During the state conventions that considered whether to
adopt the Constitution that had been written in the Philadelphia Convention, Federalists
were for the adoption of the Constitution while Anti-federalists were some of them
against adopting it and other for adopting it only if it was first
amended.
Federalists wanted a strong central government
that would rule the people of the United States directly and not through the state
governments. Anti-federalists wanted a weak central government that would serve the
governments of the states by performing those functions of government that could be
better preformed by one authority than by 13 different authorities, such as defense and
diplomacy. Other functions of government would be performed by the states, not by the
federal government.
Federalist were for a system of strong
federal courts while Anti-federalists were for limits on the federal courts. For
example, Anti-federalists were opposed to the U.S. Supreme Court having original
jurisdiction to hear suits between a state and a citizen of another state. The suit
would be about the laws of the state involved, so it should be heard by the courts of
that state. This power and other powers given to the U.S. courts would result in the
destruction of both the judicial function and the legislative function of the state
governments. Federalists were for this original jurisdiction and for the U.S. courts
having the power of review and veto over the enactments of the state legislatures and
the decisions of the state courts.
The Federalists were for
the federal government having the power to raise taxes directly from the people. They
said that without this power, the U.S. could not have an effective defense nor an
effective diplomacy, nor could it repay foreign debts contracted by the government. The
Anti-federalists opposed this and were for the federal government getting its money from
the state governments. They said that without this check on the federal government, it
would become tyrannical over the people and the states.
The
Anti-federalists were against the federal government having the power to federalize the
state militias. The Federalists were for this power.
The
Federalists wanted one commercial policy for the whole country; the Anti-federalists
wanted more flexibility in commercial policies to fit the needs of people in different
parts of the country. The Anti-federalists thought that powerful commercial interests
would use the government to subject some regions of the country to the commercial
servitude of other regions, if the government were given this power. George Mason, a
plantation master and Anti-federalist thought that any commercial laws passed by the
U.S. Congress should have the approval of 3/4 of those present and voting. He had
helped draft the U.S. Constitution in the Philadelphia Convention, but he refused to
sign it because it did not make this provision.
There were
other differences.
No comments:
Post a Comment