More handpicked essays just for you.
Patrick Henry's speech to the convention of delegates in Virginia
The articles of confederation
The articles of confederation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Many founders believed that the Articles of Confederation were moving smoothly and everyone was completely satisfied on how the government was moving. It all started with Patrick Henry who stated that many citizens believed that they were not represented by government which led to the New Jersey Plan and Virginia Plan controversy. This controversy began with the Virginia Plan, which was a plan drafted by James Madison that contained two houses and wanted representation in Congress to be based off of population. However, in rebuttal to the plan, the New Jersey Plan was raised, which boasted a unicameral government, which consisted of one house, and wanted each state to have equal representation, essentially numbing and denying population and …show more content…
A type of confederacy or union was needed to accomplish these goals. Benjamin Franklin, proposed an example united government in 1754, long before the Articles of Confederation was introduced. The reason why Second Continental Congress hadn’t come up with the plan was due to the fact, that their Independence from Great Britain was more pressing and concerning at the time. Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist papers, specifically Federalist paper 21, about how could the citizens trust such a precarious type of government. Hamilton proclaimed, "Laws are a dead letter without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation.” After seven years of begging, the Articles of Confederation was shown to be deeply flawed and led the framers to help create our second form of government. The fear of a strong national government and fear that states would dominate each other in federal government. Which lead to the Articles giving more power to the states, not the central government. In the Revolutionary war people did not want a government like Great Britain which is Monarchy. Monarchy is the government in which central government is where all power is held, and you are not represented in government, political holders stay in power for life, not in intervals or
For five years after Revolutionary war each state basically governed themselves. Although there was national government in place, it held little power over the states. It soon became apparent that the Articles of Confederation needed to be readdressed to combat the increasing problems that were brewing in the country. The first attempt to redress was dismissed by many of the states. Nevertheless, a second attempt produced results with twelve of the states sending delegates to redress the Articles of Confederation. Several delegates submitted plans for consideration that would strengthen the national government two such plans were the Virginia and the New Jersey Plan. Despite much of Virginia’s plan being accepted, if a compromise had not been reached the New Jerseys plan would have been more workable because it offered: equal representation of the states, provided operational means to congress, and was not a radical departure from the Articles of the Confederation.
The Americans after obtaining independence from England needed to establish a form of government. Before the war had ended, the Second Congress of the Confederation called for the drafting of a new government in order to govern this new country, which the Articles of Confederation established. The Articles of Confederation built a government solely based off republican ideals, such as civic virtue, the idea that the states and the people will make sacrifices to the common good in order to benefit everybody. Relying on civic virtue did not pull through as successful for the young country. The Articles of Confederation shone through as successful in organizing and establishing states in the Old Northwest, spreading republican ideals; however, the success of the Articles of Confederation was trumped by its failures. The Articles of Confederation failed to provide a new and young United States with an effective government in its inability to collect tax revenue to pay debts, controlling the mobocratic uprising of upset factions, and dealing with foreign policies; additionally, the failure of the Articles of Confederation revealed the inefficiency and failure of republicanism.
The year of 1776 was a time of revolution, independence, and patriotism. American colonists had severed their umbilical cord to the Mother Country and declared themselves “Free and Independent States”.1 The chains of monarchy had been thrown off and a new government was formed. Shying away from a totalitarian government, the Second Continental Congress drafted a document called the Articles of Confederation which established a loose union of the states. It was an attempt at self-government that ended in failure. The Articles of Confederation had many defects which included a weak central government that lacked the power to tax, regulate trade, required equal representation and a unanimous vote to amend the Articles, and had only a legislative branch. As a result the United States lacked respect from foreign countries. These flaws were so severe that a new government had to be drafted and as a result the Constitution was born. This document remedied the weak points of the federal government and created one that was strong and fair, yet still governed by the people.
The Articles of Confederation were approved by Congress on November 15, 1777 and ratified by the states on March 1, 1781. It was a modest attempt by a new country to unite itself and form a national government. The Articles set up a Confederation that gave most of the power to the states. Many problems arose and so a new Constitution was written in 1787 in Independence Hall. The new Constitution called for a much more unified government with a lot more power. Let us now examine the changes that were undertaken.
The Federalist wanted to ratify the Constitution while the Antifederalist despised the idea entirely. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay eventually compiled 85 essays as the Federalist Papers. These supporters of the Constitution believed that the checks and balances system (a system in which the different parts of an organization (such as a government) have powers that affect and control the other parts so that no part can become too powerful )would allow a strong central government to preserve states' rights. They felt that the Articles of Confederation was too weak and that they were in need for a change. The Articles of Confederation had “errors” that needed to be corrected argued the Federalist. Ratifying the Constitution lead to an improved more advanced country.
In comparing the Articles of Confederation with the U.S constitution that was produced by the federal convention in 1787, it is important to note that the U.S operated under both documents. During March 1, 1781, the Articles of Confederation went into effect when it was ratified by Maryland. However, the U.S constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation as soon as it was ratified on June 21, 1788 by New Hampshire. The main difference between the Articles of Confederations and the U.S Constitution is that the constitution didn’t force the laws, but established the why of the constitution. In establishing the why, it warranted the farmers to work on the government being better than the Articles of Confederations. They wanted the government
After the Revolutionary War, the newly formed United States still had a major task ahead of them. They had to form a new government that would satisfy the demands of the people and ensure the success of their nation. The Articles of Confederation was the first system of government that was proposed and put into effect. This attempt at creating a system that protected the people form a strong central government ultimately failed but was an important step in the development of the current government system. The weaknesses presented by the Articles of Confederation helped lead to reforms that made the Constitution successful. Both the Articles and the Constitution demonstrate the struggles that the colonists went through with the British and their desire to establish a new tyranny free government.
The Articles of Confederation were incapable of providing the United States with an effective form of government. The Articles of Confederation presided weakly over the government as it allowed little or no power to tax, control trade, and branches of government were missing. In addition to this, the thirteen states acted as separate nations and the national government had little control over them.
James Madison was no stranger to opposition. In publishing an essay referred to today as Federalist Essay No. 10, Madison participated in a persuasive attempt to ratify the Constitution, a document he drafted and for which he is credited as its “Father”. Along with John Jay, who became the United States’ first Supreme Court Chief Justice, and Alexander Hamilton, who became the first Secretary of the Treasury, Madison articulates in his writing the necessity of the Constitution as a remedy for the extant ills of an infant nation recently freed from the grasp of distant monarchical rule. This young nation faltered under the first endeavor of organized government, the Articles of Confederation. The Articles were designed during a period of emerging
The Colonies were excited about having won their independence in 1783 with the signing of the Treaty of Paris, but they still had to be able to create their own system of government which they thought would create a strong government which would not have an overpowering central government as they thought Great Britain had had. With this was the creation of the Articles of Confederation. These articles were meant to create strong local and state governments while not granting any power to the central government with the idea that it could not have any power over the states. The states were allowed to conduct their own diplomacy, or war, from nation to nation or even from state to state. States were allowed to create their own currency and put heavy import taxes on goods from other states. The federal government had no independent executive, nor could it levy taxes on any part of the states. It could not create or maintain a militia; this duty was left to the states. All decisions had to be ratified by all thirteen colonies. In thought, this was a great idea because only the most popular decisions would be ratified and stronger states could not hurt the smaller states through majority rule. In practice it did not work very well because it could be thwarted by a single stubborn state.
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.
The American Revolution stirred political unity and motivated the need for change in the nation. Because many Americans fought for a more balanced government in the Revolutionary War, they initially created a weak national government that hampered the country's growth and expansion. In the Letter from Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Mrs. Adams complained about the inadequacy of power that the American government had to regulate domestic affairs. The Articles of Confederation was created to be weak because many had feared a similar governing experience that they had just eliminated with Britain. The alliance of states united the 13 local governments but lacked power to deal with important issues or to regulate diplomatic affairs. Congress did not have the power to tax, regulate trade, or draft people for war. This put the American citizens at stake because States had the power to refuse requests for taxes and troops (Document G). The weakened national government could not do anything about uprisings or small-scale protests because it did not have the power to put together an army. The deficiencies of the confederation government inspired the drafting of the American Constitution. The document itself embodied the principle of a national government prepared to deal with the nation's problems. In James Madison's Federalist Paper, he persuades the American public to adopt the Constitution so that the government can protect humans from their nature and keep them out of conflicts.
After the American Revolution, each of the original 13 colonies operated under its own rules of government. Most states were against any form of centralized rule from the government. They feared that what happened in England would happen again. They decided to write the Articles of Confederation, which was ratified in 1781. It was not effective and it led to many problems.
The Articles of Confederation was the first government of the United States. The Articles had created a very weak national government. At the time the Articles were approved, they had served the will of the people. Americans had just fought a war to get freedom from a great national authority--King George III (Patterson 34). But after this government was put to use, it was evident that it was not going to keep peace between the states. The conflicts got so frequent and malicious that George Washington wondered if the “United” States should be called a Union (Patterson 35). Shays’ Rebellion finally made it evident to the public that the government needed a change.
Even before the Constitution was ratified, strong argument were made by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison in the Federalist Papers urging the inclusion of a federal form of government to replace the failed confederation. In Federalist Paper No. 9 Hamilton states, “This form of government is a convention by which several smaller states agree to become members of a large one, which they intend to form. It is s kind of assemblage of societies that constitutes a new one, capable of increasing, by means of new associations, until they arrive to such a degree of power as to be able to provide for the security of a united body” (Usinfo.state.gov). The people of the United States needed a central government that was capable of holding certain powers over the states.