Federalist Papers: Advocating for the Constitution

321 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: Anti federalists and federalist conflict

After, having the debate, Delegates wanted to start something called the Constitution. Supporters of this new Constitution, were called federalist. With this new government they wanted to have the power strictly limited. They divided the power into three branches. Their was the executive, legislative, and judicial branch. People from New York were very controversial about the Constitution and many delegates would not sign it. To persuade people from New York and have them believe the constitution was a good role model, delegates John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison wrote federalist papers. They wrote a total of eighty- four essays. In the Federalist papers, the constitution could set up a new government and create goals for the people. In the text it explains “ In Federalist paper #46, the federal system lets state governments, which are closer to the people, meet the personal interest of the people.” This helped explain what the constitution could provide for the people. With the new Constitution created by delegates, eventually …show more content…

There were multiple reasons why they opposed to the constitution. Anti- Federalist felt that the country would be ruined with taxes, the president would be more like a king, and National courts would drive out State courts. One point made is Congress, the president, and the courts would have too much power in the constitution. When the British crushed American freedom it gave Anti-Federalist the idea that the Constitution will be unsuccessful. Furthermore, Anti-Federalist were determined to have the Bill of Rights on the constitution and it would be the only way of getting the constitution ratified. One textual evidence states “ To get these states to approve the Constitution, the Federalists promised that a bill of rights would be added to it.” With the new Bill of Rights, Anti-Federalist in New York and Virginia had finally agreed to sign the

Show More
Related

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Anti-Federalists

    835 Words  | 2 Pages

    The leaders of the anti-Federalists were Patrick Henry from Virginia, George Mason from Virginia, Richard Henry Lee from Virginia, James Monroe from Virginia, George Clinton from New York, Samuel Adams from Massachusetts, Elbridge Gerry from Massachusetts, Luther Martin from Maryland, and Samuel Chase from Maryland. The anti-Federalist leaders were men who had their careers and reputations already established. The anti-Federalists were the losers in the Constitution debate. They had accepted their defeat very well. They did not attempt to create problems and start fights or wars. Instead some leaders became well-known leaders in the government. James Monroe was the fifth president. George Clinton, along with Elbridge Gerry became vice presidents. Samuel Chase was in the Supreme Court. The anti-Federalists brought awareness to the subject matter of giving more power to the government and how dangerous it could be. They thought the Constitution could be improved with a bill of rights. They brought awareness to why our government needed to include a bill of rights. They wanted one to protect the rights of the people and the states. The anti-Federalists found the ratification process unreliable. They were correct because the Articles of Confederation stated it being

    Read More

  • Dbq The Beliefs Of The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    576 Words  | 2 Pages

    This party developed because of the ratification of the constitution process; one way the Federalists tried to persuade people that their views were right about a strong central government during the ratification process was through several articles, which became known as The Federalist Papers. The Federalists argued that the people needed a strong central government to keep order and protect the union (Doc 1). They believed that this form of government was needed because the Articles of Confederation was proof that the union needed a strong central government. They argued that the Articles of Confederation gave the central government too little power and as a result the Union, faced economic difficulties, foreign problems and state quarrels (Doc 3). They processed Checks and Balances, which was a system designed so that the central government would not get more powerful than the other would, and was intended to counter arguments being made by the Anti-federalists (Doc

    Read More

  • The Similarities and Differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers

    882 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Federalist papers were for the constitution being ratified. They were written by James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton. They consisted of 85 articles and essays. Most of them were published between 1787 and 1788 although; the author’s names were kept a secret until 1818. Hamilton decided to sign the papers “Publius” to keep his name anonymous. Hamilton was the first to publish an essay and soon picked Madison and Jay to assist him. To their surprise, the Federalist papers influenced many of the New York people to vote for having the constitution ratified. On the contrary, the Anti-Federalist papers did not agree entirely with the new Constitution. They were written by many different authors. Although, some of the more popular Anti-Federalists were Patrick Henry, John Hancock, Sam Adams, etc. They were also 85 Anti-Federalist papers. Much like the federalist papers, they Anti-Federalists adopted the name “Brutus”.

    Read More

  • Separation Of Powers Dbq Analysis

    742 Words  | 2 Pages

    Before the Constitution was drafted, the United States’ budding government, now independent from Great Britain, acted under a dysfunctional constitution called the Articles of Confederation. Although this constitution kept the new nation running, there were still flaws that needed to be fixed. The Articles of Confederation lacked a developed executive or judicial branch and a method for the main government to collect taxes from state governments, according to the background essay of the DBQ Packet. An assembly of fifty-five men eventually gathered for a Constitutional Convention in order to write a new constitution that would better satisfy the people’s needs. The trouble of creating another constitution lied behind creating a document

    Read More

  • Strengths And Weaknesses Of The Anti-Federalists

    853 Words  | 2 Pages

    Our powerpoint states that the Federalists were led by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. The Anti-Federalists on the other hand, did not agree. The powerpoint mentions that they attacked every area of the Constitution, but two of its features attracted the most criticism. One was the extremely increased powers of the central government. The second included the lack of “bill of rights” that would have provided necessary liberties including freedom of speech and religion.

    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

  • Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists

    348 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Anti-Federalist Party, led by Patrick Henry, objected to the constitution. They objected to it for a few basic reasons. Mostly the Anti-Federalists thought that the Constitution created too strong a central government. They felt that the Constitution did not create a Federal government, but a single national government. They were afraid that the power of the states would be lost and that the people would lose their individual rights because a few individuals would take over. They proposed a “Bill of Rights”, to make sure the citizens were protected by the law. They believed that no Bill of Rights would be equal to no check on our government for the people.

    Read More

  • Federalist Papers 10 and 51

    730 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Federalist Papers are articles and essays that were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay to promote the ratification of the United States Constitution. The eighty-five essays outlined the way that the new government would operate. The Federalist Papers were published in the New York City newspapers under the pen name Publius, they emerged from late 1787 through 1788. The authors of the Federalist Papers explained why this type of government was the best choice for the United States of America. The Federalist Papers were used to persuade the people to accept the new constitution. The people for the United States Constitution were known as Federalist, while people opposing the Constitution were known as Anti-federalist.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Anti-Federalist And Anti Federalists

    710 Words  | 2 Pages

    Anti –federalist believed that with out the bill of rights, the national government would became a to strong it would threating the americans peoples rights and libertys. Due to prior american revolution, ant-federalist did not forget what they fought for an believed that with a stronger national government, the president could become kind if he wanted. During this time people still feared a strong central government, due to british occupany of the states. Concidently the of people who wanted the bill of rights and were anti-federalist were famers and the working class, as to the fedarlist were extremely rich and powerful people Thomas Jeferson who was a active anti-federalist once wrote to james Madison A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inferences. (Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:388, Papers

    Read More

  • Examples Of The Federalist Paper And Government Today

    1034 Words  | 3 Pages

    In The Federalist Papers by James Madison, Madison discuses various aspects of government and how the government must be organized in order to better represent the people. In The Federalist, No. 10 Madison discusses the nature of political factions and parties and how they can affect the government and its practices. The Federalist, No. 51 discusses instead how the government being in branches helps maintain liberties and better protect the American people. The topics mentioned in The Federalist Papers continue to explain and structure our government today.

    Read More

  • Hamilton Argues Against A Bill Of Rights

    994 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the late 18th century the Antifederalists argued against the constitution on the grounds that it did not contain a bill of rights. They believed that without a list of personal freedoms, the new national government might abuse its powers and that the states would be immersed in an all too dominant and influential national government. The Antifederalists worried that the limits on direct voting and the long terms of the president and senators, supplied by the constitution, would create a population of elites and aristocrats, which in turn would eventually take away power from the people. They also feared that the president might become another monarch. In other words, the Antifederalists ultimately felt that the new Constitution was undemocratic.

    Read More

  • Philosophers Of The Federalist Papers

    1120 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Independent Journal published the first Federalist essay in 1787, closely following the Constitutional Convention. This was one of 85 essays that were all soon published in support of the Constitution. The essays were all published under the alias name “Publius.” All essays were compiled into a single volume titled The Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers is considered a significant illustration of American political philosophy under the Articles of Confederation, which were adopted by the Continental Congress. The Articles set up the first legislative system that unified the thirteen states that battled in the American Revolution. A major theme that was discussed in the essays centers around the idea that the United States could not continue to endure under the Articles of Confederation and the weaknesses that accompany it. The Articles gave states the authority to create their own laws, however they were unsuccessful in creating a strong government. The essay suggested that immediate action be taken to prevent the impending anarchy that would ensue under these Articles.

    Read More

  • Essay On Ratification Of The Constitution

    1213 Words  | 3 Pages

    While the Federalists believe in a strong, central government, the Anti-Federalists believe in the shared power of state and national governments to maintain the rights of all Americans .The Anti-Federalist favored a confederated government were the state and national governments could share power ,protect citizen’s freedom ,and independence. The Anti-Federalists found many problems in the Constitution. Many were concerned the central government take was all individual rights. Anti-Federalist primarily consisted of farmers and tradesmen and was less likely to be a part of the wealthy elite than were members of their rival the Federalist. Many Anti-federalists were local politicians who feared losing power should the Constitution be ratified and argued that senators that served for too long and represented excessively large territories would cause senators to forget what their responsibilities were for that state. They argued that the Constitution would give the country an entirely new and unknown form of government and saw no reason in throwing out the current government. Instead, they believed that the Federalists had over-stated the current problems of the country and wanted improved characterization of power allowable to the states. They also maintained that the Framers of the Constitution had met as a discriminatory group under an order of secrecy and had violated the stipulations of the Articles of Confederation in the hopes for the for ratification of the Constitution. The Anti-Federalist were sure that the Constitution would take away the rights of the American citizens and fought hard to stop the ratification on the

    Read More

  • U.S. Constitution

    430 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Federalist Papers 10 & 51 were essays which helped persuade the citizens of the United States to vote for the federal Constitution. James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay used pseudonyms as their names to convince the public. Those who were skeptical of voting for a government, which had many different major powers, were reassured by the founding fathers in their speeches and conventions throughout the U.S.

    Read More

  • Competitive Federalism

    2725 Words  | 6 Pages

    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.

    Read More

More about Federalist Papers: Advocating for the Constitution

Open Document