For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222

Federalists, Anti-Federalists & the Framing of the U.S. Constitution
  Term Paper ID:27899 		Get This Paper Free! or
Essay Subject:
Discusses intentions of Federalists & Anti-Federalist in the formation of the US constitution. Also reviews portions of the FEDERALIST PAPERS.... More...
6 Pages / 1350 Words
3 sources, 8 Citations, APA Format
$24.00

More Papers on This Topic


Paper Abstract:
Discusses intentions of Federalists & Anti-Federalist in the formation of the US constitution. Also reviews portions of the FEDERALIST PAPERS.

Paper Introduction:
The U.S. Constitution was constructed as a series of compromises between the two major factions involved in its writing, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The framers of the Constitution feared the potential "mischiefs" of faction and designed a governmental system that would balance competing interests and prevent the ascension of any one faction. A given faction might gain control of one of the branches of government or one level of government, but this would not enable that faction to control the entire system or to create a tyranny over other factions. The Constitution embodied a series of checks and balances to prevent one faction from gaining ascendancy over others. The overriding intent of the Framers was balance, to balance the rights of different groups, to balance the powers of the

Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.


The concept of justice that drove the Framers made it necessary thatboth rights and responsibilities be spelled out clearly in the documentsand institutions of society and that the means for deciding differences ofviewpoint also be clearly delineated. The concept of justicethat drove the Framers made it necessary that both rights andresponsibilities be spelled out clearly in the documents and institutionsof society and that the means for deciding differences of viewpoint also beclearly delineated. Constitution was constructed as a series of compromisesbetween the two major factions involved in its writing, the Federalists andthe Anti-Federalists. 29)In America, John Adams was the premier theorist of conservatism, and hewrote: "The foundations of every government is some principle or passion inthe minds of the people" (Ball & Dagger, 1991, p. (Pole, 1987, p. Madisonpointed out that Americans found a way of applying a republic to anextended territory, and he also noted that the elaborate system ofrepresentation in the Constitution would do two essential tasks: It would prevent the central government from grasping excessive power, because representatives were always to be responsible to their electors; and it would, in turn, screen the central government from the elemental force of popular passion. 34-35). (1987). 2 3) Balance was sought not only between the federal and state governmentsbut also within the federal government itself. In terms of the developing debate over theConstitution, this Anti-Federalist considered a single assembly to beinherently faulty and subject to all the vices and frailties an individualmight evince. ReferencesBall, T., & Dagger, R. 19) To protect individual rights from the tyranny of the majority andfrom the centralized control that was emerging form the Convention in thefederal form of government, the Anti-Federalists insisted above all on theaddition of a bill of rights: They were unconvinced by the rather lame Federalist arguments that individual rights were protected by the state constitutions, that the new government could never impinge on the liberties of the individual, or that a bill of rights might actually weaken the federal government and thus impair the very protections which it had the power to bestow. The Bill of Rights is in fact a statement of principles that arenot to be curtailed even if the majority wants to do so. (Stinebrickner, 1993, p. (Pole, 1987, pp. As a solution he suggested the creation of two bodies, withthe smaller elected as a council from the larger. The aristocratic Federalists believed that an elitewas better suited to administer government and dispense justice, butjustice was always seen as a matter of balancing the inherent rights of theindividual as expressed by Locke and Rousseau, among others, and therequirements of society under the social contract. (1993). At the same time, the majority does not have unlimited power. The Framers developed a system bothflexible and resistant to abrupt change. He also recommended thecreation of a balance of powers between the legislative, executive, andjudicial branches (Ball & Dagger, 1991, pp. The Supreme Court is a vitalinstitution precisely because it serves as the final arbiter for balancingcompeting interests and for protecting the minority--even a minority of one--from the tyranny of the majority. TheConstitution embodied a series of checks and balances to prevent onefaction from gaining ascendancy over others. 33). (Pole, 1987, p. It is always possible to amend the Constitution and to change thoseprinciples, but the process for doing so is deliberately difficult in orderto avoid making the country, and any minority within the country, hostageto the vagaries of public opinion. Thegovernment developed by the framers is not a strict democracy but arepublican form which seeks to protect the minority from a tyranny of themajority. 16)In No. The Bill of Rights is in fact a statement of principles that arenot to be curtailed even if the majority wants to do so. (1991). The U.S. Agiven faction might gain control of one of the branches of government orone level of government, but this would not enable that faction to controlthe entire system or to create a tyranny over other factions. The conception of liberty and the conception of justice are fused,with the belief upheld that freedom should not be curtailed except whenabsolutely necessary for the greater good, for the protection of thefreedom of the majority. The overriding intent of the Framers was balance, to balance therights of different groups, to balance the powers of the different branchesof government, to balance the power of the states against the power of thefederal government. (Ball & Dagger, 1991, p. Thisseparation of powers is part of the system of checks and balances cited byThomas Jefferson: But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. Separation of powers wasthe provision placing different governmental powers in the three branchesof government--the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. These principles as a consequenceremain in force today in spite of shifts in the public consensus over time. The basic issue both faced was the ratification ofthe Constitution, with the Federalists supporting this document and thefederal form of government it would represent and the Anti-Federalistsopposing the document and the underlying philosophy. The power structure that the Framers developed was onethat was balanced, and this balance in itself indicated institutionalmethods for weighing differences and for finding a median course. Ideals and ideologies. A republic in strictest terms is a form ofgovernment in which the people exercise their power through electedrepresentatives. New York: HarperCollins.Pole, J.R. The power structure that the Framersdeveloped was one that was balanced, and this balance in itself indicatedinstitutional methods for weighing differences and for finding a mediancourse. The framers of the Constitution feared the potential"mischiefs" of faction and designed a governmental system that wouldbalance competing interests and prevent the ascension of any one faction. The Bill of Rights would beadded as the first ten amendments to the Constitution in 1791. The republican form of government was developed duringthe era of the Roman Republic and then revived during the ItalianRenaissance in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The American Constitution for and against. 197)Madison concluded that the proposed government was indeed republican inform, modified for the size of the territory: The proposed Constitution therefore is in strictness neither a national nor a federal constitution; but a composition of both. (Pole, 1987, p. There were specific problems facingthe new republican government that had not been solved in Europe. It is always possible to amend the Constitution and to change thoseprinciples, but the process for doing so is deliberately difficult in orderto avoid making the country, and any minority within the country, hostageto the vagaries of public opinion. These principles as a consequenceremain in force today in spite of shifts in the public consensus over time. The essential form of the new government would be a republic, assupported by the Federalist position. The Constitutionnot only provides for the form of government but also codifies certainprinciples and makes provision for enforcement and adjudication ofdifferences over those principles. Thegovernment developed by the framers is not a strict democracy but arepublican form which seeks to protect the minority from a tyranny of themajority. Theconception of liberty and the conception of justice are fused, upholdingthe belief that freedom should not be curtailed except when absolutelynecessary for the greater good, for the protection of the freedom of themajority. The Constitutionnot only provides the form of government but also codifies certainprinciples and makes provision for enforcement and adjudication ofdifferences over those principles. He saw the republicas the best of governments. Liberalism and republicanism were both involved in the creation ofthe American government and the development of the Constitution that wouldbe the framework for that government, and the two approaches werediscussed, compared, and argued in the debate between the Federalists andthe Anti-Federalists. 17-18)The Federalists had deliberately omitted a bill of rights, and so theyexpressed their opposition to the document. At the same time, the majority does not have unlimited power. Niccolo Machiavellicelebrated this revival in his The Discourses when he argued with those whobelieved that the people acting collectively were less wise than a singleking or prince. Yet, ultimately, bothpoints of view were represented in some degree in the final document and inthe government it created. New York: Hill and Wang.Stinebrickner, B. Machiavelli found them subject to the same pressures andthe same errors: I say, then, that individual men, and especially princes, may be charged with the same defects of which writers accuse the people; for whoever is not controlled by laws will commit the same errors as an unbridled multitude. American government. Guilford, Connecticut: Dushkin.----------------------- 7 39 of The Federalist Papers, Madison asked whether the newgovernment would be strictly republican: It is evident that no other form would be reconcilable with the genius of the people of America; with the fundamental principles of the revolution; or with that honorable determination, which animates every votary of freedom, to rest all our political experiments in the capacity of mankind for self-government.

If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:

Search for:

or

We can write a Custom Essay just for you.


Browse Essays by Subject