Jeff Shettler
History 583
October 18, 2006
Précis: The Other Founders; Anti-Federalism and the Dissenting Tradition in America, 1788-1828, Saul Cornell, The University of North Carolina Press, 1999
In The Other Founders, Saul Cornell
examines the history of debate and dissent in the forming of the
Part I
Information from both the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist camps was distributed to the people through various channels. Through the pamphlets, papers, and, on occasion, manuscripts, the ideas of the Anti-Federalists found their way to the public. Interestingly, Cornell points out that most of these writings were produced (and sometimes intended) only for small audiences and not reproduced in large quantities. Even so, the Anti-Federalists’ views found their way into the American discourse of the time. The debate seemed not only accepted by both sides, but encouraged. As one writer put it “Those who are competent to the task of developing government, ought to be encouraged to come forward.”
In the first section of the book, Cornell outlines the arguments that the Anti-Federalists shared. Among the complaints against the constitution that appeared in the literature were the lack of a bill of rights, the degree of authority granted to federal courts, and the absence of references to express liberties and rights of the citizens. Many of the items Anti-Federalists wished to see incorporated in the new constitution came directly from the Articles of Confederation, such as the right to bear arms and the fears associated with a standing army. Size of the government was also a significant concern for the Anti-Federalists since they believed that a government based far from most of the citizens would be unresponsive to them. They instead maintained that state and local governments would better secure the future of republicanism.
Although most
Anti-Federalists spoke against stratification of the social order, each social
class made a distinct contribution to Anti-Federalist constitutional thought. The social elite became an important part of
the process of dissent. Cornell points
out that having this elite on the side of the Anti-Federalists helped to lend
credence to their arguments. These people
with political connections helped to insure that Anti-Federalist ideas would
gain widespread circulation. The
middling classes, represented most effectively by writers such as Federal
Farmer, spoke out against the aristocracy they saw rising in government and believed
that the only way to combat this trend was to have government placed close to
home. For their part, the populist plebeians
rose up in violent opposition against the constitution in the
The
Anti-Federalist opposition began to gain a greater footing as states such as
Part II
Once the states ratified the constitution, opposition to the constitution itself seemed to dissipate. Instead, the Anti-Federalists took their place in government and carried on their tradition of dissent by engaging in debate from within. From the structure of representation to arguments over the proper wording of the amendments, the Anti-Federalists staked out positions to challenge the Federalists and thereby established for themselves the role of loyal opposition.
Now that the Anti-Federalists had become part of the government, new alliances began to emerge. With the advent of the “Court Party” that sought to bring more power to the executive branch of the government, many moderate Federalists began to agree with certain views of their erstwhile opponents. As many of the former Anti-Federalists’ fears came to be realized, leaders such as Jefferson and Madison began to switch their allegiance and joined the loyal opposition.
This amalgam of
former Federalists and Anti-Federalists became the Democratic-Republicans. Their opposition to Hamiltonian ideas became
the glue that held them together. The
Democratic-Republicans opposed
Part III
The Alien and
Sedition Acts of 1798 appeared to many as another
example of the national government making a grab for more power. The opposition responded by exploring new
ways to oppose the government. The
compact treaty of federal government proposed that the states, as signatories
to the constitution, could put a check on the powers the national government
was accruing. Jefferson and Madison were
able to put through resolutions in both the
The tradition of
dissent in