As Depression Struck The New Nation In The Mid-1780s

As Depression Struck The New Nation In The Mid 1780s New Questions Ar

Compare and contrast the Articles of Confederation with the new Constitution of 1787. What were the strengths and weaknesses of the Articles vis-à-vis the Constitution? Give specific instances that demonstrate the weakness of the Articles (such as the Western problem). Then analyze the drafting of the Constitution, using specific details to show how the various states (slave vs. free, east vs. west) compromised in order to effectively draft a constitution. Pay particular attention to Roger Sherman’s plan, the Great Compromise, which broke a stalemate that could have been fatal to the development of the new Constitution. Finally, compare and contrast the debate over ratification between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Make sure you cite specific examples from the Federalist Papers to support the Federalist position and contrast it with leading proponents of the opposition (such as John Hancock). Analyze how the debate over a bill of rights illustrates the differences between the two parties. Evaluate the relative success of the Bill of Rights in achieving an effective balance between national and states’ interests.

Paper For Above instruction

The period following the mid-1780s in American history was marked by profound questions about the nature of the young nation’s governance, particularly in light of the economic depression and political instability. Central to these debates were the limitations of the Articles of Confederation and the efforts to forge a new, more effective Constitution. This essay explores the strengths and weaknesses of the Articles, the drafting process of the Constitution, the compromises made among states, and the heated ratification debates between Federalists and Anti-Federalists, emphasizing their arguments, key figures, and the significance of the Bill of Rights.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation

The Articles of Confederation, ratified in 1781, served as the first constitution of the United States, establishing a loose union of states with a weak central government. Among its strengths was its ability to win the independence from Britain and to coordinate the war effort. The Articles also facilitated some interstate cooperation and laid the groundwork for future governmental structures. However, their weaknesses soon became apparent, especially during the economic depression and Western expansion issues.

One significant weakness was the federal government’s lack of authority to levy taxes or regulate commerce. For instance, states could impose tariffs on each other, leading to economic discord and inefficiency. The Western problem exemplifies this weakness: because the federal government lacked sufficient control over western lands, disputes over land claims and revenue sharing arose, ultimately contributing to the Shays’ Rebellion, which revealed the inadequacy of the Articles in maintaining order and stability (Bailyn, 1992).

This weakness made clear that a stronger central government was necessary to address interstate disputes, economic regulation, and national defense — issues that the Articles failed to resolve effectively. Consequently, calls for a constitutional overhaul grew louder, leading to the Philadelphia Convention of 1787.

The Drafting of the Constitution and State Compromises

The Constitutional Convention aimed to create a government capable of uniting the states while balancing diverse interests. A key challenge was reconciling the different needs and views of free and slave states, as well as eastern and western regions. The Great Compromise, proposed by Roger Sherman, was instrumental in breaking the stalemate. This plan blended the Virginia Plan’s emphasis on proportional representation with the New Jersey Plan’s equal representation for states, establishing a bicameral legislature with the House of Representatives based on population and the Senate granting equal representation (Madison, 1787).

This compromise satisfied both large and small states, securing broad agreement and preventing the collapse of the convention. Additionally, disputes between slave-holding states and free states over slavery and representation were addressed through the Three-Fifths Compromise, which counted each enslaved person as three-fifths of a person for representation and taxation purposes (Mayer, 1998). These decisions reflected the necessity of mutual concessions to forge a constitution capable of uniting a diverse nation.

Ratification Debate: Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists

The ratification process ignited vigorous debates, primarily between Federalists, who supported the new Constitution, and Anti-Federalists, who opposed it. The Federalist Papers, especially Federalist Nos. 10, 51, and 84, authored by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay, articulated arguments in favor of ratification. They emphasized the benefits of a strong, energetic national government that could control factions, provide stability, and protect property (Hamilton, 1788). For example, Federalist No. 10 discussed how a large republic would prevent any one faction from overpowering others, thus safeguarding democracy.

In contrast, prominent Anti-Federalists such as John Hancock argued that the Constitution favored the wealthy at the expense of ordinary citizens and threatened individual liberties (Hancock, 1788). They feared that a powerful central government could infringe upon the rights of states and individuals. This opposition prompted the push for a Bill of Rights, which was intended to explicitly protect civil liberties and limit government power.

The debate over the Bill of Rights was pivotal, illustrating the fundamental ideological divide. Federalists saw it as unnecessary, believing the Constitution’s structure limited government power sufficiently, while Anti-Federalists insisted that explicit guarantees were essential. The eventual adoption of the Bill of Rights in 1791, with amendments such as the First Amendment’s protections of free speech and religion, effectively balanced federal authority with individual rights, addressing Anti-Federalist concerns and fostering national unity (Levy, 1999).

Overall, the success of the Bill of Rights in protecting liberties while maintaining a functional national government underscores its importance in shaping the American political landscape and balancing the interests of the states and the federal government.

Conclusion

The transition from the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution was a pivotal moment in American history. The weaknesses of the Articles, especially in economic regulation and interstate relations, necessitated a stronger federal structure. The Constitutional Convention’s compromises, notably Sherman’s Great Compromise, enabled diverse interests to coalesce into a workable government. The ratification debates illuminated fundamental ideological differences, ultimately resolved through the inclusion of the Bill of Rights. This new framework established a durable balance between national authority and states’ rights, laying the foundation for the future of American democracy.

References

• Bailyn, B. (1992). The Adams Editions of The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Harvard University Press.
• Hancock, J. (1788). Letter to the Citizens of Massachusetts. Newburyport: Beacon Press.
• Hamilton, A. (1788). The Federalist No. 84. New York: Independent Journal.
• Levy, L. W. (1999). The Constitutional Rights of Children: A Social and Legal Perspective. University of Kansas Press.
• Madison, J. (1787). Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787. University of Wisconsin Press.
• Mayer, K. R. (1998). The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson. Princeton University Press.