I. Federalists In General
A. Federalists (Supporters of the Constitution)
i. Early Federalists, mainly Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Fay, had to convince the people in the states that the new federalism of the Constitution was better than the old confederacy.
ii. While they deeply believed that the United States needed a strong central government to survive, they also knew that many people feared the centralization of power.
iii. While they deeply believed that the United States needed a strong central government to survive, they also knew that many people feared the centralization of power.
iv. The colonial experience with the power of British government was still fresh in people’s minds.
v. The Federalists argued that without a strong national government anarchy, or political disorder would triumph.
vi. They claimed that only a strong national government could protect the new nation from enemies abroad and solve the country’s internal problem. They also claimed that a Bill of Rights was not needed since 8 states already had such bills in their state constitutions.
vii. To gain the necessary support, however, the Federalists promised to add a Bill of Rights to the Constitution as the first order of business under a new government.
B. Quotes for Federalists, by Federalists:
i. “The proposed Constitution, so far from implying an abolition of the State governments, make them constituent parts of the national sovereignty, by allowing them a direct representation in the Senate, and leaves in their possession certain exclusive and very important portions of sovereign power. This fully corresponds…with the idea of a federal government.” – Alexander Hamilton, the Federalist, No. 9, 1787.
ii. “Two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended. The effect of the first difference is…to refine and enlarge the public views by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations…” – James Madison, The Federalist, No. 10.
C. Anti-Federalists (Opponents of the Constitution)
i. The Anti-Federalists criticized the Constitution for having been drafted in secrecy.
ii. They claimed the document was extralegal, not sanctioned by law, since the Convention had been authorized only to revise the old Articles. They further argued that the Constitution took important powers from the states.
iii. The Anti-Federalists’ strongest argument, however, was that the Constitution lacked a Bill of Rights.
iv. They warned that without a Bill of Rights, a strong national government might take away the human rights won in the Revolution.
v. They demanded that the new Constitution clearly guarantee the people’s freedoms.
D. Quotes for Anti-Federalists, by Anti-Federalists:
i. “A consolidation of this extensive continent under on government [under the Constitution of 1787] cannot succeed, without a sacrifice of your liberties.” – Brutus
ii. “In every free government, the people must give their assent to the laws by which they are governed. This is the true criterion between a free government and an arbitrary one. The former are ruled by the will of the whole [the people], expressed in any manner they may agree upon; the latter by the will of one, or a few. If the people are to giver their assent to the laws, by persons chosen and appointed by them, the manner of the choice and the number chosen must be such, as to possess, be disposed, and consequently qualified to declare the sentiments of the people; for if they do not know, or are not disposed to speak the sentiments of the people, the people do not govern, but the sovereignty is in a few. Now, in a large extended country, it is impossible to have a representation, possessing the sentiments, and of integrity, to declare the minds of the people…” – Brutus, 1787.
iii. “In…a good constitution…the power is committed to [representatives with] the same feelings…and…the same objects as the people [have] … who transfer to them their authority. There is no possible way to effect this but by an equal, full and fair representation…For without this it cannot be a free government; let the administration of it be good or ill, it still will be a government, not according to the will of the people, but according to the will of a few… A farther objection against the feebleness of the representation [in a Constitution of 1787] is that it will not possess the confidence of the people…If then this government [Constitution of 1787] should not derive support from the good will of the people, it must be executed by force, or not executed at all; either case would lead to the total destruction of liberty.” – Brutus, 1787.
iv. “The necessity of a Bill of Rights appears to me to be greater in this government than ever it was in any government before…All rights not expressly and unequivocally reserved to the people are impliedly and incidentally relinquished to rulers…If you intend to reserve your unalienable rights, you must have the most express stipulation; for…If the people do not think it necessary to reserve them, they will supposed to be given up.” – Patrick Henry, 1787.
v. “I am sure they were fully impressed with the necessity of forming a great consolidated government instead of a confederation…and the danger of such a government is, to my mind, very striking…Who authorized them to speak the language of “We, the people,” instead of “We the states”?...If the states be not the agents of this compact, it must be one great, consolidated, national government of the people of all the states…If consolidation proves to be as mischievous to this country as it has been to other countries, what will the poor inhabitants of this country do? This government will…destroy the state governments and swallow the liberties of the people, without giving previous notice…” – Patrick Henry, 1787.
II. The Constitution
i. The Delegates –
A. William Paterson of New Jersey
B. Franklin Dayton, the oldest member; Jonathan Dayton, the 27-year old youngest – delegates from New Jersey.
C. The average age of delegates = 42.
D. Most of the delegates had studied law, had served in colonial or state legislatures, or had been in the Congress.
E. Well versed in philosophical theories of government advanced by such philosophers as James Harrington, John Locke, and Montesquieu, profiting from experience gained in state politics, the delegates composed an exceptional body, one that left a remarkably learned record of debate.
ii. The New Jersey Plan –
A. This nationalist position revolted many delegates who cringed at the vision of a central government swallowing state sovereignty.
B. In June, 13 delegates from smaller states rallied around proposals offered by New Jersey, delegate William Paterson. Railing against efforts to throw the states into “hotchpot,” Paterson proposed a “union of the States merely federal.”
C. The “New Jersey resolutions” called only for a revision of the articles to enable the Congress more easily to raise revenues and regulate commerce. It also provided that acts of Congress and ratified treaties be “the supreme law of the States.”
D. For 3 days the convention debated Paterson’s plan, finally voting for rejection. With the defeat of the New Jersey resolutions, the convention was moving toward creation of a new government, much to the dismay of many small-state delegates.
E. The nationalists, led by Madison, appeared to have the proceedings in their grip. In addition, they were able to persuade the members that any new constitution should be ratified through conventions of the people and not by the Congress and the state legislatures- -another tactical coup.
F. Madison and his allies believed that the constitution they had in mind would likely be scuttled in the legislatures, where many state political leaders stood to lose power. The nationalists wanted to bring the issue before “the people,” where ratification was more likely.
iii. History of the Constitution—
A. The states were very different from each other; however, they realized that in order to grow and prosper, they needed the other states. So, delegates from each state got together and a plan for unity was initially submitted to the 2nd Continental Congress on July 12, 1776. After much debate, on November 15, 1777, the states finally established a “firm league of friendship”.
iv. The Debate Over the Constitution –
A. The Constitution that emerged from Philadelphia in mid-September 1787 by its own terms required the ratification of nine states before it could go into operation.
B. Earlier a federal government meant a government of independent entities, such as that established under the Articles. Now the supporters of the Constitution redefined the term by applying it to the government developed at Philadelphia.
C. The opponents of the Constitution were forced on the defensive both in regard to the appellation, Antifederalist, and in regard to the fact that they had no ready alternative to suggest.
D. Federalists countered that the new government was one of delegated powers with no authority to invade individual rights and that any listing of rights would be incomplete. Their adversaries responded that a central government endowed with the authority to pass “necessary and proper” legislation could indeed infringe on individual rights.
E. Antifederalists recognized that they had found a popular issue and the Federalists had to give ground in a number of states by suggesting that they state append amendment proposals to its ratification. These suggestions were considered in the First Congress and a bill of rights was added to the Constitution in 1791, when the requisite number of states had ratified the first 10 amendments that comprise the Bill.
F. The Federalists believed in a strong and effective government that would ensure commercial growth and international prestige; the Antifederalists saw such goals threatening liberty and preferred local control.
G. The Antifederalists saw a strong national government as a threat to the liberties of Americans, believing its distance from the people and its extended territory only increased the threat.
H. The debate over the Constitution lasted less than a year, and the Antifederalists accepted the fact that its popular ratification had legitimated the document. They hoped though, that they could weaken some of the granted powers by suggested amendments.
III. Anti-Federalists / Why New Jersey are Federalists
i. The anti-Federalists attacked wildly on several fronts: the lack of a bill of rights, discrimination against southern states in navigation legislation, direct taxation, the loss of state sovereignty.
ii. Quote à Federalists = Good
A. “The smaller the society the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party and the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression.” Extend the size of the republic, Madison argued, the country would be less vulnerable to separate factions within it.
IV. Ratification
i. By January 9, 1788, five states of the nine necessary for ratification had approved the Constitution—Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut.
ii. The Constitution was finally finished on September 12, 1787 and made public.
iii. The Constitution was finally ratified and became legal on June 21, 1788.
iv. Order of Ratification:
A. Delaware – December 7, 1787
B. Pennsylvania – December 12, 1787
C. New Jersey – December 18, 1787
D. Georgia – January 2, 1788
E. Connecticut – January 9, 1788
F. Massachusetts – February 6, 1788
G. Maryland – April 28, 1788
H. South Carolina – May 23, 1788
I. New Hampshire – June 21, 1788 (With this states signing, the Constitution became legal)
J. Virginia – June 25, 1788
K. New York – July 26, 1788
L. North Carolina – November 21, 1788 (Initially voted against ratification)
M. Rhode Island – May 29, 1790 (Did not even hold a constitutional convention)
v. Bill Of Rights:
A. Because there was so much interest and debate regarding individual freedoms, a Bill of Rights became law on December 15, 1791.
B. Twelve amendments were proposed but only 10 were passed.
C. The Bill of Rights consisted of the Constitution’s first 10 amendments and included freedom of speech, religion, the press, peaceful assembly, and rights to jury trials.
V. Why we disagree with anti-federalist.
i. The main problem that anti-federalists have is that they fear that with a central government in place it will only lead to a new kind of Britain that is full of tyranny and people not having their voice heard. These beliefs however do not warrant enough of a reason to not ratify the constitution. This is because America as it was during this time had no government at all to truly keep order. They needed some kind of document to do this for the people. This was the constitution, it would allow the American people to finally start off as being an independent country that can truly fend for it’s self. So the reason why anti-federalists were viewed as wrong was pretty much because America needed to start off with some kind of Structure, this was the constitution, and while it probably would have many problems with it at first over time as a country there would always be the ability to change it as long as it would cause the county as a whole to benefit. The Constitution was finally finished on September 12, 1787 and made public.
B.
i. Another issue brought up by the anti-federalists was that of the economics of the south based mostly off of slave labor. This problem came to be the fact that the southern states thought that when they did ratify the constitution that the northern states would start to try and stop using as much slave labor. The south thought that this would only cause their economy to fall and was a huge reason why they decided to be more anti-federalists. This however was not really a problem for the federalists. They still would not do anything to make their economy suffer. So of course salve labor would be there because no one wanted to see their country start to fail. So this is just another fear that anti-federalists had with ratifying the constitution. Pretty much anti-federalists believe the way they do off of fears that in reality never would really come true.
