The Federalists versus the Anti-Federalists

At the close of the Constitutional Convention, the document neared completion. However, two groups emerged in the process and and their ideological differences halted ratification over a key issue: individual rights. The compromise between the two groups left an enduring legacy for the rights of all in the United States today.

Anti-Federalists

The Federalists believed the Constitution was ready to be ratified (approved). However, a group opposed ratification of the Constitution because they believed a key issue was missing. The Anti-Federalists wanted a guarantee of individual rights included in the Constitution. (The Federalists believed that an explicit statement of individual rights was redundant and unnecessary since the rights were implied in the Constitution itself.) Stemming from the history of the American Revolution and the colonists’ treatment by the British monarch, the Anti-Federalists believed individuals should have an explicitly-written guarantee of natural rights.

Led by Thomas Jefferson, the Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution called for a strong national government that would weaken the power of states and by extension the individual. Anti-Federalists tended to be from rural areas, often from states with large populations. Many Anti-Federalists were farmers and they feared a strong national government would strip them of their rights and power in favor of the interests of businessmen and industry.

Federalists

Led by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, the Federalists believed the Constitution should be ratified as it was written. They believed the inclusion of individual rights would in fact limit citizens to those rights only defined in the Constitution. Their inclusion of limited government measures of checks and balances would protect individual citizens from a strong national government and therefore addressing individual rights was not necessary. Federalists tended to be merchants from smaller, more urban states. For Federalists a strong national government would offer them protection, not only in legislative matters, but also in relation to issues such as tariffs which would have a direct impact on merchants’ economic success over time.

Anti-Federalists

Photograph of the cover of the Federalist Papers. To argue their points, several members of the Constitutional Convention who sided with the Federalists wrote a series of 85 essays. The Federalist Papers, as they became known, were written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay under the pen name Publius. The essays outlined reasons the Constitution should be ratified without any changes to accommodate individual rights. The essays argued the reliance on state powers in the Articles of Confederation had weakened the government. The essays called for a republican form of government where individual voices would be “heard” through the election of representatives. The essays also used the philosophies of Charles de Montesquieu to demonstrate the limited government that was being established.

Anti-Federalists continued to argue against ratification and used the essays as speaking points for their own reasons the Constitution should not be ratified. Eventually, Federalists agreed to use the amendment process of the Constitution to include a Bill of Rights. Federalist James Madison drafted the proposed amendments. Once the Anti-Federalists agreed to ratify the Constitution, the Federalists would include a Bill of Rights.

Review

INFO-GRAPHIC USED WITH PERMISSION FROM: THE GILDER-LEHRMAN INSTITUTE OF AMERICAN HISTORY

FEDERALIST PAPERS BY PUBLIUS (PSEUDONYM) [ALEXANDER HAMILTON, JOHN JAY, JAMES MADISON]. [PUBLIC DOMAIN], VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS