constitution » Constitutional Convention http://constitution.laws.com Constitution- Constitution Law, US Constitution, The Constitution, Constitutional Law Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:20:05 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.18 What You Need To Know About The Fathers of the Constitution http://constitution.laws.com/fathers-of-the-constitution http://constitution.laws.com/fathers-of-the-constitution#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:49:11 +0000 What You Need To Know About The Fathers of the Constitution
The Constitution of the United States was a result of a conglomerated effort, both fueled and inspired by the foremost of political thinkers and authors of the time. The framers of the Constitution are considered to be every individual involved in the construction of the document, from its inception to its actual penning. The Fathers of the Constitution are considered to include not only those members of the Continental Congress responsible for restructuring the perceived flaws of the Articles of Confederation, but also the representatives sent from all of the 13 states, which had a hand in its transformation. 
Subsequent to the approval of the content of the Constitution, the document was sent to Independence Hall in Philadelphia in 1787 to receive its final modifications. Pending the approval of the document itself at the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution was distributed to all 13 states of the United States in order to win the approval of at least 9 of those states – the ratification of the Constitution was commensurate on this.
Yet, most historians cannot agree on a conclusive Father of the Constitution. Although quite a few of the men present at the ratification of the Constitution have been credited with the honor of Framer of the Constitution, the following list illustrates the main contenders: 
Alexander Hamilton, a representative from New York, as well as a renowned Federalist, has been credited with the initial ideology expressed in the Constitution. The practices that were proposed in his Federalist Papers, a direct explication of the perceived flaws of the Articles of Confederation, have been credited with both the inspiration and the framework of the Constitution.  
  
James Madison, a Federalist credited with the collective authorship of the Federalist Papers, has been considered by many to be the Father of the Constitution. Due to his acumen in political thought and theory, he applied a majority of the tenets expressed in the Federalist Papers to the ideology of the Constitution, oftentimes regarded as providing the groundwork and structure to the document.     
Thomas Jefferson, who has also been credited as the Father of the Declaration of Independence, as well as John Adams are both considered to be the primary framers of the Constitution. Yet, in an ironic turn of events, they were both in Europe on diplomatic assignment during the ratification of the Constitution – neither of the two signed the document.     
Many historians argue that without Roger Sherman’s introduction of the Connecticut Plan, a selection process for individual State legislation, the ratification of the Constitution might never have taken place. As a result of his ingenuity and ability to meet the collective needs of all 13 states, he is credited as a Father of the Constitution.
Though historians might never agree on who was the single-most prominent Father of the Constitution, there exists at least one facet upon which a majority of historians agree: The framers of the Constitution were amongst the most innovative, revolutionary, and progressive political minds of their time.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/fathers-of-the-constitution/feed 0
The State Ratification Process http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/state-ratification-process http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/state-ratification-process#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:49:11 +0000 The State Ratification Process
The ratification of the Constitution was conditional to the approval of 9 out of the existing 13 states of the United States. The representatives of less populous states like New Jersey were concerned about the eclipsing of their respective legislative power by the more numerous larger states. The New Jersey Plan was created to alleviate this concern. Its unicameral legislative style would ensure that every State would be represented equally. Yet, larger states refused to accept that the size of a state’s population should not be taken into consideration in choosing representatives. As a result, many of the larger states rejected this legislative proposal.
The representatives of more populous states, like Virginia, demanded that the representation of a State be commensurate with its population. As a result, the Virginia Plan was created – a plan that offered a bicameral legislation – in order to factor a state’s population into the amount of representatives it was allowed. However, the Connecticut Plan combined these two ideologies, and as a result, smaller states like New Jersey and Delaware, as well as larger states like New York and Maryland, had agreed upon their respective State ratification of the Constitution.     
Massachusetts, one of the most densely populated states, was initially unwilling to participate in the ratification of the Constitution. Their approval of the document was reliant on a clause introduced into the Constitution that ensured an amendment process, allowing the document to be modified in the future. When the Bill of Rights was established, Massachusetts approved of ratification of the Constitution.    
Due to the fact that both Georgia and North Carolina were adamant on the preservation of slavery, should slavery have been abolished upon the beginning of the ratification process, both states threatened a refusal to agree. In order to quell both states, a gag rule regarding slavery was imposed; this rule solidified that due to its controversial nature, slavery, both its potential abolition, as well as its maintenance, would not be discussed for 20 years.
Virginia refused to enter its State approval in the initial ratification process of the Constitution. George Mason, a State representative from Virginia, was weary that the structure outlined in the Constitution was overtly similar to that of the British Monarchy – similarities that he had felt if accepted would undermine the Declaration of Independence, trading one monarchy for another. 
The only State to neither participate in ratification of the Constitution, nor wholly approve of the Constitution, was Rhode Island. Due to their smaller size, they felt that representation to which they were allowed as a result of the Articles of Confederation was definitively more substantial than proposed in the Constitution.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/state-ratification-process/feed 0
The Continental Convention In Depth http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/continental-convention http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/continental-convention#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:49:10 +0000 The Continental Convention In Depth
The Background of the Constitutional Convention and Prior Attempts

The precepts set forth in the Articles of Confederation, both on a legislative level, as well as a national level, had all but languished in the United States. Due to the general unrest in interstate relations, as well as a growing animosity on the part of a majority of the European world powers, all as a result of a lack of a nationalized domestic and interstate diplomatic policy, the economy of the United States was nearing a collapse. This dynamic was elucidated when George Washington held a conference at his home in Mount Vernon, Virginia in order to establish a process by which to traverse the Potomac River, a river that spanned the borders of multiple states. 
The representatives at the conference of Mount Vernon quickly realized that even a seemingly simple process, such as navigating a river, was needlessly complex, if not impossible, all due to the dysfunctional legislative model presented in the Articles of Confederation. Political figureheads such as Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams agreed that a new legislative doctrine was imperative, and as a result, the Constitutional Convention was organized and set into motion in 1787.
George Washington and his Importance as Presiding Officer
A delegate from Virginia sent to the Constitutional Convention was primarily recognized for his service as the commander of the Continental Army throughout the Revolutionary War, not for his political or philosophical acumen. However, much to his own bewilderment, George Washington was unanimously nominated to preside over the Constitutional Convention by the entirety of the delegates who were also sent to represent their respective states in the proceedings of the Convention. Although initially declining his nomination, George Washington eventually accepted the position at the unanimous behest of his fellow delegates. 
Unbeknownst to George Washington, it was his tireless dedication and service to the well-being of the United States of America that had inspired his unanimous nomination. Neither identifying himself as a Federalist nor as a Sovereigntist, George Washington was the penultimate example of a patriot whose only concern was the prosperity of a nation that he not only loved so dearly, but for which he was also willing to give his life.
Virginia Plan
The Virginia Plan was a proposition offered by Virginia delegate Edmund Rudolph at the Constitutional Convention – also known as the Philadelphia Convention – with the hopes of securing a definitive selection process for a national, consolidate legislative body. The Virginia plan was based off a bicameral legislative model, which included two tiers of Congress: the Upper House and the Lower House. The Lower House would be elected in accordance with each individual State’s population, and afterwards, the Upper House would be elected by the Lower House. As a result, states with larger populations would be unable to rely solely on their size, and states with smaller populations would not be able to form alliances. 
In addition, a bicameral legislation would ensure that a single State, or a ‘minority’, would be unable to decide the fate of the majority. However, it came as no surprise that the smaller states attending the Philadelphia Convention viewed the Virginia Plan as unfairly partial to states with larger populations. 
New Jersey Plan
The New Jersey Plan was created by New Jersey State delegate William Paterson and presented to the Constitutional Convention. The New Jersey Plan, also known as the Small State Plan, was a system set forth to determine the selection process of State representatives to a consolidated, Congressional legislative body. Furthermore, there would only exist a single Congressional legislative body. 
William Paterson’s New Jersey Plan consisted of a unicameral legislation in which each State, regardless of size, would be entitled to an equal number of representatives admitted to a Congressional legislative body. William Paterson created his New Jersey Plan with the hopes of preventing the respective size of a State from becoming a deciding factor in the establishment of any sort of legislative process. As a result, smaller states would be denied the opportunity to create unjust alliances and larger states would not be entitled to greater indulgences due to their larger size. 
Connecticut Compromise
An absence of a confirmed methodology in regards to a selection process establishing individual State legislation to Congress, the prospect of the rejection of the Constitution became an impending reality. The rejections of both a unicameral legislation proposed in the New Jersey Plan and a bicameral legislation proposed in the Virginia Plan, made it clear an immediate solution to rectify the discord was imperative. 
Roger Sherman, a politician from Connecticut, suggested his Connecticut Plan – also referred to as The Great Compromise – as a means to unify the individual states in a collective, nationwide ratification of the Constitution. Converging the methods illustrated in both the New Jersey Plan and the Virginia Plan, the Connecticut Plan outlined a structural process with the hopes of a fair, balanced, and practical strategy to appoint State legislation, which factored in population size, as well as the desire to dismiss any potential favoritism allowed to states as a result of their respective sizes. 
The Connecticut Plan outlined a bicameral legislature that would be comprised of two legislative bodies: the House of Representatives and the Senate. The House of Representatives’ selection processes would be commensurate on population, while the Senate’s would be uniform amongst all states. 
Approach to Slavery
Alongside with a process to select legislation, the debate over slavery – and its undetermined presence in the future of the United States – was a deciding factor in the ultimate ratification of the Constitution. Many of the Southern states of the Union, Georgia and North Carolina being the most prominent, were adamant about the preservation of slavery in the United States. Although many of the Northern states, along with many of their respective representatives, were ferociously opposed to the moral and ethical turpitude that slavery enabled, a majority of the Southern states maintained that both the preservation of their respective economies, as well as their general prosperity was reliant on slave labor.
As the process of ratification continued, many of the framers of the Constitution became aware that certain disagreements about tenets of the Constitution could prevent the ultimate ratification of the Constitution. As a result, they created a gag rule in regards to the debate about slave trade. The gag rule stated that although slavery would be permitted at the time, its presence could be reevaluated in no less than twenty years. 

Constitution Authors and Signers
There existed 55 signers of the Constitution, all of whom were comprised of State representatives from 12 of the 13 states of the Union. The only State absent from the ratification process of the document was Rhode Island, who contended that they were summarily dissatisfied with both the methodology and practices proposed within the text. 
The authorship of the Constitution is far more ambiguous. The Constitution of the United States is considered by most historians to be a comprehensive restructuring of the Articles of Confederation under the pretense of a definitive Federalist influence. Although the physical penning of the Constitution was done by Governor Morris, the credit of the ideology, methodology, and vision has been credited not to a single individual, but instead to a network of political figureheads and thinkers, including John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison. 

State Ratification Process
The journey leading to the ratification of the Constitution was a long and arduous one, complete with an overarching concern on the part of all involved of its impending rejection. Due to the various concerns of the 13 individual states of the Union, the prospect of creating a single, unanimous doctrine that both encompassed an American ideology, as well as addressed the individual interests of each State, the future of the Constitution was transient up until its ultimate ratification. 
The Connecticut Compromise addressed the concerns of both smaller states, as well as larger states in its methodology of a State-specific legislative selection process. The Massachusetts Plan ensured the presence of a clause that would allow for future amendments to the Constitution. The gag rule regarding slave trade ensured the participation Southern states in the ratification process. With respect to its approval contingent upon 9 out of 13 states, the Constitution was finally ratified.
Fathers/Framers of the Constitution
Although no definitive accreditation exists with regard to a ‘Father’ of the Constitution, historians consider the men involved both in its authorship, as well as its inception to be the framers – or Fathers – of the Constitution. Amongst the main contributors to the Constitution include John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton. However, countless politicos and thinkers have been awarded with the honor of framing the Constitution. 
Attributes for those considered to be framers – or Fathers – of the Constitution consist of a presence and participation in the Revolutionary War, physically and politically. Furthermore, all of the framers of the Constitution lived underneath the Articles of Confederation and were privy to its perceived flaws. Finally, those bestowed with the title of ‘framer(s) of the Constitution’ are considered to be comprised of men who were present at both the Constitutional Convention, as well as the signing process subsequent to the nationwide approval.
However, it is important to mention that both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, both of whom are primarily credited with the advent of the Constitution, were not present during its signing. They were in Europe on diplomatic assignment.
 
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/continental-convention/feed 0
A Overview of the Constitutional Convention http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 A Overview of the Constitutional Convention
The Background of the Constitutional Convention and Prior Attempts

The precepts set forth in the Articles of Confederation, both on a legislative level as well as a national level, had all but languished the United States. Due to the general unrest in interstate relations, as well as a growing animosity on the part of a majority of the European world powers, all as a result of a lack of a nationalized domestic and interstate diplomatic policy, the economy of the United States was nearing a collapse. This dynamic was elucidated when George Washington held a conference at his home in Mount Vernon, Virginia in order to establish a process by which to traverse the Potomac River, a river that spanned the borders of multiple states.
The representatives at the conference at Mount Vernon quickly realized that even a seemingly simple process, such as navigating a river, was needlessly complex if not impossible, all due to the dysfunctional legislative model presented in the Articles of Confederation. Political figureheads such as Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams agreed that a new legislative doctrine was imperative and, as a result, the Constitutional Convention was organized and set into motion in 1787.


George Washington and his Importance as Presiding Officer
A delegate from Virginia sent to the Constitutional Convention was primarily recognized for his service as the commander of the Continental Army throughout the Revolutionary War, not for his political or philosophical acumen. However, much to his own bewilderment, George Washington was unanimously nominated to preside over the Constitutional Convention by the entirety of the delegates who were also sent to represent their respective states in the proceedings of the Convention. Although initially declining his nomination, George Washington eventually accepted the position at the unanimous behest of his fellow delegates.
Unbeknown to George Washington, it was his tireless dedication and service to the well-being of the United States of America that had inspired his unanimous nomination. Neither identifying himself as a Federalist nor a Sovereigntist, George Washington was the penultimate example of a patriot whose only concern was the prosperity of a nation that he not only loved so dearly, but for which he was also willing to give his life. 

Virginia Plan
The Virginia Plan was a proposition offered by Virginia delegate Edmund Rudolph at the Constitutional Convention – also known as the Philadelphia Convention – with the hopes of securing a definitive selection process for a national, consolidated legislative body. The Virginia Plan was based on a bicameral legislative model, which included two tiers of Congress: the Upper House and the Lower House. The Lower House would be elected in accordance with each individual State’s population. Afterwards, the Upper House would be elected by the Lower House. As a result, states with larger populations would be unable to rely solely on their size and states with smaller populations would not be unable to form alliances.
In addition, a bicameral legislature would ensure that a single state, or a ‘minority’, would be unable to decide the fate of the majority. However, it came as no surprise that the smaller states attending the Philadelphia Convention viewed the Virginia Plan as unfairly partial to states with larger populations. 
New Jersey Plan
The New Jersey Plan was created by New Jersey State delegate William Paterson and presented to the Constitutional Convention. The New Jersey Plan, also known as the Small State Plan, was a system set forth to determine the selection process of State representatives to a consolidated, Congressional legislative body. Furthermore, there would only exist a single Congressional legislative body.
William Paterson’s New Jersey Plan consisted of a unicameral legislation in which each state, regardless of size, would be entitled to an equal number of representatives admitted to a Congressional legislative body. William Paterson created his New Jersey Plan with the hopes of preventing the respective size of a state from becoming a deciding factor in the establishment of any sort of legislative process. As a result, smaller states would be denied the opportunity to create unjust alliances and larger states would not be entitled to greater indulgences due to their larger size. 
Connecticut Compromise

An absence of a confirmed methodology in regards to a selection process establishing an individual State legislature to Congress, the prospect of the rejection of the Constitution became an impending reality. The rejections of both a unicameral legislature proposed in the New Jersey Plan and a bicameral legislature proposed in the Virginia Plan made an immediate solution to rectify the discord imperative.
Roger Sherman, a politician from Connecticut, suggested his Connecticut Plan – also referred to as The Great Compromise – as a means to unify the individual states in a collective, nationwide ratification of the Constitution. Converging the methods illustrated in both the New Jersey Plan and the Virginia Plan, the Connecticut Plan outlined a structural process with the hopes of a fair, balanced, and practical strategy to appoint a State legislature which factored in population size, as well as the desire to dismiss any potential favoritism allowed to states as a result of their respective sizes.
The Connecticut Plan outlined a bicameral legislature that would be comprised of two legislative bodies: the House of Representatives and the Senate. The selection process for the House of Representatives would be commensurate with a state’s population, while that for the Senate would be uniform amongst all states.


Approach to Slavery
Alongside a process to select the legislature, the debate over slavery and its undetermined presence in the future of the United States was a deciding factor in the ultimate ratification of the Constitution. Many of the southern states of the Union, Georgia and North Carolina being the most prominent, were adamant about the preservation of slavery in the United States. Although many of the northern states, along with many of their respective representatives, were ferociously opposed to the moral and ethical turpitude that slavery enabled, a majority of the southern states maintained that both the preservation of their respective economies, as well as their general prosperity, was reliant on slave labor.
As the process of ratification continued, many of the framers of the Constitution became aware that certain disagreements about tenets of the Constitution could prevent the ultimate ratification of the Constitution. As a result, they created a gag rule in regards to the debate about slave trade. The gag rule stated that although slavery would be permitted at the time, its presence could be reevaluated in no less than twenty years.


Constitution Authors and Signers
There were 55 signers of the Constitution, all of whom were comprised of State representatives from 12 of the 13 states of the Union. The only State absent from the ratification process of the document was Rhode Island, which contended that they were summarily dissatisfied with both the methodology and practices proposed within the text.
The authorship of the Constitution is far more ambiguous. The Constitution of the United States is considered by most historians to be a comprehensive restructuring of the Articles of Confederation under the pretense of a definitive Federalist influence. Although the physical penning of the Constitution was done by Governor Morris, the credit of the ideology, methodology, and vision has been credited not to a single individual, but instead to a network of political figureheads and thinkers, including John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison.

State Ratification Process
The journey leading to the ratification of the Constitution was a long and arduous one, complete with an overarching concern on the part of all involved of its impending rejection. Due to the various concerns of the 13 individual states of the Union, the prospect of creating a single, unanimous doctrine that both encompassed an American ideology, as well as addressed the individual interests of each state, the future of the Constitution was transient up until its ultimate ratification.
The Connecticut Compromise addressed the concerns of both smaller states, as well as larger states in its methodology of a state-specific legislative selection process. The Massachusetts Plan ensured the presence of a clause that would allow for future amendments to the Constitution; the gag rule regarding the slave trade ensured the participation of the southern states in the ratification process. With respect to its approval contingent upon 9 out of 13 states, the Constitution was finally ratified. The respective approvals of Virginia and North Carolina arrived months after, while  Rhode Island completely abstained.
Fathers/Framers of the Constitution
Although no definitive accreditation exists with regard to a ‘father’ of the Constitution, historians consider the men involved both in its authorship, as well as its inception, to be the framers, or fathers, of the Constitution. Amongst the main contributors to the Constitution include John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton. However, countless politicos and thinkers have been awarded with the honor of framing the Constitution.
Attributes for those considered to be framers, or fathers, of the Constitution consist of a presence and participation in the Revolutionary War – physically and politically. Furthermore, all of the framers of the Constitution lived underneath the Articles of Confederation and were privy to its perceived flaws. Finally, those bestowed with the title of “framer(s) of the Constitution” are considered to be comprised of men who were present at both the Constitutional Convention, as well as the signing process subsequent to the nationwide approval.
However, it is important to mention that both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson – both of whom are primarily credited with the advent of the Constitution – were not present during its signing. They were in Europe on diplomatic assignment.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/feed 0
What was the Constitutional Convention? http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/the-constitutional-convention http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/the-constitutional-convention#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 What was the Constitutional Convention?
Even prior to the Constitutional Convention of 1787, due to the chaos that ensued as a result of the flawed gubernatorial model established in Articles of Confederation, a complete adjustment of the national legislative schematic was already set in motion by not only Federalists Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, but also by figureheads such Benjamin Franklin and George Washington. 
In 1785, a conference was held in Mt. Vernon, Virginia, which was initially held in order to determine a course of action for the circumvention of the Potomac River. 
Due to the Articles of Confederation’s vague criterion concerning interstate legislation, which ultimately disallowed the establishment of determining any sort of state borders in regards to the Potomac River – it spanned across multiple states such as Maryland and Virginia. As a result, the delegates at the conference proposed a nationwide convention in Philadelphia with the hopes of completely reformatting the existing governmental schematic – this was known as the Constitutional Convention.
The Constitutional Convention began at Independence Hall in Philadelphia on May 5th, 1787, and ended upon the completion of the final draft of the Constitution on September 17th, 1787. The Constitutional Convention was comprised of 55 delegates from 12 of the 13 states of the Union. Rhode Island, protesting the proposed ideals set forth in the Constitution, refused to send any delegates. 
The Constitutional Convention was presided over by George Washington, a delegate from Virginia, and the future first President of the United States. The actual content of the Constitution is considered to be a conglomeration of ideas contributed by various politicos of that time, including Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Thomas Paine, and John Adams. 
Despite an initial desire to simply modify the precepts set forth in the Articles of Confederation, delegates participating in the Constitutional Convention found the existing gubernatorial and legislative systems unworkable, and as a result, created an entirely new document, which would become the Constitution of the United States. Rhode Island’s vehement opposition of the abolition of the Articles of Confederation prompted their refusal to send delegates to the Constitutional Convention. 
The legislative methodology set forth in the Articles of Confederation maintained that any amendment of legislation, which was precisely the purpose of the Constitutional Convention, could not take place without the unanimous approval of each of the 13 states of the Union. Yet, the refusal to participate on the part of Rhode Island’s State Legislature was perceived to be laden with irony by the Federalists. The Federalists maintained that a single state’s ability to sway a decision on a national scale was inherently paradoxical. 
However, even without the participation of Rhode Island, the Constitutional Convention commenced. The remaining 12 states grew tired of perpetual legislative ambiguity and erratic trade policies. The Constitutional Convention would cover a host of issues, both legislative and commercial, such as the role of central government, state representation, taxes, tariffs, the establishment of borders, and slavery.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/the-constitutional-convention/feed 0
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/the-constitutional-convention-of-1787 http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/the-constitutional-convention-of-1787#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 The Constitutional Convention of 1787

The
Constitutional Convention took place in 1787 in Philadelphia, PA. It was one of
the primary instances of the gathering of delegates from the collective state
of the Union. The Constitutional Convention was comprised of
55 delegates from 12 of the 13 states of the Union. Rhode Island, protesting
the proposed ideals set forth in the Constitution, refused to send any
delegates.

The
Constitutional Convention was presided over by George Washington, a delegate
from Virginia, and the future first President of the United States. The actual
content of the Constitution is considered to be a conglomeration of ideas
contributed by various politicos of that time, including Thomas Jefferson,
James Madison, Thomas Paine, and John Adams. 

Due to the unrest caused by the gubernatorial system put in place
by the Articles of Confederation, which consisted of a weak central government
coupled with each state maintaining its individual sovereignty, many political
figureheads of the time held that there needed to exist a vast restructuring of
the governmental model serving the newly-formed United States of America. The
initial realization of the importance of this overhaul was brought to light
during a meeting held by George Washington at his home in Mount Vernon,
Virginia, which focused on creating a mandated plan regarding the navigation of
the Potomac River.

 

Due to the fact that the Potomac River runs through multiple
states, the establishment of a definitive plan was difficult due to the absence
of any national policy. Each state had individual agency in the creation of
laws and statutes regarding any events that took place within their respective
borders. As a result, the fact became clear that additional legislative power
needed to be afforded to the central government in order to eradicate confusion
due in part to legislative inconsistency that was occurring on national
level. 

 

In the wake of the Federalist ideals set forth by Alexander
Hamilton, the establishment of the Constitutional Convention was to solidify an
all-encompassing legislative process, which balanced power between State and
governmental bodies. 
However, despite what some political figureheads
and citizens alike viewed as glaring inefficiencies existing in the midst of
the governmental structure set forth in the Articles of Confederation, other
citizens of the United States felt that both the ability for individual states
to exists as sovereign entities, as well the lack of central government,
allowed for a heightened sense of agency and autonomy within the scope of a
conglomeratic framework. 

 

As a result of the an initial impasse on the part of various
states – larger states and smaller states were amongst those who failed to
arrive at an initial meeting of the minds – various legislative addenda was submitted
to the text of the Constitution of the United States with the hopes of
establishing a legislative methodology that would satisfy the needs of both
larger states, as well as their smaller counterparts. In addition, issues such
as slavery and individual state legislative representation were amongst the
most largely debated during the Constitutional Convention. 

]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/the-constitutional-convention-of-1787/feed 0
What Happened at the Philadelphia Convention? http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/philadelphia-convention http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/philadelphia-convention#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 What Happened at the Philadelphia Convention?
George Washington was nominated as the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention in 1787. Earning both notoriety and respect as a result of his service as the commander of the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War, George Washington was held in the highest esteem throughout the United States both as a general and as a patriot. However, according to historical records, no one was more surprised than George Washington himself when he was nominated to preside over the Constitutional Convention by Pennsylvania delegate Robert Morris. 
Even in his personal records, George Washington expressed bewilderment as a result of his unanimous nomination as Chairman of the Constitutional Convention. His bewilderment manifested as a result of his self-perceived lack of aptitude required to chair such a conference. Initially, he declined the nomination, but as a result of the unanimous insistence on the part of all of the delegates sent to the Constitutional Convention, he eventually accepted the position to chair the Constitutional Convention. 
Despite his concerns regarding the lack of his own political experience, George Washington assumed the role of Chairman of the Constitutional Convention. However, the delegates sent to participate in the Constitutional Convention unanimously agreed that he was an ideal candidate for the position. Though he was not wholly versed in political theory, it was his undying dedication and devotion to the prosperity of the United States of America that inspired his fellow delegates to demand that he chair the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention.
In addition, the fact that George Washington did not align himself with any single sect of political thought, coupled with his eternal patriotism, made him both a reliable and objective choice. The delegates trusted that he would conduct the Constitutional Convention under the pretense that the best interest of the citizens of the United States of America would take precedence above all other matters. 
Furthermore, George Washington’s military service guaranteed his passion in all matters concerning the well-being, as well as the solubility, of the United States of America. He had led the Continental Army for the entirety of the Revolutionary War, and as a result, had witnessed the ultimate sacrifice on the part of his troops – the consent to give their lives for their country. This was a matter that George Washington held above all others. His patriotic fervor would ensure that any casualties suffered in the War of Independence would not be in vain. As a commander in the Continental Army, he was well aware that it was the citizens of the United States – not the central government – who had earned the nation’s independence from the British monarchy. 
Although in theory, there existed more qualified candidates to be nominated with the honor of presiding over the Constitutional Convention, it was his patriotism, dedication, and service that established George Washington as the unanimous candidate to chair the Constitutional Convention.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/philadelphia-convention/feed 0
The Truth About The History of American Slave Trade http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/slave-trade http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/slave-trade#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 The Truth About The History of American Slave Trade
The notion of slavery and slave trade was a volatile issue during the process to ratify the Constitution of the United States. At the time, slave trade and labor was considered by many politicians and State leaders as a cornerstone of the economy of the United States. The usage of slave labor provided both economic and commercial benefits as a result of a general regard as slaves as subhuman workhorses. Both advocates and supporters of this practice deemed slaves as commodities and utilities, not as human beings, devoid of feelings, senses of self, and families. 
At the time, slave trade was regarded in the same light as any other commercial practice. White traders arrived in Africa, seized the natives, and swiftly claimed ownership of them. Africans unjustly and cruelly seized as slaves and forced into slave trade were forced onto overcrowded ships and brought to the United States and essentially sold as commodities that provided free labor. The American slave trade contributed to the near-decimation of a culture, as well as the exploitation of millions of people, most of whom were ripped from their homes and families and subject to subhuman living and working conditions. 
Over the course of the ratification process of the Constitution, slavery was a concern both on the part of its vehement detractors like Alexander Hamilton and John Adams, as well as its advocates such as the Representatives from Georgia and North Carolina. However, much like a definitive selection process for State representation, the ratification of the Constitution was contingent on a definitive Constitutional stance on slave trade. In particular, Georgia and North Carolina were immovable with their respective claim that slave trade was essential for their economy, unshakably so that they both refused to ratify the Constitution should slavery be abolished. 
The discord that resulted from the debate over slavery prompted the authors of the Constitution to create a gag rule about the topic, which forbade any representative involved from discussing the subject. The gag rule established that slave trade could not and would not be discussed for twenty years after the ratification of the Constitution. Though many of the Founding Fathers were dissatisfied with the creation of the gag rule pertaining to the debate over slavery, they were confident that the ratification of the Constitution would provide a structural and humanistic platform from which abhorrent practices such as slavery could be abolished. 
However, the gag rule did not render the results for which the Founding Fathers who were opposed to slave trade would have hoped. Only in 1865 after almost a century of the ratification of the Constitution, following the end of the Civil War, was slavery finally abolished with the passing of the Thirteenth Amendment of the Constitution.
Slavery is considered by most historians to be the single-most disgraceful, abhorrent, and vile practice in the history of the  United States; a practice that displayed a general disregard and disrespect for human life. However, despite the popularity and purported need for slavery in the United States, there still existed progressive visionaries like John Adams who knew the extent of the dreadful practice. Adams is quoted as saying: “Consenting to slavery is a sacrilegious breach of trust, as offensive in the sight of God as it is derogatory from our own honor or interest of happiness.”
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/slave-trade/feed 0
Who Wrote the Constitution? http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/who-wrote-the-constitution http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/who-wrote-the-constitution#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 Who Wrote the Constitution?
The signers of the Constitution are considered to be a collection of the greatest political and philosophical minds in the United States. The very thought of attendees of the Constitutional Convention – George Washington, John Adams, and Ben Franklin, just to name a few – collected in a single room while deciding the fate of a new country is staggering.
 
The brilliance of the signers of the Constitution is only second to the bravery displayed by them. Unwilling to recreate the tyranny of the British monarchy and refusing to indulge in the reactionary whims of the Articles of Confederation, the Founding Fathers both authored and promulgated a political document that is considered to be the forefront of revolutionary, democratic political thought. Comprised of Federalists, nationalists, and patriots, the signers of the Constitution had not only witnessed the overthrowing of a tyrannical ruling body, but many of them also had a direct hand in this process. 
·         George Washington, the appointed head of the Constitutional Convention, was the leader of the Continental Army responsible for defeating the British troops, and as a result, removing the presence of King George and the British monarchy as the ruling body of the thirteen colonies, which soon-after became the United States. 
·        James Madison is credited as not only a signer of the Constitution, but also one of its primary authors. However, James Madison’s career as a political author began prior to his authorship of the Constitution. Along with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, all three men are credited with the authorship of the Federalist Papers. 
·      Alexander Hamilton was not only a renowned political thinker responsible for the primary authorship of the Federalist
Papers, but also served as an Assistant General under George Washington in the Revolutionary War. 
·        Benjamin Franklin was a respected author and Federalist who, aside from his political acumen, is considered to be an
accomplished inventor, credited with the invention of the lightning rod and bifocals. 
·        Other noteworthy signers of the Constitution were William Paterson, a delegate from New Jersey who was responsible for the creation of the New Jersey Plan and Edmund Randolph, a delegate from Virginia who was responsible for the creation of the Virginia Plan. 
·        George Mason, a delegate from Virginia, is credited alongside James Madison with the passing of the Bill of Rights. He is renowned for his refusal to sign the Constitution due to the absence of a clause that would allow for amendments – coincidentally, this clause would later be defined as the Bill of Rights. He, alongside his fellow Virginia delegates, had unanimously abstained from signing the Constitution until 5 months following its ratification. The State of Rhode Island joined in that abstaining as well. 
Those who were not present as signers of the Constitution were Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. They were both in Europe at the time on diplomatic assignments.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/who-wrote-the-constitution/feed 0
When Was the Constitution Written? http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/when-was-the-constitution-written http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/when-was-the-constitution-written#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 When Was the Constitution Written?
The Constitution of the United States was a result of a conglomerated effort, both fueled and inspired by the foremost of political thinkers and authors of the time. The framers of the Constitution are considered to be every individual involved in the construction of the document, from its inception to its actual penning. The Fathers of the Constitution are considered to include not only those members of the Continental Congress responsible for restructuring the perceived flaws of the Articles of Confederation, but also the representatives sent from all of the 13 states, which had a hand in its transformation.
Subsequent to the approval of the content of the Constitution, the document was sent to Independence Hall in Philadelphia in 1787 to receive its final modifications. Pending the approval of the document itself at the Constitutional Convention, the Constitution was distributed to all 13 states of the United States in order to win the approval of at least 9 of those states – the ratification of the Constitution was commensurate on this. Yet, most historians cannot agree on a conclusive Father of the Constitution. Although quite a few of the men present upon the ratification of the Constitution have been credited with the honor of Framer of the Constitution, the following list illustrates the main contenders:
●  Alexander Hamilton: A representative from New York, as well as a renowned Federalist, he has been credited with the initial ideology expressed in the Constitution. The practices that were proposed in his Federalist Papers, a direct explication of the perceived flaws of the Articles of Confederation, have been credited with both the inspiration and the framework of the Constitution.
 
●  James Madison: A Federalist credited with the collective authorship of the Federalist Papers. He has been considered by many to be the Father of the Constitution. Due to his acumen in political thought and theory, he applied a majority of the tenets expressed in the Federalist Papers to the ideology of the Constitution and oftentimes has been regarded as providing the groundwork and structure to the document. 
●  Thomas Jefferson and John Adams: Thomas Jefferson has also been credited as the Father of the Declaration of Independence. He, as well as John Adams are both considered to be the primary framers of the Constitution. Yet, in an ironic turn of events, they were both in Europe on diplomatic assignment during the ratification of the Constitution, and thus, neither of the two signed the document.
●  Roger Sherman: Many historians argue that without Roger Sherman’s introduction of the Connecticut Plan, a selection process for individual State legislation, the ratification of the Constitution might never have taken place. As a result of his ingenuity and ability to meet the collective needs of all 13 states, he is credited as a Father of the Constitution. 
Though historians might never agree on who was the single-most prominent Father of the Constitution, there exists at least one facet upon which a majority of historians agree: The framers of the Constitution were amongst the most innovative, revolutionary, and progressive political minds of their time.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/constitutional-convention/when-was-the-constitution-written/feed 0