The national government would fail without New York and Virginia signing on, being powerful economic and political centers, and their ratification conventions were deadlocked.
The issue of a bill of rights was the turning point.
I am persuaded that it is the best which our political situation, habits, and opinions will admit, and superior to any the revolution has produced. A nation, without a national government, is, in my view, an awful spectacle.
The establishment of a Constitution, in time of profound peace, by the voluntary consent of a whole people, is a prodigy, to the completion of which I look forward with trembling anxiety.
67 to 77, about the powers of the executive branch—like the president’s commander-in-chief and pardoning powers, in No. Madison, too, wrote essays on the fundamental powers of the federal and state governments: in Nos.
41, 42, and 43, describing the general powers of the federal government (to declare war; to borrow money; “to make treaties; to send and receive ambassadors …Should America embrace commerce and the aristocracy or a democratic, agrarian way of life?The choice was between Jefferson and Hamilton’s competing visions of America.on local factions and insurrections” and “the prevention of extensive military establishments, which could not fail to grow out of wars between the States in a disunited situation.” He then entreated each person to consider carefully the arguments of the Federalist Papers: Let us now pause and ask ourselves whether, in the course of these papers, the proposed Constitution has not been satisfactorily vindicated from the aspersions thrown upon it; and whether it has not been shown to be worthy of the public approbation, and necessary to the public safety and prosperity.Every man is bound to answer these questions to himself, according to the best of his conscience and understanding, and to act agreeably to the genuine and sober dictates of his judgment.; to define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations; to regulate foreign commerce”); in No. 45, the powers left to the states (“all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State”). 2, 3, 4, and 5, wrote about the dangers from “foreign force and influence” that wholly independent states would face without a unified federal republic: “[W]eakness and divisions at home would invite dangers from abroad; and that nothing would tend more to secure us from them than union, strength, and good government within ourselves.” Finally, in the last Federalist, No.44, the restrictions on state power (“No State shall enter into any treaty … 85, Hamilton summarized the security that a unified government under the Constitution would provide, such as “restraints …Between October 1787 and May 1788, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay undertook what was essentially a public relations campaign to encourage New York to ratify the U. New York was a large, populous, and geographically central state, and its membership in the new republic was crucial. Though the members of the Constitutional Convention had already approved the document as of September 17, 1787, it could not go into effect until at least nine states ratified it.While the Constitution does not mention political parties, the legacy of the Federalist –Antifederalist debate was the birth of the party system with the new Federalist and Democratic-Republican parties.Madison and Jefferson (Democratic-Republicans) by the late 1790’s came to think Hamilton and his Federalists had become a faction.