hat the different branchesof government would be able to check the power of eachother. In Federalist Paper No. 51, Madison details why hethinks the separation of power among three branches willcreate checks and balances among those branches. Madisonstates that "Ambition must be made to counteract ambition"(Madison 262). Madison believed that by dividing the powerof the people between two distinct governments and thensubdividing this power among distinct and separatedepartments, that a high level of security would be able tobe maintained for the rights of the people (Madison 264).The Anti-Federalists addressed the issue of a standing armyunder the control of the Federal government, they fearedthat Congress' control over both taxes and a standing armycould result in an oppression of the people. This alsofactored into the debate over state power, because it wasobvious that the state militias would be no match for thefederal army, if it decided to encroach into the state. Anti-Federalist John Smilie declared that, "...In a freeGovernment there never will be Need of standing Armies, forit depends on the Confidence of the People. If it does notso depend, it is not free..." (Main 147).Madison contradicts the arguments of the Anti-Federalistconcerning this issue in Federalist Paper No. 46. He pointsout two reasons that the states need not worry about astanding army. His first argument is that it would beincredibly unlikely that the people would consistently electtraitors that would, "...pursue some fixed plan for theextension of the military establishment..."(Madison 241). Secondly, Madison points out that Americans are armed andthat the states control of militias will, "...form a barrieragainst the enterprizes of ambition..."(Madison 242). Againin this argument Madison goes back to his belief that theFederal government is unlikely to become oppressive becausethe people grant its power.Both the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists belie...
