Isabella Carter
The Anti-Federalists, including Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and Richard Henry Lee, opposed the new Constitution. They believed that it consolidated too much power in Congress, resembling the old British regime, and that the unitary president resembled a monarch. They also argued that the liberties of the people were best protected by state governments, not a federal one. The Federalists, including John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison, countered with The Federalist Papers, a series of essays defending the Constitution and arguing for a centralized republic. The debate over the new Constitution began in the press in 1787, and the Anti-Federalists' writings became known as the Anti-Federalist Papers.
Explore related products
![Eight Objections to the Constitutional Amendment Answered. By Joel Swartz 1889 [Leather Bound]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/617DLHXyzlL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
What You'll Learn
The Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution would consolidate power in Congress
The Anti-Federalists believed that the new Constitution would consolidate power in Congress, at the expense of the states. They argued that the liberties of the people were best protected when power resided in state governments, rather than a federal one. They wanted strong state governments and a weak central government, with direct elections of government officials and short term limits for officeholders.
The Anti-Federalists wanted to replace the government under the Articles of Confederation, which had created a confederal government with a Congress of limited authority and states retaining primary sovereignty. However, the proposed new Constitution created a federal government in which national laws were supreme over state laws, and the government could act directly upon individuals.
The Anti-Federalists believed that the new Constitution gave too much power to the federal government and the office of the president, resembling a monarch. They feared that Congress might seize too many powers under the necessary and proper clause and other open-ended provisions.
To address these concerns, the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution, reserving any power not given to the federal government for the states and the people. The Bill of Rights includes 10 constitutional amendments that secure the basic rights and privileges of American citizens, including the right to free speech, the right to a speedy trial, the right to due process under the law, and protections against cruel and unusual punishments.
Gaining Senate Majority: The Magic Number of Seats
You may want to see also
The unitary president resembled a monarch
The Anti-Federalists, those who opposed the 1787 Constitution, believed that the unitary president resembled a monarch. This was one of the key objections to the new constitution, along with the belief that it consolidated too much power in Congress, and that the liberties of the people were best protected by state governments rather than a federal one. The Anti-Federalists included Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and Richard Henry Lee, heroes of the Revolutionary War. In their view, the unitary executive, with its resemblance to monarchy, would lead to the development of courts of intrigue in the nation's capital.
The Anti-Federalists' concerns about the concentration of power in a unitary executive were not without merit. They feared that the new constitution would consolidate power in the hands of wealthy aristocrats and the elite, who would formulate policies that benefited their own class. This would undermine local state elites and result in a government that was not reflective of the people. The Anti-Federalists believed that a pure democracy, if practicable, would be the most perfect form of government, as articulated by Alexander Hamilton in New York's ratifying convention.
The Federalists, on the other hand, championed the new constitution and argued for a centralized republic. They included John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison, who authored the Federalist Papers, a series of essays defending the constitution. Hamilton, in particular, proposed a model of government with an executive serving for life or good behaviour and possessing veto power over all laws. This proposal, though failing to gain traction, resembled the British monarchy, which some members of the convention expected the country to move towards.
The debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists was fierce, with each side articulating contrasting visions of the American republic and democracy. The Anti-Federalists' concerns about the unitary executive resembled a monarch, and their insistence on a Bill of Rights, led to important compromises and amendments, including the Bill of Rights, which secured basic rights and privileges for American citizens.
Drawing Details: The Key to Construction Success
You may want to see also
The Federalists believed a centralised republic was the best solution
The Federalists, including John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison, believed that a centralised republic was the best solution for the future of the American republic and democracy. They argued that a large republic provided the best defence against the tumult of direct democracy. In a large republic, compromises would be reached, and citizens would be represented by representatives of their own choosing.
Federalists believed that a centralised republic would prevent the wealthy aristocrats from running the new national government. They disagreed with the Anti-Federalists' view that the elite would not represent ordinary citizens and that the rich would monopolize power. Instead, Federalists believed that a centralised republic would ensure that citizens' liberties were protected and that power was not consolidated in the hands of a few.
Furthermore, Federalists argued that a centralised republic would address the problems of political parties or "factions". Madison, in particular, argued that there were two approaches to solving this issue: a republican government and a democracy. He believed that a centralised republic would lead to a more stable and united country, where citizens' rights and privileges would be secured. This belief was reflected in the Bill of Rights, which guaranteed basic rights such as free speech, the right to a speedy trial, due process under the law, and protections against cruel and unusual punishments.
The Federalists also disagreed with the Anti-Federalists' view that the new Constitution resembled the old corrupt and centralised British regime. They believed that a centralised republic would ensure that the mistakes of the past were not repeated and that the new government would be accountable to the people. Federalists also recognised the importance of state power and worked to address concerns about the concentration of power in the southern states due to the three-fifths rule, which gave them an advantage in representation.
Lecompton Constitution: A Compromise or a Mistake?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Anti-Federalists wanted a Bill of Rights
The Anti-Federalists, who came to be known as the opponents of the new Constitution, wanted a Bill of Rights. They believed that the new Constitution consolidated too much power in the hands of Congress, at the expense of the states. They saw the unitary president as resembling a monarch too closely and believed that the liberties of the people were best protected when power resided in state governments, rather than a federal one.
The Anti-Federalists argued that the Constitution did not contain a bill of rights, and that a bill of rights was necessary to secure the basic rights and privileges of American citizens. They believed that the rich would monopolize power and use the new government to formulate policies that benefited their class, and that the Constitution appeared to mimic the old corrupt and centralized British regime, under which a far-off government made the laws.
In Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York, three crucial states, Anti-Federalists made ratification of the Constitution contingent on a Bill of Rights. James Madison, a supporter of the Constitution, eventually agreed to draft a list of rights that the new federal government could not encroach upon, in order to salvage the ratification efforts. The Bill of Rights is a list of 10 constitutional amendments that include the right to free speech, the right to a speedy trial, the right to due process under the law, and protections against cruel and unusual punishments.
The Anti-Federalists' collected speeches, essays, and pamphlets later became known as the “Anti-Federalist Papers”. While each Anti-Federalist had their own view of what a new constitution should look like, they generally agreed that the Constitution as it stood consolidated too much power in the hands of Congress.
Felons' Right to Vote: What Does the Constitution Say?
You may want to see also
The three-fifths rule gave southern states more power
The Three-Fifths Compromise, also known as the Constitutional Compromise of 1787, was an agreement reached during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention over the inclusion of slaves in counting a state's total population. This count would determine the number of seats in the House of Representatives, the number of electoral votes each state would be allocated, and how much money the states would pay in taxes. Slaveholding states wanted their entire population to be considered when determining the number of Representatives they could elect and send to Congress. Free states, on the other hand, wanted to exclude the counting of slave populations in slave states, as slaves had no voting rights.
The Three-Fifths Compromise counted three-fifths of each state's slave population toward that state's total population for the purpose of apportioning the House of Representatives. This gave the Southern states more power in the House relative to the Northern states. The Southern bloc in Congress, comprised of Southern Democrats, constituted a powerful voting bloc until the 1960s. Their representatives, repeatedly re-elected by one-party states, controlled numerous chairmanships of important committees in both houses, giving them control over rules, budgets, and patronage projects, among other issues.
The Three-Fifths Compromise also gave slaveholders enlarged powers in Southern legislatures. This was an issue in the secession of West Virginia from Virginia in 1863. The compromise was superseded and explicitly repealed by the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868.
The three-fifths ratio was originally proposed as an amendment to the Articles of Confederation in 1783. The amendment would have changed the basis for determining a state's wealth, and hence its tax obligations, from real estate to population. The South objected to this formula since it would include slaves, who were viewed primarily as property, in calculating taxes. Thomas Jefferson noted that the Southern states would be taxed "according to their numbers and their wealth conjunctly," while the Northern states would be taxed only on numbers.
Lyttleton Constitution of 1954: Key Features Explained
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Anti-Federalists believed that the new Constitution consolidated too much power in the hands of Congress, at the expense of the states. They also believed that the unitary president resembled a monarch, and that the liberties of the people were best protected when power resided in state governments, as opposed to a federal one.
The Federalists, particularly John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison, put their case to the public in a famous series of essays known as The Federalist Papers. They argued that a centralized republic provided the best solution for the future.
The three-fifths rule stated that each slave counted as three-fifths of a White person for representation purposes. People from the northern states were concerned that this rule would give the southern states too much political power.
The Anti-Federalists argued that the Constitution did not contain a bill of rights. They made ratification of the Constitution contingent on a Bill of Rights in Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York. James Madison eventually agreed to draft a list of rights, known as the Bill of Rights, which secured basic rights and privileges for American citizens.
