary precondition for
republican government: a small territory.
Montesquieu, for example, argued:
It is natural for a republic to have only a
small territory; otherwise it cannot long
subsist…In an extensive republic the
public good is sacrificed to a thousand
private views; it is subordinate to
exceptions, and depends on accidents.
In a small one, the interest of the public
is more obvious, better understood,
and more within the reach of every
citizen; abuses have less extent, and, of
course, are less protected. (Spirit of the
Laws)
© The Bill of Rights Institute
In short, conventional wisdom at the time
of America’s founding was that only a
geographically small republic could provide
competent self-government that protected
liberty. Our Constitution, however, crafted
the very “extensive republic” against which
Montesquieu cautioned.
James Madison would turn the small-territory
theoretical republicanism of the Enlightenment
on its head in Federalist No. 10. In this essay,
he argued that in any free society people would
naturally come together in groups to pursue
common interests. While all interest groups
pursued their desires under the assumption that
they were rooted in the “common good,” many
in fact posed a threat to the liberty of others.
Madison called these harmful groups, “factions.”
By a faction, I understand a number of
citizens, whether amounting to a majority
or a minority of the whole, who are
united and actuated by some common
impulse of passion, or of interest,
adversed to the rights of other citizens,
or to the permanent and aggregate
interests of the community.
Madison theorized that in a small republic, the
number of interests would be few and, therefore,
both the influence of each, and the threat
each posed, would be greater. In an extensive
republic, however, there would be a large variety
of diverse and distinct interest groups that likely
possessed different beliefs and desires. These
many groups, spread out over a large territory,
would be less likely to develop into harmful
factions, and less able to combine to oppress
minorities.
“Extend the sphere, and you take
in a greater variety of parties and
interests; you make it less probable
that a majority of the whole will have
a common motive to invade the rights
of other citizens; or if such a common
motive exists, it will be more difficult
for all who feel it to discover their own
strength, and to act in unison with each
other.
British Prime Minister Winston Churchill once
famously quipped: “Democracy is the worst
form of government except for all those others
that have been tried.” Benjamin Franklin,
however, was likely far closer to the truth of
human experience: “Democracy is two wolves
and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.”
In forming a republic based in the will of the
people, equipped to establish justice and
promote liberty, the Founders placed great trust
in the virtue of future generations. Today we
might well echo Franklin—we have a republic, if
we can keep it.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Handout C: Viewing Guide for Constitutional
Principle Video: Representative Government
Directions: Complete the first section while you watch the video. Then read the questions that
follow. Watch the video a second time if needed, and then answer the questions.
While you watch:
1. What do you think of when you hear the term “democracy?” Write down some key words and
phrases.
2. Have you heard the phrase “majority rules”? Should the majority always rule? Why or why not?
After you watch:
1. What does the principle of republican government (or representative government) mean?
2. What was the chief reason that the Founders were wary of democracy?
3. How did James Madison challenge traditional thinking about republics?
4. Why are frequent and fair elections for representative offices a necessary ingredient for
sustaining representative government? Challenge question: Why are some offices elected and
others appointed?
5. Could representative government exist without frequent and fair elections? Why or why not?
6. Do you agree that representative government helps prevent “tyranny of the majority”? Why or
why not?
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Handout D: Principles in Cartoons
Draw a cartoon or other visual representation for one of these two statements. Then answer the
questions that follow.
“A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.” -- Ben Franklin
(attributed)
“Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of
the other 49%.” – Thomas Jefferson (attributed)
1. What principle(s) allows the majority to rule within a constitutional framework?
2. How do these principle(s) protect freedom?
3. How do these principles affect you as an American?
© The Bill of Rights Institute
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE Representative Government Module
Representative Government Module:
Representative Government and Faction Lesson
Overview
Although the Founders believed that a representative government would be able to take the will of
the people and turn it into policy and laws, they were aware that there were many obstacles to be
overcome to make a functioning representative system. In the Federalist Papers, James Madison –
writing under the pseudonym Publius – responded to common critiques of republican governance,
and demonstrated how a representative government with a strong federal system would be able to
operate effectively.
Recommended Time
and Anti-Federalists have helped shape
government in the United States over
time (e.g., Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison,
Federalist Papers, strong central
government, protection of individual rights,
Elastic Clause, Bill of Rights, etc.).
70 minutes
Objectives


Evaluate how a representative government
would handle self-interested factions.
Explain why Madison thought a republican
government in a big country would work
better than in a small one.



Critically engage with this theory.
Understand how good republican
governance is tied to the overall structure of
government.
North Carolina Clarifying Objectives


CE.C&G.1.1: Explain how the tensions
over power and authority led America’s
founding fathers to develop a constitutional
democracy (e.g., mercantilism, salutary
neglect, taxation and representation, boycott
and protest, independence, American
Revolution, Articles of Confederation, Ben
Franklin, George Washington, John Adams,
Sons of Liberty, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.3: Evaluate how debates on
power and authority between Federalists
© The Bill of Rights Institute


CE.C&G.1.4: Analyze the principles and
ideals underlying American democracy in
terms of how they promote freedom (e.g.,
separation of powers, rule of law, limited
government, democracy, consent of the
governed, individual rights –life, liberty,
pursuit of happiness, self-government,
representative democracy, equal
opportunity, equal protection under the law,
diversity, patriotism, etc.).
CE.C&G.1.5: Evaluate the fundamental
principles of American politics in terms
of the extent to which they have been
used effectively to maintain constitutional
democracy in the United States (e.g., rule
of law, limited government, democracy,
consent of the governed, etc.).
CE.C&G.2.1: Analyze the structures of
national, state and local governments
in terms of ways they are organized to
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE Representative Government Module
maintain order, security, welfare of the
public and the protection of citizens (e.g.,
federalism, the three branches, court
system, jurisdictions, judicial process,
agencies, etc.).





CE.C&G.3.6: Explain ways laws have been
influenced by political parties, constituents,
interest groups, lobbyists, the media and
public opinion (e.g., extension of suffrage,
labor legislation, civil rights legislation,
military policy, environmental legislation,
business regulation and educational policy).
CE.C&G.4.3: Analyze the roles of citizens
of North Carolina and the United States in
terms of responsibilities, participation, civic
life and criteria for membership or admission
(e.g., voting, jury duty, lobbying, interacting
successfully with government agencies,
organizing and working in civic groups,
volunteering, petitioning, picketing, running
for political office, residency, etc.)
CE.C&G.4.4: Analyze the obligations of
citizens by determining when their personal
desires, interests and involvement are
subordinate to the good of the nation or
state (e.g., Patriot Act, Homeland Security,
sedition, civil rights, equal rights under the
law, jury duty, Selective Services Act, rule of
law, eminent domain, etc.).
AH1.H.1.2: Use Historical Comprehension
to: 1. Reconstruct the literal meaning of a
historical passage. 2. Differentiate between
historical facts and historical interpretations.
3. Analyze data in historical maps. 4.
Analyze visual, literary and musical sources.
AH1.H.1.3: Use Historical Analysis and
Interpretation to: 1. Identify issues and
problems in the past. 2. Consider multiple
© The Bill of Rights Institute
perspectives of various peoples in the past.
3. Analyze cause-and-effect relationships and
multiple causation. 4. Evaluate competing
historical narratives and debates among
historians. 5. Evaluate the influence of the
past on contemporary issues.



AH1.H.2.1: Analyze key political, economic,
and social turning points from colonization
through Reconstruction in terms of causes
and effects (e.g., conflicts, legislation,
elections, innovations, leadership,
movements, Supreme Court decisions, etc.)
AH1.H.2.2: Evaluate key turning points
from colonization through Reconstruction
in terms of their lasting impact (e.g.,
conflicts, legislation, elections, innovations,
leadership, movements, Supreme Court
decisions, etc.).
AH1.H.4.1: Analyze the political issues
and conflicts that impacted the United
States through Reconstruction and the
compromises that resulted (e.g., American
Revolution, Constitutional Convention, Bill
of Rights, development of political parties,
nullification, slavery, states’ rights, Civil War).
Materials
Handout A: Federalist No. 10
Handout B: Cato No.3
Warm-up [20 minutes]
D. Begin the lesson by briefly describing to
students the context of the structure of
government in post-Revolution America.
Describe how there was disagreement
about the appropriate structure of American
government, and that the divide was
exacerbated because different groups had
different social and economic interests.
FOUNDING PRINCIPLES COURSE E. Have students find a partner. Assign each
duo to represent a group from the early
republic. They may also come up with their
own ideas for groups.
a. Groups could include: plantation
owners, southern or northern farmers,
soldiers, merchants, lawyers, statesmen/
politicians, indentured servants,
homemakers, etc.
Representative Government Module
D. In their journals students should:
Compare and contrast the arguments
made in Federalist No. 10 and Cato No. 3.


F. Students will then generate a list of things
their group would want from a government.
a. Examples could include: money, tax
breaks, legal privileges, power/authority,
land, access to ports, representation,
protection of slavery, abolition of slavery,
water rights, protection of markets,
foreign policy changes, protection of
individual rights and liberties, rule of
law and due process, advancement of
regional interests, contract law, changes
in master/servant relations, etc.


G. Have the students come together and
share the top demands from each group.
Write them on the board, and, with time
permitting, allow students to vote on
whether to accept each individual demand.
a. Explain to your class how factions—
individual segments of the population
with particular interests that can run
contrary to the public good—constituted
an issue that vexed the Founders
and caused concern about creating a
government for such a broad territory.
Activity: Readings and Documents
[30 minutes]
C. Distribute Handout A: Federalist No.
10 and Handout B: Cato No. 3. Have
students read each handout individually.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Explain why Publius believed that
republican (or representative)
government was important to maintain
the nation, how a representative
structure prevents harmful factions,
how the new Constitution promised
such a government, and why the size
of the nation would be beneficial in
protecting against factions and foreign
powers.
Explain why Cato believed that the
diverse nature of the country—with
contrasts in geography, industries, and
culture—would put too much strain on
a large representative government.
Some scholars believe that the Civil
War was evidence of the validity of the
Anti-Federalist claims. Do you believe
that issues related to representative
government led to the Civil War?
Students should justify their answers
using examples from the handouts
and historical examples.
Wrap-Up [20 minutes]
A. Divide the students into two groups. One
group will be the Federalists and the other
will be the Anti-Federalists. Have the
students debate the following topics from
the point of view of their assigned group.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Special interests
Diversity
Culture
Geography
Industry and economics
Size of the national government
Size of the nation
Handout A: Federalist No. 10
The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard
Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection
(continued)
To the People of the State of New York:
AMONG the numerous advantages promised
by a well-constructed Union, none deserves to
be more accurately developed than its tendency
to break and control the violence of faction.
The friend of popular Governments never finds
himself so much alarmed for their character and
fate, as when he contemplates their propensity
to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore,
to set a due value on any plan which, without
violating the principles to which he is attached,
provides a proper cure for it. The instability,
injustice, and confusion introduced into the
public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal
diseases under which popular Governments
have everywhere perished; as they continue to
be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the
adversaries to liberty derive their most specious
declamations. The valuable improvements made
by the American Constitutions on the popular
models, both ancient and modern, cannot
certainly be too much admired; but it would
be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that
they have as effectually obviated the danger
on this side, as was wished and expected.
Complaints are everywhere heard from our most
considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the
friends of public and private faith, and of public
and personal liberty, that our Governments are
too unstable; that the public good is disregarded
in the conflicts of rival parties; and that
measures are too often decided, not according
to the rules of justice, and the rights of the minor
© The Bill of Rights Institute
party, but by the superior force of an interested
and overbearing majority. However anxiously
we may wish that these complaints had no
foundation, the evidence of known facts will not
permit us to deny that they are in some degree
true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review
of our situation, that some of the distresses
under which we labor have been erroneously
charged on the operation of our Governments;
but it will be found, at the same time, that other
causes will not alone account for many of our
heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that
prevailing and increasing distrust of public
engagements, and alarm for private rights,
which are echoed from one end of the continent
to the other. These must be chiefly, if not wholly,
effects of the unsteadiness and injustice, with
which a factious spirit has tainted our public
administrations.
By a faction, I understand a number of citizens,
whether amounting to a majority or a minority
of the whole, who are united and actuated
by some common impulse of passion, or of
interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens,
or to the permanent and aggregate interests of
the community.
There are two methods of curing the mischiefs
of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the
other, by controlling its effects.
There are again two methods of removing
the causes of faction: the one, by destroying
the liberty which is essential to its existence;
the other, by giving to every citizen the same
opinions, the same passions, and the same
interests.
It could never be more truly said than of the
first remedy, that it was worse than the disease.
Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment
without which it instantly expires. But it could
not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is
essential to political life, because it nourishes
faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation
of air, which is essential to animal life, because
it imparts to fire its destructive agency.
The second expedient is as impracticable, as
the first would be unwise. As long as the reason
of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty
to exercise it, different opinions will be formed.
As long as the connection subsists between
his reason and his self-love, his opinions and
his passions will have a reciprocal influence
on each other; and the former will be objects
to which the latter will attach themselves. The
diversity in the faculties of men, from which
the rights of property originate, is not less
an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of
interests. The protection of these faculties is the
first object of Government. From the protection
of different and unequal faculties of acquiring
property, the possession of different degrees
and kinds of property immediately results; and
from the influence of these on the sentiments
and views of the respective proprietors, ensues
a division of the society into different interests
and parties.
The latent causes of faction are thus sown
in the nature of man; and we see them
everywhere brought into different degrees
of activity, according to the different
circumstances of civil society. A zeal for
different opinions concerning religion,
concerning Government, and many other
points, as well of speculation as of practice;
an attachment to different leaders ambitiously
© The Bill of Rights Institute
contending for preëminence and power; or to
persons of other descriptions whose fortunes
have been interesting to the human passions,
have, in turn, divided mankind into parties,
inflamed them with mutual animosity, and
rendered them much more disposed to vex and
oppress each other, than to coöperate for their
common good. So strong is this propensity of
mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that
where no substantial occasion presents itself,
the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions
have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly
passions, and excite their most violent conflicts.
But the most common and durable source of
factions has been the various and unequal
distribution of property. Those who hold, and
those who are without property, have ever
formed distinct interests in society. Those who
are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall
under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a
manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a
moneyed interest, with many lesser interests,
grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and
divide them into different classes, actuated by
different sentiments and views. The regulation
of these various and interfering interests forms
the principal task of modern Legislation, and
involves the spirit of party and faction in the
necessary and ordinary operations of the
Government.
No man is allowed to be a judge in his own
cause; because his interest would certainly
bias his judgment, and, not improbably,
corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with
greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be
both judges and parties at the same time; yet
what are many of the most important acts of
legislation, but so many judicial determinations,
not indeed concerning the rights of single
persons, but concerning the rights of large
bodies of citizens? and what are the different
classes of Legislators, but advocates and
parties to the causes which they determine?
Is a law proposed concerning private debts?
It is a question to which the creditors are
parties on one side and the debtors on the
other. Justice ought to hold the balance
between them. Yet the parties are, and must
be, themselves the judges; and the most
numerous party, or, in other words, the most
powerful faction, must be expected to prevail.
Shall domestic manufactures be encouraged,
and in what degree, by restrictions on foreign
manufactures? are questions which would
be differently decided by the landed and
the manufacturing classes; and probably by
neither, with a sole regard to justice and the
public good. The apportionment of taxes on the
various descriptions of property is an act which
seems to require the most exact impartiality;
yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in
which greater opportunity and temptation are
given to a predominant party, to trample on the
rules of justice. Every shilling, with which they
overburden the inferior number, is a shilling
saved to their own pockets.
It is in vain to say, that enlightened statesmen
will be able to adjust these clashing interests,
and render them all subservient to the public
good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be
at the helm: Nor, in many cases, can such an
adjustment be made at all, without taking into
view indirect and remote considerations, which
will rarely prevail over the immediate interest
which one party may find in disregarding the
rights of another, or the good of the whole.
The inference to which we are brought is, that
the causes of faction cannot be removed; and
that relief is only to be sought in the means of
controlling its effects.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief
is supplied by the republican principle, which
enables the majority to defeat its sinister views
by regular vote. It may clog the administration,
it may convulse the society; but it will be unable
to execute and mask its violence under the
forms of the Constitution. When a majority
is included in a faction, the form of popular
Government, on the other hand, enables it to
sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both
the public good and the rights of other citizens.
To secure the public good, and private rights,
against the danger of such a faction, and at the
same time to preserve the spirit and the form
of popular Government, is then the great object
to which our inquiries are directed: Let me add,
that it is the great desideratum, by which this
form of Government can be rescued from the
opprobrium under which it has so long labored,
and be recommended to the esteem and
adoption of mankind.
By what means is this object attainable?
Evidently by one of two only. Either the
existence of the same passion or interest in a
majority, at the same time, must be prevented;
or the majority, having such coexistent passion
or interest, must be rendered, by their number
and local situation, unable to concert and
carry into effect schemes of oppression. If
the impulse and the opportunity be suffered
to coincide, we well know that neither moral
nor religious motives can be relied on as
an adequate control. They are not found
to be such on the injustice and violence of
individuals, and lose their efficacy in proportion
to the number combined together; that is, in
proportion as their efficacy becomes needful.
From this view of the subject, it may be
concluded, that a pure Democracy, by which I
mean a Society consisting of a small number
of citizens, who assemble and administer the
Government in person, can admit of no cure
for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion
or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by
a majority of the whole; a communication and
concert result from the form of Government
itself; and there is nothing to check the
inducements to sacrifice the weaker party, or
an obnoxious individual. Hence it is, that such
Democracies have ever been spectacles of
turbulence and contention; have ever been
found incompatible with personal security, or
the rights of property; and have in general been
as short in their lives, as they have been violent
in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who
have patronized this species of Government,
have erroneously supposed, that by reducing
mankind to a perfect equality in their political
rights, they would, at the same time, be
perfectly equalized and assimilated in their
possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
A Republic, by which I mean a Government
in which the scheme of representation takes
place, opens a different prospect, and promises
the cure for which we are seeking. Let us
examine the points in which it varies from pure
Democracy, and we shall comprehend both
the nature of the cure, and the efficacy which it
must derive from the Union.
The two great points of difference, between
a Democracy and a Republic, are, first, the
delegation of the Government, in the latter, to
a small number of citizens elected by the rest:
Secondly, the greater number of citizens, and
greater sphere of country, over which the latter
may be extended.
The effect of the first difference is, on the one
hand, to refine and enlarge the public views,
© The Bill of Rights Institute
by passing them through the medium of a
chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may
best discern the true interest of their country,
and whose patriotism and love of justice will
be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or
partial considerations. Under such a regulation,
it may well happen, that the public voice,
pronounced by the representatives of the
People, will be more consonant to the public
good, than if pronounced by the People
themselves, convened for the purpose. On the
other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men
of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of
sinister designs, may by intrigue, by corruption,
or by other means, first obtain the suffrages,
and then betray the interests of the people.
The question resulting is, whether small or
extensive Republics are more favorable to the
election of proper guardians of the public weal;
and it is clearly decided in favor of the latter by
two obvious considerations.
In the first place, it is to be remarked that
however small the Republic may be, the
Representatives must be raised to a certain
number, in order to guard against the cabals of
a few; and that however large it may be, they
must be limited to a certain number, in order
to guard against the confusion of a multitude.
Hence, the number of Representatives in the
two cases not being in proportion to that of the
Constituents, and being proportionally greater
in the small Republic, it follows, that if the
proportion of fit characters be not less in the
large than in the small Republic, the former will
present a greater option, and consequently a
greater probability of a fit choice.
In the next place, as each Representative will
be chosen by a greater number of citizens
in the large than in the small Republic, it will
be more difficult for unworthy candidates to
practise with success the vicious arts, by
which elections are too often carried; and the
suffrages of the People, being more free, will
be more likely to centre in men who possess
the most attractive merit, and the most diffusive
and established characters.
It must be confessed, that in this, as in most
other cases, there is a mean, on both sides of
which inconveniences will be found to lie. By
enlarging too much the number of electors, you
render the representatives too little acquainted
with all their local circumstances and lesser
interests; as by reducing it too much, you
render him unduly attached to these, and too
little fit to comprehend and pursue great and
National objects. The Federal Constitution
forms a happy combination in this respect; the
great and aggregate interests being referred
to the National, the local and particular to the
State Legislatures.
The other point of difference is, the greater
number of citizens and extent of territory
which may be brought within the compass of
Republican, than of Democratic Government;
and it is this circumstance principally which
renders factious combinations less to be
dreaded in the former, than in the latter. The
smaller the society, the fewer probably will be
the distinct parties and interests composing
it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests,
the more frequently will a majority be found of
the same party; and the smaller the number
of individuals composing a majority, and the
smaller the compass within which they are
placed, the more easily will they concert and
execute their plans of oppression. Extend the
sphere, and you take in a greater variety of
parties and interests; you make it less probable
© The Bill of Rights Institute
that a majority of the whole will have a common
motive to invade the rights of other citizens;
or if such a common motive exists, it will be
more difficult for all who feel it to discover their
own strength, and to act in unison with each
other. Besides other impediments, it may be
remarked, that where there is a consciousness
of unjust or dishonorable purposes,
communication is always checked by distrust,
in proportion to the number whose concurrence
is necessary.
Hence, it clearly appears, that the same
advantage which a Republic has over a
Democracy, in controlling the effects of faction,
is enjoyed by a large over a small Republic, — is
enjoyed by the Union over the States
composing it. Does the advantage consist in
the substitution of Representatives, whose
enlightened views and virtuous sentiments
render them superior to local prejudices, and to
schemes of injustice? It will not be denied, that
the Representation of the Union will be most
likely to possess these requisite endowments.
Does it consist in the greater security afforded
by a greater variety of parties, against the event
of any one party being able to outnumber and
oppress the rest? In an equal degree does
the increased variety of parties, comprised
within the Union, increase this security. Does
it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles
opposed to the concert and accomplishment of
the secret wishes of an unjust and interested
majority? Here, again, the extent of the Union
gives it the most palpable advantage.
The influence of factious leaders may kindle
a flame within their particular States, but will
be unable to spread a general conflagration
through the other States: A religious sect may
degenerate into a political faction in a part
of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects
dispersed over the entire face of it, must secure
the National Councils against any danger
from that source; A rage for paper money, for
an abolition of debts, for an equal division of
property, or for any other improper or wicked
project, will be less apt to pervade the whole
body of the Union, than a particular member of
it; in the same proportion as such a malady is
more likely to taint a particular county or district,
than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the
Union, therefore, we behold a Republican
remedy for the diseases most incident to
Republican Government. And according to the
degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being
Republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing
the spirit, and supporting the character, of
Federalists.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Handout B: Cato No. 3
Fall 1787
The recital, or premises on which this new
form of government is erected, declares a
consolidation or union of all the thirteen parts,
or states, into one great whole, under the
firm [form?] of the United States, for all the
various and important purposes therein set
forth.--But whoever seriously considers the
immense extent of territory comprehended
within the limits of the United States, together
with the variety of its climates, productions,
and commerce, the difference of extent, and
number of inhabitants in all; the dissimilitude of
interest, morals, and policies, in almost every
one, will receive it as an intuitive truth, that a
consolidated republican form of government
therein, can never form a perfect union,
establish justice, insure domestic tranquility,
promote the general welfare, and secure the
blessings of liberty to you and your posterity, for
to these objects it must be directed: this
unkindred legislature therefore, composed of
interests opposite and dissimilar in their nature,
will in its exercise, emphatically be, like a house
divided against itself.
The governments of Europe have taken
their limits and form from adventitious
circumstances, and nothing can be argued
on the motive of agreement from them; but
these adventitious political principles, have
nevertheless produced effects that have
attracted the attention of philosophy, which has
established axioms in the science of politics
therefrom, as irrefragable as any in Euclid.
It is natural, says Montesquieu, to a republic
to have only a small territory, otherwise it
© The Bill of Rights Institute
cannot long subsist: in a large one, there are
men of large fortunes, and consequently of
less moderation; there are too great deposits
to intrust in the hands of a single subject, an
ambitious person soon becomes sensible
that he may be happy, great, and glorious by
oppressing his fellow citizens, and that he
might raise himself to grandeur, on the ruins of
his country. In large republics, the public good
is sacrificed to a thousand views; in a small one
the interest of the public is easily perceived,
better understood, and more within the reach
of every citizen; abuses have a less extent, and
of course are less protected--he also shews
you, that the duration of the republic of Sparta,
was owing to its having continued with the
same extent of territory after all its wars; and
that the ambition of Athens and Lacedemon to
command and direct the union, lost them their
liberties, and gave them a monarchy.
From this picture, what can you promise
yourselves, on the score of consolidation of the
United States, into one government-impracticability in the just exercise of it-your freedom insecure--even this form of
government limited in its continuance--the
employments of your country disposed of
to the opulent, to whose contumely you will
continually be an object--you must risque much,
by indispensably placing trusts of the greatest
magnitude, into the hands of individuals, whose
ambition for power, and aggrandizement, will
oppress and grind you--where, from the vast
extent of your territory, and the complication
of interests, the science of government will
become intricate and perplexed, and too
misterious for you to understand, and observe;
and by which you are to be conducted into a
monarchy, either limited or despotic; the latter,
Mr. Locke remarks, is a government derived
from neither nature, nor compact.
Political liberty, the great Montesquieu again
observes, consists in security, or at least in the
opinion we have of security; and this security
therefore, or the opinion, is best obtained in
moderate governments, where the mildness
of the laws, and the equality of the manners,
beget a confidence in the people, which
produces this security, or the opinion. This
moderation in governments, depends in a great
measure on their limits, connected with their
political distribution.
The extent of many of the states in the
Union, is at this time, almost too great for
the superintendence of a republican form
of government, and must one day or other,
revolve into more vigorous ones, or by
separation be reduced into smaller, and
more useful, as well as moderate ones. You
have already observed the feeble efforts of
Massachusetts against their insurgents; with
what difficulty did they quell that insurrection;
and is not the province of Main at this
moment, on the eve of separation from her.
The reason of these things is, that for the
security of the property of the community, in
which expressive term Mr. Locke makes life,
liberty, and estate, to consist--the wheels of
a free republic are necessarily slow in their
operation; hence in large free republics, the
evil sometimes is not only begun, but almost
completed, before they are in a situation to
turn the current into a contrary progression: the
extremes are also too remote from the usual
seat of government, and the laws therefore too
feeble to afford protection to all its parts, and
insure domestic tranquility without the aid of
© The Bill of Rights Institute
another principle. If, therefore, this state [New
York], and that of N. Carolina, had an army
under their controul, they never would have
lost Vermont, and Frankland, nor the state
of Massachusetts suffer an insurrection, or
the dismemberment of her fairest district, but
the exercise of a principle which would have
prevented these things, if we may believe the
experience of ages, would have ended in the
destruction of their liberties.
Will this consolidated republic, if established,
in its exercise beget such confidence and
compliance, among the citizens of these
states, as to do without the aid of a standing
army--I deny that it will.--The mal-contents in
each state, who will not be a few, nor the least
important, will be exciting factions against
it--the fear of a dismemberment of some of
its parts, and the necessity to enforce the
execution of revenue laws (a fruitful source of
oppression) on the extremes and in the other
districts of the government, will incidentally, and
necessarily require a permanent force, to be
kept on foot--will not political security, and even
the opinion of it, be extinguished? can mildness
and moderation exist in a government, where
the primary incident in its exercise must be
force? will not violence destroy confidence, and
can equality subsist, where the extent, policy,
and practice of it, will naturally lead to make
odious distinctions among citizens?
The people, who may compose this national
legislature from the southern states, in which,
from the mildness of the climate, the fertility
of the soil, and the value of its productions,
wealth is rapidly acquired, and where the same
causes naturally lead to luxury, dissipation, and
a passion for aristocratic distinctions; where
slavery is encouraged, and liberty of course,
less respected, and protected; who know not
what it is to acquire property by their own toil,
nor to oeconomise with the savings of industry-will these men therefore be as tenacious of
the liberties and interests of the more northern
states, where freedom, independence, industry,
equality, and frugality, are natural to the climate
and soil, as men who are your own citizens,
legislating in your own state, under your
inspection, and whose manners, and fortunes,
bear a more equal resemblance to your own?
It may be suggested, in answer to this, that
whoever is a citizen of one state, is a citizen of
each, and that therefore he will be as interested
in the happiness and interest of all, as the
one he is delegated from; but the argument is
fallacious, and, whoever has attended to the
history of mankind, and the principles which
bind them together as parents, citizens, or
men, will readily perceive it. These principles
are, in their exercise, like a pebble cast on the
calm surface of a river, the circles begin in the
center, and are small, active, and forcible, but
as they depart from that point, they lose their
force, and vanish into calmness.
The strongest principle of union resides within
our domestic walls. The ties of the parent
exceed that of any other; as we depart from
home, the next general principle of union is
amongst citizens of the same state, where
acquaintance, habits, and fortunes, nourish
affection, and attachment; enlarge the circle
still further, and, as citizens of different states,
though we acknowledge the same national
denomination, we lose the ties of acquaintance,
habits, and fortunes, and thus, by degrees,
we lessen in our attachments, till, at length,
we no more than acknowledge a sameness
of species. Is it therefore, from certainty like
this, reasonable to believe, that inhabitants
of Georgia, or New-Hampshire, will have the
© The Bill of Rights Institute
same obligations towards you as your own, and
preside over your lives, liberties, and property,
with the same care and attachment? Intuitive
reason, answers in the negative.
The recital, or premises on which this new
form of government is erected, declares a
consolidation or union of all the thirteen parts,
or states, into one great whole, under the firm
[form?] of the United States, for all the various
and important purposes therein set forth.--But
whoever seriously considers the immense extent
of territory comprehended within the limits of
the United States, together with the variety of
its climates, productions, and commerce, the
difference of extent, and number of inhabitants
in all; the dissimilitude of interest, morals, and
policies, in almost every one, will receive it as
an intuitive truth, that a consolidated republican
form of government therein, can never form a
perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic
tranquility, promote the general welfare, and
secure the blessings of liberty to you and your
posterity, for to these objects it must be directed:
this unkindred legislature therefore, composed of
interests opposite and dissimilar in their nature,
will in its exercise, emphatically be, like a house
divided against itself.
The governments of Europe have taken
their limits and form from adventitious
circumstances, and nothing can be argued
on the motive of agreement from them; but
these adventitious political principles, have
nevertheless produced effects that have
attracted the attention of philosophy, which has
established axioms in the science of politics
therefrom, as irrefragable as any in Euclid.
It is natural, says Montesquieu, to a republic
to have only a small territory, otherwise it
cannot long subsist: in a large one, there are
men of large fortunes, and consequently of
less moderation; there are too great deposits
to intrust in the hands of a single subject, an
ambitious person soon becomes sensible
that he may be happy, great, and glorious by
oppressing his fellow citizens, and that he
might raise himself to grandeur, on the ruins of
his country. In large republics, the public good
is sacrificed to a thousand views; in a small one
the interest of the public is easily perceived,
better understood, and more within the reach
of every citizen; abuses have a less extent, and
of course are less protected--he also shews
you, that the duration of the republic of Sparta,
was owing to its having continued with the
same extent of territory after all its wars; and
that the ambition of Athens and Lacedemon to
command and direct the union, lost them their
liberties, and gave them a monarchy.
From this picture, what can you promise
yourselves, on the score of consolidation
of the United States, into one government-impracticability in the just exercise of it- your freedom insecure--even this form of
government limited in its continuance--the
employments of your country disposed of
to the opulent, to whose contumely you will
continually be an object--you must risque much,
by indispensably placing trusts of the greatest
magnitude, into the hands of individuals, whose
ambition for power, and aggrandizement, will
oppress and grind you--where, from the vast
extent of your territory, and the complication
of interests, the science of government will
become intricate and perplexed, and too
misterious for you to understand, and observe;
and by which you are to be conducted into a
monarchy, either limited or despotic; the latter,
Mr. Locke remarks, is a government derived
from neither nature, nor compact.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
Political liberty, the great Montesquieu again
observes, consists in security, or at least in the
opinion we have of security; and this security
therefore, or the opinion, is best obtained in
moderate governments, where the mildness of
the laws, and the equality of the manners, beget
a confidence in the people, which produces
this security, or the opinion. This moderation
in governments, depends in a great measure
on their limits, connected with their political
distribution.
The extent of many of the states in the
Union, is at this time, almost too great for
the superintendence of a republican form of
government, and must one day or other, revolve
into more vigorous ones, or by separation be
reduced into smaller, and more useful, as well
as moderate ones. You have already observed
the feeble efforts of Massachusetts against
their insurgents; with what difficulty did they
quell that insurrection; and is not the province of
Main at this moment, on the eve of separation
from her. The reason of these things is, that for
the security of the property of the community,
in which expressive term Mr. Locke makes
life, liberty, and estate, to consist--the wheels
of a free republic are necessarily slow in their
operation; hence in large free republics, the
evil sometimes is not only begun, but almost
completed, before they are in a situation to
turn the current into a contrary progression: the
extremes are also too remote from the usual
seat of government, and the laws therefore too
feeble to afford protection to all its parts, and
insure domestic tranquility without the aid of
another principle. If, therefore, this state [New
York], and that of N. Carolina, had an army
under their controul, they never would have
lost Vermont, and Frankland, nor the state of
Massachusetts suffer an insurrection, or the
dismemberment of her fairest district, but
the exercise of a principle which would have
prevented these things, if we may believe the
experience of ages, would have ended in the
destruction of their liberties.
Will this consolidated republic, if established,
in its exercise beget such confidence and
compliance, among the citizens of these
states, as to do without the aid of a standing
army--I deny that it will.--The mal-contents in
each state, who will not be a few, nor the least
important, will be exciting factions against
it--the fear of a dismemberment of some of
its parts, and the necessity to enforce the
execution of revenue laws (a fruitful source of
oppression) on the extremes and in the other
districts of the government, will incidentally, and
necessarily require a permanent force, to be
kept on foot--will not political security, and even
the opinion of it, be extinguished? can mildness
and moderation exist in a government, where
the primary incident in its exercise must be
force? will not violence destroy confidence, and
can equality subsist, where the extent, policy,
and practice of it, will naturally lead to make
odious distinctions among citizens?
The people, who may compose this national
legislature from the southern states, in which,
from the mildness of the climate, the fertility
of the soil, and the value of its productions,
wealth is rapidly acquired, and where the same
causes naturally lead to luxury, dissipation, and
a passion for aristocratic distinctions; where
slavery is encouraged, and liberty of course,
less respected, and protected; who know not
what it is to acquire property by their own toil,
nor to oeconomise with the savings of industry-will these men therefore be as tenacious
of the liberties and interests of the more
© The Bill of Rights Institute
northern states, where freedom, independence,
industry, equality, and frugality, are natural to
the climate and soil, as men who are your own
citizens, legislating in your own state, under your
inspection, and whose manners, and fortunes,
bear a more equal resemblance to your own?
It may be suggested, in answer to this, that
whoever is a citizen of one state, is a citizen of
each, and that therefore he will be as interested
in the happiness and interest of all, as the
one he is delegated from; but the argument is
fallacious, and, whoever has attended to the
history of mankind, and the principles which bind
them together as parents, citizens, or men, will
readily perceive it. These principles are, in their
exercise, like a pebble cast on the calm surface
of a river, the circles begin in the center, and are
small, active, and forcible, but as they depart from
that point, they lose their force, and vanish into
calmness.
The strongest principle of union resides within
our domestic walls. The ties of the parent exceed
that of any other; as we depart from home, the
next general principle of union is amongst citizens
of the same state, where acquaintance, habits,
and fortunes, nourish affection, and attachment;
enlarge the circle still further, and, as citizens
of different states, though we acknowledge
the same national denomination, we lose the
ties of acquaintance, habits, and fortunes, and
thus, by degrees, we lessen in our attachments,
till, at length, we no more than acknowledge
a sameness of species. Is it therefore, from
certainty like this, reasonable to believe, that
inhabitants of Georgia, or New-Hampshire, will
have the same obligations towards you as your
own, and preside over your lives, liberties, and
property, with the same care and attachment?
Intuitive reason, answers in the negative.
Representative Government Module Answer Key
Lesson One: What is Representative
Government, and How Does it Protect
Freedom?
Handout A: Focus Quotations
Questions to Consider
3. Madison believed that a large, extended
republic would naturally protect liberty
because the people would naturally divide
themselves into factions with different
interests that would prevent a majority from
gaining too much power over the minority.
Handout C: Viewing Guide for
Constitutional Principle Video:
Separation of Powers
4. Democracy is not enough to protect
people’s rights, so the people elect
representatives to represent their interests
in government. The elections need to be
frequent and fair to ensure that the people’s
rights are protected. If a representative is
not doing their job, the people do not have
to reelect that representative. As a check
on the people and their representatives,
the president and Senate have the power
to appoint certain offices. This ensures that
these officers do not change their opinions
or actions simply based on obtaining
reelection.
While you watch:
5. Accept reasoned answers.
1. Madison notes that representatives can
only hold office during limited times or
during good behavior because if they are
not fulfilling their constitutional duties, they
can be removed from office through an
election or impeachment.
2. Washington believed that the responsibility
for success of America depended on the
American people.
1. Some examples may include: freedom,
liberty, America, equality, rights, republic,
etc.
6. Accept reasoned answers.
Handout D: Principles in Cartoons
2. Accept reasoned answers.
1. What principle(s) allows the majority to rule
within a constitutional framework?
After you watch:
2. How do these principle(s) protect freedom?
1. The people chose representatives to make
and carry out laws.
2. The Founders believed that democracy was
just as dangerous as monarchy because
the majority could not be trusted with
people’s rights. Direct democracy had been
tried throughout history and had repeatedly
failed.
© The Bill of Rights Institute
3. How do these principles affect you as an
American?