During the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison, Republicans, such as Jefferson were seen as strict constructionists of the Constitution while Federalists, like Madison, were generally looser with their interpretations of the Constitution's literal meaning. While the constructionist ideas were part of what separated the two parties from one another, Jefferson and Madison are both guilty of not adhering to these ideas on many occasions. Jefferson writes in a letter to Gideon Granger expressing his idea that the United States is too large to have only one central government, and the states should receive more power, which goes against the fact that the Constitution was created in order to unite a new country. Also, when passing the Embargo Act, Jefferson demonstrates the federal power over the people, which goes against his Republican belief of allowing the states to have more power. As Madison prepares for his term in office, the citizens of the United States were most likely expecting him to be more open to suggestion in his interpretations of the Constitution. However, during a speech by Daniel Webster, a Federalist speaking on behalf of the entire Federalist Party, and a veto on internal improvements, Madison proves that he truly is not a loose constructionist as his party would have preferred him to be. Both Madison and Jefferson are guilty of frequently going against the general ideas of their parties in order to meet their needs at a certain time.
In Jefferson's letter to Gideon Granger, a future member of his cabinet, he speaks of giving the states more power, which goes against the reasoning behind the drafting of the Constitution; to unite a new country. As a true Republican, Jefferson should have stuck close to ...
... middle of paper ...
... with the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison. Neither of the two men followed their party guidelines on many occasions, suggesting that their ideas relating to their parties were changing. Although some of these situations resulted in a good outcome for the country, their party members were most likely disappointed in the fact that the men weren't adhering to the basic beliefs of their respective parties. Over the course of the two presidencies, many people began to recognize the need for a strong central government to hold the country together. This realization probably occurred to both men and influenced their decisions regarding the general good of the country. It can not be assumed that all Republicans and all Federalists support the ideas of their parties, as Jefferson and Madison prove this wrong on many occasions during the courses of their presidencies.
Jeffersonian and Jacksonian Democracy Jeffersonian and Jacksonian democracy are the same in just about every regard. Their views and goals as presidents are the same. Both are in favor of the common man and feel that it is the common people who should have the biggest influence on government, not the wealthy aristocrats. They also support states rights and feel that the federal government should not get involved with the state affairs. Both men's actions clearly show that the common man does not include minorities.
During the early 1800s America was still developing, trying to develop the government so it can learn to stand up on its own. Both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison played a key role in the country’s developing time, they created the idea of strict v. broad constructionism. Political parties were contradicting each other on the different point of views they had on the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson during his presidency sometimes made decisions that were based literally on the Constitution, whereas James Madison being a broad constructionist didn’t always take the Constitution literally.
Based on the following doctrines, I believe the extent of characterization of the two parties was not completely accurate during the presidencies of Madison and Jefferson, because of key pieces of evidence that proves inconsistencies during the period between 1801 and 1817. In the following essay, I will provide information supporting my thesis, which describes the changing feelings by each party and the reasoning behind such changes.
During the early 1800s, two parties were developed having different perspectives on government and the Constitution. The Democratic Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, were always characterized by following the strict construction of the constitution. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, were characterized by following the broad construction of the constitution. The presidencies of Jefferson and Madison proved this characterization to be somewhat accurate. Although the Democratic Republicans and the Federalists did support their own ideas and views, they also did many things that contradicted them.
The creation of political parties originally caused some conflict. Many people thought that they were evil. As time went on, the people warmed up to the idea, and characterizations of the Republican and Federalist parties began. The Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson, strictly interpreted the Constitution, but eventually, they loosened their views on the interpretation of the Constitution. On the other hand, Federalists held views on a loose interpretation of the Constitution, until they realized that a more strict interpretation could be a good thing.
Supporters of the Constitution called themselves Federalists, a name referring to a balance of power between the states and the national government. They argued for a federal system as in the Constitution. James Madison claimed that the Constitution was less dangerous that it looked because the separation of powers protected people from tyrannical abuse. The Federalists compile a group of essays, known as The Federalist Papers. In No. 51, Madison insisted that the division of powers and they system of checks an balances would protect Americans from the tyranny of centralized authority. He wrote that opposite motives among government office holders were good, and was one of the advantages of a big government with different demographics. In No. 10, he said that there was no need to fear factions, for not enough power would be given to the faction forming people; thus, they wouldn't become tyrannical. Hamilton, in No. 84, defended the Constitution with the case that the Constitution can be amended by representatives, who are there to represent the citizens' interests.
He states that the government had too many leaders and not enough followers. That the government administrated by too many people who had a different motive on running the state. In addition, Madison agreed to what Hamilton was saying. Therefore, Madison helped Hamilton settle this dilemma. “It has been seen that delinquencies in the members of the Union are its natural and necessary offspring; and that whenever they happen, the only constitutional remedy is a force, and the immediate effect of the use of it, civil war.” (Hamilton) Hamilton father explains why this would be a problem with government and predicts what might happen if it reaches to that point. “To this reasoning, it may perhaps be objected, that if any State should be disaffected to the authority of the Union, it could at any time obstruct the execution of its laws, and bring the matter to the same issue of force, with the necessity of which the opposite scheme is reproached.” (Hamilton) Both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison wrote the 18th and 19th Federalist paper. The 18th article spoke about contradicting the argument of anti-federalists that proposed a monarchical rule in America. Madison states that if the anti-federalist and federalist do not collaborate on the rule that they established for the people. They would become like the people in Greek history. “Instead of this obvious policy, Athens and Sparta, inflated with the victories and the glory they had acquired, became first rivals and then enemies; and did each other infinitely more mischief than they had suffered from Xerxes.” Demonstrating a jealous view of power and disorganized fashion. “Their mutual jealousies, fears, hatreds, and injuries ended in the celebrated Peloponnesian war; which itself ended in the ruin and slavery of the Athenians who had begun
Political parties can mobilize the nation as a movement for change. Zeal can be too emotional and partisan, but it can be good if used toward republican ideals. Madison believed that the creation of the Jeffersonian-Republican Party was a good thing because it fought for republican ideals. The Federalists, whom he called Anti-republicans, he charged with deserting true republican principles (Reichley 49). Most political societies will have two natural societies, he explained, the haves and the have-nots. The haves supported those who had power and money and would protect their power and money, using power and force, thinking that the have-nots were incapable of governing themselves. The Jeffersonian-Republican Party represented the have-nots, the great body of the people (Reichley 43). Since the party that Madison helped create was representing the majority of the people, it supports his argument in Federalist No. 51 ¨a coalition of a majority of the whole could seldom take place on any other principles than those of justice and the general good.” The majority of people are normally right, so if the majority of people were against the Federalists, then the Jeffersonian-Republicans were filling a republican
With respect to the federal constitution, the Jeffersonian Republicans are usually characterized as strict constructionists who were opposed to the broad constructionism of the Federalists. To what extent was this characterization of the two parties accurate during the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison.
When Thomas Jefferson entered office in 1800, he came in with lots of new ideas and goals as the president. Jefferson believed in a smaller central government with stronger state governments. He was a Republican and favored the view of strict construction. He believed that, “Our country is too large to have all its affairs directed by a single government…” (Document A). Jefferson and his Republican party believed in a government that was going to work for the people and that was going to have them at its best interests. That is why they believed in having stronger state governments, they were closer to home and to the people they were governing, therefore they knew more of what the public needed. Document B also refers to strict construction and Jefferson’s beliefs. It talks about the freedoms that were stated in the constitution, mainly, the freedom of religion. Jefferson believes that the federal government should not have any say in dealing with religion of the people. The Republicans believed that any law stated in the Constitution should be strictly followed.
Although the time periods and goals may be different the method for bringing about change is usually the same, this method is protest. Martin Luther King Jr.'s letter from Birmingham Jail, which was written in April 16, 1963, is a passionate letter that addresses and responds to the issue and criticism that a group of white clergymen had thrown at him and his pro- black American organization about his and his organization's non- violent demonstrative actions against racial prejudice and injustice among black Americans in Birmingham. And The Declaration of Independence was written to show a new theory of government, reasons why they were separating from England, and a formal declaration of war. It gave the 13 colonies freedom from England's laws. The man responsible for writing the Declaration was Thomas Jefferson. He wrote the Declaration between June 11, 1776 and June 28, 1776. Benjamin Franklin and John Adams looked at what Jefferson had written and made some changes to the Declaration. On July 4, 1776 Congress adopted the Declaration. This method is supported by two different people, in two different time periods, with two different goals; these two people are Martin Luther King Junior and Thomas Jefferson.
The federalists view saw the republicans view as a weakness. They insisted on a stronger common government. The federalists had an understanding that there could only be one sovereign in a political system, one final authority that everyone must obey and no one can appeal. They thought this was the only effective way in creating an effective central government. The independent states seemed to think it was clear that each one of them were independently sovereign, although based on history only small countries were suitable for the republican government. With history proving the republicans wrong for trying to create a republican government in the states the federalists were slowly trying to create a stronger central government. There first step was making the sovereign states agree to the Articles of Confederation which established a close alliance of independent states. The federalist central government was referred to as a “confederacy”.
When Jefferson came into office, he planned to institute the policies of the Democratic-Republicans in domestic affairs. The judicial system had gained a lot of power through the Federalists which forced Jefferson to attempt to shrink their influence. He ultimately prevailed, and even reduce...
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.
Jefferson’s beliefs in local self government created differences between himself and Alexander Hamilton which created the Federalists (Hamilton followers) and the Democrat Republican’s (Jefferson followers).