Centinel's Objections: A Federal Constitution Critique

The Anti-Federalists, who opposed the ratification of the US Constitution, had several objections to the proposed constitution. Two of the most notable objections were:

First, the Anti-Federalists argued that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government at the expense of the state governments. They believed that the Constitution created a federal government with supreme authority over state laws and the power to act directly upon individuals. This was a significant shift from the Articles of Confederation, which established a confederal government with limited powers and allowed states to retain primary sovereignty.

Second, they objected to the absence of a Bill of Rights in the original draft of the Constitution. Notable Anti-Federalist George Mason proposed the addition of a bill of rights, but this was rejected by 10 out of 10 states as unnecessary. The Anti-Federalists believed that a Bill of Rights was essential to protect individual liberties and prevent the federal government from overreaching its powers.

Explore related products

The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates (Signet Classics)

$6.92 $8.95

The Anti-Federalist: Writings by the Opponents of the Constitution

$32.67

The Federalist & The Anti-Federalist Papers: Complete Collection: Including the U.S. Constitution, Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Important Documents by the Founding Fathers & more

$0.99 $20.4

The Anti-Federalist Papers (Dover Thrift Editions: American History)

$8.89 $10

The Anti-Federalist Papers

$0.99 $15.99

The Federalist Papers, Extended Edition: An Essential Collection of The Original, Unabridged Text (1787–88) With Detailed Commentary on Each Essay to Guide you Through America's Founding Ideas

$24.95

Opponents of the Constitution were called Anti-Federalists

The Anti-Federalists failed to prevent the adoption of the Constitution, but their efforts were not entirely in vain. Their influence helped lead to the enactment of the Bill of Rights. The Anti-Federalists included politicians such as Patrick Henry, Melancton Smith, and Samuel Adams. Most Anti-Federalists advocated their position under pseudonyms, but historians have concluded that the major Anti-Federalist writers included Robert Yates (Brutus), most likely George Clinton (Cato), Samuel Bryan (Centinel), and either Melancton Smith or Richard Henry Lee (Federal Farmer).

Anti-Federalists included Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and Richard Henry Lee

The Anti-Federalists, who opposed the ratification of the US Constitution, included Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and Richard Henry Lee. They were heroes of the Revolutionary War who objected to the Constitution's consolidation of power.

Patrick Henry, the author of the famous "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" speech, was an outspoken Anti-Federalist. In Virginia, he called the proposed constitution "a revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain". He, along with other Anti-Federalists, believed that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government at the expense of the state governments. They wanted strong state governments, a weak central government, the direct election of government officials, short term limits for officeholders, accountability by officeholders to popular majorities, and the strengthening of individual liberties.

The Anti-Federalists mobilized against the Constitution in state legislatures across the country, particularly in Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York, three crucial states. They also wrote the Anti-Federalist Papers, a collection of essays authored by Cato and other incognito writers, including possibly Centinel. These essays were responsible for producing the Bill of Rights, a list of 10 constitutional amendments that secure the basic rights and privileges of American citizens.

The Anti-Federalists failed to prevent the adoption of the Constitution, but their efforts were not entirely in vain. Their debates vindicated the importance of freedom of speech and press in achieving national consensus. After the Constitution was ratified, Anti-Federalists like Patrick Henry sought legal means of change. Although many Federalists initially argued against the necessity of a bill of rights, they eventually promised to add amendments to specifically protect individual liberties.

The Constitution gave too much power to the federal government

The Constitution of the United States was drafted in the summer of 1787, and its ratification was uncertain. The Anti-Federalists, or the opponents of the Constitution, believed that it gave too much power to the federal government. They argued that the Constitution consolidated power and detracted from the republican governments of antiquity. The original draft of the Constitution did not include a Bill of Rights, and it declared all state laws subservient to federal laws, effectively creating a king-like office in the presidency.

The Anti-Federalists' objections were rooted in their belief that the Constitution would lead to a concentration of power in the federal government, undermining the sovereignty of individual states. They saw this as a departure from the traditional republican governments and a potential threat to the liberties and rights of the citizens.

One of the most prominent Anti-Federalists, Patrick Henry, famously stated that the proposed Constitution was "a revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain." He, along with other Anti-Federalists like Samuel Adams and Richard Henry Lee, heroes of the Revolutionary War, voiced their concerns about the Constitution's impact on the balance of power between the federal and state governments.

Another key objection raised by the Anti-Federalists was the absence of a Bill of Rights in the original draft of the Constitution. George Mason, one of the "Three Dissenters" who refused to sign the document, proposed the addition of a bill of rights just a week before the Constitution was signed. However, this proposal was rejected by 10 out of 10 states as unnecessary.

The Anti-Federalists' concerns about the concentration of power in the federal government were not without merit. The Constitution's provision for a strong federal government, with the power to make and execute laws, appoint officers, institute courts, and declare offences, marked a significant shift from the Articles of Confederation, which had established a confederal government with limited authority.

Explore related products

The Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist Dispute: The Original Arguments For Each

$0.99 $25.13

Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist: ALL Essays and Articles in One Edition: Founding Fathers' Political and Philosophical Debate, Their Opinions and Arguments about the Constitution:

$0.99

The Anti-Federalist Papers

$10.95

Documents of Revolution: Common Sense, The Complete Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, The Articles of Confederation, The Articles of Confederation, The U. S. Constitution, The Bill of Rights

$26.99 $26.99

Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist: The Great Debate (Complete Articles & Essays in One Volume): Constitutional Arguments Shaping American Democracy

$1.99

The Anti-Federalist: An Abridgment of The Complete Anti-Federalist

$32.99

The Constitution did not include a Bill of Rights

The United States Constitution faced opposition from Anti-Federalists, who objected to the consolidation of power and extensive powers it granted the federal government. One of the notable Anti-Federalists, George Mason, proposed the addition of a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. However, this proposal was rejected by 10 out of 10 states as unnecessary.

The absence of a Bill of Rights in the original draft of the Constitution was a significant concern for the Anti-Federalists. They believed that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government, declaring all state laws subservient to federal ones. This marked a shift from the Articles of Confederation, which established a confederal government with limited authority, allowing states to retain primary sovereignty.

The Anti-Federalists argued that the proposed Constitution created a federal government with supreme authority, enabling it to act directly upon individuals. They worried that it established a king-like office in the presidency and granted the federal government legislative, executive, and judicial powers that could potentially infringe upon the rights of citizens.

The omission of a Bill of Rights in the Constitution was seen as a failure to protect the liberties and rights of individuals against the potential overreach of the federal government. The Anti-Federalists advocated for explicit guarantees of individual freedoms and limitations on the powers of the federal government.

However, it is worth noting that the Constitution was designed to be a living document, open to amendments. The process of ratification and the inclusion of a Bill of Rights, which later became the first ten amendments, demonstrated the evolving nature of the Constitution and the efforts to address the concerns of the Anti-Federalists.

The Constitution was a radical revolution

The Constitution of the United States was drafted in the summer of 1787, and it was indeed considered a radical revolution. The document was created to address the failure of the Articles of Confederation, which made it clear that a new form of government was needed in America.

The Constitution's ratification was uncertain, as it needed approval from at least nine of the 13 state legislatures. Madison, one of the key figures in the process, believed that the proposed Constitution would likely be scuttled in the legislatures, where many state political leaders stood to lose power. This belief was shared by other nationalists, who wanted to bring the issue before "the people," where ratification was more likely.

The Constitution faced significant opposition, particularly from the Anti-Federalists, who objected to the extensive powers it granted the federal government and its departure from the republican governments of antiquity. One of the most prominent Anti-Federalists, Patrick Henry, went so far as to call the proposed Constitution "a revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain."

The original draft of the Constitution did not include a Bill of Rights, declared all state laws subservient to federal ones, and created a powerful executive office in the presidency, resembling a king-like figure. These aspects contributed to the perception of the Constitution as a radical revolution, as they represented a significant shift in the balance of power and a potential threat to the established republican governments.

The concept of revolutionary constitutionalism refers to using the constitution-making process to institutionalize and bring about a political revolution. This phenomenon often involves an initial radical transition, followed by resistance to further radical change. The American Constitution, with its far-reaching implications and transformative nature, exemplifies this concept of revolutionary constitutionalism.

Frequently asked questions