D Hamilton And Madison Views On The Necessity Of A Bill Of Rights

Since these rights are given by God, no man has the moral right to seize them from another man. Following this line of thought, Hamilton further extrapolates that any civil government must be established via a voluntary compact, containing self restraining limits so as to protect the natural rights of those ruled, which should be the objective of every civil government. Any government that usurps these boundaries thus violates our natural rights and can, “Confer no obligation to obedience” (Hamilton, 97). Hamilton once again stresses the import of the fact that the sole purpose of human law is to maintain our absolute rights. Masterfully, Hamilton turns around and uses similar solid evidences to examine Parliament. Arguing avidly that Parliament does not protect colonists’ rights, he presents that Parliament is both assumptive in its authority over its citizens without consent, and also takes away their security because they have no voluntary participation in the making of laws. As such, uncontrolled legislators are unbound, and a government that no longer falls in line with the natural laws delegitimizes itself. Hamilton shows that America’s Congress was created in opposition to such a government. In his closing, he contends with his opponent by once again headlining the fact that laws and government which conflict with natural rights (such as Parliament) can not be considered truly

After the failure of the Articles of Confederation, the founders believed it was necessary to hold a National Convention to revise it in order for it to become the Constitution. After the signing of the Constitution, two groups were created. The Anti-federalists who composed a series of essays one known as An Old Whig V (1787) suggests that an inclusion of a Bill of Rights would be more effective in clarifying the limits of the government, while others, the Federalists, opposed to it. To understand the effects of ratifying a Bill of Rights in the Constitution, both sides must be analyzed. This paper examines An Old Whig V’s arguments against the Federalist, mainly letters from Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison, to propose that the inclusion of a Bill of Rights allows citizens to verbalize their right of protection in regards to the occasion of being shown in the Constitution.

The bill of rights, written by James Madison, is the original 10 amendments. These amendments protect our personal freedoms and outlines the responsibility of out government. The people are the “protectors” or enforcers of these amendments. The first amendment is the most important amendment while the 3rd amendment is no longer relevant.

The Constitution did not include the Bill of Rights, the Anti- Federalists believed that this was yet another example of there being no limit on the centralized government’s power, and there was no protection for the

This was the Anti-Federalists most effective argument in the ratification battle. The lack of a Bill of Rights was evidence that the Framers had either failed to build in fortifications against tyranny or worse that they had purposely laid the foundation for tyranny. With Americans already experiencing democracy in their own towns and states, with the proposed centralized powers the people viewed it as a danger to their rights. The Anti-Federalists were confident in their fight to overthrow the Constitution and preserve the sovereignty and power of the states, with the fact that there were no protections of the peoples civil

The Constitution alone was not enough for the anti-federalists; they believed that there had to be a Bill of rights in order to protect citizens. The Bill would simply state the clear rules and regulations that allowed the citizens to know what the government is and is not allowed to do. The federalists argued that the constitution already established rights for the citizens and a Bill was not necessary, however the Anti federalists would only agree to ratify the Constitution if there was a bill of rights. Yates argues a major point in the Anti –Federalists papers against the necessary and proper clause of the Constitution, he states, “The Congress shall judge of what is necessary and proper in all these cases and in all other cases;-in short in all cases whatsoever. Where then is the restraint?” (Essay II) There had to be a law preventing the government from being unfair or abusing power to the citizens. The Bill of rights was then created as a result of lots of compromise. It then allowed the people to know there rights if they needed to protect themselves in any way. This bill gave the citizens back the power that the antifederalists thought the citizens would not have under a federal

(Hamilton, 1788) “It has been several times truly remarked that bills of rights are, in their origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgements of prerogative in favor of privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered to the prince.” (Hamilton, 1788) In this quote Alexander Hamilton is stating that by creating a Bill of Rights the citizens would be agreeing to just these terms with the government. To follow up that statement he says, “It is evident, therefore, that, according to their primitive signification, they have no application to constitutions professedly founded upon the power of the people, and executed by their immediate representatives and servants. Here, in strictness, the people surrender nothing; and as they retain every thing they have no need of particular reservations”. (Hamilton, 1788) In this statement he is explaining that a Bill of Rights is for an earlier age of government and has no place in the government that is to be in the United States, a government for the people and by the people. He is also saying that without a Bill of Rights that the people would not have to give up any

Anti-Federalist concerns raised during the ratification process lead to the creation of the Bill of Rights. Without everyone on his side, Madison could not ratify the constitution. So in order to gain support from the Anti-Federalists he promised them that he would enact a Bill of Rights that would eventually give them their freedom.

During Washington’s presidency, Jefferson and Madison’s views contradicted Hamilton’s Federalist ideals. For example, the Republicans believed in a small central government. Therefore, Jefferson initially viewed the Bank of the United States to be unconstitutional because it was beyond the power of the national government. (Doc A) Then in the Virginia Resolution, Madison describes the compact theory and how states have the right to limit the national government based on the constitution. (Doc C) On the other hand, Hamilton supported a strong central government that could enforce the law and uphold the constitution. (Doc B)

The people are the basis for any power that the federal government preserves and must always protect those who empower them. The written Constitution they created was not to define the rights of the people, but to limit the powers the national government would hold over the people. The Constitution would create a National government that would create a strong federal government, while safeguarding the rights of the people, and conserving checks on power it holds. The framers did not believe in cataloging individual rights in the constitution. They believed it would be threatening to define the rights that the people hold. Alexander Hamilton specifically believed that the Constitution had no power to infringe on the natural rights that all people have. However, the Bill of Rights was created from a compromise and thus, created the first ten amendments to the Constitution. These rights listed protections from the National government. These rights have proven to be security against the federal governments use of an enumerated power that they might hold. It is important for this very reason to have a written Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution. It does not define what rights the people hold, it defines what the government is entrusted to protect: the people. It is for this reason that I agree that the Bill of Rights was necessary to be written in the

After the Founding Fathers ratified the Constitution, they realized that they had to deal with sixty-three million dollars debt that they owed to those who took part in the American Revolution. In order to pay back this debt Alexander Hamilton created a financial program. However, some Republicans such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison thought that his plan was unconstitutional because one would need to use the necessary and proper clause which most people feared because it gave the government too much power. This, however, is not so Alexander Hamilton’s financial plan however was mostly constitutional because it allowed it to use the powers as well as responsibilities congress already had such as print its own form of currency, issue

As an example, in his efforts to establish a central national bank and raise desperately needed capital for the new republic, Hamilton encountered opposition from James Madison as “he could find no basis in the Constitution for a National Bank” (Tindall Shi, 2010). Thomas Jefferson further argued that the Tenth Amendment reserves to the states and the people powers not delegated by Congress (Tindall & Shi, 2010). “Hamilton insisted that the power to charter corporations was included in the sovereignty of any government, whether or not expressly stated” (Tindall & Shi, 2010). Hamilton’s powers of persuasion led to the signing of the bill by President George Washington. “By doing so, in Jefferson’s words, the president had opened up “a boundless field of power,” which in coming years would lead to a further broadening of implied powers with the approval of the Supreme Court” (Tindall & Shi, 2010).

Hamilton argued that out of the three branches of government the judiciary branch was the weakest; therefore it must be empowered to strike down laws passed by congress that go against the constitution. Having independence of the courts creates a balance from congress. Hamilton strongly believes that given the amount of legislative bodies there is ´´reason to fear that the pestilent breath of faction may poison the fountains of justice´´ so as I, Hamilton

Nevertheless, Madison created a series of amendments that became foundation for the Bill of Rights. This included the First Amendment, which prohibited Congress from legislating about religion and protecting freedom of the press and assembly. In his Second Amendment, it gave the right to bear arms and organize armies, and other amendments supporting the right to trial by jury and debarring maltreatment such as arrests without warrants and forcing a person accused of a crime to testify against him/her self. The Ninth stated that rights not particularly talked about in the Constitution were “retained by the people,” leading down a new path to establishing new rights that were not provided in the written matter. Also, the Tenth Amendment protected

The first 10 Amendments to the Constitution make up the bill of rights written by James Madison. He wrote this in response to calls from several states for greater constitutional protection for individuals rights. The Bill Of Rights states specific prohibitions on Governmental power. What influenced James Madison to write these Amendments was The Virginia Declaration Of Rights by George Maddison. The Bill Of Rights was inspired by Thomas Jefferson who was Madison 's mentor and created on September 25, 1789 The Bill Of Rights was Ratified on December 15, 1791 in the House Of Representatives. The congress transmitted to the states legislatures and 12 proposed amendments.