In Federalist No. 10, Madison also responds to the anti-federalist argument that the new nation is geographically too large to be effectively administered by a strong Republican government. Some anti-federalists argued that the geographic sprawl of the United States, as well as its economic and social diversity, meant that it was not well suited to a republic because it encompassed so many different interests. Madison refuted this argument by suggesting that the diversity of the new nation, both in terms of geography and social and economic factors, was actually its greatest strength. According to Federalist No. 10, a diverse country could produce “more appropriate characters” for each election because it could tap into a larger population, and it could reduce the power of individual factions because so many different interest groups would have to compete for attention. No faction would be able to wield excessive power. “My advice let me down. The Council was so divided in its opinions that it was impossible to reach a better solution on this point. These and similar pretexts are constantly at hand, whether true or false. And who is there who takes the trouble or takes the odium, of a strict penetration into the secret sources of the transaction? If there is a citizen willing enough to take on the unpromising task when there is collusion between the parties involved, is it easy to cover the circumstances with such ambiguity that it becomes uncertain what exactly the behaviour of one of those parties was? In this federalist newspaper, Alexander Hamilton argued for a strong executive leader, as opposed to weak executive power under the Articles of Confederation. He says: “Energy in the executive branch is the main character in defining good government. This is important for the protection of the community from foreign attacks. for the constant application of the law, for the protection of property.
justice; [and] the security of freedom. In Federalist No. 70, Alexander Hamilton defends the idea of a unified executive against critics who argue that the executive branch should have an executive committee or a privy council. According to Hamilton, a unified executive was the best option for the United States because it allowed the executive branch to operate on energy and security. In addition, Hamilton believes that a single person representing the whole of government increases the accountability of the entire executive. But in a republic where every magistrate should be personally responsible for his or her conduct in the performance of his duties, the reason which dictates the adequacy of a council in the British constitution not only ceases, but turns against the institution. In the monarchy of Great Britain, it replaces the prohibited liability of the Chief Justice, who serves to some extent as a hostage to national justice for his good conduct. In the American Republic, this would serve to destroy or greatly diminish the intended and necessary responsibility of the Chief Justice himself. When two or more persons are involved in a joint venture or persecution, there is always a risk of disagreement. If it is a public foundation or a public function in which they are held with the same dignity and authority, there is a particular risk of personal imitation and even hostility.
It is from both, and especially from all these causes, that the most bitter differences of opinion can arise. Whenever this happens, they diminish seriousness, weaken authority, and divert attention from the plans and operations of those who divide them. If they unfortunately attack the supreme executive branch of a country composed of a large number of people, they could hinder or thwart key government actions in the most critical state emergencies. And what is worse, they could divide the community into the most violent and irreconcilable factions and adhere differently to the different individuals who trained the magistrate. One of Hamilton`s main arguments in favour of the proposed judicial structure is that it establishes an independent branch of government.