Strict Constructionism Dbq Analysis

783 Words2 Pages

Throughout their time as Presidents, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison attempted to stay true to Democratic-Republican fundamentals of strict constructionism, limited central power, and states’ rights that were put into place following the success of the Revolution. However, they eventually strayed from the original characterizations of their parties. In fact, during Jefferson and Madison’s presidencies, they often adopted or acted upon principles that were more aligned with Federalist ideals of broad constructionism, when the needs of the country demanded this, while remaining convinced that Republican values of limited central government were essential.
Early on Jefferson showed his passion and conviction that the rights of states under …show more content…

He firmly felt that the President of the United States had no right to dictate what religious practices the citizens followed. (Doc. B) However, in a cartoon by Alexander Anderson in 1808, Anderson criticizes the Embargo act which was put into place by Jefferson. He went against strict constructionism when passing the act as the constitution says nothing about placing a ban on trade or other commercial activity with another country is acceptable. Even the federalists opposed the broad constructionism of the Madison administration. In 1814 Daniel Webster protested in a speech to the house of representatives that president Madison does not have the right to draft men into the military because the constitution does not support this. (Doc. D) In this, Webster who was a federalist, is illustrating a strict constructionist viewpoint, opposing drafting into the War of 1812. He explains very clearly that Madison’s departure from the principles and ideals of Republicanism regarding the interpretation of the Constitution and questions whether or not Madison was in fact true Republican because a true Republican would not have used his power to wage war. Arguments similar to this finally led to the Hartford convention where a group of lawmakers, primarily federalists, gathered and showed support for amending the constitution so that a two thirds vote would be required to declare war in the

Show More
Related

  • Compare And Contrast Jefferson And Adams

    613 Words  | 2 Pages

    John Adams and Thomas Jefferson brought many different viewpoints and strengths after the establishment of the Constitution but they both put the nation’s stability first and wanted to preserve the wellbeing of the people first by Adams ending the Quazi war and Jefferson making the Louisiana Purchase.

    Read More

  • Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists

    348 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Federalist Party, led by James Madison, was in favor of the newly formed Constitution. One of the main objects of the federal constitution is to secure the union and in addition include any other states that would arise as a part of the union. The federal constitution would also set its aim on improving the infrastructure of the union. This would include improvements on roads, accommodations for travelers, and interior navigation. Another consideration for the Federalist Constitution would be in regards to the safety of each individual state. They believed that each state should find an inducement to make some sacrifices for the sake of the general protection.

    Read More

  • Strict Constructionism Dbq

    930 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the early 1800s America was still developing, trying to develop the government so it can learn to stand up on its own. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison played a key role in the country’s developing time, they created the idea of strict v. broad constructionism. Political parties were contradicting each other on the different point of views they had on the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson during his presidency sometimes made decisions that were based literally on the Constitution, whereas James Madison being a broad constructionist didn’t always take the Constitution literally.

    Read More

  • AP US History: 1800s

    992 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the early 1800s, two parties were developed having different perspectives on government and the Constitution. The Democratic Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, were always characterized by following the strict construction of the constitution. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, were characterized by following the broad construction of the constitution. The presidencies of Jefferson and Madison proved this characterization to be somewhat accurate. Although the Democratic Republicans and the Federalists did support their own ideas and views, they also did many things that contradicted them.

    Read More

  • The Federalist No.'s 10 and 51

    433 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Federalist, No. 10, by James Madison is a clear expression of views and policies for a new government. Madison was a strong supporter and member of the Federalists whose main beliefs favored the Constitution. They also believed that the Articles of Confederation needed to be rewritten so that a new central government would control the power of the states.

    Read More

  • Bill of Rights To Protect From Tyranny

    768 Words  | 2 Pages

    Supporters of the Constitution called themselves Federalists, a name referring to a balance of power between the states and the national government. They argued for a federal system as in the Constitution. James Madison claimed that the Constitution was less dangerous that it looked because the separation of powers protected people from tyrannical abuse. The Federalists compile a group of essays, known as The Federalist Papers. In No. 51, Madison insisted that the division of powers and they system of checks an balances would protect Americans from the tyranny of centralized authority. He wrote that opposite motives among government office holders were good, and was one of the advantages of a big government with different demographics. In No. 10, he said that there was no need to fear factions, for not enough power would be given to the faction forming people; thus, they wouldn't become tyrannical. Hamilton, in No. 84, defended the Constitution with the case that the Constitution can be amended by representatives, who are there to represent the citizens' interests.

    Read More

  • Did The Founding Fathers Create The Constitution Essay

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    He states that the government had too many leaders and not enough followers. That the government administrated by too many people who had a different motive on running the state. In addition, Madison agreed to what Hamilton was saying. Therefore, Madison helped Hamilton settle this dilemma. “It has been seen that delinquencies in the members of the Union are its natural and necessary offspring; and that whenever they happen, the only constitutional remedy is a force, and the immediate effect of the use of it, civil war.” (Hamilton) Hamilton father explains why this would be a problem with government and predicts what might happen if it reaches to that point. “To this reasoning, it may perhaps be objected, that if any State should be disaffected to the authority of the Union, it could at any time obstruct the execution of its laws, and bring the matter to the same issue of force, with the necessity of which the opposite scheme is reproached.” (Hamilton) Both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison wrote the 18th and 19th Federalist paper. The 18th article spoke about contradicting the argument of anti-federalists that proposed a monarchical rule in America. Madison states that if the anti-federalist and federalist do not collaborate on the rule that they established for the people. They would become like the people in Greek history. “Instead of this obvious policy, Athens and Sparta, inflated with the victories and the glory they had acquired, became first rivals and then enemies; and did each other infinitely more mischief than they had suffered from Xerxes.” Demonstrating a jealous view of power and disorganized fashion. “Their mutual jealousies, fears, hatreds, and injuries ended in the celebrated Peloponnesian war; which itself ended in the ruin and slavery of the Athenians who had begun

    Read More

  • Jeffersonian Republicans

    723 Words  | 2 Pages

    With respect to the federal constitution, the Jeffersonian Republicans are usually characterized as strict constructionists who were opposed to the broad constructionism of the Federalists. To what extent was this characterization of the two parties accurate during the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison.

    Read More

  • Jeffersonian Republicans Vs. Federalists

    1170 Words  | 3 Pages

    As the young colonies of America broke away from their mother country and began to grow and develop into an effective democratic nation, many changes occurred. As the democracy began to grow, two main political parties developed, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists.      Each party had different views on how the government should be run. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict construction of the Constitution. The Federalists opted for a powerful central government with weaker state governments, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. Throughout the years, the political parties have grown, developed, and even dispersed into totally new factions. Many of the inconsistencies and changes can be noted throughout the presidencies of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.

    Read More

  • The Rivalry Between Hamilton And Jefferson's First Political Parties

    607 Words  | 2 Pages

    As president, George Washington appointed cabinet members: Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of War Henry Knox, and Attorney General Edmund Randolph as is trusted advisors. However, Hamilton and Jefferson had opposing political view, which developed American’s first political parties by the mid-1790s. The Federalist Party led by Hamilton and supported by Washington, believed that merchants and manufacturers were the backbone of the economy, they also supported a strong central government. On the other hand, Jefferson led The Democratic- Republic, advocated limited national government, and believed that artisans and farmers were the backbone of the economy. The rivalry between the Federalist and Democratic- Republican was the result of disputing the interpretation of the Constitution, conflicting political ideologies, and opposing agendas for the future of the American Republic.

    Read More

  • Jeffersonian Era

    1285 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout the period dating from 1801 to 1817, the United States government was primarily controlled by the Jeffersonian Republican party, whereas the Federalist Party began to slowly fade away from public view. The Jeffersonian Republican party, led by Thomas Jefferson, professed to favor a weak central government through the support of more states' rights, "...that the states are independent... to...themselves...and united as to everything respecting foreign nations." (Document A). The Federalists of the United States were known as the loose constructionists, where if there is something which the constitution does not state, then it should be allowed to be done. The Jeffersonian Republicans were known as strict constructionists for their views towards the constitution that if there is anything that is not in the constitution, then it cannot be done. The Jeffersonian Republican party centered many of their political moves on the basis of creating a strong agricultural society with a weakly centralized government where each of the states have more rights to govern themselves, where the Federalist party believed more strongly on industrializing the nation and creating a strong central government. Even though strict constructionism was the idea behind the Jeffersonian Republican party, both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both have evidence against them which can prove that they were not strict constructionists. This is based on different political moves made by these two presidents which are more towards the Federalist side of things opposed to their own Republican and strict constructionist ideas.

    Read More

  • How Did The Embargo Act Of 1807

    590 Words  | 2 Pages

    There is no doubt there were issues with international trade before President Thomas Jefferson imposed the Embargo Act, such as the impressements that the British empire imposed. The act itself was unconstitutional if it was to be imposed permanently and it destroyed the commerce of the country. In my eyes, I believe that Thomas Jefferson intended to hurt New England’s economy and provoked war with Britain; demonstrated through the unnecessary Embargo Act of 1807. The act protected the ships, but it destroyed commerce and completely demolished the economy. In addition the country’s neutrality throughout the war was questioned because Jefferson supports France and Napoleon. Thomas Jefferson is an incapable president, he has his own agendas for presidency, and does not care for the country’s prosperity.

    Read More

  • What Are Thomas Jefferson's Boundaries As A President

    500 Words  | 1 Pages

    As a Republican president, Thomas Jefferson believed in having an agrarian paradise protected by a small government with no standing military and no debt. It also meant he believed in having very little interference with the people’s lives and to completely obey the constitution. Jefferson's administration as president confirmed conflicting interpretations of executive power. He had a high hostility to the idea of a strong central government. Jefferson has done many momentous achievements during his presidency that have had a long lasting impact in American history. However, some of those achievements defied his beliefs.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of George Clinton's Attack On The Constitution

    852 Words  | 2 Pages

    Not all American people were a fan of the Constitution. There were many flaws with the proposed Constitution that turned people off of the document. George Clinton was one of the people who disliked the Constitution immensely. Clinton wrote a paper, under a pseudonym, entitled “An Attack on the Proposed Federal Constitution”, in which he further explained his beliefs. Clinton, dubbed an “antifederalist”, believed the country would fail with one government controlling all of the power. James Madison took his paper seriously enough to write his own in response to Clinton. George Clinton mainly focused on the suggested republican government and quoting philosophers to make his paper sound more legitimate,

    Read More

  • Factions and the Constitution

    419 Words  | 1 Pages

    In Madison's Federalist 10, it is evident that he was not in favor of the formation of factions. He states, "…The public good is often disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties…" Madison made the point that the dangers of factions can only be limited by controlling its effects. He recognized that in order to abolish political parties from the government completely, liberty would have to be abolished or limited as well. For this reason, the government had to accept political parties, but it did not have to incorporate them into being a major part of the government. He says that the inclination to form factions is inherent, however the parties effectiveness can be regulated. If the party is not majority than it can be controlled by majority vote. Madison believed that in the government established by the Constitution, political parties were to be tolerated and checked by the government, however the parties were never to control the government. Madison was absolutely convinced that parties were unhealthy to the government, but his basic point was to control parties as to prevent them from being dangerous.

    Read More

More about Strict Constructionism Dbq Analysis

Open Document