The Shay’s Rebellion, as well as economic depression in the United States, opened doors for protests and questions regarding the effectiveness of the Articles of Confederation. The question of whether a powerful central government was necessary to provide citizens fundamental rights caused deliberation among officials. After years of debate, the Articles of Confederation was overturned, resulting in the establishment of the United States Constitution. The Constitution, perceived as a supreme document, served as a solution to the defects of the Confederation. In 1787, the same year the Constitution was ratified, an essay was written, presumably by Robert Yates. Adopting Brutus as a pseudonym, Yates expressed his disapproval of the Constitution, …show more content…
He argued against the ratification of the United States Constitution as it would derange the distribution of power between the federal and state governments. Throughout the entirety of the essay, he discussed how “a country of such immense extent” could not operate as a single government. A free republic governing over the vast area would fail to “attend to the various concerns and wants of its different parts," while the people fail to come together to discuss, conceive and decide on their wills. The extent of the United States prevents satisfaction to the citizens’ wills, further complicating the duties of the representatives. Substantially, the number of citizens would increase over time, challenging representatives to “declare the sentiments of the people” without arousing conflicts. Emerging the states would also prevent "full, fair, and equal representation of the people." By locating power in the states, the concerns, interest, and wants are much easily regarded, satisfying the citizens. He spoke on behalf of the citizens, commenting on the importance of being acquainted with the leaders. Without this familiarity, the people would lose their confidence in the government's leadership. Considering the size of the United States, the people would encounter problems when measures are taken and …show more content…
He rejected any ideas of the possibilities of the Constitution subsisting. Yates, throughout the majority of the essay, argued against the Constitution and provided reasons as to why he relied heavily on state sovereignty. He nonetheless formally addressed his position, supporting his arguments with details and referencing historical accounts. He was subjective by essentially noting the negative consequences of a powerful government. He omitted any advantages and benefits the Constitution might bring
Shay’s Rebellion thought that the Articles of confederation was not strong enough and that there should be more power in the central government. The Articles of confederation was seen weak because, it revealed the economic issues and taxation, the lack of leadership, and not being efficient in making laws. In Shay’s rebellion raising the tax on farmers to pay off debt was a weakness. Farmers had taken out loans due to shortages of the revolution, and were being taxed by state.
Last night on February 4, 1787, General Benjamin Lincoln attacked members of the Shays’ Rebellion, and successfully captured 150 of the rebels. As a result, Daniel Shays left Massachusetts and fled to Vermont. Shays Rebellion was an armed rebellion consisting of 1,200 angry farmers from Massachusetts. They caused major chaos in this state. On December 26, 1786 Daniel Shays and the rebels revolted in Springfield, Massachusetts insisting that the state legislature address their issues, such as lack of money.
A is an incorrect statement because Daniel Shays did not get killed or executed as a result of the conflict. In the source titled, "Mount Vernon" it stated that "Many participants were later captured and most men, including Shays, eventually received amnesty as part of a general pardon. " Daniel Shays was not hung, rather he was released back to his family where he later died in September 1825. Answer choice B is the legitimate answer because in the book for this class it says, "The state government [Massachusettes] responded by sending 4,400 militiamen.
Shays’ Rebellion was the first rebellion to happen in the United States after they broke away from England. It was viewed in many ways and was considered the start of chaos. When Thomas Jefferson heard about it he believed it was not the start of chaos but a good thing. Jefferson said that no country would be able to go on without any problems. In the letter it states that “Where has there ever been a conflict except in the single instance of Shays’ rebellion?”
The interminable discussion over ratification was the first national political debate. Even if the ratification of the United States Constitution had been dismissed, this debate gave an opportunity to national political communities to emerge. The same issues concerned men and women in various parts of the country either to refuse the Constitution or to defend it. One of the most important Anti-Federalist assertions was that the United States was clearly too big to be governed by a single government. According to James Madison who wrote in The Federalist: “Hearken not to the unnatural voice which tells you that the people of America, knit together as they are by so many chords of affection, can no longer live together as members of the same
Robert Yates was a politician and judge best known for his Anti-Federalist views along with being known as the presumed author of political essays, which were published in 1787 and 1788, under the pseudonyms "Brutus" and "Sydney". His political career is one that challenged many while preparing others through his own schools of thought. Yates was part of the organization that formed the Constitution of the United States, was a New York representative from 1785 until 1787 serving in the general congress, and in 1808 he was appointed as Master in Chancery. Yates was also present at the 1787 Philadelphia meeting of the Constitutional Convention, but left early because of his anti-federalist views and refused to sign the Constitution. (“Delegates
Prior to the ratification of the United States Constitution, a series of eighty-five essays, later compiled and published as The Federalist Papers, were written under the joint pseudonym “Publius” by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. In these essays, the three men expressed support for ratification by explaining the meaning and virtues of the Constitution (Brinkley, 139). Although, it did not receive such fame until the early twentieth-century, Madison’s Federalist No. 10 has since been regarded as one of the more prominent Federalist papers (Adair, 48). In it, Madison presents the argument that the new republican government under the Constitution would be better able to deal with the problems that arise from factions. This paper
After the Constitution was written by the Philadelphia Convention in 1787, all the individual states of America had to be convinced for its ratification. But, opponents, named "Anti-Federalists" opposed against the Constitution's ratification for multiple reasons: some thought that the Constitution would "take away the power from individual states", others desired "an even more centralized government with a single popularly elected government" and finally, some seeked for a Bill of Rights to "protect individuals liberties", in fear of undermining "the claims of slaveholders or other property owners". James Jay, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison therefore wrote the Federalist Papers, eighty-five anonymous essays , in order to reduce the fears of Anti-Federalists and promote the Constitution's ratification. These papers described the importance
The Federalist No. 10” is a persuasive argument written by James Madison in an attempt to ratify the Constitution. He wrote a series of documents called the Federalist Papers under a pseudonym to convince others to approve of the Constitution. He says that factions are not good for America, neither is a pure democracy. Madison provides extensive arguments and remedies for the problems he is addressing. James Madison is attempting to ratify the Constitution by analyzing the way to deal with factions, comparing a republic to a democracy, and by comparing a small government to a large government.
As a Federalist he believed the central government should hold the most power and influence over everything else. He thought the people themselves favored a government where the power was directly out of their control. He became critical of the other national delegates’ plan for ratification stating that it was more of the same as the Articles of Confederation (Lack et al, 1987.) Hamilton thought the people’s role in government to be that of a liability. He stated that the people were constantly changing in their attitudes and dispositions, and could not be trusted to make a sound judgement or do what was right for the nation.
Allotting representatives on the basis of statehood rather than population, he wrote, "Contradicts the fundamental maxim of republican government, which requires that the sense of the
Federalist No.85 was written as a final warning to opponets of the new constitution. Worried that ratification was still in doubt, Alexander Hamilton used the strongest language possible to describet the base motives of his adervistses and the ultimate consequence of inaction.” Describing the fact thereof, government and rights do not eqaute eachother and should therefore be separate. Papers such as the Federalist paper number nine also creates a logical standing on advantages of a
What is a “Rebellion”? Do rebellions occur in our world today? According to merriam-webster.com, “A rebellion is an effort by many people to change the government or leader of a country by the use of protest or violence.” There are multiple global and national crises that occur in today’s society and they typically involve efforts from people to change a certain situation by the use of violence. For example, last year there was an incident that occurred in Ferguson, Missouri which involved the killing of an innocent black teenager named Michael Brown.
DBQ Essay The United States Constitution is a document that or founding fathers made in order to replace the failing Articles of Confederation (A of C). Under the Constitution, the current government and states don’t have the problems they faced when the A of C was in action. The Constitution was created in 1788, and held an idea that the whole nation was nervous about. This idea was a strong national government, and the Federalist assured the people that this new government would work. The framers of the Constitution decided to give more power to the Federal government rather than the state governments because the A of C had many problems, there was a need for the layout of new government, rights, and laws, and there was a need for the Federal
1. This document was recorded and written during the Virginia Convention of 1788. In this recording of the Virginia Convention, the opposing side against the ratification of the constitution presented its arguments of why the new constitution should not be ratified. The writers or authors of this document are Patrick Henry, George Mason and an unknown recorder. Patrick Henry was born on May 29th, 1736.