Summary Of The People As Constituents By R. R Palmer

In the American Revolution: The People As Constituents, the Author R.R Palmer makes the argument that the major power that was behind the American Revolution was the people. He makes several cases for this within his paper, but first he makes the point that the revolution did not contribute a set of beliefs (Palmer, P.159). The ideas that were used during the revolution were not unique to the United States. The idea’s that really drove the revolution was Liberty and rights of people. During that time plenty of people in Europe were talking about those ideas, but Palmer states that America was one of the only countries that created a system of government off them (Palmer.P.160). He gives the example of the agreements that occurred during

The author refers to it as “ voluntarily putting themselves under restraint”(Palmer, P.161). Palmer brings up the fact that there were people who did not want to give up power; the people Palmer refers to were the “ Revolutionary Elite” (Palmer, P.162). The other issue he talks about is the fact that many of the colonies kept their previous systems. Not all of the colonies delayed changing governments; he gives the examples of North Carolina and Maryland going and voting for ratification (Palmer, P.163). A very interesting fact gets brought up about North Carolina. The poor in the counties of Orange and Mecklenburg had a mistrust of the rich gaining political power. Both counties had a meeting and tried working out the functions of the state government (Palmer, P.163). Once the constitution of North Carolina was written it became clear that all taxpaying citizens could vote for members of the lower house (Palmer, P.164). Palmer refers to the North Carolina constitution as a “ compromise between populace and landed gentry” (Palmer, P.164). In the case of Pennsylvania, palmer describes the convention as “dictatorial” (Palmer, P.164) because the attitude of a majority of the state was not

Beard, and the argument was that the constitution created in 1787 allowed the rich and powerful to maintain their wealth (Palmer, P.172). However, Palmer uses another author, Robert Brown to disprove Beard’s theory. The theory was that the upper class in the United States was less “ caste-conscious” than in Europe (Palmer, P.172). This lack of consciousness made it so the upper class was able to work with the rest of the country to govern because both had the common goal of independence (Palmer. P.172). Palmer gives the example of George Mason, a very wealthy man from Virginia who advocated for giving representation to the lower class. The thinking behind that was to try to create a more “fluid society” and avoiding a “permanent aristocracy” (Palmer, P.172). Palmer addresses what occurred in Philadelphia that the members of the convention “betrayed” the individuals that sent them (Palmer, P.172). Originally the purpose was making the Articles of Confederation stronger, but ended up getting rid of them entirely (Palmer, P.172). Towards the end of the essay Palmer refers to the Revolution as “Ambivalent”, because it could be Revolutionary and conservative