Posted on 03/09/2011 11:55:08 AM PST by Publius
The flurry of newspaper pieces that began in October 1787 concluded some ten months later with a piece in which the reader senses as much exhaustion from Hamilton’s pen as exhilaration, as much trepidation as triumph. It turned out to be quite a series of papers: 85 in total. Taken along with papers written by the opposition, whose somewhat misleading name of “anti-Federalist” came about in part through the machinations of Hamilton himself, they compose a window on the creation of a government that was unique in history up to its time.
The debates at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 were conducted in secret and were, considering their subsequent effect on world history, sparsely documented. Despite the rhetorical detachment of Madison and Hamilton, who throughout the Federalist Papers consistently present the intentions of the Convention as something that had to be deduced, the two men were present and were central actors in the drama. It is principally from Madison’s notes that the modern reader derives a sense of the tides of the debate at that Convention, and from his pen, the Constitution itself. For the rest of his very long life Madison denied the title “Father of the Constitution,” insisting that it was a child of many parents, born of theory, historical experience, and most of all, a spirit of compromise.
Hamilton’s part in the Federalist Papers was clearly that of the leading advocate of a legal team, his approach that of an attorney presenting a case, his reputation as a fierce practitioner of the forensic arts evident in his written words. It is a posture often mistaken for arrogance, a mask an attorney must don in order to represent his client, and for Hamilton, who seldom would be accused of over-modesty in his life outside politics, his client was nothing less than the people of the future United States. It is only at the very end, in the last part of his last essay, that the reader glimpses the man breathless at the fruition of his own years of effort and “awed” – his own word – at the implications of success.
Throughout it all, the one towering figure seldom visible in the public debate, the eminence grise of the Constitution, was George Washington, who had formed his own preferences for central government, and in particular for the superiority of an army belonging to one as he had dodged enemy fire and rallied his defeated troops during the French and Indian War some thirty years prior. He, who had laid down his commander’s sword to the astonishment of Europe and who would not be king, had taken the presidency of the Constitutional Convention with reluctance, and would accept the office of President that was designed for him in what was quite sincerely the same frame of mind. For constitutional government, however, he was far from reluctant. It was in no small measure his voice echoing in the debates at Poughkeepsie by way of his young aide-de-camp turned Chief of Staff, Alexander Hamilton.
John Jay, the minority author of the Federalist Papers and Washington’s principal correspondent in New York during the ratifying convention, would become Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. John Adams would become Vice President, Edmund Randolph Attorney General, Thomas Jefferson Secretary of State, and James Monroe a senator from Virginia. Madison would become Speaker of the House. George Clinton, the anti-Federalist Governor of New York, would twice become Vice President. Aaron Burr, who would become Jefferson’s Vice President, would also become Hamilton’s murderer. Robert Livingston would swear Washington into office. These men were far from done in August 1788; they were barely beginning.
For the wheels of government had begun turning two months earlier when the Confederation Congress learned of New Hampshire’s ratification. After Virginia’s and then New York’s, there remained only two states of the original thirteen who had not ratified: North Carolina and Rhode Island. It did not matter. There would be a national election on 7January 1789, and the issue within those two states would now turn from whether the Constitution would be ratified at all, to whether, and when, they would be allowed to participate.
There were certain irregularities that were the natural result of a nascent effort, but the January election did come off on schedule. On 4 March the first session of Congress was to sit; however by that date there were too few of the newly elected senators and representatives on hand in the capital of New York City to constitute a quorum, not reached for the House until 1 April, and for the Senate some five days later. Adams arrived on 21 April, to be sworn in as Vice President immediately, and with Washington’s arrival and swearing-in on 23 April, the United States had its first constitutional government.
It would not be a complete union, in the sense guaranteed by the old Articles of Confederation, until both of the holdout states ratified. In November 1789, North Carolina ratified, but not until the end of May 1790 would stubborn Rhode Island, the first state to declare its independence from Great Britain, finally accede. At that point Washington had been President for an entire year, and the capital was moving to Philadelphia.
But the work was not yet done. It had been made overwhelmingly clear during the ratification debates that a bill of rights was demanded as a barrier to the new federal government’s assumption of powers not specifically enumerated. To this task James Madison now put his hand, drawing from such sources as the Virginia Constitution whose own Bill of Rights was crafted by anti-Federalist George Mason and by Madison himself. There were twelve such amendments presented to Congress in September 1789, which were approved and sent to the states for ratification. The reader may smile to note that one vote in favor was Patrick Henry’s.
Ratification of ten of those twelve amendments became final on 15 December 1791 and unanimous four months later. That unanimity consisted of fourteen states, not thirteen, for Vermont had joined the Union as a separate state. One of those twelve amendments not ratified in 1791 became the 27th Amendment, ratified in 1992.
Far from abating, the stream of political events that had burst forth in 1776 was now a torrent with no sign of decreasing, a torrent that none of these men, not even the aged and weary Franklin, could resist. But now the Federalist Papers were history. Here the commentators must lay down their pens in the same spirit with which Hamilton had laid his to rest in 1788, not from any sense of finality, but with a distinct sense of wonder at the concretion of the plan of government and a sense of profound gratitude toward the men who made it happen.
9 March 2011
Two books take the Constitutional Convention and inspect it from different angles.
The Colliers avoid strict chronology and cover the Convention by thread. On a given day, many different subjects were taken up, and the authors cover each subject as a separate thread.
Stewart focuses on the role of James Wilson, a Framer who was lesser known, but critical to the formation of the Constitution.
James Thomas Flexner looks at two men who drove the entire effort.
Flexner focuses on the formation of Hamilton’s character and his early years in the West Indies and New York.
This is the indispensable book about Washington.
Forrest McDonald is one of America’s treasures, a critical person in understanding the early years and the concept of federalism.
McDonald focuses on the role of Hamilton as America’s lawgiver.
This is the definitive book on federalism. Without it, this effort would have been far more difficult.
Ellis examines the interplay of the men who founded America.
This is the definitive book on the 1800 election, which changed the method of presidential election by way of the 12th Amendment.
Three books cover the period between the War of 1812 and the Civil War with an eye to the evolution of the Federalist and Nationalist theologies of the formation of the Union.
The following are some of the readings of the Founders that led to their conception of government.
This is the single most quoted and referenced work in the Federalist Papers. Montesquieu was the reigning king of Enlightenment political philosophy in the late 18th Century.
This is an anti-monarchy, pro-republican volume written by a member of the Long Parliament during the English Civil Wars. After the Restoration, Sydney was tried and executed for having written it.
This is the seminal work on the superiority of republics as a form of government, based on the idealized days of the Roman Republic, written by a public official of the Renaissance Florentine Republic who was later racked by the Medici for his opposition.
The second treatise was Locke’s fundamental thesis on civil government, containing the novel argument in favor of an individual’s right to life, liberty and property.
This is an incendiary plea for the independence of the American colonies written by a brilliant, trouble-making English immigrant. Written two years after he had been sent to America by none other than Benjamin Franklin, it remains the single best-selling secular volume per capita in American history.
These are two later volumes resulting from the events of the War of Independence and the subsequent French Revolution.
This is a shocking volume from the stout defender of the American side in Parliament. Burke came to the conclusion that certain principles of liberty could lead to to license and violence as well as freedom. To the dismay of many of his political allies he defended the established French government on these grounds and predicted the Terror which was to come.
This is Paine’s stout defense of the principles of individual liberty indicted by his friend Burke in the latter’s Reflections, to which the Rights constitutes a reply. It caused Paine to be tried in absentia for treason in England, and his enemy Robespierre to attempt to guillotine him in France. Napoleon later chased him out of France for calling him a charlatan.
In further reading, I have read that Thomas Jefferson had a set of Federalist essays that he had annotated.
After looking around the various Google suggestions, I’m not finding anything about it.
Do you gents have a quick link?
In the meantime, I’ll keep looking.
That’s news to me. If you find anything about this, I’d like to know about it.
This was my starting point:
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/jefffed.html
You’ll see the information in the 4th pane. I’m trying to find it in the Rare Books and Special Collections section.
However, once Jefferson received sufficient votes in the electoral college...
Dead wrong. The deadlock in the Electoral College threw the election into the House of Representatives, and it was the House that made the call. Edward Larson's A Magnificent Catastrophe: The Tumultuous Election of 1800, America's First Presidential Campaign covers all this in great detail.
The focus on finding annotated Papers is fascinating to me. I would LOVE to read what Jefferson had noted. Yet, I'm turning up nothing.
A few years back I checked on something else. Looks like I'm going to go searching again.
No disrespect, but is it necessary to overrun this location...?
I have all of this documentation in hard copy, and read it twenty years back.
Wading through this again here is like hunting for turtles in my swamp. I know they are there, and I know what they are. A waste of time.
Did you ever find those annotated papers by Jefferson?
Excellent job. Really. An amazing compilation that i have put at the front of my list of things to read.
And I’m glad that idiot up there was banned.
Btd and I are hoping we can turn it into a book some day.
Hey Pub' - the other book proof may have gotten sent to the wrong address. I'll track it down. That one's ready, maybe. Anyone here want to read our stuff about Atlas Shrugged?
Where oh where is that proof?
Since I wrote that I have exchanged emails with someone who may know, or will know a person who will know.
I’ll hit the email after I write this.
I already bookmarked the Atlas Shrugged material when i saw the wonderful compilation of links on Publius’ homepage. Looking forward to reading it!
Publius, remind me again how to check that number? I’m thinking that feature disappeared, but not sure. I think mine was 4180, so between Dec ‘97 and Apr ‘98 this place exploded. Gee, i wonder what was going on during THAT time period. ;-) It’s also a reflection on how many people were hitting Drudge’s site at the time (for the Whitewater link).
Thanks!
Years ago, another FReeper showed me how to find the signup number, but I’ve forgotten how to do it. Sorry
Have you purchased the Rush Limbaugh series.
I have all 3 books - and I keep hearing so many good things about them. The kids love them and end up enjoying reading.
Book 1 - The Pilgrims
Book 2 - The First Patriots
Book 3 - The Revolution
ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.