| Title | : | The Debate on the Constitution, Part 1: Federalist and Anti-Federalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification: September 1787 to February 1788 |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 0940450429 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780940450424 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Hardcover |
| Number of Pages | : | 1214 |
| Publication | : | First published June 1, 1993 |
When the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia ended its secret proceedings on September 17, 1787, few Americans were prepared for the document that emerged. Instead of revising the Articles of Confederation, the framers had created a fundamentally new national plan that placed over the states a supreme government with broad powers. They proposed to submit it to conventions in each state, elected “by the People thereof,” for ratification.
Immediately, a fierce storm of argument broke. Federalist supporters, Antifederalist opponents, and seekers of a middle ground strove to balance public order and personal liberty as they praised, condemned, challenged, and analyzed the new Constitution.
Assembled here in chronological order are hundreds of newspaper articles, pamphlets, speeches, and private letters written or delivered in the aftermath of the Constitutional Convention. Along with familiar figures like Franklin, Madison, Patrick Henry, Jefferson, and Washington, scores of less famous citizens are represented, all speaking clearly and passionately about government. The most famous writings of the ratification struggle—the Federalist essays of Hamilton and Madison—are placed in their original context, alongside the arguments of able antagonists, such as “Brutus” and the “Federal Farmer.”
Part One includes press polemics and private commentaries from September 1787 to January 1788. That autumn, powerful arguments were made against the new charter by Virginian George Mason and the still-unidentified “Federal Farmer,” while in New York newspapers, the Federalist essays initiated a brilliant defense. Dozens of speeches from the state ratifying conventions show how the “draft of a plan, nothing but a dead letter,” in Madison’s words, had “life and validity…breathed into it by the voice of the people.” Included are the conventions in Pennsylvania, where James Wilson confronted the democratic skepticism of those representing the western frontier, and in Massachusetts, where John Hancock and Samuel Adams forged a crucial compromise that saved the country from years of political convulsion.
Informative notes, biographical profiles of all writers, speakers, and recipients, and a detailed chronology of relevant events from 1774 to 1804 provide fascinating background. A general index allows readers to follow specific topics, and an appendix includes the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution (with all amendments).
The Debate on the Constitution, Part 1: Federalist and Anti-Federalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification: September 1787 to February 1788 Reviews
-
This monumental book, clocking in at over 1000 pages, is merely part one of a two part series of primary texts relating to the struggle over the ratification of the Constitution of the United States by noted Atlantic historian Bernard Bailyn [1]. While this is a long book, for the most part it was a very enjoyable one to read, as one could get a sense, mostly, of the skill of the debaters on the constitution, on their hopes and fears, their intense interest in matters of ancient history and current events, and their full involvement as a peripheral state in the Atlantic world. While there are accessible volumes that provide the Federalist papers and that provide a separate list of anti-federalist papers as a contrast, there are few books I am aware of that deal with the complex interplay and connections between the two in the way that this book does. One gets the feeling in reading this monumental work of scholarship that flame wars and pamphlet wars were at a far more elevated level in the late 18th century than they are at present.
This particular volume is divided into two parts. The first part, taking up the vast majority of the material, looks at the debates over ratification in the press and in private correspondence from September 17, 1787 to January 12, 1788 (I). The second part of the book looks at the debates in the state ratifying conventions of Pennsylvania between November 20 and December 15, 1787, Connecticut between January 3 and 9, 1788, and in Massachusetts between January 9 and February 7, 1788. Included in the discussions are transcriptions of speeches, private letters (including one particularly bad example of hooked-on-phonics written to James Madison from one of his not particularly eloquent neighbors), as well as pamphlets, many of them written under elegant and classical pseudonyms that reflected the fears and concerns of Americans at the time over whether the Constitution was a necessary response to pervasive anarchy and a broken government that was incapable of defending the people of the United States or providing to the reputation of the fledgling republic abroad, or whether the Constitution would create a dangerously expansive federal government that would run roughshod over the people. As a reader I found both perspectives to be pretty persuasive. Appended on to the lengthy primary documents from characters as diverse as George Washington and Samuel Adams and Noah Webster (of dictionary fame) to obscure members of ratifying conventions in rural Massachusetts and Western Pennsylvania is a detailed chronology of the period by the editor and a thoughtful and expansive set of notes on the sources as well as short biographies of all of the senders and recipients of correspondence and speakers included in this volume.
There are a variety of reasons why someone would want to tackle this book even though it is a large one. For one, this book puts the debate over the Constitution in the context of its then-contemporary politics, where we can see the fears and desires of the community caught up in a complicated moment of history. We see how political conditions encouraged compromise and elegant statesmanship and how despite fierce partisan divides that the political community as a whole was able to overcome its mistrust and create institutions to support a shared commitment to freedom as well as order. We see some prescient warnings about corruption in government and the reminder that populism itself was a problem even at our nation's founding, and that local elites were not always willing to easily support a government that would represent the commonweal of the American people as a whole. This is a rare book that both provides a detailed look at the practice of politics in the early American republic, that places those local politics in a context of interest in the larger body of political tension involving nations like Switzerland and Sweden as well as more familiar Atlantic powers like Britain and France, and that is relevant to our own contemporary concerns about a lack of trust in government officials and a large divide among the populace.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2017... -
Bailyn, an author and editor whose works I read often, discusses the debates on the ratification of the United States Constitution in this text. While most of the work is not his (it is composed of primary sources), everything put together in this volume serves as a perspective of what was actually happening at the debate which was pivotal to America.
As a writer, I learned from Bailyn that sometimes it is more important to connect relatable ideas and information than write a narrative contrived to be interrelated. While he does preface the documents, the overall structure is for any individual that wants to see what the framers of the Constitution were thinking at the time of its ratification. -
Quite remarkable the quality of the discourse as it appeared in the newspapers of the day. Remarkable first that the newspapers printed, and apparently had a readership for serious and sometimes difficult essays on government. Remarkable also that the authors of the essays weren't university professors or journalists, but politicians, businessmen, and ordinary citizens writing letters to the editor.
The Federalists obviously won the debate. The Constitution was ratified. But looking back almost 240 years later, many, many of the dangers that the Anti-Federalists were shouting about have come to pass. Fascinating to read these essays in the basic time order as they appeared between the constitutional convention and the State ratifying conventions. -
Anyone wondering about the constitution needs to pick up this book packed with great information. So many great speeches, articles and more preserved for ordinary citizens to look at and make their own decisions on what the founding fathers wanted and if America is still living up to the dream.
-
Volume 1 of The Debate on the Constitution assembles a chronological history of letters, editorials, broadsides, pamphlets, and many of the Federalist Papers. These documents provide objective insight into the complications and controversies that embroiled the ratification process of the U.S. Constitution. Here, without the taint of historical interpretation, are the strengths & weaknesses of anti-federalist arguments; the reasoning of Delegation dissenters Mason, Gerry, and Randolph; the intellectual, though sometimes misguided, passion of the Federalists; the opinions of average citizens, and the texts of the Articles of Confederation and Constitution. Essential reading for all who are interested in the nature of American political thought.
-
The published arguments over the Constitution of the United States show that before it came to be worshipped as no less than inspired by God Himself there was little agreement on its value. To some, it was a perfect political document, the perfect one of the age. To others it was an example of tyranny, an economic blue print for the domination of one class over another. This outstanding collection of documents is a must for any student of American history.
-
Reading the arguments for and against the ratification of the Constitution provides great insights.
-
wow. ...and i can't believe i'm only half done.
-
Fabulous source documents for understanding what motivated the Framers to write what they did-- and what they meant in the context of their time -- particularly with regard to the Bill of Rights.
