Constitution
With the Constitution the elite society protected rights for every
American that
would secure and ensure our nation’s existence for hundreds of
years. Under
the Articles of Confederation, the United States’ government was
in a state of
chaos. To end the existing chaos and build a stronger
democratic society for the
future, the government would need to be more
powerful and centralized. Thus, the
elite class established the rules and
boundaries that would protect the rights
of all citizens from a suppressive
government. The Articles created a weak,
almost non-existent government had
neither an executive or judicial branch,
which meant that it lacked
enforcement powers. The newly formed government had
neither and executive or
judicial branch, which meant that it lacked enforcement
powers. There were
three problems that existed under the Articles of
Confederation that
would spawn and act of change. First, under the Articles of
Confederation
the government could not protect property and other rights of the
citizens.
Second, the society created under the Articles of Confederation lacked
a
means of advancing commerce and interstate trade. Third, government lacked
the
money and power to provide and adequate national defense (Dye 65-66).
Traders
and commercial men found their plans for commerce on a national scale
impeded by
local interference with interstate commerce. The currency of the
states and the
nation were hopelessly muddled. Creditors everywhere were
angry about the
depreciated paper money, which the agrarians had made and
were attempting to
force upon those whom they had borrowed specie. Poor,
small landowning farmers
could not sell or trade goods that they produced on
their land to other states.
The "muddled currency" in 1786, led to the
loss of land in Massachusetts.
During this time Continental army veterans
were unable to pay their debts with
the paper money that they were supplied
with by the Continental Congress. This
bankruptcy led to the loss of land and
a great rebellion led by Daniel Shays.
The Shay’s rebellion was ended
easily enough but it was the lack of national
government that frightened
people. Had Daniel Shays gathered a larger number of
people and had more
firepower the small amount of farmers and townspeople might
not have been
able to squash this rebellion. Anarchy in the States could not be
tolerated
(ShaysNet). However it was James Madison that stated that the way to
abolish
the rule by faction is to abolish liberty but that liberty is essential
to a
faction as air is to fire. Madison continues to state that, "The
interference
to which we are brought is, that the causes of faction cannot be
removed and
that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its
effects."
Madison understood that to take away liberty was to stop a faction
and
therefore if a hindrance or boundary on liberty was established of
liberty
and therefore the most reasonable decision were to place boundaries
on it.
Madison and the elite class noticed how the Articles of
Confederation disrupted
the majority of the American people and created a
system of government where
liberty was so free that it hindered society. The
decision to create a new
system of government was in the best interest of all
the people in America
(James). In creating the Constitution there were many
conflicting views of how
the newly created government should function.
Alexander Hamilton, wanted a
strong central government in which a Senate and
executive power were chosen for
life by indirect election; therefore creating
an aristocracy. George Mason, an
anti-federalist, objected to the final
document because of the possibility that
this new government would create
aristocracy. Mason also proposed that, "there
is no declaration of Rights"
and the "Legislature cannot prohibit the
further importation of slaves,"
which he felt was destructive of the
country’s moral fiber (Virginia). On the
Bill of Rights issue, the government
did not need regulations that stated
what it couldn’t do because a government
cannot act unless it is stated
within the law. If there was not a law that
stated that they could censor the
press then it is illegal for them to do so.
Mason and many other
anti-federalists were opposed to the Constitution because
it allowed the
importation of slaves for at least another twenty years. Without
this clause
in the Constution it never would have been ratified because the
South
would not have voted for ratification denying the Constution
the
three-fourths vote that it needed. Although the importation of slaves in
the
Constution was not ideal there was not a way to ratify the
Constitution without
the South’s vote on this issue. Charles A. Beard
critizes the creators of the
Constitution deeming that: "I believe in the
infallibility, all-sufficient
wisdom, and infinite goodness of the late
convention; or in other words, I
believe that some men are of so perfect a
nature that it is absolutely
impossible for them to commit errors or design
villainy. I believe that the
great body of the people are incapable of
judging in their nearest concerns, and
that, therefore, they ought to be
guided by the opinions of their superiors ..
. I believe that aristocracy is
the best form of government . . . I believe that
trial by jury and the
freedom of the press ought to be exploded from every wise
of government . . .
I believe that the new constitution will prove the bulwark
of liberty --- the
balm of misery --- the essence of justice --- and the
astonishment of
mankind(Anti-Federalist). Another anti-federalist, Patrick Henry
gave a
speech at the Virginia Convention, which is telling the founders that
their
new Constution will have the same rule of the land that does not differ
from
the former rule of England. Below is a small section of the speech
from
Patrick Henry: THIS, sir, is the language of democracy--that a
majority of the
community have a right to alter this! How different from the
sentiments of
freemen that a contemptible minority can prevent the good of
the majority! If,
then, gentlemen standing on this ground are come to that
point, that they are
willing to bind themselves and their posterity to be
oppressed, I am amazed and
inexpressibly astonished. If this be the opinion
of the majority, I must submit;
but to me, sir, it appears perilous and
destructive. I can not help thinking so.
Perhaps it may be the result of
my age. These may be feelings natural to a man
of my years, when the American
spirit has left him, and his mental powers, like
the members of the body, are
decayed. If, sir, amendments are left to the
twentieth, or tenth part of the
people of America, your liberty is gone forever
(Yesterday‘s). There were a
few problems within the Constution of the United
States of America, but
the effects that it produced in society was far more
positive than that of
the Articles of Confederation. The chaos that was
constructed under the
Articles was legally banned under the Constution. The
slave trade and acts of
slavery would last many more years but finally it was
ended very bloodily.
Although the history of the United States has not always
been a happy on the
ratification of the Constution still is on of America’s
best
accomplishments.
Bibliography
Dye, Thomas R. (1998) Politics in
America - Third Edition. New Jersey:
Prentice, Inc James Madison
University. James Madison: His Legacy. Trans. Devin
Bent. Online. James
Madison Center. Internet. 26 February 2000.
http://www.jmu.edu/madison.
ShaysNet. Shay’s Rebellion. Trans. Peg
Larson. Online. Wintergreen Associates.
Internet. 26 February 2000.
http://www.shaysnet.com/~shayg/dshay.htm. The
Virginia Anti-Federalist.
Online. Internet. 26 February 2000.
http://users.erols.com/wmwalkers/anti.html
Yesterday’s Anti-Federalist.
Online. Internet. 26 February 2000. http://www.no-debts.com/anti-federalist