Leaders:
Alexander Hamilton / James Madison / John Jay Ideas: The Federalists favored the ideas of a stronger federal (national) government. Here is a list of their opinions on how the government should be structured:
The Federalists thought the Constitution was structured well enough to guard against tyranny in the national government and that no Bill or Rights was necessary. They had answers to all of the Anti-Federalist complaints. They stated that:
Overall, the Federalists were more organized in their efforts. They had published The Federalist Papers to explain their viewpoint and counter any arguments posed by the Anti-Federalists. |
Leaders:
Patrick Henry / George Mason / Samuel Adams Ideas: The Anti-Federalists favored the ideas of a stronger state governments. Here is a list of their opinions on how the government should be structured:
The Anti-Federalists did not want to ratify the Constitution because they thought it gave the national government too much power, and that it might lead to tyranny once again. Basically, they argue that:
Of these complaints, the lack of a bill of rights was the most effective. The American people had just fought a war to defend their rights, and they did not want a intimidating national government taking those rights away again. The lack of a bill of rights was the focus of the Anti-Federalist campaign against ratification. |
Results:
By June of 1788, the Constitution was close to ratification. Nine states had ratified it, and only one more (New Hampshire) was needed. To achieve this, the Federalists agreed that once Congress met, it would draft a bill of rights. Finally, New York and Virginia approved, and the Constitution was a reality. Interestingly, the Bill of Rights was not originally a part of the Constitution, and yet it has proved to be highly important to protecting the rights of the people.
In the end, neither the Federalists or the Anti-Federalists won the debate. It seems that compromise again proves an effective way to settle things.
By June of 1788, the Constitution was close to ratification. Nine states had ratified it, and only one more (New Hampshire) was needed. To achieve this, the Federalists agreed that once Congress met, it would draft a bill of rights. Finally, New York and Virginia approved, and the Constitution was a reality. Interestingly, the Bill of Rights was not originally a part of the Constitution, and yet it has proved to be highly important to protecting the rights of the people.
In the end, neither the Federalists or the Anti-Federalists won the debate. It seems that compromise again proves an effective way to settle things.
Notes Questions:
1. Name the three main Federalist leaders.
2. What was the Federalist perspective on the U.S. Constitution and how government should be structured?
3. How were they right?
4. Name the 3 main Anti-Federalist leaders.
5. What was the Anti-Federalist perspective on the U.S. Constitution and how government should be structured?
6. How were they right?
Summary:
Using details from your notes, explain if you would have been a Federalist or and Anti-Federalist.
1. Name the three main Federalist leaders.
2. What was the Federalist perspective on the U.S. Constitution and how government should be structured?
3. How were they right?
4. Name the 3 main Anti-Federalist leaders.
5. What was the Anti-Federalist perspective on the U.S. Constitution and how government should be structured?
6. How were they right?
Summary:
Using details from your notes, explain if you would have been a Federalist or and Anti-Federalist.
To Sign or Not to Sign: A Read-Aloud Play
Characters:
John Jay, a citizen of New York and a Federalist
Elbridge Gerry, a delegate from Massachusetts and an Anti-Federalist
John Jay: Mr. Gerry, I humbly request that you reconsider your reasons for not supporting this Constitution.
Elbridge Gerry: But Mr. Jay, I cannot stand by it! I cannot sign my name to a document that does not secure the rights of every American.
Jay: But we are accounting for that. We will have a chance to amend the Constitution.
Gerry: Yes, but should free people adopt a form of government that they believe needs amendment? This document is unacceptable!
Jay: This document is as good as we can make it. Tell me Mr. Gerry, do you think it is possible to come up with a better plan? We cannot please everyone. I say that delaying the ratification of this Constitution will put our country at great risk.
Gerry: I know, you believe that our enemies will see our indecision as weakness, and our creditors may stop lending to us. But isn’t personal freedom important, too?
Jay: We have been meeting for such a long time. What if we reject this Constitution? Would we ever be able to come up with something better?
Gerry: What do you suggest we do?
Jay: I believe we should ratify the Constitution, give it a fair amount of time to work for the people, and fix it as time, occasion, and experience may dictate. What do you suggest we do, Mr. Gerry?
Gerry: I believe we should add a bill of rights that secures the liberties of the American people. It pains me to disagree so strongly with those who signed, but I sincerely believe that the American people deserve to have their rights protected.
Jay: Well, Mr. Gerry, we are putting this decision in the hands of the American people.
Gerry: Indeed, and I sincerely hope that whatever Constitution is finally adopted will secure the liberty and happiness of America.
Characters:
John Jay, a citizen of New York and a Federalist
Elbridge Gerry, a delegate from Massachusetts and an Anti-Federalist
John Jay: Mr. Gerry, I humbly request that you reconsider your reasons for not supporting this Constitution.
Elbridge Gerry: But Mr. Jay, I cannot stand by it! I cannot sign my name to a document that does not secure the rights of every American.
Jay: But we are accounting for that. We will have a chance to amend the Constitution.
Gerry: Yes, but should free people adopt a form of government that they believe needs amendment? This document is unacceptable!
Jay: This document is as good as we can make it. Tell me Mr. Gerry, do you think it is possible to come up with a better plan? We cannot please everyone. I say that delaying the ratification of this Constitution will put our country at great risk.
Gerry: I know, you believe that our enemies will see our indecision as weakness, and our creditors may stop lending to us. But isn’t personal freedom important, too?
Jay: We have been meeting for such a long time. What if we reject this Constitution? Would we ever be able to come up with something better?
Gerry: What do you suggest we do?
Jay: I believe we should ratify the Constitution, give it a fair amount of time to work for the people, and fix it as time, occasion, and experience may dictate. What do you suggest we do, Mr. Gerry?
Gerry: I believe we should add a bill of rights that secures the liberties of the American people. It pains me to disagree so strongly with those who signed, but I sincerely believe that the American people deserve to have their rights protected.
Jay: Well, Mr. Gerry, we are putting this decision in the hands of the American people.
Gerry: Indeed, and I sincerely hope that whatever Constitution is finally adopted will secure the liberty and happiness of America.