More handpicked essays just for you.
The creation of the United States constitution
The u.s constitution then and now
The u.s constitution then and now
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
2. How did the Great Compromise reconciled interests of large and small states? The Great Compromise, is also referred to as, The Great Connecticut Compromise, was headed by Franklin. The Compromise was discussed in meeting by a committee, at the constitutional convention was held in 1787. This was to accomplish and settle the interests for both the small and large states. It had allowed the for one to lead in the senate and the other in the House by an arrangement, that each of the states would have two representatives in the Senate no matter what the size of the state. However, any provisions, were further granted based on the populace of the house (Wilson, Dilulio, Jr. and Bose, 23). The larger states felt that they had represented more …show more content…
of the population than the smaller states. Because of this held belief, the larger states had wanted more representation for their people based off their populace. Alternatively, the concern for the smaller states was they did not want to be overpowered and taken into less consideration on issues, by representation, if the larger states had more representation, than they had. What came to be the resolve for the concerns, was The Great Compromise. It had created two Houses, for equal representation for both the smaller states and the larger states and representation would be based on states populace. Thus, we have the Great Compromise (Wilson, Dilulio, Jr. and Bose, 21-22). Work Cited Wilson, James Q., John DiIulio, Jr., and Meena Bosse. American Government. Brief Version. 11th ed. Boston: Wadsworth, 2014. Print. 5.
How did the Signers of the U.S. Constitution deal with the issue of slavery? The Signers did not have much to say on the issue of slavery during this time. In fact, I don’t believe it is mentioned in the words of the Constitutions, rather clauses are in place that seem to touch on the issue of slavery. It may appear the Signers avoided the word altogether. As we know there were clauses included that held some important, rights for slaves and mainly what I can tell slave owners, on the issue of slavery. Although it would seem, at the time in history this was written, and normal way of life, to have offered some protection to slaves. (Wilson, DiIulio, Jr. and Bose 29). The Signers also owned slaves themselves. They did not mention the issue of slavery, in the Constitution and little address was given to it, in a sense it was done to turn a blind eye. The signers were accused of being hypocrites. Although they did give some of the slave owning states a few extra seats in the House because they had “other persons,” this was not enough to stop the future problems that would challenge the meaning of, “all mean are created equal.” Some of the only mention The Signers had written the Constitution to ban slave trade for twenty years, in the Atlantic. There was a fugitive slave clause, that required others to return any runaway slaves to their owners. In my opinion this is not all-encompassing of the meaning “we the people” in its entirety. The signers did not include more protection and make provisions for the Slaves. I understand it was the time in history that was the way of life, and nothing seemed to be different for the country at that time however, it seems so disappointing to know the signers may have deliberately turned a blind eye (Wilson, DiIulio, Jr. and Bose
29-30). Lastly, the Signers also left out the slavery issue because if they restricted the trading of slaves in any way, it would allow Georgia and South Carolina to refuse to join the Union. However, to me this is a weak reason. They did not have the forethought to see that problems would arise in the centuries ad years ahead in history (Wilson, DiIulio, Jr. and Bose 29) Later in the future and in present time we see such upset and this had led to the great civil war. IF anyone had an opposition to ending slavery they presented arguments that insisted if the constitution was silent on this subject matter then the federal government was in no power to free slaves. On the other hand, if there were those expressing opinions to abolish slavery they presented an argument that the constitution would need to be read and interpreted in light of the Declaration of Independence, that had been signed eleven years prior and included the statement that, “all men are created equal” (Wilson, DiIulio, Jr. and Bose 30-31). Works Cited Wilson, James Q., John DiIulio, Jr., and Meena Bosse. American Government. Brief Version. 11th ed. Boston: Wadsworth, 2014. Print.
The Founding Fathers were a revolutionary group, diverse in personalities and ideologies but shared the common goal of American liberty. They understood that the citizens should have a say in their government, and the government only obtains its power from the citizen’s consent. In order to avoid endless debates on issues that needed to be solved immediately, the revolutionary leaders compromised their beliefs. Joseph J. Ellis writes of the compromises that changed the constitutional debate into the creation of political parties in, The Founding Brothers. The 3 main chapters that show cased The Founding Brothers’ compromises are The Dinner, The Silence, and The Collaborators.
Document 22 focuses on William Cushing. In this case, William Cushing addresses that all men should be born free and is entitled to liberty and not doing so would result in their prosecution. He states: “This being the case, I think the idea is slavery is inconsistent without own conduct and Constitutional and there can be no such thing as perpetual servitude of a rational creature, unless his liberty is forfeited by some criminal conduct or given up by personal consent or contract…” (Holton 79). Based on this statement, one would imply that Cushing was not in favor of slavery. In addition, one would feel surprised knowing Cushing had this mindset because the idea of slavery was very prominent in that era, and would not end until about 100 years later, when the 13th Amendment was ratified, which would abolish slavery. It seems as if Cushing was open-minded and appealed to the mindsets of many African Americans. Furthermore, another document used in discussing slavery is Document 31. This document concentrates on Thomas Jefferson, who was not yet president of the United States at that time. Jefferson explains in this document that if the slaves in Virginia to be emancipated, why they would not be able to conform to the Virginian society. In the document, Jefferson speaks upon African Americans in a degrading manner, criticizing them and pointing out their flaws. He points out subtle
...However the large states were not satisfied with their plan either, so a third plan was made, The Great Compromise. In other words the Connecticut Compromise (The Great Compromise) happened, it mixed the ideas of the two and was passed by a one-vote margin. The plan consists of proportional representation in The House of Representatives and equal representation in The Senate, as well as adding separation of powers to the mix. It was highly important and crucial to the success of the new constitution.
This task was easier said than done. The fear of creating a government with too much power was a fear that was very much alive throughout the states. Tyranny was a common factor in developing governments, the delegates were seeking to avoid this error. Two ground rules were put into place for the Convention. The first was that any and all deliberations were to remain secretive. The second was that no topic or decisions would be considered closed and could therefore be up for debate and revision at any time. Once these rules were agreed upon, business started. The two contenders were the Virginia Plan, which had the larger states rooting, and the New Jersey Plan, claiming the votes of the smaller states. Under the Virginia Plan, legislature would be two houses and would be represented based on population. Under the New Jersey Plan, legislature would be one house and each state would have equal representation regardless of population. An agreement could not be reached between these two plans, instead a compromise was made. The Great Compromise met each side with an upper and lower house. The upper house was the Senate and would provide equal representation that was elected by the lower house. The lower house was the House of Representatives and would be dispersed based on population of the states. This compromise satisfied the small and large states, giving a
As I stated earlier each state wanted to be represented according to different factors. The states with bigger populations wanted representation to be based solely off of population. The states with smaller populations wanted there to be a fixed number of representatives per state, regardless of size or population. The Connecticut Compromise resolved this issue by forming the two houses that we have today.
"The American constitution recognized slavery as a local constitution within the legal rights of the individual states. But in the North slavery was not adaptable to the local economy, and to many, it contradicted the vision of the founding fathers for a nation in which all men are to be free. The South considered slavery as a necessary institution for the plantation economy. It was linked to the local culture and society. As the United states expanded, the North worried that the South would introduce slavery into the new territories. Slavery had become both a moral issue and a question of political power." (Kral p61)
The two factors that shape the Constitution as being pro-slavery: the necessity of the slaveholders to protect their private property by the means of the law and the limited support of the North for the abolition at the time of the drafting of the Constituti...
Even though it took a lot of persuasion to convince the states to ratify this document, making concessions such as including a clause that the slave is only 3/5 of a person for apportionment purposes is not just. The urgency of ratification or the dire circumstances the nation did not justify the 3/5 provision. Furthermore, the demise of the union is not validation for not ending slavery. Slavery should not be a topic that is carefully tiptoed around: if the unity of the union fails because of slavery then it would have been deserved and warranted. In fact, if the tolerance of slavery remains
Unfortunately, the South would hear nothing of it. Being strong defenders of states rights, most of the Southern states adhered to their believe in a government less like a supreme authority and more like a dominion of independent states. They would rather stay loyal to their oppressive government than participate in one that shunned their way of life. In order to keep their dreams of independence, they North was forced to make the one cession they did not wish to make. In order to keep a unified nation, the slavery issue was deliberately absent from the Declaration.
There was no significant desire among most delegates to abolish slavery during the 1787 Constitutional Convention. In addition, the focus of the convention was on forming a more perfect union, not dealing with the issue of slavery (Dolbeare, 71). Also complicating things was the concern among some delegates that putting too much weight on the issue of slavery might cause the unification process to fall apart. This resulted in the Constitution containing a series of compromises regarding slavery, and blatantly avoiding the issue of slavery.
The south and the north made numerous compromises to create a great nation. The first indirect compromise was when the constitution didn’t mention slavery in the constitution, they left that for the states to deal with. After years after when the congress decide to stop the slave trade in 1808, they gave the south time to adjust to this but they new that by the time the slave trade died line was over the slave would have reproduces and they would have more slaves. Third compromise gave the south more power. They had notice that they had less seats in the house of representative. States with the most slaves, for instance Virginia and Maryland, were get out number in the house of representative, so the compromised to have the slave counted as part of the population. They got three counts for every five slaves. This helped balance the house of representative.
The first proposals to this new plan were the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan. The Virginia Plan called for a separation of powers among the government’s three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. Some states proposed this idea and came up with the New Jersey Plan, which called for all of the states to have equal representation from Congress. In order to move forward from the deadlock of the two proposals, the Connecticut Compromise was enacted. This decided that legislature would be bicameral, which meant that there would be two houses: one would have equal representation and one would be based on state population. This unified the states under a federal system. To this day, there are three types of Fe...
On further analysis, most of the issues within the document were due to vast cultural, racial, and economic lifestyles that our country did and will continue to support, as unintentional as it may be. This document lessened some of those issues and attempted to accommodate the requests of all states. However, Elitist framers manipulated the idea of a constitution in order to protect their economic interests and the interests of their fellow white land and slave owning men' by restricting the voices of women, slaves, indentured servants and others.
Slavery was an issue that would become extremely important topic when it came to the concern for the future of America, but the Founders knew that slavery was not going to be around forever due to its controversy. The Constitution reflects this belief in its wording for the long term effects it would foresee to have on the country.
The New Deal period has generally - but not unanimously - been seen as a turning point in American politics, with the states relinquishing much of their autonomy, the President acquiring new authority and importance, and the role of government in citizens' lives increasing. The extent to which this was planned by the architect of the New Deal, Franklin D. Roosevelt, has been greatly contested, however. Yet, while it is instructive to note the limitations of Roosevelt's leadership, there is not much sense in the claims that the New Deal was haphazard, a jumble of expedient and populist schemes, or as W. Williams has put it, "undirected". FDR had a clear overarching vision of what he wanted to do to America, and was prepared to drive through the structural changes required to achieve this vision.