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.
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.
In Tindall and Shi’s “America,” the reader is denied the opportunity to have a complete understanding of both the Virginia Plan (representing the large states) and the New Jersey plan (representing the small states.) In order for the people of today to comprehend their government, a detailed historical account of how our government came to be is an important factor. Given a brief explanation, the reader is only vaguely introduced to the concepts that there were disagreements in how our country should be run in the beginning. More emphasis is given to the outcomes and effects of the Connecticut Compromise than why the Compromise was needed in the first 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
Thomas Jefferson was the chief opponent of the Federalists. He despised Hamilton’s plan. He and the rest of the Democratic-Republican party believed that it weakened their revolutionary ideals, specifically the idea that “all men are created equal,” because Hamilton’s plan favors insiders. They also believed that his plan divided the American people, geologically and economically. This goes against the idea of a United States of America. When writing to George Washington about Hamilton’s plan, Jefferson says, “His system flowed from principles adverse to liberty, and was calculated to undermine and demolish the Republic, by creating an influence of his department over the members of the Legislature” (Jefferson). In a letter written after Pinckney’s and Jay’s treaties were put into action, Jefferson says, “In place of that noble love of liberty, & republican government which carried us triumphantly thro’ the war, an Anglican monarchical, & aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object is to draw over us the substance...of the British government” (Jefferson). This statement shows the hostility that Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans have towards the control that the Federalists have over their government and communications with other countries. The two parties have a lot of pressure and hostility between each other because they both think they believe
Jefferson and Hamilton both articulated admirable visions of America’s future, and both believed to be carrying out the legacy of the revolution. Hamilton favored a strong central government, a balanced market oriented economy and a national bank. Jefferson, on the other hand, desired to create strong state governments, have agriculture as the backbone of America and little government involvement within the economy. Despite the merits of each vision, implementation of only one of the plans would have led to either a very different or shortened American history. As such, it was necessary for the plans, to “blend” in an unconventional way. With both politicians insisting their plans were in the best interest of the country, an outright 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...
Hamilton and the Federalist party sided with the British; this was quite frowned upon by Jefferson and his party. For example, he implied in a memo that Hamilton was not only a monarchist, but supported Britain, a monarchy based upon corruption (Document 1). Jefferson’s point of view in this memo is entirely anti-British, and anti-Hamilton. He is attempting to tell the people reading it that Hamilton could be corrupt. On the other hand, Hamilton did not agree with Jefferson, Madison, and the Democratic-Republicans siding with the French. For instance, Alexander Hamilton suggests in a letter that these men are untrustworthy and dangerous due to their bond to France and hatred toward Great Britain (Document 2). The implication of Jay’s Treaty with the British furthered the disagreements over foreign relations. As previously stated, Democratic-Republicans were pro-French, while Federalists were pro-British; this caused obvious problems over Jay’s Treaty. For example, the Democratic-Republicans feared this negotiation would sell out their country and force southern planters to pay for a majority of pre-revolutionary debts. On the flip side, Federalists were in support of a stronger alliance with Britain and would earn benefits from it; Federalist shippers were being repaid for the damages left during British seizures
Hamilton's Federalist Party and the Democratic Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson had polarized views on the majority of the important political issues. These two political parties which possessed differing opinions and views pertaining to the future of the U.S. government were persistent in their respective arguments against each other. The strongly contrasting views of these two parties are the foundation of the puissant and sometimes callous attacks by the Republicans against Hamilton and his economic plan. Although Alexander Hamilton was viewed as an arrogant self-promoting individual, the primary reason he faced fierce opposition from the Democratic Republicans against his economic plans was strictly rooted in the fundamental differences that Hamilton and the Republicans held when debating their proposed structures of the U.S. government.
The Founding Fathers most famous writings is without a doubt the Constitution. The constitution was an amazing piece of literature, and played a huge part in shaping America. The founding fathers wrote many different writings that also helped found the United States. These other writings expressed some very good concerns and taught some necessary values.
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.
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...
Alexander Hamilton’s first Federalist Paper endorses ratification of the proposed constitution. His unifying point is that the use of reason—in the form of the people’s "reflection and choice"—will lead to the truth, whereas their use of passion will lead to ruin. Hamilton attempts to persuade his readers to make the correct decision by reminding them of the sheer importance of the matter. He suggests that "good men" will want to make the correct choice in light of their "true interests" (33), while the adversaries of the Constitution will be ruled by passions, deceit, and even weak minds. He frankly warns his readers against "any impressions other than those which may result from the evidence of truth" (35); he offers them a chance to join him on the right side of the issue, which he implies he has arrived at by knowledgeable deliberation. Finally, Hamilton courts his audience by implying that they will use reason to reach the truth. By contrast, the opponents of the Constitution rely on their emotions and follow a "much more certain road to the introduction of despotism" (35).
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.
In his First Report on Public Credit, Alexander Hamilton discusses the current financial situation of the United States and, as a response, proposes a plan to take care of the debt accrued from the Revolutionary War. Hamilton 's address tells the story of a significantly indebted newfound nation in desperate need of financial reorganization. He first discusses the strain that could be placed on public credit from public engagements and that the expensive engagement of war against Britain was the price to pay for liberty. Subsequently, he delivers his plan, which focused on the full payment of foreign loans, redemption of bonds (which would create new debt, but nonetheless establish good federal credit), and the assumption of individual state