User:Rwwhiteheadpstcc/sandbox

Anti-Federalism

Fact: Anti-Federalism was a late-18th century movement that opposed the creation of a stronger U.S. federal government and which later opposed the ratification of the 1787 Constitution.

MLA Citation: Van Cleve, George. “The Anti-Federalists' Toughest Challenge: Paper Money, Debt Relief, and the Ratification of the Constitution.” Journal of the Early Republic, vol. 34, no. 4, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2014, pp. 529–60, doi:10.1353/jer.2014.0063.

DOI: 10.1353/jer.2014.0063

Quote: "Instead, the Anti-Federalists’ behavior strongly suggests that they con�cluded that in attacking Section 10 they were on treacherous ground and that their cause would not benefit—and might even lose support—from aggressively advocating what had become an unpopular position in a clear majority of states."

Phase 3

Cornell, Saul, and Omohundro Institute of Early American History & Culture. The Other Founders : Anti-Federalism and the Dissenting Tradition in America, 1788-1828. Published for the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia, by the University of North Carolina Press, 1999.

The article shares the perspectives of the lower/working class people and the effect the Constitution had on them. This perspective was not shared in the original article as it mainly focused on those more close to the decision making process of ratifying or editing the Constitution. The author of this article was able to share the lower class’s perspective by sharing what one Virginia commentator had shared that he had seen throughout Virginia as well as in Philadelphia a citizen shared that the Constitution had “made a bustle in the city and its vicinity” (P.20)

Johnson, Calvin H. Righteous Anger at the Wicked States : The Meaning of the Founders’ Constitution. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

This book, put together by Calvin Johnson, shows a different side of the ratification of the Constitution. He discusses that, in order to get the Constitution past the states, the framers built it to reflect the people and their desires rather than to make the states happy. Johnson uses a quote from Alexander Hamilton stating that the people’s approval is the “pure original fountain of legitimate authority” (Pg. 4). In discussing this information, Johnson is able to build a picture of what the people whose opinion was often bypassed such as the African-americans, Spanish, and working class.

Fact #1 Although the Constitution had been drafted in private by a small, select group of statesmen, its meaning was inescapably public. As soon as the results of the Philadelphia Convention became known, Americans began discussing the new frame of government. A week after the convention ad�journed, one Philadelphian reported, ‘‘The new plan of government proposed by the Convention has made a bustle in the city and its vicinity.’’ Less than a month later, farther west in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, another observer noted, ‘‘The new Constitution for the United States seems now to engross the attention of all ranks.’’ In other parts of America similar observations were made. One Virginia commentator remarked, ‘‘The plan of a Govern�ment proposed to us by the Convention—a√ords matter for conversation to every rank of beings from the Governor to the door keeper.’’

Fact #2 "The Framers ended the sovereignty of the states on the authority of the sovereignty of the people. The Framers sent the Constitution for ratification by the people meeting in conventions and bypassed the states because they did not think they could get ratification from the “local demagogues” who controlled the state offices. The Framers used the people as a weapon against the states. The Constitution was legitimate although it was not ratified by unanimous consent of the state legislatures, Alexander Hamilton argued, because the consent of the people is that “pure original fountain of legitimate authority.”Had the Framers trusted the states to ratify a reasonable solution, they might well have drafted a Constitution more appealing to the states. The decision to bypass the states and appeal directly to the people allowed the document to be a more revolutionary, anti-state act."

Fact #1 Summary The working class made a lot of discussion out of the Constitution and took a great interest in it's contents.

Fact #2 Summary The lower class and slaves had opinions that greatly differed from the states and this was what allowed the Framers to get away with not matching all of the state legislature's desires.

Article Section for Fact #1 & 2 "During the period of debate over the ratification of the Constitution, numerous independent local speeches and articles were published all across the country. Initially, many of the articles in opposition were written under pseudonyms, such as "Brutus" (likely Melancton Smith),[4] "Centinel" (likely Samuel Bryan), and "Federal Farmer." Eventually, famous revolutionary figures such as Patrick Henry came out publicly against the Constitution. They argued that the strong national government proposed by the Federalists was a threat to the rights of individuals and that the president would become a king. They objected to the federal court system created by the proposed constitution. This produced a phenomenal body of political writing; the best and most influential of these articles and speeches were gathered by historians into a collection known as the Anti-Federalist Papers in allusion to the Federalist Papers."