The Speeches Of Melancton Smith And Alexander Hamilton

1102 Words5 Pages

Clive Ibrahim Sabrina Sanchez History 146 9 August 2015 From the speeches of Melancton Smith, Alexander Hamilton, And from Robert Livingston, they have some contrasting arguments and opinions on the Constitution. Since the debate occurred between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalist, they all had different opinions in three significant concerns, such as representation in congress, sources of corruption, and the constitution’s effect on the states. Melancton Smith represented the Anti-Federalists. He argued that the House of Representatives were not representative enough. He believed that the representatives should be the figure for the society, possess knowledge of their circumstances and their wants, sympathize in all their distresses, …show more content…

He argued that people were living far from the city and one body could not legislate for the whole. He supported that by questioning whether the federal government could frame a system of taxation that would operate uniform advantages or not. He understood that it was not possible to collect a set of representatives who were acquainted with all parts of the continent. Furthermore, he believed that the state government had operated more beneficially than expected, although they had passed some bad laws in most of the states, which arose from the difficult times. Hence, he claimed that the state government was necessary in order to be the guardians of our domestic rights and interests and the support and the check of the federal …show more content…

He believed the only difficulty that lay in the want of resources was if they were adequate, the operation was easy, and however, if they were not, taxation must be restrained. Additionally, believed that if there was a tyranny in the government then people were better not to have general government at all. If people unite, however, it would bring great accomplishment. In addition, Robert Livingston as a Federalist argued that we were all equally aristocrats. He did not agree that the rich and the great were unfeeling and prone to excessive indulgence in drink. He imagined that, “those who are the most occupied by their own cares and distresses have the least sympathy with the distressed of others. The sympathy of the poor was generally selfish, that of the rich a more disinterested emotion (page 128).” He believed that all men from all classes had the same ambition when it came to having power in the

Open Document