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.
In The Dinner, the+ men compromise on Hamilton’s Assumption Plan. When an exhausted and unkempt Hamilton tells Jefferson that he wishes to resign from Secretary of Treasury because his financial plan “was trapped in a congressional gridlock” because of James Madison’s strong disapproval of it, Jefferson agreed to help him. The recovery of Public Credit assumed that the “federal government would take on all the accumulated debts of the states” . However, Madison disapproved of this plan because he worried that Hamilton valued speculators over the common man who had fought in the Revolution. Also, many states had already paid off their wartime debts, so the Assumption Bill would do them an injustice by “compelling them, after having done their duty, to contribute to those states who have not equally done their duty” . Later on Jefferson invited Hamilton and Madison over to dinner, their discussion lead to a
compromise. Jefferson’s account suggests the growing divide, showing that without a mediator, the ideologies are too far divided to achieve legisla...
... middle of paper ...
...fferent plans in mind for the republic. In order to avoid endless debates on the issues presented, the revolutionary leaders often compromised their beliefs. The Founding Brothers compromised their ideas for the well-being of the United States. Joseph J. Ellis writes of the compromises that changed the constitutional debate into the creation of political parties in, The Founding Brothers. Without compromise our nation today would not be where it is now, compromising is a crucial element in the governing a country. This is a concept that our Founding Brothers have grasped fully.
Works Cited
Joseph Ellis, Founding Brothers (New York: Vintage Books, 2000), 48.
Ellis, Founding Brothers, 57.
Ellis, Founding Brothers, 57.
Ellis, Founding Brothers, 83.
Ellis, Founding Brothers, 92.
Ellis, Founding Brothers, 89.
Ellis, Founding Brothers, 179.
From 1787-1790 the development of the American Constitution was a battle between two opposing political philosophies. America’s best political minds gathered in Philadelphia and other cities in the Northeast in order to find common ground in a governmental structure. The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists had both some political thoughts that agreed as well as some political thoughts that disagreed. However, both parties would compromise and ultimately come together.
David A. Carson argues in “Blank Paper of the Constitution: The Louisiana Purchase Debates” that Thomas Jefferson did abandon his political ideals when purchasing Louisiana (P. 1). The Louisiana Territory gave the United States control of the Mississippi Valley and the mainland of North American, and it opened the doors for the expansion of slavery across the country (P. 3). Although the acquisition of Louisiana was important to the success and growth of the United States, Carson states that President Jefferson, “Saw that it threatened to make “blank paper” of the Constitution since it expanded the powers of the national government further than even the most die-hard Federalists could have imagined” (P. 3). On the 16th of July, two days after Jefferson received the purchased treaty, he called together his cabinet to help plan the course of the agreements through Congress (P. 4). The cabinet agreed to assemble Congress on the 17th of October to give both houses enough time to act before the closing day of October 30th (P. 4).
Though the full scope wasn't probably apparent, Jefferson had a way of ensuring these types of meetings would universally be looked back on the way he wanted. Many of the discussions leading up to the dinner conversation were conveniently tucked away. This made the dinner conversation out to be much more important and decisive than it probably actually was. Ellis repeatedly touches these three themes throughout “The Dinner” to illustrate how much personal relationships, ideas, personalities, and presumed control affected the way our government was formed, and how we view the process as it took place.
Alexander Hamilton and James Madison did have faith in the ethics of the people to establish a republican government, for they could see that the old Federalist Government was no longer working for the people. The people had out-grown the Federalist government, and needed to become a Union. Alexander Hamilton asked the people to come join him in making a new Union. By uniting the thirteen colonies, the colonists could have more of a say in their government, and become united as a country. Alexander Hamilton told the colonists that they needed to meet and deliberate on a new Constitution for the United States of America. In the
In this book Founding Brothers, the author Joseph J. Ellis writes about American Revolution's important figures such as George Washington, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Aaron Burr, Benjamin Franklin and James Madison exhibit that how the specific relationships of the Founding Fathers have influenced, or were influenced in the course of the American Revolution. These men have become the Founding Fathers and had a strong connection with each other as friends fighting one another to eliminate the British from North America, and forming optimistic brotherhood eager for freedom. However, many of the Founding Fathers were preoccupied with posterity. They wanted to construct and preserve images that served both their egos and
Jefferson had made promises to Americans, some of his promises in particularly the increase of land for the yeoman farmer and promised not kept were decreasing National debt and Federal power. Jefferson’s presidency was to a certain extent a “Republican Revolution” but at the same time it had also become a continuation of Federalists policies. While making decisions for the best interests of Democratic Republicans, Jefferson had chosen the same path of the Federalist in order to keep his promises, and had to sacrifice some of the ideals and promises of the “Republican Revolution.”
When the Founding Fathers got together at Philadelphia to draft the Constitution, they had many different views and opinions as to how to govern our country. At the convention, the founders fought over the issues of slavery, representation and the Congress’s powers. Their personal lives had influenced their ideas and some of the compromises made at the Constitutional Convention. The founders’ different personal experiences, economic backgrounds, and coming from states of different sizes, economy and needs, led to the creation of the Three-Fifths Compromise, The Great Compromise, and the Slave Trade Compromise.
The first political parties in America began to form at the end of the 18th century. "The conflict that took shape in the 1790s between the Federalists and the Antifederalists exercised a profound impact on American history." The two primary influences, Thomas Jefferson a...
During the period 1800-1817, the Jeffersonians to a great extent compromised their political principles and essentially “out Federalized the Federalists”. While traditional Jeffersonian Republicanism advocated a strict interpretation of the Constitution and an emphasis on an agrarian economic system, the actual policies of Presidents Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were markedly different from their theoretical principles. This obvious compromise of Jeffersonian principles is evident in the Federal government’s assumption of broad-based political powers and institution of capitalistic Hamiltonian economic reforms, both of which stemmed from Jefferson and Madison’s adoption of broad constructionist policies.
One of the earliest examples of Hamilton’s power was his role in the national assumption of state debts. After the Revolutionary War, individual states had varying amounts of debt. States with less debt were in favor of paying it off themselves, while those with greater debt needed some federal aid. Wanting to make the country more unified, Hamilton saw making a large collective national debt as a way to bring together the states. “Hamilton’s impulse, therefore, in assuming all outstanding state debts was to avoid unnecessary and destructive competition between state and federal governments, and at the same time to preempt the best sources of revenue for the United States Treasury” (Elkins and McKitrick 119). The author states Hamilton’s motives for assumption were to eliminate competition between the states that might damage the union. This fits in with his larger policy of strong national government. Other politicians were opposed to this, such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Their opposition to the plan went away as assumption became associated with other less controversial plans of Hamilton’s. Madison even turned in defense of the plan after being convinced of Hamilton’s financial vision (Bowers 61). Hamilton made a compromise turning out in his favor when he allowed Madison and Jefferson to have a capital on the Potomac River. This allowed him to pass his plan more...
The Founding Fathers were strong advocates of republicanism and they were the ones who founded that system in America since 1776. Although Dickinson originally proposed a strong central government, which could control the western lands and provide equal representation for all states(http://www.barefootsworld.net/aoc1777.html), these ideas were not accepted by the 13 states. They did not want to create a strong central gove...
However, the author 's interpretations of Jefferson 's decisions and their connection to modern politics are intriguing, to say the least. In 1774, Jefferson penned A Summary View of the Rights of British America and, later, in 1775, drafted the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arms (Ellis 32-44). According to Ellis, the documents act as proof that Jefferson was insensitive to the constitutional complexities a Revolution held as his interpretation of otherwise important matters revolved around his “pattern of juvenile romanticism” (38). Evidently, the American colonies’ desire for independence from the mother country was a momentous decision that affected all thirteen colonies. However, in Ellis’ arguments, Thomas Jefferson’s writing at the time showed either his failure to acknowledge the severity of the situation or his disregard of the same. Accordingly, as written in the American Sphinx, Jefferson’s mannerisms in the first Continental Congress and Virginia evokes the picture of an adolescent instead of the thirty-year-old man he was at the time (Ellis 38). It is no wonder Ellis observes Thomas Jefferson as a founding father who was not only “wildly idealistic” but also possessed “extraordinary naivete” while advocating the notions of a Jeffersonian utopia that unrestrained
The men who wrote the American constitution agreed with Thomas Hobbes that humans were naturally evil. Therefore, they agreed that in order to prevent a dictatorship or monarchy, the citizens should have influence in the government. The writers wanted a more ideal constitution, but they realized evil human motives would never change. One of the main goals of the constitution was to create a balanced government that would allow the citizens to prevent each other from being corrupt. The writers wanted to give citizens liberty, but they did not want to give people so much liberty that they would have an uncontrollable amount of power. The writers agreed that a citizen’s influence in government would be proportionate to that individual’s property.
Wills, G. (Ed.). (1982). Introduction. The Federalist papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay. (pp. vii – xxiv). New York: Bantam.
While Hamilton and Jefferson both tried to give the new nation what they thought was best, it was inevitable that their views would clash. Due to sharp differences in their political and economical thoughts, Hamilton and Jefferson more often then not found themselves fighting over issues they should have been in agreement with. Hamilton’s Federalism and Jefferson’s anti-Federalism all served to create different movement that would affect the nation both economically and politically as the years after the Revolution played out.