The Pros And Cons Of Federalists And Republicans

The Pros And Cons Of Federalists And Republicans
After Washington's historic term as president, he warned in his farewell address to the American
citizens against political parties and foreign affairs and encouraged them to unify as one republic.
Despite Washington's advice to the nation, political parties and foreign affairs were yet established
that divided the nation into two opposing factions: Federalists and Republicans. The Federalists, led
mainly by Alexander Hamilton, were the citizens who favored the Constitution. Anti–Federalists, on
the other hand, were the citizens who opposed the ratification of the Constitution and sided with
Jefferson to form the Democratic–Republican Party. While Federalists envisioned America with a
strong, complex, and centralized government, Republicans wanted America to remain a small
federal government where states and local governments held the majority of the power.
Many of the Federalist plans were centered around the idea of a strong, centralized government that
was effective and organized in the way it ran. Those who were Federalists, generally, were people of
professions and advocates of commercial interest. Alexander Hamilton, who led the Federalist Party,
wanted to pay off the national debt by establishing a national bank, restoring trade with Britain, and
encouraging American manufacturing through government tariffs in order to improve the economy
after the American Revolution. Hamilton believed that a strong and cohesive government would
allow these plans to work effectively
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Federalist And The Anti Federalist
In America today there are many political parties which include the Democrats and the Republicans.
The beginning of political parties started in 1787 with the federalist, then later on the anti–federalist
in 1796. Alexander Hamilton was the leader of the federalist party. Thomas Jefferson was the leader
of the anti–federalist; who called themselves the Democratic–Republicans. Our first president,
George Washington warned us about having parties and the danger of them. However, "not until
Congress debated the ratification and implementation of Jay's Treaty with Great Britain did two
political parties clearly emerge"; the Federalist and the Anti–Federalist. Today the most influential
parties are the Democrats and the Republicans. These parties win all of the presidential elections as
of today. Political parties formed because the United States was beginning to grow and expand.
Many people had different opinions and so political parties were formed. People were concerned
about the how the new government was going to be organized. In 1787, the Federalist party, which
was lead by Alexander Hamilton, was formed. Alexander Hamilton wrote the papers "The
Federalist" and they were published in 1787 and 1788. The papers were about ratifying the
constitution of the United States. This party was formed by people who had the same or similar
beliefs as Alexander Hamilton. The federalists were "individuals who supported a strong national
government, diplomatic ties with Great Britain,

The Federalist Papers By John Jay
The Federalist Papers
"This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the
design of Providence that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a ban of brethren, united to
each other by the strongest of ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien
sovereignties." (Jay 1787) This was written by John Jay in one of a collection of 85 essays written
by John Jay, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton known as The Federalist Papers. (Henretta,
Edwards, Self, 2012) The Federalist Papers were written during a time of uncertainty, when a new
nation was attempting to do what no other nation in the world had ever done, set up a government of
the people, by the people and for the people. These essays were influential, well written and
published at a juncture in history where they were needed the most. The Federalists Papers were
instrumental to the ratification of the U.S. Constitution and perhaps some of the most important
documents in U.S. national history for without the Federalists Papers, our constitution and nation
would not be what they are today. The end of the revolutionary war with the signing of the Treaty of
Paris in 1783 meant the great experiment was really about to begin. It really boiled down to a simple
question, "can man govern himself?" A revolution occurred against the most powerful empire in the
world because the founding fathers believed the answer to be "yes". For this to

The Federalist Papers By Alexander Hamilton, James...
But the Federalists would not easily forfeit. They argued that the Constitution didn't require a Bill of
Rights. The Federalist Papers written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay,
summed up the thoughts of many Federalists. In Federalist Paper No. 84 Publius, a pseudonym
under which they wrote, addressed Antifederalist worries, "Bills of rights... are not only unnecessary
in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous." Publius argued that because the
Constitution was "founded upon the power of the people" the people surrendered nothing, and
retained all rights not explicitly given to the federal government. Alexander Hamilton summed up
this perfectly when he asked, "Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall
not be restrained, when no power is given [to Congress] by which restrictions may be imposed?"
Many federalists shared this view, arguing that a bill of rights would actually infringe upon
individual liberties, because such bill could not possibly cover every right the people were entitled
to. Madison shared this view, adding that a bill of rights is a "parchment barrier" and that the best
way to protect individual and state liberties was to separate the powers among three branches of
government. He opposed a bill of rights in the constitutional convention of 1787, in many of his
contributions to the Federalist Papers, and at the Richmond convention. It wasn't until late 1788 that
Madison actually endorsed a

The Federalist Party Vs. The United States
By 1800, the Federalist Party was divided, clearing the way to the presidency for the Democratic
Republicans. Federalists like Washington and Adams wanted the federal government to have most
of the power in the United States. The non–Federalists, Jefferson and Madison, during that time
wanted a small federal government with very little power. They were very much concerned with
state rights and individual freedom for the people. The political shift from Federalists, Washington
and Adams, to Democratic–Republicans, Jefferson and Madison, resulted in non–Federalists coming
to power and a shifting of government focus, the repealing of policies such as the Alien and Sedition
Acts and the Judiciary Act of 1808, and westward expansion. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Jefferson, as a non– Federalist, believed that Hamilton's national bank was unconstitutional and
decided to abandon that policy, trim the federalist budget, and cut taxes. Jefferson, as a Democratic–
Republican, did not like or trust the government due to its limit on the freedom of the individuals,
but he acknowledged the necessity. Jefferson believed in a democracy where the people and the
states had most of the power, which was a great step away from the policies the federalists had been
putting in place. In order to fulfill the non –federalist's wishes to return power to the state, it meant
relinquishing powers of the central government, and this began with repealing the alien and sedition
acts put in place by the federalists. One of Adam's major flaws in his presidency was the execution
of the Alien and Sedition Acts, which allowed the government to compulsorily banish foreigners and
jail newspaper editors for scandalous writing. The acts were political, aimed at abolishing new
settlers support for Democratic– Republicans. The Sedition Act strictly regulated anti–government
speech and was a clear violation of the First Amendment. When the Federalists came into power,
they repealed the Alien and Sedition acts, and Jefferson led the opposition to them. Together with
Madison, he drafted the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, which claimed that the Alien and
Sedition Acts were unconstitutional. In addition, before the federalists had left

Compare And Contrast Federalists And Democratic Republicans
Federalists versus Democratic–Republicans
A political party is defined as an organized group of people with roughly similar political views, that
seeks to influence the public by getting its candidates elected to public office. During George
Washington's first term, there were no publicly accepted political parties. During Washington's
second term, two parties emerged. The Federalists and Democratic–Republicans are similar by
being the first political parties to emerge and are different through their stances on government
power, the economy, and foreign affairs, which all affected their group of supporters.
The Federalists and Democratic–Republicans are similar by being the first political parties to
emerge. In 1797, George Washington stepped down from the presidency after two successful terms
in office. Prior to this, towards the end of his last term, he wrote his farewell address which
contained his advice to whatever comes after him. He warns the people that the emergence of
political parties fighting to control the nation would cause divisive factions. While different groups
existed while George Washington was president, he was the glue that kept the people together. But
once he stepped down from office, two main political parties emerged and began competing for
control of the presidency, Congress, and the states. These two political parties were the Federalists
and the Democratic Republicans. The two had opposing views on nearly every policy, but both
began at the same

The Federalist Papers : Alexander Hamilton, James Madison,...
The authors of The Federalist Papers are Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. The
book is edited by Clinton Rossiter, and has introduction and notes by Charles R. Kesler.
Alexander Hamilton was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, along with being the first
secretary of the treasure of the United States. Hamilton was a man of many things: a Government
official, author, military leader, economist, lawyer, and political scientist in his short lifetime. As
ambitious a man Hamilton was, he obtained his first job at the age of eleven. Hamilton kept himself
bust, determined to be successful, and enrolled in Kings College for a short time. When the
Revolutionary War started Hamilton left college to join the Provincial ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
He also worked to draft the Bill of Rights, and served in the House of Representatives in his time as
a politician before he was elected the fourth President of the United States. ("James Madison."
History.com)
John Jay was born in New York and grew to be an influential man. Jay attended and graduated from
Kings College and after established himself as a successful attorney. Although Jay feared a mob rule
due to independence, he became a huge supporter of the revolution. Jay became a delegate to the
first Continental Congress and began drafting the Address to the People of Great Britain. John Jay
soon after became the first Chief Justice of the United States, Governor of New York, President of
the Continental Congress, and Minister Plenipotentiary of Spain. As Minister, Jay had a mission to
borrow money and gain access to the Mississippi river. Good as Jay was, he made liberal terms
known as the Treaty of Paris, concluding the war. When Jay returned he found a position as
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, where he became frustrated by the limitations the job offered. At this
point he started collaborating with Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. ("John Jay United
States Statesman and Chief Justice." Britannica.com)
I believe the authors wanted to remain anonymous because many people, especially in New York
didn't like the idea of the Constitution. These people thought the Constitution would be taking away
the freedom they'd just gained. With that there were people

Anti Federalist Paper Pros And Cons
The Federalist and Anti–Federalist papers were created in response to the United States
Constitution. In 1787, the Second Continental Congress called for a federal convention. This
meeting in Philadelphia came to create the U.S Constitution. It originally was held to revise the
Articles of Confederation, but due to the mindsets of many proponents present at the convention,
like Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, and the vision of creating a new government rather
than fixing the old one, the United States Constitution was formed. Once this was sent to congress it
was submitted to the states for ratification. In response, many articles and letters were submitted to
the public criticizing the proposition. These articles and letters are where the Anti–Federalist papers
are derived from. Although there was opposition to the Constitution, many were in its favor. In
response to these criticizing papers, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison wrote papers
in the constitutions defense. These were come to be known as the Federalist papers. Two papers in
particular, Federalist 51 and Anti––Federalist 51, are written on the topic of checks and balances and
how this relates to a separation of powers within the national government. These arguments were
successful due to their primary points of contention and strong arguments proposed.
The primary point of contention in Federalist 51, written by James Madison, was to support the
checks and balances system in the United States

Essay on Federalist 10 Summary
Summary & Analysis of Federalist #10 Summary:
Madison begins perhaps the most famous of the Federalist papers by stating that one of the strongest
arguments in favor of the Constitution is the fact that it establishes a government capable of
controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. Madison defines that factions are groups of
people who gather together to protect and promote their special economic interests and political
opinions. Although these factions are at odds with each other, they frequently work against the
public interests, and infringe upon the rights of others. Both supporters and opponents of the plan
are concerned with the political instability produced by rival factions. The state governments have ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
To Madison, there are only two ways to control a faction: one, to remove its causes and the second
to control its effects. The first is impossible. There are only two ways to remove the causes of a
faction: destroy liberty or give every citizen the same opinions, passions, and interests. Destroying
liberty is a "cure worse then the disease itself," and the second is impracticable. The causes of
factions are thus part of the nature of man and we must deal with their effects and accept their
existence. The government created by the Constitution controls the damage caused by such factions.
The framers established a representative form of government, a government in which the many elect
the few who govern. Pure or direct democracies (countries in which all the citizens participate
directly in making the laws) cannot possibly control factious conflicts. This is
because the strongest and largest faction dominates, and there is no way to protect weak factions
against the actions of an obnoxious individual or a strong majority. Direct democracies cannot
effectively protect personal and property rights and have always been characterized by conflict. If
the new plan of government is adopted, Madison hopes that the men elected to office will be wise
and good men the best of America. Theoretically, those who govern should be the least likely to
sacrifice the public good to temporary condition, but the opposite might

The Federalists
The ability to unify a nation in a liberal democracy and work towards obtaining a given objective is
incredibly difficult when everyone's opinion is supposed to be valued. However it's not just valuing
everyone's opinion that can cause concern, but the fact that people are allowed to act on their
opinions, no matter how radical or crazy they are to the majority of the population. This allows for
dissenting opinions against the general will to rise up and hold seats within the legislature; therefore,
legitimizing their claims by thrusting them into the public spotlight. This can be both good and bad
and it was explored in–depth by James Madison in The Federalist Papers. In his work he states the
obvious concerns factions can have on a society ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Madison's usage of the word "most" seems to the reader that he is assuming more than 50%,
however, those popular social movements consist of people of all economic standing on both sides.
Therefore, how can the unequal distribution of property be the cause of factions. Without factions
(according to Madison) society would have to be involved in a communist state to guarantee the
equal distribution of property so as not to cause factions to develop. However, society can't enter
into a state of an authoritarian regime because it needs to maintain liberty, a theme Madison believes
is unreplaceable. Instead of trying to remove factions by mandating a communist egalitarian world
view (which some people understand when they read Madison's work, not what Madison himself
said), society should embrace factions as an example of political and intellectual freedom working
beautifully. It demonstrates that dissenting views are able to properly lobby government officials,
through either being elected or organizing protests. There is validity to the claim that factions cause
unnecessary bureaucracy, however, the constitution of the United States formed a government that
intentionally worked this way, it was expected factions would rise up, that's why there is so many
checks and balances. The checks and balance system is the effective way of handling factions, not
removing liberty, and certainly not forming a communist egalitarian state. Factions are not only
necessary to maintaining a capitalist society, but they are also important in guaranteeing that
dissenting views and opinions are allowed to be heard. They serve a role and purpose in the echo

Summary Of The Federalist Papers
The Federalist Papers are a collection of 85 essays and articles written by three of the most
prominent men in early United States history: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay.
All of these essays were written to try to ratify the United States Constitution. Seventy–seven were
published serially in The Independent Journal and The New York Packet between October 1787 and
August 1788. A compilation of these and eight others, called The Federalist; or, The New
Constitution, was published in two volumes in 1788 by J. and A. McLean. The collection's original
title was The Federalist; the title The Federalist Papers did not emerge until the 20th century.
As many as seventy seven were published in The Independent Journal and The New York ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Federalist No. 10, in which Madison discusses the means of preventing rule by majority faction and
advocates a large, commercial republic, is generally regarded as the most important of the 85 articles
from a philosophical perspective; it is complemented by Federalist No. 14, in which Madison takes
the measure of the United States, declares it appropriate for an extended republic, and concludes
with a memorable defense of the constitutional and political creativity of the Federal Convention.[3]
In Federalist No. 84, Hamilton makes the case that there is no need to amend the Constitution by
adding a Bill of Rights, insisting that the various provisions in the proposed Constitution protecting
liberty amount to a "bill of rights". Federalist No. 78, also written by Hamilton, lays the groundwork
for the doctrine of judicial review by federal courts of federal legislation or executive acts.
Federalist No. 70 presents Hamilton's case for a one–man chief executive. In Federalist No. 39,
Madison presents the clearest exposition of what has come to be called "Federalism". In Federalist
No. 51, Madison distills arguments for checks and balances in an essay often quoted for its
justification of government as "the greatest of all reflections on human

Federalist Papers : The Federalist Paper
Daniel Gasca
Mr. Brooks
AP Government Period 1
10/27/15
The Federalist Papers Ten and Fifty–One were the ideal papers written by Madison to support
th¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬e ratification of the Constitution. Out of all the federalist papers, these are two of the
most important federalist papers. So what were the federalist papers? They were 85 essays written
by three gentlemen: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay that explained particular
provisions of the Constitution in detail. Alexander Hamilton goes on to be the first treasury
secretary, James Madison goes on to be the fourth president and John Jay the first chief justice in US
history. So what was the purpose of these papers? Well, they were written to gain support for the US
Constitution, especially in New York. While many people might see it as inevitable, the Constitution
was a revolutionary step. Because of the revolutionary nature of the new constitution, arguments
were necessary to rationalize it. Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York were the
states critical to the success or failure of the Constitution. Of these four states, New York by far was
the state where the success of the constitution was in the most doubt. Quickly, Alexander Hamilton
decided that a massive propaganda campaign was necessary in New York, more than in any other
state. So with the help of James Madison and John Jay, he published several essays in different
newspapers in New York. There is really little

Federalist No. 10 And No Essay
Federalist No. 10 and No. 51, essays are Madison's arguments about the fictions provides details
about the cause, effect, and solutions to deal with factions. The two Federalist essays, which are
highly regarded today, are the numbers 10 and 51. In these essays. Madison explained that in a large
state a variety of factions and interests could terminate one another out and it makes it tough for any
single faction to create a majority and hijack the government for its interests.
Arguing and lobbying for the ratification of the United States Constitution, the Federalist essays are
a series of essays initiated by Alexander Hamilton. However, the Federalist Number 10 and 51 is
James Madison's essays, but he was initially invited by Hamilton to co–author these. Published on
November 1787 Federalist Number 10 is among the most highly regarded American political
writings.
According to the essay, factions means an adverse act of some people, a group of individuals or
groups of citizens, who are inspired by some common passions towards the rights of other citizens.
The essay is mainly discussing the issue of factions and ways to deal with it.
In the Federalist number 10, Madison argued and analyzed the importance of the Constitution that
can support the establishment of a government capable of controlling the violence and damage
caused by factions. The essay proposes that the state administrations have not accomplished in
resolving factions, but the situation is so challenging

Federalist 10 Essay
Federalist 10 Liberty. This word means many things to many people. There is no way to distinctly
define the term without leaving someone's crucial point of view out of the equation.
One person might say that anarchy would be the only way to have complete and utter freedom,
while others would go as far as to believe a controlled communist government is the best route to
achieving liberation. Factions (a group of people who agree on certain topics) are inevitable, due to
the nature of man. As long as men hold different opinions, have different amounts of wealth, and
own different amount of property, they will continue to fraternize with people who are most similar
to them. In Federalist #10, James Madison summed up factions ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The only way to manage faction is to remove its causes and to control its effects. By removing its
causes Madison believes that liberty will be destroyed, or that by giving every citizen the same
opinions, passions, and interests, would be impossible because people can never all be the same.
Madison wanted the United States to be a republic, a form of democracy in which power is vested in
representatives, so there will be a greater number of citizens represented and we will also be able to
have more control over the factions effects.
In today's society, we see many examples of James Madison's explicit view on American political
culture. Everyone in America, from the time that they have been born, has been placed into factions.
Newborns are put into daycare facilities based on their parent's income and parental beliefs.
Students, throughout their entire academic career, have volunteered to become part of at least one
faction. Some students stay after school for art club, French club, guitar club, or a select few even
stay after for student council. The students select the student council members, by having fellow
classmates' sign the petition form that each individual member must get signed in order to become a
representative. At the meetings, the student council might have enough money to only sponsor one
after school activity, so they

Anti Federalists And The Revolutionary War
Although independence was just won, the country still needed protection from other hostile
countries. Besides protecting the country from foreign enemies, the Anti–Federalists wanted to
protect the American people from its own government. In fact, the "Anti–Federalists were especially
concerned with preserving for ordinary citizens the ability to participate in government" (Amar).
After all, the Revolutionary War was fought in order to gain freedom from oppression. However, by
giving all of the power to the states, the nation would be divided. A nation divided would not stand
forever because it would be limited against foreign enemies. While the Anti–Federalists had the
right idea in mind, not all possibilities were thought of. For the Federalists, protection from foreign
nations was ideal. In concerns with protection, the leader of the Federalists, Alexander Hamilton,
proclaimed, "Let the thirteen States, bound together in a strict and indissoluble Union, concur in
erecting one great American system, superior to the control of all transatlantic force or influence,
and able to dictate the terms of the connection between the old and the new world!" (Hamilton).
Besides Hamilton preaching these ideas and writing two–thirds of the essays in the Federalist Papers
(Schmidt 53), James Madison contributed to supporting the Federalists and developing a system of
checks and balances, which limited the power of each branch in the government as stated in
Constitution. Madison and

Anti Federalists Vs. Federal Republicans Essay
In modern America, many citizens hold to the notion that the Constitution was adopted
unanimously, without debate or disagreement. Not only is this not the case, the debate and
disagreement that took place during the institution of the governing articles for the newly formed
country are ultimately responsible for the system we have in place today as the concerns and
counterpoints raised in the discussion were more crucial to the successful continuance of stability in
the nation than any unanimous decision. Given the apparent import of such discussion, it is therefore
prudent to examine the original points of contention to determine their merit and to further ensure
that the concerns originally raised have been addressed sufficiently.
These discussions and debates often took place between two specific groups, the Federalists, and
their opponents who they termed the Anti–Federalists. However, these so–called Anti–Federalists
would have referred to themselves as Democratic Republicans or Federal Republicans, so they will
be referenced in this vein. On the side of the Federalists were men such as James Madison,
Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, Gouverneur Morris, and other proponents of a centralized
Federal government. The opposition to these ideals was led by men like Thomas Jefferson, Samuel
Adams, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, and other state governors, farmers, and craftsmen
concerned about the powers being allocated to the proposed central government. These

The Federalist Papers By Alexander Hamilton
Written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, the Federalist Papers are a collection
of essays that were created in order to defend the Constitution against claims that stated it threatened
the freedom and liberty of individuals, and gave too much power to the national government. The
78th essay of the Federalist Papers was written by Alexander Hamilton in efforts to address one of
these concerns, that anti–federalists feared the independence of the Judiciary. In this paper, Hamilton
recognized and acknowledged the concerns that the anti–federalists had with the Judiciary and
defends it by stating why it is necessary for our government and why the people should not fear it
for being undemocratic. He creates his argument by explaining how judges are appointed, making
clear its purpose and detailing how it's the least dangerous branch. These ideas that he expressed and
argued for can be most clearly seen implemented into Article III of the Constitution, which covers
the Judiciary.
Publius, or Hamilton, while writing paper 78, addresses the concerns that were written down in the
anti–federalist papers under the name Brutus. The primary concern is that the judiciary power is too
independent to be beneficial for the people. They are worried about this because the members of the
judiciary have a life tenure, which is a lifetime term as long as good behavior is maintained, after
they are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. This branch is one

Beliefs of the Anti-Federalists Essay
The name, Anti–Federalists is not the best–suited name for what they truly are, or what they believe
in. "They are called the Anti–Federalists, but it should be made clear at once that they were not
Anti–Federal at all." (Main xi) Originally, the word federalist, meant anyone who supported the
Articles of Confederation. The term "Anti–Federalist" was placed on them to portray them as people
who did not agree with the Federal Government, which was exactly opposite of what they are.
According to the proper definition, the Anti–Federalists were really more "Federal" than the so–
called Federalists. Many Anti–Federalists felt this way because "they took their bearings from the
principles of federalism laid down in the Articles." ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They thought that the national government would soon dominate the state governments. The
Federalists started calling the groups of people who disagreed with them the Anti–Federalists. The
Federalists felt that what they were trying to do what was best for the country and government,
therefore being more "federal". Not only were they calling their enemies Anti–Federalists just
because they did not agree with them, but they also had a reason behind it. The Federalists' idea was
"the use of the term was the way some great men had to deceive the common people, and prevent
their knowing what they were about." (Main xiii) This idea states that the term "anti" puts on an
image that they are not for the federal government. The Federalists were trying to convince the
people that the Anti–Federalists were not fighting for, but against the country and government. In
the Boston American Herald of December 10, 1787 there was a phrase that became helpful to the
people: "A FEDERALIST is a Friend to a Federal Government– An ANTI–FEDERALIST is an
Enemy to a Confederation. –Therefore, the FRIENDS to the New Plan of CONSOLIDATION, are
Anti–Federal, and its Opposers are firm Federal Patriots." (Main xii) This newspaper was trying to
show to the "common people" (Main xiii) what the Anti–Federalists believed in. The Federalists
wanted a large national government and smaller state governments, whereas the

Compare And Contrast Federalist And Federalists
"The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches, that we must be contented to secure what we can
get from time to time, and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade
men to do even what is for their own good," quoted by Thomas Jefferson on January 27, 1790.
Around this time there were two political parties that are talked about throughout this paper, The
Federalists and The Democratic–Republican party. There were several problems occurring in the
United States of America around the 1790's, due to the fact that George Washington resigned from
presidency and didn't choose to run for a third four year term. Around this time Washington worried
that the nation will split from political parties emerging trying to elect a new president and vice–
president. There are two major political parties emerging, Federalist and the Democratic–Republican
party, these two parties had differing views on The Constitution, ideal people, government, and
foreign policy position. These two parties do represent, and they do not represent the Democratic
Party and the Republican Party of today. Our government today follows some of each sides views
today. I think that it doesn't matter what kind of job you have or what ethnicity you are to be
president, unlike the Federalist and the Democratic–Republican party. The Government chooses bits
and pieces of there ideal views, and that's how they run the government today. I do favor parts of the
Federalist Party, and the Democratic–Republican Party today. I like how the Democratic–
Republican Party had farmers as some of there people because today we don't run off large scale
manufacturing, and large scale manufacturing only, we use small farms to help produce products for
the whole entire world. Alexander Hamilton headed one these parties known as the Federalists, he
was followed by George Washington, John Adams, and Charles Pinckney. Although Washington
tried to stay neutral and not pick a side of the political parties he favored the Federalists, because
they were loyal to the government. Hamilton had views of wealthy, well–born aristocracy, based of
their birth, wealth, and status as his people. Hamilton truly believed that people are basically selfish,
and

The Federalist 10, By James Madison
In the Federalist 10, it is mostly about the constitution. It was written by James Madison, who
oversaw it. The main purpose of this article is faction. In politics, faction is people that group
themselves. Madison said that in the republic. Madison says that the number one common
characteristic is the largest people. The democracy would be possible because you couldn't create a
majority group of people that would have a lot in common. However now, democracy become too
big in this scale. People don't have much in common. That was the anti–federalist concerned. And
now Madison came up by saying that just because there are larger group of people that doesn't mean
they are right with what they should say. Majorities are somewhat dangerous; they sometimes do
foolish stuff. Also, they somewhat not to be trusted. Now, the fact that the new constitution republic
is covering. Democracy is
In addition, Madison defined that a faction is an amount of people, whether a popular or smaller,
who are combined and motivated by nearly mutual compulsion of desire, or of attention, opposing
to the privileges of further residents, or to the durable and collective benefits of the public. Also he
explained why the Framers took a representative democracy, a republic, slightly than a clean,
straight, democracy as the system of government for our new population. He defined a "pure
democracy" as "a culture involving of a lesser quantity of nations, who gather and direct the rule in
individual."

Introduction
The Federalist Papers present a series of essays written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and
John Jay. This volume of eighty–five essays, written between October 1787 and May 1788, is
perhaps the most famous, and at the same time the most important newspaper column ever
published. These essays are considered to be among the most important documents of the Founding
period, together with the Constitution and Civil Rights Act. In these essays the authors provided
facts and justification for the Constitution, with also raising and discussing some of the most
important political issues of the time. The sole purpose for writing the essays was to convince
people of the State of New York to ratify the U.S. Constitution. People of New York and its political
leaders were strongly against the Constitution and they firmly opposed new government. The main
reason for that is the fact that the State of New York gain independence under the Articles of
Confederation and was becoming rich trough the trade. The citizens of this state believed that they
have no interest in ratifying the Constitution and joining the Union.
The writers of The Federalist Papers were very concerned that because of New York's reluctance and
decided to take the matter into their hands and came all the efforts in order to change their minds.
They were very well aware of the relationship between human nature and popular government.
Hamilton, Madison and Jay were apprehensive of the ethics of the

Federalists Essay
The early years of the Constitution of the United States were full of political strife. The two
prominent political ideals were complete opposites. The Jeffersonian Republicans were focused on
giving power to the people and maintaining a pastoral economy, while the Federalists supported the
control of the government by the elite class, and maintaining "positive" democracy. Both parties
feared the influence and effect the other party would have on the public. In Linda K. Kerber's article,
"The Fears of the Federalists", the major concerns Federalists held in the early 19th century are
described. Ever since the war with and separation from England, the citizens of America were seen
to be continually drive to "patriotic rebellion" as a way to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
Despite the vast amount of land available for agriculture, industry was created regardless, in order to
become more independent from Europe. Machinery was developed that would eliminate the need
for actually laborers, but at the same time this machinery needed laborers to work it6. Thus the
Proletariat formed. This class was negatively viewed by the Federalists as they believed that any one
who was dependent upon others was not virtuous and thus not a proper citizen. The condition of the
proletariat class was also poor, and the Federalists believed that the poor were more prone to
indecent behavior and unpredictability7. Kerber quotes Federalist Philip Barton Key, who stated that
men and boys in workshops were not expected to have the same stable constitution as those who
were in charge of their own salaries and independent in their lives8. What is meant is that those who
are rich and assured of their social and economic standing are not going to rebel. They have
influence in what matters to them politically, unlike those who are poor, who would have more
reason to start an uprising. Federalists also feared that the Republicans would "'...break down the
'barrier of habitual morality...both as it respects our civil & religious institutions..."9. Of course, this
referred to the cultivation of the public desire rather than the elite rich and educated. As

The Democratic-Republican Party: Anti-Federalist Report
Madison's significance of a "faction," or political social affair, is entrancing and most basic in
context of the way that Madison soon halted to be one of the Federalists who had confidence in a
one–party structure, and transformed into Jefferson's most dynamic lieutenant in sorting out in
confinement the Democratic–Republican Party, which was decidedly Anti–Federalist and took
control after 1800 (Madison.at.al.2008).
Madison begins possibly the most surely understood of the Federalist papers by communicating that
a standout amongst the most grounded conflicts for the Constitution is the way that it develops an
organization prepared for controlling the brutality and damage brought on by gatherings. Madison
portrays amasses as social events ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Larger parts consistently undermine the benefits of minorities. There are only two techniques for
avoiding perniciousness. The first is to assemble a successful government, a "gathering will." Such a
"will' is greater than, and self–ruling of, the direct larger part (Madison.at.al.2008). This "plan" is
hazardous in light of the way that such a lawmaking body may hurl its vitality behind a social affair
in people in general eye clashing with the overall public incredible. In our country, the pro to
regulate begins from the entire society. In addition, under the Constitution society is detached into
numerous get–togethers of people who hold various points of view and have unmistakable interests.
This makes it to a great degree troublesome for one assembling to summon or undermine the
minority

Essay on The Underdogs by Mariano Azuela
Author Mariano Azuela's novel of the Mexican revolution, The Underdogs, conveys a fictional
representation of the revolution and the effects it had on the Mexican men and women who lived
during that time. The revolutionary rebels were composed of different men grouped together to form
small militias against the Federalists, in turn sending them on journeys to various towns, for long
periods of time. Intense fighting claimed the lives of many, leaving women and children behind to
fend for themselves. Towns were devastated forcing their entire populations to seek refuge
elsewhere. The revolution destroyed families across Mexico, leaving mothers grieving for their
abducted daughters, wives for their absent husbands, and soldiers for their ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Some revolutionaries were Federalist deserters, who were forced to join the Federalist army. Azuela
refers to a soldier who was abducted from his home in the middle of the night by Federalists, and
woke up a soldier, twenty–five miles from his home (26). Luis Cervantes, a medical student in
Azuela's The Underdogs, "wrote a piece in favor of the revolution... [and] as a result, they
persecuted [him], caught [him], and finally landed [him] in the barrack" as well (22).
The chaotic revolution bread violence and confusion amongst the ill informed population. As a
result, families fled southward in search for a safe haven. "Trains were overloaded with people;
there was scarcity of trucks and coaches; hundreds of people, panic stricken, walked along the
highroad with their belongings in a pack slung over their shoulders" (Azuela 46). Women, who were
left behind while their husbands fought, were faced with extensive abuse from Federalist soldiers.
Young women were abducted and raped, and at times impregnated. In The Underdogs, soldiers
"carried away Senora Nieves' little girl" (Azuela 19), Fortunata's daughter (Azuela 36), and left
Uncle Matias' girl, "big with child" (Azuela 35). Some women were also forced to work, and take up
arms to defend themselves, with "revolvers at their waists, [and] cartridge–belts across their breast"
(Azuela 86).
The violence inflicted on the poor by

Analysis Of Alexander Hamilton In The Federalist Papers
"The science of politics, however, like most other sciences, has received great improvement. The
efficacy of various principles is now well understood, which were either not known at all, or
imperfectly known to the ancients," wrote Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper number 9. In The
Federalist Papers, which Thomas Jefferson described as "the best commentary on the principles of
government, which was ever written," writers Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay
sought to articulate and defend the integrity of the new Constitution, and to demonstrate the ways in
which it fulfilled the requirements necessary to establish a Republican form of government.
However, as seen in the opening quote, the new Constitution, while drawing ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
First to be explored is Aristotle's Politics. It this work, Aristotle portrays man as an inherently
political animal, with logos and the ability to distinguish injustice from justice. He purports that the
purpose of humanity within nature is to live together and seek justice. Since human beings live as
political animals, the polis arises naturally. The purpose of the polis is not merely to help humans
live, but to help them live well, as morally sound, well educated citizens (Nederman 287). Speaking
of the democratic state specifically, he says, "the basis of a democratic state is liberty...one principle
of liberty is for all to rule and be ruled in turn....another is that a man should live as he likes" (Book
6.2). In other words, "freedom based upon equality" (Book 6.2). This, alongside his the purpose of
the polis itself (to educate and assist citizens in living well and seeking justice) forms the foundation
of the promise of democracy within the selections from Aristotle's Politics. However, what threatens
the institutions of democracy according to Aristotle? First, he finds weakness in democracy's
definition of justice: "that to which the majority agree" (Book 6.2). In contrasting it with the
oligarch's definite ("that to which the wealthier class"), he states there is some inequality and
injustice within each. Each places the democracy in danger of tyranny, whether

Federalists vs. Democratic Republicans Essay
Federalists vs. Democratic Republicans
George Washington himself wanted to avoid a party system in America. Unfortunately, even when
saying this he was part of the beginning of one of the first parties in United States politics. There
have been many different parties surface since the beginning of the American political system. They
all have different thoughts, policies, and motivations. Each party has come and gone, some have
made significant contributions and others have not. The first split, and beginning of the party
system, came with the differentiation between the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans.
These two parties were extremely different in thought, design, and status of people involved. This
paper, will deal with ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Federalist Party consisted of people who were very much Anglophiles. They loved Britain and
all things British. The Federalists felt that there should be a loose constructionist interpretation of
the constitution. They believed that there were things implied by or simply understood by the
wording of the Constitution. According to the Federalists, just because something was not
specifically written in the Constitution doesn't mean that it wasn't covered or addressed as
something that the federal government could handle. The Federalist Party also supported a strong
governmental leadership. They thought that the most important branch of government was the
executive branch, and that a strong leader was needed in this office of president to make the country
strong. Some important Federalist Party supporters included George Washington, John Adams, John
Jay, and Alexander Hamilton. There were some people who didn't agree with everything that the
Federalist Party believed. This new party was known as the Democratic Republicans. This party was
made up of farmers, small businessmen, and laborers. The Democratic Republicans weren't backed
by as much money, and were considerably poorer than the Federalists. The south and west parts of
the United States were most influenced by the Democratic Republicans because that is were the
majority of the farming population was

Analysis Of Federalist 10 By James Madison
In Federalist 10 by James Madison, he addresses key issues like factions and democracy, all while
focusing on the usefulness of the Constitution and the necessity of a strong central government, to
defend his Federalist ideology. Personally, I agree with the foundation of his arguments, especially
on the topic of forms of government, as well as the role of representation in our government.
Madison's primary focus throughout the beginning of this paper is factions. He holds a deep disdain
for them as he thinks that they solely focus on themselves, while hurting other Americans, which is
evident in this quote, ("...united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest,
adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
No matter what the government or its people try to implement to disable factions, another will
always rise due to the nature of man. Destroying liberty is the most heinous crime imaginable for
Madison and I agree, every citizen having their liberty is what this country was founded on and it
should therefore be untouchable. Madison's idea of giving every citizen the same ideals and interests
is blatant sarcasm to illustrate how factions are unpreventable and simply part of human nature. No
matter what you may do to try and prevent it, there will always be new movements and ideas that
people rally behind and their freedom to do that is part of what makes America special.
Another focus of Federalist 10 is the purpose of having a republican government, which is
personally the issue raised in Federalist 10 that resonates the most with me. One of the main benefits
of a republic in a large government per Madison, is the lack of power given to factions. In a large
and diverse republic, there are large amounts of factions across the country, however, they have little
power or influence. While in a direct democracy, there is a small amount of factions, but each
faction is

The Federalist Papers By Alexander Hamilton
The Federalist papers are essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay with
the main purpose to show the pros of officially confirming the constitution. The essays show an
overall pessimistic view to mankind, emphasizing the reliance men need on government, and the
importance of having the best fit government. They give a great base for understanding the
intentions of the constitution that we, as a nation, still attempt to follow today. Although these
papers were written in 1787, you can find many similarities in today 's government, and the vision
we strive for as a nation. Obviously, times have changed, but the ideas behind our country, and the
goal for the United States to be the most successful it can be, remains very similar. The essays starts
with Hamilton addressing the people of New York. Federalist Paper No. 1 focuses on introducing
the idea of the constitution, and why it would lead the United States to the best fitting government.
Hamilton is persuading the people to be open minded. He comes across as if he is selling the
constitution. A major point that Hamilton does not ignore is that many people disagree with the
ideas in the constitution. A perfect example of why someone may disagree with the constitution is
because they simply benefit from the government without any changes. "Among the most
formidable of the obstacles which the new Constitution will have to encounter may readily be
distinguished the obvious interest of a certain class of

The Federalist Paper By James Madison
The Federalist Papers were 85 essays that were published in 1787 and 1788. They were anonymous
and always signed by "Publius." Publius was actually 3 men, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison
and John Jay. They wrote the papers to convince the people of New York to vote to ratify the
Constitution. These essays were published in newspapers throughout the state of New York.
Federalist 10 was written by James Madison and was titled The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard
Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection (continued). This essay was a continuation of Federalist
9. Federalists like James Madison and Alexander Hamilton thought that if the states continued to
maintain complete control, each state would become its own nation, which would leave the U.S.
bankrupt. They believe that a strong central government would have the ability to stop this from
occurring. Factions were James Madison's worst fear. Madison believed that factions were what
were going to keep states divided and more likely to turn to individual nations. James Madison's
opinions are correct. As defined by Madison, a faction is a group of people, 'whether a majority or
minority, who come together by some common impulse of passion, or of interest adverse to the
rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." Not all
political groups are factions, though most are. While they are rare, there are political groups out
there that are made up of people with all completely

The Anti-Federalist Papers: The Principles Of Democracy
The Federalist Papers established the definition of a Republic that would govern by the
representation of the people and the interest of the society. Based on the principles of Democracy,
the Federalist Papers established the acquisition of power by the decision of the population to
"choose a body of citizens whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of the country and
whose patriotism and love of justice will be at least likely to sacrifice it to temporary and partial
considerations", the principle of democracy established on the Federalist Paper advocated for the
recognition of power given by the popular decision of the people to attend the interest of the whole
community. The principal development of the Republic was distributed in ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
As well, the Progressive Platform saw the necessity of making changes "based on the needs of each
generation, where the people must maintain their sovereign power to establish and maintain equal
opportunity, and industrial justice" (Progressive Party Platform, 1912). The platform identified the
shift on the principles of power in which the republic was founded. As well it recognized that the
principles in which the Republic was founded to endure were missing its essence. The idea of
political parties defined the responsibility of the government to serve as the platform of the will of
the people, instead, both parties were a reflection of corruption and platforms for the acquisition of
self–interest benefits. The Platform mainly criticized the fact that the power was been used for the
benefit of the few, and which power should be shifted again to the people who put them on

The Federalist And Anti Federalist
The Anti–Federalist put up a long and hard fight, however, they were not as organized as the
Federalists. While the Anti– Federalist had great concerns about the Constitution and National
government, the Federalist had good responses to combat these concerns. The Federalist were and
for the Constitution and feel the Article of Confederation were not worth ratifying, these should be
scrapped altogether. They felt that the Articles limited the power of congress, because congress had
to request cooperation from the states. Unlike the Anti–Federalist, the Federalist organized quickly,
had ratifying conventions, and wrote the Federalist papers to rebut the Anti– Federalist arguments.
An example of this is the Anti– Federalist concerns about a republican government not working on a
scale this large or diverse. Like the Roman empire, whose government was based on the idea on
classical republicanism, they believed it would fall and turn into a monarchy in order to control its
people. The Federalist needed a theory to combat this argument so James Madison complied wrote
in Federalist 10 that factions were the great enemy of society. Madison defines a faction as "a
number of citizens,... who united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest,
adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the
community." Factions are dangerous because there will be a majority faction and then a risk of
tyranny will arise, because the

Analysis Of James Madison 's ' Federalist '
In this paper I will be discussing what James Madison meant in Federalist number10. Federalist
number 10 an essay that wish written by James Madison on November 22 1787. It was a part of a
series of essays proposed my Alexander Hamilton. The Federalist Paper essays were written to
dispute the authorization of the United States Constitution.
In Federalist number 10 Madison recognized that there was many different factions. He says that the
republican government that is put together by the new Constitution will allow all factions to express
themselves and influence their workings of the government by getting all their members elected and
appointed to offices. Madison also indicates that a democratic kind of government using the ideal of
majority rule will tame the factions and cause them to work together. Madison also claims that
minority groups would be protected because the factions will have to negotiate their differences.
According to James Madison this is his definition of faction; "By a faction, I understand a number
of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated
by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the
permanent and aggregate interests of the community."
In order for a faction to become bigger there must be liberty, Liberty helps factions grow. In today 's
world factions are political parties or also known as special interest groups. Also in today's world

The Federalist Papers By John Jay
The Federalist Papers, written in New York by John Jay, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison,
during the years of 1787 and 1788, were a collection of eighty–five essays that were written to
augment and garner support and to defend those concepts set forth in The Constitution of the United
States of America (hereafter "The Constitution"), which had not yet been ratified. The Federalist
Papers not only championed The Constitution, but they also explained how the new government
would operate in the United States as further detailed below. It was crucial to the success of the new
country that The Constitution be ratified; and Jay, Hamilton and Madison were prepared to do
anything they could to see to the documents, as well as the United States, success. In September of
1787, The Constitution was proposed to The Confederation Congress. The Confederation Congress
was a government that was made up of appointed delegates from the then, thirteen states. Since it
was the supreme governing body, it was the party that was able to make the decision about the fate
of The Constitution. The decision made was to turn the decision over to the states for ratification.
Therefore, Jay, Hamilton and Madison wrote the Federalist Papers to ensure that there was going to
be adequate support to have the states ratify The Constitution. Additionally, they were written to
counter act the negative comments being made by those persons opposed to The Constitution, which
included

The Federalist Paper, By Alexander Hamilton, James...
The Federalist Papers are a series of eighty–five essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James
Madison, and John Jay, which argued the reasons why the Articles of Confederation should be
strengthened. These articles support the new constitution as well as seek ratification from the states.
On November 7, 1787 John Jay published The Fourth Federalist Paper. In The Fourth Federalist
Paper John Jay explains that the U.S should be unified under a central government rather than
function as multiple independent bodies. The U.S would be better able to obviate from foreign
aggressors, trade with other countries, and the country would be better organized. The issues
discussed within The Fourth Federalist Paper, is still relevant today.
Based on my ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It reiterated that we would be stronger as a whole and with all of the manpower that we have, it
would be really effective against foreign countries that want to fight with the U.S. Weapons could be
manufactured in Ohio but now they could be shipped to New York if they needed weapons and in
that sense we would be more united.
In hindsight, the U.S made the right move in choosing to accept this Federalist Paper. We have the
most advanced military in the world, thanks to new technology and phenomenal programs. This
consists of programs ranging from ROTC (Reserve Officer Training Corps) to the Navy Seals (An
elite military force). ROTC is a program for college students in universities all over the country that
trains and puts them into a position to be successful in a military career. Also, the Navy Seals carry
out special missions. One that many are aware of is the assasination of Osama Bin Laden. I pointed
this out because it shows real life examples of the ideas stated within the Fourth Federalist Paper
being exercised. In my opinion, the ROTC program represents people coming from all over the
country to fight for a single cause. If it were not for John Jay and his willingness to argue the fact
that we need to be unified, then there is always the possibility that certain aspects of the U.S
Military would not exist.
Whether firmly united under one national government, or split into a number of confederacies,
certain it is, that foreign nations will know and

Federalist Papers #10 Essay
United we stand, divided we fall The Federalist Papers Number 10 is written by James Madison and
explains the necessity of the Constitution to protect our country from factions. A faction is "a
number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and
actuated by some common impulse of passion or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens,
or to the permanent aggregate interests of the community (Publius, 72)." Publius states that there are
two ways to get rid of factions. The first way to eliminate a faction is to take the Liberty away from
all of the people in the faction. The other way to cure a faction is to give everyone the same opinion.
Both of this solutions are not possible ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Publius states that it is not possible to smother a faction but what our country can do is control its
effects. A republican form of government promises the cure of controlling factions. Through elected
officials, the peoples voice will be channeled and there will be, "more consonant to the public good
then if pronounced by the people themselves (Publius,77)." One way in which a republic deals with
factions is the delegation of government to elected officials. The object of the elected officials is "to
refine and enlarge the public views by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of
citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country (Publius,76)." This in
effect will put the power of our country into the hands of qualified individuals. These individuals
will be able to hear the voice of the people and decide what is the right decision for the country.
Another way that a republic guards against a faction is expanding to include more people. In a large
republic each representative will be chosen by a greater number of citizens. The greater number of
citizens will make it more difficult for unworthy candidates to gain elected office. Elections are
designed to allow people to choose the men that they want to be represented by. People are more
likely to choose the man with the most attractive merit and the most established character thus
preventing a man with vicious views to gain

Anti Federalists Vs. Federalists
Anti Federalists vs. Federalists (Paper #1)
The Federalists and the Anti – Federalists played an indispensable part in the establishment of the
American Constitution. Federalists were supporters of the constitution, while Anti federalist were
against the ratification of the Constitution. Federalists believed in the idea of a larger heterogeneous
republic whereas anti federalists wanted a small homogenous republic. Famous federalists like
James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton are responsible for giving us paramount pieces of
historic documents in the form of "the Federalist papers". The Federalist papers were 85 documents
urging the ratification of the US Constitution. Anti federalist side included people like Samuel
Adams, George Mason and Patrick Henry, and they believed the Articles of Confederation should be
altered rather than completely changed in the form of the Constitution. Concurring with the
Federalist side, it is imperative to see that the Federalists' argument was more viable, due to the fact
that larger republics and "checks and balances" are useful tools in controlling a democracy. We can't
compare ourselves to the way Sparta and Athens operated. Our country would thrive more under a
stronger national government rather than a stronger state government. The anti federalists were
against the proposed Constitution and wanted the power to be invested in local and state levels.
They believed that the national government would be too far from the

The Jeffersonian Republicans And Federalists Essay
By 1817 the great American experiment was in full swing. America was developing into an effective
democratic nation. However as the democracy continued to grow, two opposing political parties
developed, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed
in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict interpretation of the
Constitution. The Federalists saw it differently. They opted for a powerful central government with
weaker state governments, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. The seemingly solid divide
between Federalist and Republican would begin to blur during the presidencies of Thomas Jefferson
and James Madison. For, neither Republican president was able lead ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
As his presidency continued Jefferson began drifting further away from the original ideals of the
Republican Party. His decisions no longer reflected a strict interpretation of the Constitution, but
resembled the loose construction of the Constitution employed by the Federalists. When he made the
decision to purchase the Louisiana Territory in 1803, effectively doubling the territory of the USA,
he loosely interpreted the Constitution like that of a federalist by working around the Constitution.
No where did the Constitution state that the president had the power to make such a purchase, but by
using the "necessary and proper" clause as a loop pole he made the purchase. He went against his
party doctrine of strict interpretation in order to expand American domain and to protect the US
from the threat of a resurgent France. Another show of Republican movement away from being
strict constructionist was when Jefferson passed The Embargo Act of 1807, which banned all foreign
exports. Supported by Document C, the Embargo Act was extremely unpopular with the American
public. No where in the listing of the presidential powers did it state that a law such as the Embargo
Act could be passed. When Jefferson passed this Act,

Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists
Mark Sheen – 529794668
POS 442 – American Political Tradition
12 October, 2006
During the period between its proposal in September 1787 and ratification in 1789, the United States
Constitution was the subject of numerous debates. The contending groups consisted of Federalists,
those who supported ratification, and Anti–Federalists, those opposed to the constitution. Each
group published a series of letters known as the Federalist and Anti–Federalist Papers. The Anti–
Federalist papers objected to provisions of the proposed constitution while the Federalist Papers
defended the rationale behind the document. Anti–Federalist objections included that; the United
States was too extensive to be governed by a republic, the constitution ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In what is considered the first anti–federalist paper, "Brutus" writes: "In a republic, the manners,
sentiments, and interests of the people should be similar. If this be not the case, there will be a
constant clashing of opinions; and the representatives of one part will be continually striving against
those of the other. This will retard the operations of government, and prevent such conclusions as
will promote the public good." This clash of ideas, opinions and lifestyles, he argued, did not lend
itself to any overarching federal government. He continues: "The United States includes a variety of
climates. The productions of the different parts of the union are very variant, and their interests, of
consequence, diverse. Their manners and habits differ as much as their climates and productions;
and their sentiments are by no means coincident. The laws and customs of the several states are, in
many respects, very diverse, and in some opposite; each would be in favor of its own interests and
customs, and, of consequence, a legislature, formed of representatives from the respective parts,
would not only be too numerous to act with any care or decision, but would be composed of such
heterogenous and discordant principles, as would constantly be contending with each other" (Anti–
Federalist 1). The Federal Farmer adds: "Different laws, customs, and opinions exist in the different
states, which by a uniform system of laws would be

How Did The Federalist Papers Influence The Ratification...
Section A: Identification and Evaluation of Sources This investigation will explore the question: To
what extent did The Federalist Papers influence the ratification of the Constitution? The
publications, arguments, and effects of this document will be the focus of the investigation to allow
for an analysis of where and in what ways The Federalist was influential during the constitutional
conventions from 1787 to 1789. The first source that will be evaluated in depth is Ron Chernow's
book "Alexander Hamilton" which was published in 2005. The origin of this source is valuable
because Chernow is a historian and writer who graduated from Yale university, Pembroke College,
and Cambridge. He has won the Pulitzer Prize for Biography and the American History Book Prize
and has written many books about the founding fathers and early republic, indicating his extensive
knowledge on the subject. The purpose of "Alexander Hamilton" is to tell the story of the first
secretary of the treasury and his influence on the new nation from his birth in 1755 to his death in
1804. This is valuable, because as the author of more than half of The Federalist, extensive
knowledge on Hamilton's political pursuits and views is helpful in creating an informed conclusion.
However, since the main focus of the novel is Hamilton, the role of Madison and Jay may have been
downsized or less researched. Also, the focus of the book was not the Constitutional convention and
impact of the federalist papers, so

The Pros And Cons Of Federalists And Republicans

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Mandy Cross

More from Mandy Cross (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Pros And Cons Of Federalists And Republicans