1. Federalists v. Anti-Federalists
On Whether We Needed a Bill of Rights

2. Lesson Objectives
Explain why Anti-Federalists opposed ratifying the Constitution.
Discuss the role of the Anti-Federalists in proposing a bill of rights and other contributions toward interpreting the Constitution.
Take and defend a position on the validity and relevance of the Anti-Federalist view.

3. Ratification Madison developed a plan in Article VII
9 states had to ratify
Go directly to the voters in coventions
Delegates would be select by the voters
Built upon, “We the People”
Built upon Social Contract Theory
Consistent with recent state approval
State Const. approved by people

4. Where and how did the debate take place?
Where: Convention
Mason leaves without signing
Ratification not assumed
New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia
Main authors wrote under psuedonyms
George Mason * Richard Lee
Melancton Smith *Luther Martin
Robert Yates

5. Why was ratification required?
Articles of Confederation required that Congress and state legislatures of all 50 states approve changes.
Delegates knew members of Congress and the state legislatures would not approve the draft of the Constitution
Reduced state powers
Rhode Island had not sent a delegation

6. Main Ideas of Anti-Federalists
Basic ideas of Republicanism
Small community – similar beliefs
Common good
Representation of constituents
Large state or nation cannot preserve
Too many diverse interests
Constituents are too far from government
Do not know constituents
Cannot reflect their character
Use army to enforce
Tax them for the use of the army

7. Anti-federalists Continued
Cost of national taxation to states
Agrarian communities produce people with civic virtue
More likely to sacrifice for the common good.
Social and cultural institutions: education and religion work better in small communities…foster civic virtue

8. Philosophy translated into objections
People could not control the government
Objected to Necessary and Proper Clause
Felt it could take liberty from people and states
President can pardon for crimes
Crimes he may have encouraged them to commit
National courts have too much power. Can destroy state courts
Violation of checks and balances
Some items such as treaties only approved through the Senate.
Executive and legislative can work together to pass legislation that would undermine state and local legislatures.

9. Bill of Rights Needed to protect individual and state rights.
At that time only the House was directly elected by the people.
Rights are so vague – nearly unlimited—Necessary and Proper
Nothing in the Constitution to protect individual rights
State Constitutions had a bill of rights
Bill of Rights is needed to remind the people of the principles of our system.

10. The Anti-Federalist Argument
At the Virginia Ratification Convention, Patrick Henry spoke: If you give up these powers, without a bill of rights, you will exhibit the most absurd thing to mankind that ever the world saw — government that has abandoned all its powers — the powers of direct taxation, the sword, and the purse. You have disposed of them to Congress, without a bill of rights — without check, limitation, or control. And still you have checks and guards; still you keep barriers — pointed where? Pointed against your weakened, prostrated, enervated state government! You have a bill of rights to defend you against the state government, which is bereaved of all power, and yet you have none against Congress, though in full and exclusive possession of all power! You arm yourselves against the weak and defenseless, and expose yourselves naked to the armed and powerful. Is not this a conduct of unexampled absurdity? What barriers have you to oppose to this most strong, energetic government? To that government you have nothing to oppose. All your defense is given up. This is a real, actual defect. It must strike the mind of every gentleman.