The Federalists naturally further embodied “Revolutionary principles” when they argued that virtual representation was both impractical and undemocratic. In Defense of the Constitution, John Adams argues that no assembly could ever replicate the people to the degree to which it would “be virtually deemed the nation.” Further, Hamilton explained how perverse and undemocratic the concept was considering “the true principle of a republic is, that the people should choose whom they please to govern them.” For Hamilton, and leading Federalists, the notion that you needed to constitute a perfect image inherently restricts the free, republican state the Framers were trying to create. Considering the imperial crisis was fought over being the right to choose and authorize one’s own representatives, it makes sense that depriving people of who they can vote for, would be a direct defiance of those “Revolutionary principles.” The second reason that the Federalists have a claim to “Revolutionary principles” is because …show more content…
John Adams established the Patriot viewpoint of the authorization debate when he wrote that rulers govern only by the “authority that [the people] themselves have deputed.” On the extreme end of the Patirot argument was John Zubly who argued that “the power of taxation in the House of Commons cannot extend any further than to those who have delegated them for that purpose.” While Zubly’s stance is the most expansive rejection of virtual representation, both Adams and Zubly agreed that the House of Commons was only the representative of the English people, not the colonists, because its members were not duly elected or authorized by the colonists. In order to justify establishing independence from Great Britain, and to rebel against Parliament, Patriots tore down virtual representation and promoted