 1787
| October 1787
|  Oct 5, 1787: Centinel I (Pennsylvania)
| The Antifederalist Centinel suggests that "all the blessings of liberty and the dearest privileges of freemen are now at stake and dependent on your present conduct." But since the plan is inspired by John Adams's political thought which presumes 1) a balancing of the orders of society and 2) that "the administrators of every government are actuated by views of private interest and ambition & [and] & jarring adverse interests." Furthermore, the plan encourages the exercise of extensive powers over an extensive territory which is a recipe not "for a regular balanced government & but & a permanent ARISTOCRACY."
Full Text of Document |
|
| Oct 8, 1787: Federal Farmer No. 1 (Virginia)
| The Antifederalist Federal Farmer says the proposed Constitution "appears to be a plan retaining some federal features, but to be the first important step, and to aim strongly, to one consolidated government of the United States." We ought not to hastily adopt this plan supported by "ambitious, impatient, or disorderly men." He shares a deep regret: "The non-attendance of eight or nine men, who were appointed members of the convention, I shall ever consider as a very unfortunate event to the United States."
Full Text of Document |
|
| Oct 12, 1787: Federal Farmer No. 4 (Virginia)
| The Antifederalist Federal Farmer, without mentioning James Wilson by name, criticizes the premise of the State House speech that a Bill of Rights is unnecessary and dangerous. But, he argues, aren't Article One Sections 9 and 10 of the Constitution a partial Bill of Rights so why don't we drop them or go the whole distance on behalf of a Bill of Rights?
Full Text of Document |
|
| Oct 18, 1787: Brutus No. 1 (New York)
| The New York Antifederalist Brutus, anticipating both Federalist 1 and 10, argues that 1) "the most important question that was ever proposed to your decision, or to the decision of any people under heaven, is before you," 2) "in so extensive a republic, the great officers of government would soon become above the control of the people, and abuse their power to the purpose of aggrandizing themselves and oppressing them." He recommends rejection of the proposed plan.
Full Text of Document |
|
|
| November 1787
| Nov 1, 1787: Brutus No. 2 (New York)
| Antifederalist Brutus argued that the proposed plan of government failed to provide adequate protection to individual rights of conscience, the liberty of the press, the freedom of association and the right of the people to the expectation of no unreasonable searches and no cruel and unreasonable punishments. Without mentioning James Wilson by name, he criticizes the contract theory in the State House Speech that declares a bill of Rights to be superfluous & And in direct contrast to the teachings of Federalist 10 and 51, Brutus suggests that the great art "in forming a good constitution appears to be this: so to frame it as that those to whom the power is committed shall be subject to the same feelings, and aim at the same objects as the people do, who transfer to them their authority. There is no possible way to effect this but by an equal, full, and fair representation."
Full Text of Document |
|
| Nov 15, 1787: Brutus No. 3 (New York)
| The Antifederalist Brutus continues his efforts to point out "the principal defects" of the proposed Constitution. He examines "its parts more minutely, and show[s] that the powers are not properly deposited for the security of public liberty." He criticizes the scheme of representation in both the House and Senate. The small number of representatives to be chosen violates the core meaning of representation: "those who are placed instead of the people should possess their sentiments and feelings, and be governed by their interests; or, in other words, should bear the strongest resemblance of those in whose room they are substituted." But under the plan "the well born and highest orders in life, " and not "the farmer, merchant, mechanic" will be represented
Full Text of Document |
|
|
| December 1787
| Dec 13, 1787: Brutus No. 5 (New York)
| The Antifederalist Brutus turns to an examination of "the nature and extent of the powers granted to the legislature." He interprets these powers, or means, in light of the Preamble that sets down the ends of the new government; he declares that Congress is granted all power that is necessary and proper for carrying out the comprehensive and undefined. All the more reason, says Brutus, for a Bill of Rights restricting the reach of congress over the states and the people and for a larger number of representatives in the Congress.
Full Text of Document |
|
| Dec 18, 1787: Agrippa No. 7 (Massachusetts)
| The Antifederalist Agrippa argues that 1) "it is vain to tell us that we ought to overlook local interests. It is only by protecting local concerns, that the interest of the whole is preserved." But that is what the proponents of the plan "tell us." He argues further that 2) "the perfection of government depends on the equality of its operation, as far as human affairs will admit, upon all parts of the empire, and upon all the citizens." He then proceeds to outline how the proposed plan will be unequal in its operation.
Full Text of Document |
|
|
|
|
