Jump to content

Federalist No. 43

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by TJRC (talk | contribs) at 21:40, 18 July 2024 (Nothing in 43 suggests *exclusive* jurisdiction; and in fact jurisdiction did not become exclusive until the twentieth century: the Copyright Act of 1976 (copyright) and the Bonito Boats case in 1989 (patents)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Federalist No. 43
James Madison, author of Federalist No. 43
AuthorJames Madison
Original titleThe Same Subject Continued: The Powers Conferred by the Constitution Further Considered
LanguageEnglish
SeriesThe Federalist
PublisherNew York Packet
Publication date
January 23, 1788
Publication placeUnited States
Media typeNewspaper
Preceded byFederalist No. 42 
Followed byFederalist No. 44 

Federalist No. 43 is an essay by James Madison, the forty-third of The Federalist Papers. It was first published by The New York Packet on January 23, 1788, under the pseudonym Publius, the name under which all The Federalist papers were published. This paper continues a theme begun by Madison in Federalist No. 42. It is titled "The Same Subject Continued: The Powers Conferred by the Constitution Further Considered".

The paper contains the only reference to the Copyright Clause in The Federalist Papers. In the brief discussion of the Clause, Madison states that "the utility of this power will scarcely be questioned." He also notes the Framer's intent for the federal government to have have the power to enact patent and copyright laws. Despite its perfunctory discussion of the Clause, the Paper remains one of the few sources describing the rationales and motivations for the language and intent of the Clause.[1]

The essay also references a desire that the national government be given exclusive jurisdiction over a new national capital and provides the rationale for what later became the District Clause of Article I of the U.S. Constitution.[2] The essay references "sufficient inducements of interest to become willing parties to the cession" to be offered by the state ceding land for the federal district to the inhabitants of the ceded territory and that the citizens in the federal district "will have had their voice in the election of the government which is to exercise authority over them." This assertion is often cited in the efforts for DC Home Rule and DC Statehood.

It also deals with the Treason Clause of the U.S. Constitution.[3]

References

  1. ^ Patry, William (2010). 1 Patry on Copyright. Thomson West. pp. 1:18.
  2. ^ The Federalist Papers, no. 43.
  3. ^ Olson, William J. (April 16, 2012). "Case 1:12-cv-00331-KBF" (PDF). Friedman, Harfenist, Kraut & Perlstein, PPC. lawandfreedom.com. pp. 15–16.