When we look back through history we usually just accept the series of events that lead us to the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and pretty much any other significant movement in our history as a concrete result. Most people today make close to no distinction between ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. However, the result of its ratification by the states, the Constitutional Convention, and finally its adoption into state legislatures were seen as nearly impossible by many parties involved. In this insightful novel you will learn why there were a several years between the ratification of the Constitution and the approval by state legislatures of the Bill of Rights, it amongst many other important steps in our legal history. …show more content…
Labunski starts by taking us to the Philadelphia Convention where Madison recorded the convention proceedings extended periods of time every day, noting every vote and discussion. Surprisingly, Labunski barely remarks on Madison’s role in the writing of several of the Federalist Papers, instead he focused on Madison’s exchange with Patrick Henry at Virginia’s ratifying convention and his pivotal role in that convention. Madison initially believed that the amendments on personal liberties were unnecessary because the Constitution in the form it was written, gave very few rights to the federal government. However, he and a few others argued that by specifying individual rights, that would imply that the federal government would receive the authority to all other personal rights. It was at the Virginia Ratifying Convention that Madison began to see the importance of amending the Constitution to include these rights, initially only for appeasing the people. This was the beginning of the battle for the Bill of