SHAYS'S REBELLION (1786)

The end of the Revolutionary War brought widespread economic problems among farmers, precipitated by the collapse of prices for agricultural products. Several states loaned money to farmers (in the form of scrip, or paper money) to pay their taxes and debts and some states passed stay laws to postpone taxes and mortgage payments. However, the Massachusetts state legislature - dominated by financial and merchant interests - blocked relief measures for poor farmers. Nonpayment of taxes and debts in Massachusetts led to foreclosure proceedings and imprisonment for debt.

Farmers in western Massachusetts - desperate for relief - took up arms to prevent courts from meeting. Artemas Ward and other judges were prevented from holding legal proceedings to seize farms for nonpayment of taxes. When Governor James Bowdoin issued a proclamation against unlawful assembly and called out the militia to enforce it, the soldiers he sent to Springfield were met with armed farmers led by a former Revolutionary War officer, Captain Daniel Shays. The militia withdrew after a long standoff, leaving the rebels in charge and the courts unable to meet. The rebellion was quickly put down by armed forces sent from Boston, but Shays's Rebellion reinforced the fears of national leaders about the dangers of ineffective state governments and popular democracy out of control.

POLITICAL THEORY OF THE REVOLUTIONARY ERA

Initially, the Revolution was fought to preserve an existing way of life. Existing rights of life, liberty, and property seemed to be threatened by British policies on trade and taxation. The Revolution was inspired by a concern for liberty (which was understood as the preservation of traditional rights against the intrusions of government) and stimulated by the development of sentiments for popular sovereignty (which assumes that ultimate political authority belongs to the people) and political equality.

Delegates to the Second Continental Congress did not originally have independence in mind, but they concluded by the spring of 1776 that separation and independence were inescapable. A special committee was appointed, composed of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin, was to draft the document, and the Declaration of Independence (primarily the work of Jefferson) was adopted by the Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776. The philosophy in the Declaration reflected the political culture of the era in which it was written. Jefferson, closely following John Locke's ideas in The Second Treatise of Civil Government, argued that legitimate government can be established only by the people and can govern only with their consent. The philosophy remains a part of American political culture today - notably, that human beings possess rights that cannot be legitimately given away or taken from them, that people create government to protect these rights, and that people can withdraw their consent from government and create a new one if government fails to protect rights or if government itself becomes a threat to them.

The ideas in the Declaration sparked a responsive chord among peoples everywhere when they were first presented, and they remain very popular all over the world today. However, several issues were left unsettled - the Declaration did not deal with the issue of what to do about slavery (a significant omission in light of its defense of inalienable rights and the claim that "all men are created equal"); did not consider the question of whether the colonies were declaring their independence as a single new nation or as thirteen separate nations; and did not say anything about the political status of women, Native Americans, or African-Americans who were not slaves.

THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION: THE FIRST CONSTITUTION

The Articles of Confederation were introduced in the Continental Congress in July 1776 and adopted in 1781. Leaders envisioned a loose confederation among largely sovereign states; little power was intended for the central government. The structure was intended to assure that central government did not infringe on the liberty of the people and power of the states.

Problems and weaknesses of the Articles soon became apparent - bonds and notes of the confederate government had no value because the central government could not compel states to pay tax assessments; the new nation was unable to defend American interests in foreign affairs with no chief executive and with veto power in the hands of the states; and states became commercial rivals of their neighbors. States retained veto power over constitutional change; defects in the constitution were almost impossible to remedy because amending the Articles required unanimous consent of the states. The few areas of responsibility assigned to the central government were almost impossible to legislate because congressional legislation had to be approved by 9 of the 13 states.

FACTORS LEADING TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

Failures of the Articles of Confederation and growing concern by influential citizens about democratizing and egalitarian tendencies led most of the leading citizens to favor a new constitution. In an attempt to obtain popular support for the American Revolution, leaders had appealed to the people for the defense of freedom and for the spread of the blessings of liberty. The common people were convinced that success in the American Revolution would bring substantial improvements in their lives, but this desire for popular participation and greater equality is not what most of the leaders of the Revolution had in mind. The framers favored republicanism (a theory of how nontyrannical governments might be constructed), not democracy. Eighteenth-century republicans favored government based on popular consent, but with limited powers of government. Republicans believed that the only way to gain the consent of the governed and to simultaneously prevent tyranny was to elect government leaders and limit the power of government. Republicanism represented a step toward democracy, but retained some aristocratic or elitist features.

In the mid-1780s, popular conventions were established to monitor and control the actions of state legislators; conventions issued instructions to representatives on how they were to vote on issues. Popular culture grew increasingly hostile to privilege of any kind, and state legislatures were increasingly inclined to pass laws protecting debtors. Popular opinion strongly favored property rights but also sympathized with farmers who were being forced to pay their debts with increasingly tight money and who believed that many creditors had accumulated notes speculatively or unfairly. Finally, Shays's Rebellion reinforced fears about the dangers of majority rule and prominent citizens were alarmed by the inability of the government to maintain public order. It was in this climate of crisis that a call was issued to meet in Philadelphia to correct defects in the Articles of Confederation.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

Delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia were not common folk. They were the wealthy holders of government bonds and real estate, successful merchants, bankers, lawyers and owners of large plantations. The framers were experienced in American politics and better educated than the masses, which raised questions about their intentions. Historian Charles Beard in his book, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution, claims the framers were engaged in a conspiracy to protect their personal economic interest. Legions of defenders and detractors agree that Beard overemphasized the degree to which the framers were driven by their immediate need to "line their own pockets." There is little doubt that broad economic and social-class motives were at work in shaping the actions of the framers. That being said, the authors acknowledge that the framers were launched on a novel and exciting adventure of creating a form of government that existed nowhere else during the late eighteenth century.

The results of consensus and conflict at the Convention are explained in this chapter. Delegates agreed on the need to substitute a new constitution for the Articles of Confederation. There was strong support for a substantially strengthened national government with a reduction in the power and sovereignty of the states (combined with concern that a strong national government is potentially tyrannical) and belief in a republican form of government (based on popular consent but not unduly swayed by public opinion). Conflict at the convention often centered around disagreements between large and small states, involving issues such as representation of the states in the legislature and the method of selecting a president.

Proposals for representation of the states centered around the Virginia Plan (designed to create a strong central government controlled by the wealthiest and most populous states) and the New Jersey Plan (which envisioned a slightly more powerful national government than under the Articles of Confederation and was favored by the small states). The debates eventually culminated in the Great Compromise (sometimes known as the Connecticut Plan or Connecticut Compromise), which called for a bicameral national legislature with representation in the lower house based on population (favoring the large states) and equal representation for each of the states in the upper house (favoring the small states). Under the Great Compromise, members of the lower house would be directly elected while senators would be selected by state legislatures.

The framers created a republican form of government. Republican government is based on popular consent. The framers placed obstacles in the path of majoritarian democracy and limited the purposes and powers of the government in order to prevent tyranny. The Constitution fashioned a federal system in which some powers are left to the states, some powers are shared by component units and the central government, and some are granted to the central government alone. The supremacy clause of Article IV, tilted toward national power and the elastic clause found in Article I, became the foundations for the growth of the federal government in the twentieth century.

The framers adopted the idea of mixed or balanced government, which had been popularized by the French philosopher Montesquieu. The central idea of balanced government is that concentrated power of any kind is dangerous; the solution is to fragment government executive, legislative, and judicial powers, and to place them into different branches (the constitutional principle of separation of powers). To further ensure that power could not be exercised in a tyrannical fashion, the framers arranged for the legislative, executive, and judicial branches to check one another in such a way that no branch of the national government would be able to act entirely on its own without the cooperation of the others (the principle of checks and balances); powers are shared among separate branches.

THE STRUGGLE TO RATIFY THE CONSTITUTION

Ratification of the Constitution was a difficult process. Debate centered around the positions of the Federalists (who favored ratification) and the Anti-Federalists (who opposed ratification). The Federalists enjoyed intellectual advantages in the dispute, most notably seen in The Federalist Papers, a series of 85 essays in defense of the proposed Constitution, written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay.

Anti-Federalists believed that the new Constitution threatened people's liberty, and they were deeply concerned about the absence of a bill of rights. Federalists believed that a bill of rights was not necessary because of the protection of rights in state constitutions and safeguards already included in the proposed Constitution. During the debate over ratification, Federalists promised to add a bill of rights during the first session of Congress. This was accomplished when twelve amendments were proposed during the first session and the first ten amendments were ratified by December 15, 1791.

THE CHANGING CONSTITUTION, DEMOCRACY, AND AMERICAN POLITICS

The theme of this text is the struggle for democracy, and Chapter 2 examines the question of how the constitution relates to democracy (see the "How Democratic are We?" Box in the Chapter). The framers especially valued liberty; instituting democratic government was not one of their aims. Political life has become more democratic than the framers imagined or wanted.

The authors call the Constitution the "basic rule book" for the game of American politics. Constitutional rules apportion power and responsibility among governmental branches, define the fundamental nature of relationships between governmental institutions, specify how individuals are to be selected for office, and tell how the rules themselves may be changed. Major outlines of our present-day government that continue to fashion our politics today are expressed in the document written in 1787. However, constitutional rules can and do change over time. The Constitution has been formally amended only 27 times, but the meaning of the Constitution has changed by means of decisions and interpretations of the Supreme Court, as well as through changing political practices and customs. The tendency of the Constitution to change with the times is why we sometimes refer to the "living Constitution."

Copyright © 1995-2008, Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Pearson Longman Legal and Privacy Terms