Controversial Constitution

Ashling Geary

Period 5 APUSH

November 12, 2015

Controversial Constitution

           In the late 18th century the Constitution was launched, establishing America’s fundamental laws and basic rights for citizens, had a growing value of slave labor. Framers of the constitution, or known as wealthy landowners such as the Founding Fathers or John Marshall, felt the constitution had foundational principles that would withstand and guide the new nation into an uncertain future. Some say the framers pursued to consolidate federal power in order to value slave labor. However, others say these framers had envisioned a way of the constitution to benefit others for a brighter future. Therefore, Framers of the constitution did sought to take most of the federal power in order to benefit themselves, on the contrary they also used it to benefit the public.

     Going against the ways of the Constitution and Framers, Anti-Federalists described the Constitution as a ‘’Document secretly produced by lawyers and a hated ‘aristocratic monied interest’ that aimed to rob Americans of their hard-won liberties.’’(Schweikart 120). It is believed the ways of the constitution were following a path of valuing slave labor, on which many opposed. Discrimination was also a factor for example four groups were not represented in the Constitutional Convention such as slaves, indentured servants, women and men without property. And so the constitution did not reflect the interests of those groups.’’(Zinn 91). Completely neglecting the whole ‘’Constitution establishes equal rights’’ aspect of it therefore showing the Framers aren’t really caring about a brighter future for the society however only for themselves and or their followers.

     Therefore showing the Framers benefiting from federal power by creating slave labor of which many tried to abolish and spare those of that torture. Anti-Federalists also expressed a shock at a ‘’extent of taxation and warfare powers.’’ (Schweikart 120), leaving them left with no resources to spare. Besides the fact of beneficial labor and tax extension, single powered government was a big worry when the Constitution was announced, such as President James Monroe, the future president, worried that the document would lead to a monarchial government. A historian of the 20th century Charles Beard states that (in short) ‘’the rich must, in their own interest, either control the government directly or control the laws by which the government operates.’’(Zinn 90). Showing how the rich claim their own power for themselves and with many debts arising and all the elite minority seems to be doing is extending taxes goes to show that they may as well be takin all the federal power of the constitution for themselves.

    On a view from the people, and not those of the patriots they believe that those wealthy landowners had also benefitted the public and did not try to take it for their own. Historian George Bancroft states in the early 19th century, ‘’The Constitution establishes nothing that interferes with equality and individuality.’’(Zinn 90).         It shows that the Constitution has no affliction with any individual person and or opinion or type of equality. In the previous paragraph, Charles Beard, historian, claims the rich must take control of the government however he strives to make it clear, ‘’he did not think the Constitution was written merely to benefit the Founding Fathers(included Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, etc.) personally…’’(Zinn 91). Not only did the Constitution benefit the Founding Fathers, but their representors, they seem to have understood their economic interests and believe the framers were doing an act of goodwill. Although it was clear the Framers of the constitution tried to benefit themselves with anything they had, it is understandable to believe that they also gave back to the public and respected their individual rights.