What ideas gave birth to the world's first modern democratic nation?
The Articles of Confederation was only one of many new plans of government drafted during the war. Each of the 13 states also needed a constitution. As leaders in each state set about this task, they found few models to guide them. England did not have a written constitution. Its system of government was based on an assortment of laws, policies, and customs developed over the centuries. When it came to writing formal constitutions, the Americans were on their own.
In framing their new plans of government, state lawmakers demonstrated their commitment to constitutionalism, or the idea that government should be based on an established set of principles. These principles included popular sovereignty, limited government, the rule of law, and majority rule. The lawmakers also separated the powers of government by creating executive, legislative, and judicial branches, just as Montesquieu had described.
In addition, all state constitutions began with a statement of individual rights. The first of these, the Virginia Declaration of Rights, was adopted in June 1776 as part of Virginia’s constitution. It served as a model for other state constitutions and later for the U.S. Bill of Rights.
The governments created under the new state constitutions derived their power from the people. However, they were not completely democratic. The states typically limited voting rights to white men who paid taxes or owned a certain amount of property. None of the original 13 state constitutions specifically outlawed slavery, and all states south of Pennsylvania denied slaves equal rights as human beings.
The national government created under the Articles of Confederation was much weaker than the governments established in the states. Although some members of Congress wanted a strong central government, the majority preferred a loose confederation, with most powers remaining at the state level. The Articles emphasized that each state would retain its “sovereignty, freedom, and independence.” Any power not specifically given to Congress was reserved for the states.
The government created under the Articles consisted only of a congress, with members chosen by the states. It had neither an executive to carry out laws nor a judicial branch to settle legal questions. On paper, at least, Congress did have several key powers. It could declare war, negotiate with foreign countries, and establish a postal system. It could also settle disputes between states. But it had no power to impose taxes, which meant it was often starved for funds.
Despite these limitations, Congress held the nation together through years of war. It also enacted at least one landmark piece of legislation, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. This law established procedures for the creation of new states in the Northwest Territory, a region bounded by the Ohio and Mississippi rivers. The Northwest Ordinance served as a model for all territories that later entered the Union as states.
For the most part, however, the government created by the Articles of Confederation was a failure. Lacking the power to levy taxes, Congress could not raise the funds needed to support the Continental Army. It had to borrow heavily to fund the revolution. After the war, it had no way to raise funds to repay those debts.
Equally troubling, Congress lacked power to control trade among the states. After the war, states began setting up trade barriers and quarreling among themselves. Matters came to a head when farmers, led by Daniel Shays, attacked a federal arsenal in Springfield, Massachusetts. Although Shays’ Rebellion was finally put down by state troops, it revealed how little Congress could do to hold together the increasingly unstable country.
By 1786, it was clear to many of the nation’s leaders that the government formed under the Articles was not working. That fall, representatives from various states met at Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss trade issues. While there, they issued a call for a constitutional convention to meet the following year in Philadelphia.
In theory, the purpose of the convention was to revise the Articles of Confederation. Once the delegates met, however, they decided to scrap the Articles and create an entirely new constitution. The table below lists some of the weaknesses of the Articles and explains how they were eventually fixed under the new plan of government.
| Weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation | Weaknesses Fixed Under the Constitution |
|---|---|
| Congress could not levy or collect taxes, leaving the government starved for funds. | Congress has the power to levy taxes to support the government. |
| Congress could not regulate trade among the states or with other countries. | Congress has the power to regulate interstate trade and trade with foreign countries. |
| Congress had only one house, and each state had only one vote in Congress, regardless of population. | Congress has two houses, and representation in the House of Representatives is based on population. |
| Nine out of 13 states in Congress had to agree to pass a major law. | Laws are passed by a simple majority of members of Congress. |
| All 13 states had to agree to amend the Articles. | Amendments can be ratified by three-fourths of the states. |
| The government lacked an executive branch to enforce laws and a court system to settle legal disputes. | The government lacked an executive branch to enforce laws and a court system to settle legal disputes. |
| Congress could not create a uniform currency. Money was issued by states. | Congress has the sole power to issue money. |
| The states could and did ignore laws passed by Congress. | The Constitution and laws passed by Congress are the “supreme Law ofthe Land.” |
| The states were loosely joined in a “league of friendship.” | The states are bound together in a permanent union. |
On May 25, 1787, the Constitutional Convention began. Delegates from all the states except Rhode Island came together at the Pennsylvania State House in Philadelphia, later known as Independence Hall. They met in the same room where the Declaration of Independence had been signed 11 years before.
The 55 delegates were prominent in American political life. All were white men. Among them were former soldiers, governors, members of Congress, and men who had drafted state constitutions. Their average age was 42.
The delegates represented a wide range of personalities and experience. At 81, Benjamin Franklin was the senior member. The wisdom and wit of this writer, inventor, and diplomat enlivened the proceedings. George Washington lent dignity to the gathering, while his former military aide Alexander Hamilton brought intellectual brilliance. Other delegates, like Roger Sherman of Connecticut, contributed legal and business experience. James Madison of Virginia was perhaps the most profound political thinker and the best prepared of all the delegates.
Several key figures were not at the convention. Both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were in Europe, serving as U.S. diplomats. On reading over the delegates’ names, Jefferson described the convention as “an assembly of demigods.
Other leaders, like Samuel Adams of Massachusetts and Patrick Henry of Virginia, were suspicious of efforts to strengthen the central government. They, too, did not attend.
During the convention, no one played a greater role than Madison. Although he was just 36 years old, he had already served in Congress and the Virginia legislature. He was a serious student of politics and democratic theory. As the meetings got underway, he took detailed notes of the discussions and worked tirelessly to promote the new plan. For his role in shaping the new framework, he is rightly called the Father of the Constitution.
The first thing the delegates did was elect George Washington as the convention’s presiding officer. They also adopted rules of procedure, including a vow of secrecy. Although it was stiflingly hot and humid in Philadelphia that summer, they shut the doors and windows of their meeting room to keep the proceedings private. They knew that the public was intensely curious about their discussions, and they did not want public pressure to affect their decisions.
Next, the Virginia delegates, who favored a strong national government, put forth a plan for a new constitution. The Virginia Plan, written mainly by James Madison, was clearly designed to replace the Articles, not to revise them. It called for a government of three branches. The legislative branch would make the laws, the executive branch would carry out the laws, and the judicial branch would interpret the laws.
Under the Virginia Plan, the new government would have a bicameral, or two-house, legislature. The Virginia Plan proposed that representation in both houses should be based on the population of each state. This would give the more populous states more representatives, and thus more influence, than states with smaller populations.
For about two weeks, the delegates discussed the details of the Virginia Plan. Some thought it gave too much power to the national government. Some opposed a bicameral legislature. Moreover, the smaller states did not like their representation in Congress being tied to population.
On June 13, William Patterson of New Jersey introduced an alternative approach. The New Jersey Plan proposed a series of amendments to the Articles of Confederation. These changes would have created a somewhat more powerful national government with a unicameral, or one-house, legislature in which all states had equal representation.
Delegates from the smaller states welcomed the New Jersey Plan. But after several days of debate, the convention voted to reject this proposal and return to discussion of the Virginia Plan.
For the next month, the delegates debated the Virginia Plan point by point. They continued to argue about the critical issue of representation in Congress. The debate grew so heated at times that some delegates threatened to walk out.
Finally, Roger Sherman of Connecticut proposed a compromise deSigned to satiSfy both sides. His plan called for a bicameral legislature with a different form of representation in each house. In the Senate, states would have equal representation. In the House of Representatives, states would have representation based on their populations. Sherman’s plan, known as the Great Compromise, resolved the thorny issue of representation in Congress and allowed the convention to move forward.
Other issues also divided the delegates. Those from northern states differed sharply with those from southern states on questions of slavery and commerce. Many northern delegates wanted the constitution to include a provision for abolishing slavery. But most southerners opposed ending a system of labor on which their agricultural economy depended.
These differences over slavery spilled into debates on representation and taxes. Since most slaves lived in the South, delegates from the South wanted slaves to be counted when determining representation in the House of Representatives. Yet they did not want slaves counted when determining each state’s share of taxes to support the national government. The graph above shows which states had large slave populations at that time.
In contrast, delegates from the North wanted slaves to be counted for taxation, but not when determining representation. After much debate, the delegates reached another important compromise. For purposes of both representation and taxation, a slave was to be counted as three-fifths of all “free persons.”
The Three-Fifths Compromise helped hold the new nation together. However, by treating a slave as less than a free person, this provision contradicted the basic ideal of equality set forth in the Declaration of Independence. This contradiction between democratic ideals and the cruel inequality of slavery would haunt the nation for decades to come and would eventually result in the Civil War.
Delegates from the North and South also argued over commerce. Northerners favored giving Congress broad powers to control trade. Southerners worried that Congress might outlaw the slave trade and place heavy taxes on southern exports of crops, such as cotton and tobacco. Again the delegates reached a compromise. Congress would have the power to regulate foreign and interstate commerce, but it could not tax exports, and it could not outlaw the slave trade until 1808.
Another major issue concerned the formation of the executive branch. Some delegates wanted a single executive to head the government. Others were concerned that giving power to a Single leader might give rise to a monarchy or tyranny. Instead they favored an executive committee made up of at least two members. In the end, however, the delegates voted for a single president.
The next question was how to choose the president. Some delegates thought Congress should do it, while others favored popular elections. They finally decided to set up a special body called the Electoral College. This body would be made up of electors from each state who would cast votes to elect the president and vice president. Each state would have as many electors as the number of senators and representatives it sent to Congress. Adding the two senators to the number of electors from each state boosted the influence of small states and of those with large slave populations.
On September 17, 1787, after months of hard work, the Constitution was Signed by 39 of the 42 delegates present. The document they signed that day began with these ringing words:
After that, it was up to the states to decide whether this plan of government would indeed establish “a more perfect Union.”
The Constitution included a provision for ratification. To go into effect, the new plan of government would need to be ratified by at least 9 of the 13 states. Ratification was to take place at state conventions made up of delegates elected for this purpose. Success was by no means assured.
The pro-ratification effort was led by supporters of the Constitution who called themselves Federalists. They favored the creation of a strong federal government that shared power with the states. Their opponents were known as Anti-Federalists. These were people who preferred the loose association of states established under the Articles of Confederation. The battle between these two groups was played out in the press, in state legislatures, and at the state ratifying conventions.
Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution for various reasons. Some worried about the increased powers of taxation granted to the national government.
Others were concerned that the government would create a large standing army or that a federal court system would overrule state courts.
Anti-Federalists, however, had two chief complaints about the proposed Constitution. The first was, as Virginia delegate, George Mason, pointed out, “There is no Declaration of Rights,” or a bill of rights. The second was that the Constitution would make the national government too powerful. Mason worried that “the laws of the general government” would be “paramount to the laws and constitutions of the several states.
The Anti-Federalists feared that a strong national government would lead to tyranny. They believed that the states, being smaller, were more able to represent the people’s rights and preserve democracy. For that reason, they argued that the states, not the national government, should hold most of the power.
The Anti-Federalist camp initially included some of the leading figures of the American Revolution, including Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, and John Hancock. In their minds, the Constitution represented a betrayal of the democratic ideals that had motivated the American Revolution.
In the face of such criticism, the Federalists mounted a spirited defense of the Constitution. Three men led this campaign: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Hamilton and Madison had helped frame the Constitution. Jay was a prominent New York lawyer, diplomat, and political leader who had played a key role in the revolution.
Together, these men wrote a series of 85 essays known as The Federalist Papers. These essays were published over the course of several months and made a strong case for the new plan of government. Some historians have called the publication of these papers one of the most powerful public relations campaigns in history.
The Federalist Papers authors explained the key features of the Constitution and tried to undercut the claims of their opponents. In The Federalist No. 10, for example, Madison addressed the Anti -Federalists’ charge that it would be impossible to make representative government work over a large territory like the United States. Madison countered that the size of the United States was actually an advantage in establishing a representative government. Because such a government would represent so many people, it would be less likely to fall under the sway of factions, or groups that want power for selfish ends. The governments of small nations, he argued, were more prone to being taken over by factions, because factions find it easier to win over a small population than a large one. As Madison wrote,
The fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority,... the more easily will they... execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere [to a larger government}, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens.
– James Madison, The Federalist No. 10, 1787
In The Federalist No. 51, Madison addressed the concern that a strong national government would lead to tyranny. He explained how the checks and balances built into the Constitution were designed to keep this from happening. “If men were angels,” he wrote, “no government would be necessary. if angels were to govern,” he continued, “neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” In a government of men, he argued, “ambition must be made to counteract ambition.
It is impossible to know how many minds were changed by these essays. But over more than two centuries, these have proved to be invaluable insights to the thinking and intentions of the Constitution’s framers.
By January 1788, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey had ratified the Constitution. Georgia and Connecticut soon followed. In Massachusetts, however, the ratifying convention deadlocked over a key issue: the lack of a bill of rights. After much debate, the Massachusetts delegates agreed to ratify after receiving assurance that such a list of rights would be added after ratification.
A number of other states ratified with the same understanding. By the summer of 1788, all but two states had ratified. The Constitution was now in effect. North Carolina would join the new union in 1789, and Rhode Island in 1790.
Meanwhile, Congress prepared to make way for the new government. Elections were held for the Senate and House of Representatives. A date was also set in February 1789 for the first presidential election.
The winner of that election, by unanimous vote in the Electoral College, was George Washington. The former general had previously retired to his home, Mount Vernon, in Virginia. But he answered the call to duty and made his way to New York City, the seat of the first federal government. There, in Federal Hall on April 30, 1789, Washington placed his hand on a Bible, and like every president since that day, repeated this solemn oath:
I do solemnly swear [or affirm] that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
In his inaugural speech, President Washington urged Congress to move quickly to draft a bill of rights for the Constitution. Those amendments, he said, should show “a reverence for the characteristic rights offreemen and a regard for public harmony.” In urging Congress to take on this task, Washington was acting on promises made during the ratification process. He knew that without the pledge of a bill of rights, the Constitution would not have been ratified.
Proposing a List of Rights
No one was more aware of that pledge than James Madison. He had made just such a promise while lobbying for ratification in his home state of Virginia. As a new member of the House of Representatives, Madison immediately set out to draft a bill of rights.
Like most Federalists, Madison had initially opposed a bill of rights, arguing that the democratic principles embedded in the Constitution made such protections unnecessary. Even if one branch of the new national government tried to curtail the individual rights of citizens, he argued, the other branches would act to prevent such abuses.
Thomas Jefferson persuaded Madison to change his mind. In a letter to Madison, Jefferson wrote, “a bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth... and what no just. government should refuse.” Another reason for adding a bill of rights to the Constitution, he observed in a later letter to Madison, was “the legal check which it puts into the hands of the judiciary.
In 1789, Madison introduced to Congress a series of proposed amendments. His list of rights drew from the many different proposals made at the state ratifying conventions. Madison also pulled ideas from other documents, including the Virginia Declaration of Rights, adopted in 1776. Another was the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, written by Thomas Jefferson in 1779. The English Bill of Rights was a key influence, as well.
Madison also drew from the writings of William Blackstone, a prominent English lawyer and judge. In his famous work Commentaries on the Laws of England, Blackstone wrote extensively about the “personal liberty” and the “rights of persons.” Among those rights, Blackstone argued, was “liberty of the press,” which he saw as “essential to the nature of a free state.
Having introduced his bill of rights, Madison faced an uphill battle getting the amendments approved by Congress. Some legislators wanted to postpone them in favor of more pressing matters. Others wanted to wait until flaws in the new government became more apparent. But Madison insisted on quick action, saying that the public might otherwise think “we are not sincere in our desire to... secure those rights.
Once Congress finally agreed to debate Madison’s proposed amendments, lawmakers were merciless in their criticisms. After months of debate, Madison wrote to a friend that getting a bill of rights through Congress had become “a nauseous project.” In the end, however, Congress approved 12 amendments and passed them on to the states for ratification.
Ratifying the Bill of Rights Most states quickly ratified the Bill of Rights. By the summer of 1790, nine states had approved at least ten of the amendments. Shortly afterward, Vermont became the 14th state in the Union, which raised the number of states necessary for ratification to 11. On December I5, 1791, Virginia became the 11th state to ratify the Bill of Rights.
Two of the proposed amendments, however, failed to win ratification in 1791. The first, dealing with the number of members of the House of Representatives, was never adopted. The other, limiting the ability of Congress to increase the salaries of its members, was finally ratified two centuries later as the Twenty-seventh Amendment.
Three of the original 13 states – Georgia, Massachusetts, and Connecticut – failed to ratify in 179l. All three finally voted for ratification in 1939, on the 150th anniversary of the Bill of Rights. By then, the Bill of Rights had become an integral part of the framework of American government.
The United States was founded on a set of ideas and principles developed over many centuries. Those ideas helped give rise to a system of representative government based on the rule of law and a respect for individual rights and liberties.
Ideas on government American colonists drew their ideas about government from various sources, including classical civilizations, English law, and Enlightenment philosophy. They combined those ideas with their own experiences in colonial self-government.
Declaring independence Accustomed to self-rule, colonists were quick to react when Great Britain tried to impose taxes on the colonies. In 1776, the colonies declared themselves to be “Free and Independent States.
Framing constitutions While fighting for independence, Americans wrote state constitutions and a national plan of government called the Articles of Confederation. Weaknesses in the Articles led to the framing of a new constitution that gave more power to the national government.
Ratifying the Constitution By 1788, enough states had ratified the Constitution to make it the law of the land. A new government, with George Washington as president, was installed in 1789.
Adding the Bill of Rights To satisfy critics of the Constitution, James Madison drafted a series of amendments to protect individual rights. The Bill of Rights was ratified by the states in 1791 and became the first ten amendments to the Constitution.