A Constitution For All The People And Conflict Over Slavery

The arguments presented in Henry Steele Commager, and Staughton Lynd’s interpretations of the constitution provide more compelling and accurate arguments than Charles Beard’s. “A Constitution for All the People”, and The “Conflict Over Slavery”, when read together, provide the motivation for the constitution as well as an explanation for its articles. While Lynd’s piece provides reasoning for how, many of the articles in the constitution came to be, through the sectional divide of the North and South created by the conflict over slavery; Commager describes the constitution as a political document with two main goals, solving federalism and limiting governmental powers, clearly outlined in the constitution and its articles. In comparison

One of Beard’s main points is the constitution was written by the rich for the rich. If this were true, and the writers of the constitution were “immediately interested through their personal possessions in the outcome of their labors” then they would not have imposed a tax on those very same possessions. Another point made by Beard is that the constitution, and the republic formed by it, would only be possible because of many existing factions. This common point, that the states were split into so many little factions that tyranny of the majority would be prevented, makes sense. However Beard’s application that class is the strongest faction while “neither moral nor religious motives can be relied on” (Beard) is inaccurate. Although class has been and always will be the cause of different views, it is the combination of different identities such as geographic location that create a

However he clearly describes how these motivations led to the document we have today. Lynd states that the argument over slavery divided the government, as well as the thirteen colonies, into north and south. This sectionalism led to many of the compromises in the constitution today. With the South wanting to keep slavery, and the North wanting to abolish it, the tension between the two sides was very high. Lynch, a southerner, stated “ if it is debated, whether their Slaves are their Property, there is an end of the Confederation”, this ultimatum provides the reasoning behind the fact that slavery is not mentioned in the constitution. What the constitution does show is the compromises reached by the North and the South. One of these is the ⅗ compromise, stating that every five slaves will be counted as three people in regards to both taxation and representation. Counting slaves towards taxation discourages slave owning while counting them towards representation encourages it. This conflict between the North and the South led to a fight for more representation, higher population, and control of the government that lasted for many