The arguments presented in Henry Steele Commager, and Staughton Lynd’s interpretations of the constitution provide more compelling and accurate arguments than Charles Beard’s. “A Constitution for All the People”, and The “Conflict Over Slavery”, when read together, provide the motivation for the constitution as well as an explanation for its articles. While Lynd’s piece provides reasoning for how, many of the articles in the constitution came to be, through the sectional divide of the North and South created by the conflict over slavery; Commager describes the constitution as a political document with two main goals, solving federalism and limiting governmental powers, clearly outlined in the constitution and its articles. In comparison …show more content…
One of Beard’s main points is the constitution was written by the rich for the rich. If this were true, and the writers of the constitution were “immediately interested through their personal possessions in the outcome of their labors” then they would not have imposed a tax on those very same possessions. Another point made by Beard is that the constitution, and the republic formed by it, would only be possible because of many existing factions. This common point, that the states were split into so many little factions that tyranny of the majority would be prevented, makes sense. However Beard’s application that class is the strongest faction while “neither moral nor religious motives can be relied on” (Beard) is inaccurate. Although class has been and always will be the cause of different views, it is the combination of different identities such as geographic location that create a …show more content…
However he clearly describes how these motivations led to the document we have today. Lynd states that the argument over slavery divided the government, as well as the thirteen colonies, into north and south. This sectionalism led to many of the compromises in the constitution today. With the South wanting to keep slavery, and the North wanting to abolish it, the tension between the two sides was very high. Lynch, a southerner, stated “ if it is debated, whether their Slaves are their Property, there is an end of the Confederation”, this ultimatum provides the reasoning behind the fact that slavery is not mentioned in the constitution. What the constitution does show is the compromises reached by the North and the South. One of these is the ⅗ compromise, stating that every five slaves will be counted as three people in regards to both taxation and representation. Counting slaves towards taxation discourages slave owning while counting them towards representation encourages it. This conflict between the North and the South led to a fight for more representation, higher population, and control of the government that lasted for many
According to The Constitution: An Enduring Document, “The result was virtual chaos, without the power to collect taxes, the federal government plunged into debt” (UCS editors). As the article mentions, this caused the formation of small armies of farmers led by Daniel Shays. They were rebelling due to the high taxation on their mortgages (UCS Louisiana Education website). This shows how “The Articles of devised a loose association among states, and set up a federal government with very limited powers” (USC Loui). In contrast, the new Constitution strived to do the opposite and revive a document with more liberty to the government.
Charles Beard interprets the constitution of the United States in an economic manner. Beard claims certain personal interests among individuals such as money, public securities, and trade carried out the movement for the constitution. Beards hypothesis says merchants, manufacturers, shippers, and financiers would be in support of the constitution whereas non-slaveholding farmers and debtors would be in opposition of the constitution. For example, according to the article “An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States” by Charles Beard, beard states “Would it not be pretty conclusively demonstrated that our fundamental law was not the product of an abstraction known as “the whole people,” but of a group of economic interests
The award-winning 2011 book titled Lincoln and The Triumph of Nations by author Mark E. Neely Jr. is an insightful piece of literature that seeks to explore the constitutional wartime experiences of both the Union and the Confederacy alike. The author also depicts the constitutional dilemmas that President Lincoln was presented with throughout the American Civil War. In addition to the wartime experiences of both the Union and Confederacy, the issue of slavery, and the struggle for central power, Neely puts into play a nationalistic interpretation of Civil War constitutionalism in the United States. Neely’s argument seeks to help the reader understand how the intricacies of constitutionalism helped create and fuel the ideas of American nationalism
By the mid-nineteenth century, the Constitution had been put into the fiery crucible that was the issue of slavery, littering the antebellum era with political controversy. The national structure framed by the Founding Fathers in 1787, initially intended to bring unity, was now the primary grounds from which the question of slavery was bringing sectional conflict and national disharmony as a result of mass-moral compromise. The Constitution of the United States was instituted to encourage the unification of the stark sectional divide within the nation. However, rather than achieve its purpose, the Constitution was contorted and employed by both sections to further their envisioned future of the country.
In an attempt to address concerns dealing with representation of the states in Congress, delegates chosen from the states: Massachusetts, New York, Maryland, Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Virginia, Connecticut, and Georgia met in Philadelphia on July 16, 1787 in a meeting called, The Constitutional Convention. Among these delegates was Roger Sherman of Connecticut. Sherman was seen as awkward and unmeaning, giving off the air of a sub-conscious farmer when seated quietly. Although Sherman’s posture and physical appearance was not up to par of other politicians, and gave insight on his background as a Yeoman farmer, his superior intelligence was often recognized and spoken about on a grand level by those
The United States Constitution was established to provide basic rights and a government for the people. Much blood was shed, along with many casualties in the American Revolution to insure Americans could implement the policies and powers of the Constitution. In the election of 1860, Abraham Lincoln was elected President of the United States; however, his political views on slavery were not welcomed in the South. Consequently, Lincoln’s election sparked panic for the South knowing that he would undermine slavery. In order to insure that slavery continued, Southern states attempted to make two Constitutional provisions; consequently, they were denied.
Never directly mentioned in the Constitution, and commonly refereed to as “others”, African Americans were often denied existence in the Constitutional Conventions. James Madison embodied the complacency of the average white American man. Ellis describes his thinking as “a kind of mysterious region where ideas entered going in one direction but then emerged headed the opposite way.” (114). The Southern founding fathers, Madison included, acknowledged the moral evils of the slave trade but many of them slave owners themselves, did not desire an end to it, admittedly for their own profit.
Ratification DBQ The Constitution is a document that still stands as America’s governing body, proving its strength and ability to stand the test of time. Although some aspects of the document are debated and the argument of what is and what is not constitutional is discussed often, it has proven to be right for America and its people. However, in the late 1700s, not everyone saw the Constitution as strong and supported its state-power-heavy predecessor, The Articles of Confederation.
During the real Constitutional Convention held in 1787, slaves were not represented, making votes for abolishing slavery likely to fail. However, in this Constitutional Convention slaves were represented, which changed the passing and failing of certain motions. During all the motions involving slavery and slave trade, the faction consisting of slaves voted against anything and everything that would keep them from having their freedom. If that faction was removed and the discussion was only between the bankers/merchants, workers, southern plantation owners, and farmers, the evidence against and for why it is a good or bad reason would have changed. Most of the representatives during the real convention consisted of wealthy gentry men and politicians who owned some slaves, land, and bonds that gave them enormous amounts of profit.
America’s founders created the constitution in order to create unification and order in the United States. However, there have been controversy surrounding the interpretation of the constitution, this has caused debate over many issues within the country. These issues and the lack of wartime policy within the constitution directly lead to the Civil War, which was one of the worst alterations this nation has faced. The Missouri compromise, the Dred Scott decision, and Bleeding Kansas were controversial issues surrounding the constitution that directly lead to the Civil War.
The Constitution was made to be the document that would bring together the states to form a Union but as time went on, it was obvious there were many things separating the North and the South. The Constitution did do its job in helping to keep the Union together for a time but as a series of growing conflicts began to arise in the 1850s, it encouraged a growing split between the two and brought to light that it wasn't just the Constitution that was causing waves. The Constitution did become the source of sectional discord and tension that ultimately led to the failure of the Union. It was a prevalent ideal in the North that the ocuntry was an indissovable Union. When the Constitution was made, the points written were more conerning the breaking
Holton addressed were all valid reasons to support his argument that the unruly Americans led to the origins of the Constitution. The strongest argument made by Mr. Holton was the transgressions that the Founding Fathers laid at the feet of the thirteen state legislatures. He stated that the most glaringly representative had shown excessive indulgence to debtors and taxpayers, in which the state legislature had refused to force farmers to pay what they owed (page 92). These policies adopted by the state legislatures in the 1780s proved that ordinary Americans were not entirely capable of ruling themselves (page 96). “Honesty Is the Best Policy” (1786) “Curtis” written by an anonymous author that reads as if it was written by one of the Founding Fathers’.
Slavery in the U.S. Constitution After the Unites States declared Independence from Great Britain in 1776, they greatly feared a strong national government that would be like a monarchy like the one Great Britain had. To prevent this tyrannical government from happening in the U.S., a convention of delegates from all thirteen states were brought together to create the U.S.’s first written constitution: the Articles of Confederation. This convention was called the Continental Congress. The Articles of Confederation focused on having a federal government, or a loose alliance of the states.
DBQ Essay The United States Constitution is a document that or founding fathers made in order to replace the failing Articles of Confederation (A of C). Under the Constitution, the current government and states don’t have the problems they faced when the A of C was in action. The Constitution was created in 1788, and held an idea that the whole nation was nervous about. This idea was a strong national government, and the Federalist assured the people that this new government would work. The framers of the Constitution decided to give more power to the Federal government rather than the state governments because the A of C had many problems, there was a need for the layout of new government, rights, and laws, and there was a need for the Federal
Are “all men created equal”? Why did the Constitution allow slavery to continue? The framers of the Constitution allowed slavery to continue because of political, economic, and social issues. They wanted their nation to be unified and the number of states to stay intact. They wanted to secure wealth and slavery was a great part of their economy.