Before the famous Constitution became published on September 17, 1787, there was a huge democracy over it since some people supported it (federalists), while others opposed it (anti-federalists). Basically the main arguments used by the Anti-Federalists in the discussion of the U.S. Constitution was the fact that the Constitution offered too much power to the federal government and that the rights of the people were not promised through a Bill of Rights.
In order to get their words out, they had ratified convections for the thirteen states. They choose to go to Pennsylvania first because of its size, influence, and wealth.
By January 9, 1788, five states of the nine necessary for ratification had approved the Constitution which included Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut. Eventually, New Hampshire ratified also. …show more content…
However, the call for a Bill of Rights had been the anti-Federalists' most powerful weapon. Attacking the future Constitution, Patrick Henry asked the Virginia convention, "What can avail your specious, imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances." The anti-Federalists, demanding a briefer, clear Constitution, one that laid out for all to see the right of the people and limitations of the power of government.
But, the efforts of the Anti-Federalists were not enough to stop the ratification of the Constitution of the United States, but they managed to push for the creation of the Bill of Rights, which promised protection for the rights of all
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
December 7, 1787, by a unanimous vote, Delaware became the first state to ratify the Constitution of the United States of America. However, not every state was as eager to approve the Constitution; in fact, there were many conflicts leading to hesitation. The major conflicts were disagreements between federalists and anti federalists, state representation, and slavery. To overview, the federalists were those in favor of the Constitution and the anti federalists opposed the constitution. Some of the most noteworthy anti federalists included Samuel Adams, George Mason, James Monroe, and Patrick Henry.
The ratification of the constitution occurred between 1787-1789. Just prior to this, the colonists had defeated the French and Indians in the Seven Years War (a.k.a. French and Indian War), and immediately following the victory the British ended their salutary neglect towards the colonies and began to tax the the colonists in order to pay for the war. These events sparked a chain reaction that saw the colonists declare independence and defeat the British in the Revolution. This brings us to the constitutional convention whose task was to design a government for the people, by the people.
On the other hand, Cornell explains that this “will of the people” was often contorted on both sides as political debate. Thus, the “dissenting tradition” was not more than who was more qualified to run the government through countless debates and public appeal. As explained by Cornell,”Each side expended enormous energy crafting appeals to persuade citizens that it was better qualified to represent the will of the people” (Cornell 21). Thus, the Anti-Federalists were using the people to debate themselves in the public sphere to gain the will of the common man and avoid the evil corrupt centralized authority.
In May 25, 1787, a convention was called in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to express the purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. However, the intention from many delegates was to draft a new constitution; create a new government rather than fix the existing one. Rhode Island was the only one of the 13 original states to refuse to send delegates to the Constitutional Convention. At the Convention, the first issues they had to address was the representation in Congress.
Lectures Lecture 14 “Questions to Consider #1”: Why did the Anti Federalists object so strongly to the Preamble to the Constitution? The Anti-Federalists objected so strongly to Preamble to the Constitution due to the fact the Preamble establishes powers for the three branches of government, states’ relations, mode of amendment, debts, national supremacy, oath of office, and amendment ratification. This group felts as though when the federalists wanting to create a strong central government would not be strong enough if the Preamble was not put into place. Lecture 14 states, “Anti-federalists suspicious of central power fought the new Constitution tenaciously…..
To replace the problematic Articles of Confederation, Washington, Hamilton, Jay, Franklin, and others organized the 1787 Philadelphia Convention and started to compose a new law of the country, the United States Constitution. However, it wasn’t easy to make every state come into an agreement on things written in the Constitution, since all the state wanted to make sure they were equally and fairly treated. As a result, several major compromises in the ratified version of the Constitution, including the Great Compromise, Three-Fifths Compromise, Slave Trade Compromise and the compromise on the Bill of Rights. The Great Compromise is the a compromise about state representatives, and it was made between large states and small states.
After the Declaration of Independence in 1787, the Federal Government turned to the creation of the Constitution in which delegates from 13 states convened to make compromises on their beliefs for the betterment of a nation. Although the Bill of Rights was initially not a part of the Constitution, the Federalists thought that it was crucial to ensure ratification of the Constitution. This ratification was one of the main reasons why the Bill of Rights needed to be added. Federalists feared a strong, central government, and created a Bill of Rights in order to prevent government abuse. Others believed that a dominating Government could prohibit rights in the future, which would not necessarily be expressed in the Bill of Rights.
When it came to the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists the differences are many and at times very complex, due to the beliefs that the Federalists are nationalist at heart. The Federalists had an incredibly big role in shaping the new Constitution, which the Federalists used to create a stronger Constitution at great cost to the Anti-Federalists. If you ask the Anti-Federalists They believe that should be a ratification of the US Constitution in every state. But due to the Anti-Federalists being poor at organizing they really didn’t gain any ground. Although they didn’t achieve their goals of ratification of the US Constitution, but they did force the first congress under a new Constitution along with the bill of rights.
The Federalists wanted a strong central government. The Anti- Federalists claims Constitution gives the central government too much power and, and they worried about the new constitution will not give them any rights. That the new system threatened freedom; Also, threatened the sovereignty of the states and personal liberties; failed to protect individual rights. Besides, some of famous peoples such as " Patrick Henry" and artists have came out against the Constitution. Although the anti-Federalists were unsuccessful in stopping the passage of the Constitution, their efforts have been responsible for the creation and implementation of the Bill of
The Constitution of the United States of America, the final Constitution, was finally finished and signed in 1787. But even before the document could be used, at least nine states had to accept it. Federalists, supporters of the Constitution, had to teach everyone about the document. Antifederalists, who were against the Constitution, believed that without a Bill of Rights, it would be dangerous. Consequently, the Federalists added a Bill of Rights to the Constitution.
Represented by Alexander Hamlton, they favored the constitution and were against the bill of rights. The Anti-Federalists feared/preferred a weak central government. They were represented by Thomas Jefferson, they favored the articles of confederation and were for the bill of rights. The warnings from the Anti-Federalists about the constitution were right. They warned the Federalists about the consequences of undelegated power becoming abused.
Hence Federalists came up with the Bill of Rights as a way to get the Constitution ratified and for people to really see a needed change. The Bill Of Rights which lists specific prohibitions on governmental power, lead the Anti-Federalists to be less fearful of the new Constitution . This guaranteed that the people would still remain to have rights, but the strong central government that the country needed would have to be approved. The 1804 Map of the nation shows that even after the ratification of the United States Constitution there still continued to be “commotion” and dispute in the country.(Document 8) George Washington stated that the people should have a say in the nation and government and everything should not be left to the government to decide.(Document 3) Although George Washington was a Federalist many believed he showed a point of view that seemed to be Anti-Federalists. Many believed that The Bill of Rights needed to be changed and modified and a new document’s time to come into place.
After signing the Declaration of Independence in 1776, The 13 former colonies were undergoing an identity crisis. It was one thing to declare independence, but it was another to realize what you were now that you declared it. The Constitution was eventually written, at an attempt to create a more perfect union between the states. One of the amazing things about the Constitutional Convention was that the people knew most governments would result in either chance or war. They knew that what they were doing was sitting in a room and rationally trying to create a good government.
In 1787 many important people, like Benjamin Franklin and John Hancock, had different views and beliefs on ratifying the Constitution. This lead to two groups forming the federalists and the anti federalists. The federalist believed that the Constitution should be ratified for the sake of a strong government, while the anti federalist believed that the Constitution should not be ratified because of the lack of individual rights. Specifically, the antifederalists point of view was more reasonable towards the public due to the fact the anti federalists wanted power within each state and not the central government. One reason why the anti federalist’s point of view is more sensible than the federalists is because the anti federalist thought