Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 15, 2025
It included not only most of the Anti-Federalists, but the small politicians, the tradesmen and artisans, who had worked themselves into a ridiculous frenzy over the French Revolution and who despised Washington for his noble neutrality.
Chase was the leader of the Anti-Federalists in Maryland, but was at first compelled by popular feeling to temporize, as is shown by the following extracts, taken from the Maryland Journal for September 28, 1787: The following is the conclusion of the speech of Samuel Chase, Esq., delivered this day, at the Court House, before a numerous and respectable body of citizens.
It was agreed that when it was adopted by nine states, it should become the supreme law of the land. Now for the first time there was a real national issue. The people arranged themselves into two great political parties, the Federalists, who believed in a strong government and the new Constitution, and the Anti-Federalists, who were opposed to a stronger union between the states.
In December, 1788, a bill for carrying into operation the federal constitution being under consideration, a proposition was made to choose United States senators; but the federalists having a majority in the Senate, and the anti-federalists a majority in the House of Assembly, no compromise between the parties could be effected, and consequently no senators were chosen.
The weakness of the anti-federalists, in regard to the point just mentioned, sufficiently shews their delinquency with respect to rational argument. They have done nothing more than barely to assert, that the representation would not be sufficient: it is a true saying, that assertions are often the very reverse of facts.
The anti-federalists have said, that if a cause should come before one of state judicial courts, and judgment be given against the person who possessed most interest, that he would immediately appeal to the federal court, whose residence would be at the seat of government, and consequently at so great a distance that an inhabitant of the state of Georgia or New-Hampshire, if he was in low circumstances, would not be able to carry his cause before the federal court, and would, therefore, be obliged to give it up to his wealthier antagonist.
Soon after the adoption of the new constitution, the anti-federal party were recognised by a name more descriptive of their principles and their views. They assumed the title of democrats. They considered themselves anti-consolidationists, but not anti-federalists. They knew that a section of the dominant party were the friends of a splendid national government.
In these were explained all the points of the Constitution, and to this day they remain the best exposition of the Constitution ever written. The objections raised by the Anti-Federalists were many. In the first place, it was of course objected that it gave to the central government too much power; that state government and State liberty would be crushed out.
Soon after the adoption of the new constitution, the anti-federal party were recognised by a name more descriptive of their principles and their views. They assumed the title of democrats. They considered themselves anti-consolidationists, but not anti-federalists. They knew that a section of the dominant party were the friends of a splendid national government.
These discussions arose on the question of calling a state convention. Parties had now become organized. The friends of the new constitution styled themselves federalists. Its opponents were designated anti-federalists.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking