More handpicked essays just for you.
What is the importance of constitution
What is the importance of constitution
The importance of the US constitution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
George Mason was one of the most active speakers in the Constitution. At first, Mason “advocated a stronger central government but withdrew his support toward the end of the deliberations” (Gordon). Although he was a delegate of Virginia for the Constitutional Convention, he never did sign the U.S. Constitution, for he “objected to powers granted to the new government, which he believed to be ill-defined and overzealous” (Bio.com). He was in favor of rights given to individuals and states rather than the federal government. Mason was also in favor of popular elections, unrestricted admission of new western states, and in favor of a three-part executive. His foremost objection was that “there is no Declaration of Rights, and the laws of the
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.
From five states arose delegates who would soon propose an idea that would impact the United States greatly. The idea was to hold a meeting in Philadelphia called the Constitutional Convention in 1787 meant to discuss the improvements for the Articles of Confederation and would later be called the United States Constitution. The United States Constitution was greatly influenced by Ancient Rome, the Enlightenment, and Colonial Grievances.
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
Alexander Hamilton was a Federalist. A federalist is Supporter of the Constitution during the debate over its ratification; someone who favored a strong central government. Hamilton believed in a loose interpretation of the Constitution. This means that he believed that the Constitution was a set of guidelines that did not need to be followed strictly. Hamilton wanted to expand the economy and increase the nation's wealth by using the power of the federal government to promote
The Federalist, No. 10, by James Madison is a clear expression of views and policies for a new government. Madison was a strong supporter and member of the Federalists whose main beliefs favored the Constitution. They also believed that the Articles of Confederation needed to be rewritten so that a new central government would control the power of the states.
The meeting in Philadelphia was successful, it is known as the Constitutional Conventional. James Madison went to the meeting in Philadelphia it was his idea to create the United States in a republican model. The people would have the power in the form of representatives. Madison and his fellow Virginians came up with the details and a plan for the new government, it was known as the Virginia Plan. And Madison became known as the father of the constitution.
Everyone has heard the name Alexander Hamilton, but few are familiar with his views and actions regarding the survival of the young American republic. He could be recognized for anything from serving our fledgling country by fighting in the New York militia; to serving his community as a lawyer and as a national tax agent; to beginning his political career as a representative for New York at the National Congress. Though most would agree his most important contribution to our struggling republic was to spearhead the project which formed the doctrine helping to establish the foundation in which modern democracy is based, the Articles of Confederation.
Some historical circumstances surrounding the issue of the ratification of the Constitution was weakness of the new government under the Articles of Confederation which led to the Constitutional Convention. Members of Congress believed that the Articles of Confederation, the first government of the United States, needed to be altered while others did not want change. This desired Constitution created a huge dispute and argument between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The people who supported the new Constitution, the Federalists, began to publish articles supporting ratification. As stated in document 2 John Jay (Federalist) had many arguments to support ratification of the Constitution. One argument John Jay used was, with the ratification of the Constitution, he says, “…Our people free, contented and united…” The Antifederalists had numerous arguments they used to oppose the ratification of the Constitution. The Antifederalists believed that a free republic wouldn’t be able to long exist over a country of the great extent of these states.
On September 17, 1787, the Philadelphia Convention sent their new constitution to the states for ratification. The Federalists highly approved of the Constitution because it allowed for a more central and powerful government that was previously undermined under the Articles of Confederation. The Anti-Federalists, however, didn’t want a powerful central government, but, instead, powerful state governments; in response to the Constitution, many Anti-Federalists began writing essays and creating pamphlets as a means of arguing against it. In retaliation to the Anti-Federalists attempt at getting states to not ratify the Constitution, many Federalists developed a group of essays known as the Federalist Papers, which argued for the ratification of the new law system.
As a federalist Alexander Hamilton wanted to establish a stronger federal government under a new Constitution. He met in Philadelphia with other delegates to discuss how to fix the Articles of Confederation that created a weak central government. During the meeting, Hamilton expressed his view that a dependable current source of revenue would be crucial to develop a more powerful and resilient central government. Although Hamilton played a diminutive part in the writing of the Constitution itself, he did heavily influence its ratification. In cooperation with James Madison and John Jay, Hamilton wrote fifty one of eighty five essays under the joint title The Federalist “The Federalist Paper.” In the essays, he cunningly explained and defended the newly drafted Constitution prior to its approval. In 1788, at the New York Ratification Convention, two thirds of delegates opposed the Constitution, however Hamilton was a powerful advocate for ratification, effectively arguing against the anti Federalist persuasion. His efforts succeeded when New York agreed to ratify, which led the remaining eight states to follow. He had a proposal for the new government that was modeled on the British system, which Hamilton considered the best.
Alexander Hamilton was the architect of the federalist papers and much of the financial structure of America. He was only reluctantly admitted to the rule of the great American thinkers. His prominence as a primary nationalist and financial visionary in the post-revolutionary were truly uncovered in the middle of the twentieth century. Historical evidence points to him being Christian and saying: “I have carefully examined the evidences of the Christian religion, and if I was sitting as a juror upon its authenticity I would unhesitatingly give my verdict in its favor. I can prove its truth as clearly as any proposition ever submitted to the mind of man.” ("Alexander Hamilton") Historians started to reassess his success. He is preeminently recalled as an opinionated advocate of a solid central government for his composition of the Federalist papers which were used to persuade Americans to ratify the new constitution. His other achievements make his entire political career hard to comprehend. He was critiqued for his egotism just as much as his intelligence and determination.
The Constitution, when first introduced, set the stage for much controversy in the United States. The two major parties in this battle were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists, such as James Madison, were in favor of ratifying the Constitution. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists, such as Patrick Henry and Richard Henry Lee, were against ratification. Each party has their own beliefs on why or why not this document should or should not be passed. These beliefs are displayed in the following articles: Patrick Henry's "Virginia Should Reject the Constitution," Richard Henry Lee's "The Constitution Will Encourage Aristocracy," James Madison's "Federalist Paper No. 10," and "The Letters to Brutus." In these documents, many aspects of the Constitution, good and bad, are discussed. Although the Federalists and Anti-Federalists had very conflicting views, many common principals are discussed throughout their essays. The preservation of liberty and the effects of human nature are two aspects of these similarities. Although the similarities exist, they represent and support either the views of the Federalists or the Anti-Federalists.
The growth of a new nation can be a great struggle. Our founding struggled to form a perfect nation through the enactments of The Articles of Confederation, The Constitution, and also The Federalist Papers. They struggled to make a document that they could depend on in times of need, and the constitution was the one that really set the line and challenged the government to near perfection. Something can never be perfect that's why the federalist papers were created to enhance the constitution and make it something very close to perfect. All of these essays under the federalist papers were very important building blocks that helped us become the great nation that we are now.
In creating the Constitution, the states had several different reactions, including a rather defensive reaction, but also an understanding reaction. As a document that provided the laws of the land and the rights of its people. It directs its attention to the many problems in this country; it offered quite a challenge because the document lent itself to several views and interpretations, depending upon the individual reading it. It is clear that the founders’ perspectives as white, wealthy or elite class, American citizens would play a role in the creation and implementation of The Constitution.
Unlike many other foundational documents written by other counties, the US Constitution has held strong from the start. The Constitution is at the center of our everyday lives and is the reason we are able to live with the freedom and security that we do. As the Constitutions author, contents, and effect on the US are evaluated it is very clear why America holds so strongly to the foundation the Constitution set in place.