alexander hamilton (1757–1804) - amazon web services€¦ · alexander hamilton was born in 1757...

Founders and the Constitution: In Their Own Words—Volume 2

Alexander Hamilton(1757–1804)

In a government framed for durable liberty,no less regard must be paid to giving themagistrate a proper degree of authority, to

make and execute the laws with vigour than toguarding against encroachments upon the rightsof the community. As too much power leads todespotism, too little leads to anarchy, and botheventually to the ruin of the people.

—Alexander Hamilton, 1781

IntroductionAlexander Hamilton is perhaps the most misunderstood and under-appreciated of theFounders. A proponent of a strong national government with an “energetic executive,” he issometimes described as the godfather of modern big government. But Hamilton was no lessa champion of human liberty than his more famous political rival and American icon,Thomas Jefferson. And his personal story is impressive.

Born in the West Indies, the illegitimate son of a Scottish merchant, young Hamiltonseemed condemned to a life of hardship on the lowest rung of society. But his intellectualtalents won him passage to the American colonies on the eve of the Revolution. Though stilla teenager in 1775, Hamilton made a name for himself as a spokesman for the Patriot cause.After American independence, Hamilton worked to strengthen the national government asa delegate to the Constitutional Convention and later in The Federalist Papers. As secretaryof the treasury in the Washington Administration, Hamilton endeavored to promote anindustrial, market economy throughout the United States of America. Though his plan wasnot fully implemented in his lifetime, Hamilton’s ideas became the foundation of theAmerican financial and economic system that would take shape during the mid- and late-nineteenth century.

While acting as the defense lawyer in a New York trial of 1803, Hamilton expanded theidea of freedom of the press by arguing that truth could be used as a defense in criminal libelcases. Though he lost the case, New York subsequently changed its libel laws, acceptingHamilton’s argument. A year after the trial, Hamilton was killed by Aaron Burr in a duel,cutting short the life of a significant Founder.

Relevant Thematic Essays for Alexander Hamilton• Limited Government• Liberty• Commerce (Volume 1)

r

r

08 050-061 Found2 Hamilton 9/13/07 11:10 AM Page 50

In His Own Words:Alexander Hamilton

ON THE CONSTITUTION

Alexander Hamilton

Standards

CCE (9–12): IC1, IC3, IIIA1, IIIA2NCHS (5–12): Era III, Standards 3A,3B, 3DNCSS: Strands 2, 5, 6, and 10

MaterialsStudent Handouts

• Handout A—Alexander Hamilton(1757–1804)

• Handout B—Vocabulary andContext Questions

• Handout C—In His Own Words:Alexander Hamilton on theConstitution

• Handout D—Outline of FederalistNo. 70

Additional Teacher Resource

• Answer Key

Recommended Time

One 45-minute class period.Additional time as needed forhomework.

OverviewIn this lesson, students will learn about AlexanderHamilton. They should first read as homeworkHandout A—Alexander Hamilton (1757–1804) andanswer the Reading Comprehension Questions. Afterdiscussing the answers in class, the teacher should havestudents answer the Critical Thinking Questions as aclass. Next, the teacher should introduce the primarysource activity, Handout C—In His Own Words:Alexander Hamilton on the Constitution in whichHamilton argues for an energetic executive. As a preface,there is Handout B—Vocabulary and Context Questions,which will help the students understand the document.Then, working in pairs or trios, they will completeHandout D—Outline of Federalist No. 70 by paraphrasingthe main ideas and supports of Hamilton’s argument.

There is a Follow-Up Homework Option, whichasks students to create a dialogue between Hamilton andsomeone who disagrees with him about a strong executivebranch. Extensions asks students to explain how theybelieve Hamilton would view modern additions to theexecutive branch such as the FBI or the Department ofEducation, or to read and analyze one of Hamilton’s lettersto his wife about his upcoming duel with Aaron Burr.

ObjectivesStudents will:

• explain Hamilton’s reasoning in support of asingle and powerful executive leader.

• understand Hamilton’s role at the ConstitutionalConvention.

• understand the historical context and purpose ofThe Federalist Papers.

• analyze Federalist and Anti-Federalist views aboutthe nature of the executive branch.

• evaluate the effectiveness of Hamilton’s argumentsin excerpts from Federalist No. 70.

• appreciate the role Hamilton played in shapingthe new United States government.


I. Background HomeworkAsk students to read Handout A—Alexander Hamilton (1757–1804) and answer theReading Comprehension Questions.

II. Warm-Up [10 minutes]A. Review answers to homework questions.B. Conduct a whole-class discussion to answer the Critical Thinking Questions.C. Ask a student to summarize the historical significance of Alexander Hamilton.

Hamilton was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, a Federalist leader andco-author of The Federalist Papers. He served as secretary of the treasury underPresident George Washington and worked to establish a national economic system forAmerica. Hamilton died at age forty-seven in a duel with his political rival, Aaron Burr.

III. Context [5 minutes]Briefly review with students the debate among Federalists and Anti-Federalists regardingthe ratification of the Constitution. Federalists wanted a strong central government,while Anti-Federalists were concerned that the Constitution would create a presidentwho was too powerful. Additionally, discuss the historical meaning of the word“energy” which was commonly used as a synonym for “strength” or “power.”

IV. In His Own Words [20 minutes]A. Begin by asking the class to consider how having a national executive council

could be different from having one president. They may also consider: How wouldschool be different if they had two principals? How do families with one parentdiffer from those with two? How could their home life be different if they had acouncil of parents?

Students may suggest that having a council of leaders or parents decreases accountability,and that if no one person is responsible, there may be less efficiency. Some may pointout that a team of executives may be better able to consider issues from broaderperspectives. Others may say that having two or more executives may contribute topeople taking sides, and the result being a divided nation.

B. Distribute Handout B—Vocabulary and Context Questions and Handout C—InHis Own Words: Alexander Hamilton on the Constitution.

C. Ask students to read silently the excerpts from Federalist No. 70 and pay closeattention to the main ideas of each paragraph in bold.

D. Divide students into pairs or trios to complete Handout B and the outline onHandout D—Outline of Federalist No. 70. They should begin by filling in themain idea of each paragraph by paraphrasing it into their own words.

E. Next, have each group paraphrase and fill in each of Hamilton’s supporting pointsfor each paragraph.

F. Fill in the outline as a class with an overhead of Handout D.

LESSON PLAN



V. Wrap-Up Discussion [10 minutes]Ask students to evaluate the effectiveness of Hamilton’s argument in favor of a singleexecutive. Did he argue persuasively? What were his strongest points? What were theshortcomings of his argument?

VI. Follow-Up Homework OptionsHave students write a dialogue between Hamilton and someone who disagrees withhim. The two should discuss the question of which type of executive branch wouldbetter protect liberty: a single executive or an executive council.

VII. ExtensionsA. Have students examine the executive branch as it exists today. Have students write

a two- to three-paragraph essay explaining how they believe Hamilton would viewadding to the executive branch, for example, the FDA, the FBI, the Department ofEducation, or the Department of Homeland Security. Do these departmentsbolster or drain the energy of the executive?

B. On July 4, 1804, Alexander Hamilton wrote to his wife about the upcoming duelwith Aaron Burr. How does Hamilton feel about the “interview”? Why do youthink he went ahead with the duel?

“This letter, my very dear Eliza, will not be delivered to you, unless I shall first haveterminated my earthly career; to begin, as I humbly hope from redeeming grace anddivine mercy, a happy immortality. . . . If it had been possible for me to have avoidedthe interview, my love for you and my precious children would have been alone adecise motive. But it was not possible, without sacrifices which would have renderedme unworthy of your esteem. . . .”

Source: “To Elizabeth Hamilton.” American Studies at the University of Virginia.<http://xroads.virginia.edu/ ~CAP/ham/LTRELIZA.HTML>.

C. Have students research the details of the duel between Alexander Hamilton andAaron Burr, and report to the class about the Code Duelo.

Alexander Hamilton

LESSON PLAN


Resources

PrintBrookhiser, Richard. Alexander Hamilton, American. New York: Free Press, 2000.Chernow, Ron. Alexander Hamilton. New York: The Penguin Press, 2004.Ellis, Joseph. Founding Brothers. New York: Alfred Knopf, 2000.Freeman, Joanne B., ed. Hamilton: Writings. New York: Library of America, 2001.McDonald, Forrest. Alexander Hamilton: A Biography. New York: Norton, 1982.

Internet“Alexander Hamilton.” National Archives and Records Administration: The Founding Fathers.

<http://www.archives.gov/exhibit_hall/charters_of_freedom/constitution/new_york.html>.“Alexander Hamilton, New York.” The United States Army. <http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/RevWar/

ss/hamilton.htm>.“Alexander Hamilton on the Web.” <http://www.isidore-of-seville.com/hamilton/>.“The American Experience: The Duel.” PBS: The American Experience. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/

amex/duel/>.“A Biography of Alexander Hamilton.” From Revolution to Reconstruction. <http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/

B/hamilton/hamilxx.htm>.“The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History.” <http://www.gilderlehrman.org/>.

Selected Works by Alexander Hamilton• The Farmer Refuted (1775)• Continentalist Essays (1781)• The Federalist Papers [with James Madison and John Jay] (1787–1788)• Report on Public Credit (1790)• Report on Manufacturers (1791)

LESSON PLAN


08 050-061 Found2 Hamilton 9/13/07 11:10 AM 4

Energy in the Executive is a leading character in the definition of good government.

—Alexander Hamilton, 1788

Alexander Hamilton never meant it to come to this. But there he stood in1804 on a rock ledge, some ten feet wide and forty feet long, just belowthe plains of Weehawken, New Jersey. Twenty paces away stood AaronBurr, Vice President of the United States and Hamilton’s political rival.Burr had taken exception to several unflattering remarks Hamiltonhad made about Burr’s character. When Hamilton refused to disavowthe comments, Burr challenged him to a duel. Hamilton believed thathonor required him to meet Burr for what the men called an “interview.”

Now Hamilton raised his pistol and fired. Burr flinched as the bulletharmlessly struck a tree branch above his head. Burr paused and tookcareful aim at Hamilton. He squeezed the trigger of the pistol, a shot rangout, and Hamilton fell. He had been hit four inches above the hip. Thebullet broke a rib and tore through his liver and diaphragm, finally lodging inhis spine. A doctor who had been asked to be present at the duel rushed to Hamilton,who immediately told him, “This is a mortal wound, Doctor.” Hamilton was right. Hedied the next day.

BackgroundAlexander Hamilton was born in 1757 on the island of Nevis in the British West Indies.He was the illegitimate son of a poor Scottish merchant and a woman of French descent.Hamilton’s father deserted the family when Hamilton was a toddler. His mother diedwhen he was eleven years old. Hamilton then became an apprentice clerk in a shippingbusiness. His intelligence and ambition impressed a local businessman, who arranged tosend the boy to America to receive a formal education.

Hamilton attended a school in Elizabethtown, New Jersey. He completed the two-year course of study in less than a year. Hamilton next considered entering PrincetonCollege in New Jersey. But the president of the college, John Witherspoon, would notagree to the gifted Hamilton’s request to study at his own pace. Hamilton instead choseKing’s College in New York. He completed the four-year program in two-and-a-half years.But he never formally graduated. Political events distracted him.

Young Patriot and SoldierAt the age of seventeen, Hamilton became active in New York’s Patriot movement. Hewrote two pamphlets and spoke at rallies denouncing British tyranny. After war brokeout, Hamilton formed an artillery company. His unit was soon under the command ofGeneral George Washington. Washington asked him to join his personal staff and promotedthe twenty-year-old to the rank of lieutenant colonel.

An indispensible aide to General Washington, Hamilton did not return to a fieldcommand until 1781 during the Yorktown Campaign. Hamilton personally led a bayonetattack against the British entrenchments. Americans won their War of Independence fivedays later.

Alexander Hamilton

ALEXANDER HAMILTON (1757–1804)

Handout A

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

r

r


Ambitious StatesmanIn 1780, Hamilton had married Elizabeth Schuyler, daughter of a wealthy and powerfulNew York family. Two years later, he was admitted to the bar after a mere three monthsof study of the law. In 1783, he was chosen to represent New York in the ConfederationCongress. There he became an ally of Virginian James Madison, who shared Hamilton’sdesire for a stronger central government. But frustration with other colleagues causedHamilton to leave Congress in 1784.

Hamilton became a leading critic of the Articles of Confederation during the 1780s.In 1787, Hamilton was appointed a member of the New York delegation to theConstitutional Convention.

Securing the ConstitutionHamilton played a minor role in the debates at Philadelphia for two reasons. First, hewas often absent from the proceedings because of legal business. Second, his extremelynationalist views caused many of his fellow delegates to discount his views. “Thegentleman from New York,” summarized William Johnson of Connecticut, is “praised byeverybody . . . [but] supported by none.” Hamilton in particular favored the creation ofa strong executive branch headed by a single elected president who would serve for life.

The Constitution produced by the Philadelphia convention greatly increased thepower of the central government, though not as much as Hamilton had hoped.Nevertheless, he thought it far superior to the Articles of Confederation.

Hamilton took the lead in the campaign for ratification in New York. He joined withMadison and John Jay in writing a series of essays during 1787–1788 supporting theConstitution. These essays, written anonymously under the name “Publius,” becameknown as The Federalist Papers. Hamilton wrote fifty-two of the eighty-five Federalistessays. They were soon published in book form and sold throughout the country.

In The Federalist Papers, Hamilton made the case that “the vigor of government isessential to the security of liberty.” Brushing aside concerns about tyranny, Hamiltonmade the case for a strong executive branch. “Energy in the Executive,” Hamilton wrotein Federalist No. 70, “is a leading character in the definition of good government.”

Economics and PoliticsHamilton eagerly accepted the post of secretary of the treasury under President GeorgeWashington. He intended to use his position to build a national economic system forAmerica. Hamilton believed that such a system would bind Americans together andcreate a strong nation.

Hamilton pressed for the establishment of a national bank, funding of the nationaldebt, and assumption of state war debts. He also favored a tax to protect manufacturing,and the creation of a standing army and navy. Hamilton wanted to change the basis ofwealth in America from land to money. Money, he held, was the great equalizer. Anyonecould acquire it and thereby advance up the economic and social ladder.

Hamilton’s bold plan alarmed many who feared government power. Secretary ofState Thomas Jefferson became the leader of the opposition to Hamilton. The firstAmerican party system formed around these two men. The Federalists supported theHamiltonian program. The Democratic-Republicans (or simply, Republicans) workedfor its defeat.


Handout A

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute


Duel and DeathIn 1795, Hamilton left the Washington administration and resumed his law practice inNew York City. While acting as the defense lawyer in People of New York v. Croswell(1803), he made the argument that truth could be used as a legitimate defense incriminal libel cases. Though Hamilton lost the case, this principle was accepted inAmerican law and greatly expanded the freedom of the press.

The year after this case, Vice President Aaron Burr challenged Hamilton to a duel.Burr and Hamilton were political rivals, and Burr had taken offense at remarks attributedto Hamilton. On July 11, 1804, the two men met in the early morning at Weehawken,New Jersey. Hamilton and Burr both fired one shot. Hamilton’s bullet missed its mark,but Burr’s found Hamilton’s hip. Mortally wounded, Hamilton died the next day at theage of forty-seven.

Alexander Hamilton

Handout A

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

Reading Comprehension Questions

1. What role did Hamilton play in the creation of the Constitution?

2. What were the elements of the economic plan proposed by Hamilton when hebecame secretary of the treasury? Why did he make these proposals?

3. What role did Hamilton play in the creation of the first American party system?

Critical Thinking Questions

4. Hamilton believed in the importance of developing America’s commercial andindustrial economy. Which economic system better promotes liberty andpersonal freedom: a commercial and industrial economy or an agrarian(agricultural) economy?

5. Do you think that having a strong federal government ensures that you havegreater individual liberty? Why or why not?


Excerpts from Federalist No. 70 (1788)

1. Vocabulary: Use context clues to determine the meaning or significance of eachof these words and write their definitions:

a. advocates

b. vigorous

c. destitute

d. propriety

e. conciliate

f. emulation

g. animosity

h. formidable

i. equivocal

2. Context: Answer the following questions.

a. Who wrote this document?

b. When was this document written?

c. Who is the audience of this document?

d. Why was this document written?


VOCABULARY AND CONTEXT QUESTIONS

Handout B

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute


Excerpts from Federalist No. 70 (1788)

Directions: Read the excerpts, playing special attention to the main ideas in bold ofeach paragraph. Then, complete the outline on Handout D, filling in each main idea inyour own words. Finally, complete the outline with the supports Hamilton provides foreach of his arguments.

To the People of the State of New York: Energy in the Executive is a leading characterin the definition of good government. It is essential to the protection of the communityagainst foreign attacks; it is not less essential to the steady administration of the laws; tothe protection of property against those irregular and high-handed combinations whichsometimes interrupt the ordinary course of justice; to the security of liberty against theenterprises and assaults of ambition, of faction, and of anarchy. . . .

Those politicians and statesmen who have been the most celebrated for thesoundness of their principles and for the justice of their views, have declared in favorof a single Executive and a numerous legislature. They have with great propriety,considered energy as the most necessary qualification of the former, and have regardedthis as most applicable to power in a single hand, while they have, with equal propriety,considered the latter as best adapted to deliberation and wisdom, and best calculated toconciliate the confidence of the people and to secure their privileges and interests. . . .

Wherever two or more persons are engaged in any common enterprise or pursuit,there is always danger of difference of opinion. If it be a public trust or office, in whichthey are clothed with equal dignity and authority, there is peculiar danger of personalemulation and even animosity. From either, and especially from all these causes, themost bitter dissensions are apt to spring. Whenever these happen, they lessen therespectability, weaken the authority. And what is still worse, they could split thecommunity into the most violent and irreconcilable factions. . . .

It is far more safe there should be a single object for the jealousy and watchfulnessof the people; and, in a word, that all multiplication of the Executive is ratherdangerous than friendly to liberty. . . . The united credit and influence of severalindividuals must be more formidable to liberty, than the credit and influence of eitherof them separately. When power, therefore, is placed in the hands of so small a numberof men, as to admit of their interests and views being easily combined in a commonenterprise, by an artful leader, it becomes more liable to abuse, and more dangerouswhen abused, than if it be lodged in the hands of one man; who, from the verycircumstance of his being alone, will be more narrowly watched and more readilysuspected, and who cannot unite so great a mass of influence as when he is associatedwith others.

Source: “Federalist No. 70, 1788.” The Avalon Project at Yale University Law School.<http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed70.htm>

Alexander Hamilton

IN HIS OWN WORDS: ALEXANDER HAMILTONON THE CONSTITUTION

Handout C

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute


Directions: Complete the outline below with information and arguments fromFederalist No. 70. Write a paraphrase of the main idea of each paragraph (highlighted inbold on Handout C). Then fill in the supports Hamilton provides for his argument. Thefirst section has been begun for you.

A. [paragraph one] Main idea: A strong and single executive is themost important quality for an effective government.

Supports

1. It is vital to protecting against foreign attacks

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

B. [paragraph two] Main idea:

Supports

1.

2.


ANALYSIS: ALEXANDER HAMILTON ANDFEDERALIST NO. 70

Handout D

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute


C. [paragraph three] Main idea:

Supports

1.

2.

3.

D. [paragraph four] Main idea:

Supports

1.

2.

Alexander Hamilton

Handout D

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute


Thomas Jefferson accurately represented theconvictions of his fellow colonists when heobserved in the Declaration of Independence thata government, to be considered legitimate, must bebased on the consent of the people and respect theirnatural rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit ofhappiness.”Along with other leading members of thefounding generation, Jeffersonunderstood that these principlesdictated that the government begiven only limited powers that,ideally, are carefully described inwritten charters or constitutions.

Modern theorists like JohnLocke and the Baron deMontesquieu had been makingthe case for limited governmentand separation of powers duringthe century prior to the AmericanRevolution. Colonial Americanswere quite familiar with Locke’sargument from his Two Treatisesof Government that “AbsoluteArbitrary Power, or Governing without settledstanding Laws, can neither of them consist with theends of Society and Government. . . .” Locke addedthat the reason people “quit the freedom of thestate of Nature [is] to preserve their Lives, Libertiesand Fortunes.” Civil society has no higher end thanto provide for the safety and happiness of thepeople, and this is best done under a system ofknown rules or laws that apply equally to “the Rich and Poor, . . . the Favorite at Court, and theCountry Man at plough.” For his part, Montesquieuargued that only where governmental power islimited in scope, and then parceled out amongdifferent departments, will people be free fromoppression. Constitutional government, formodern natural rights theorists, should be limitedgovernment dedicated to the comfortablepreservation of the people—that is, to theirsecurity, freedom, and prosperity.

John Adams echoed the beliefs of manyAmericans when he argued that only by creating abalance of forces within the government could thepeople hope to escape despotism and misery. Anunchecked legislature, he observed, would becapable not only of making tyrannical laws, but of

executing them in a tyrannical manner as well. In hisfamous draft of a constitution for the commonwealthof Massachusetts, Adams declared that the“legislative, executive and judicial power shall beplaced in separate departments, to the end that itmight be a government of laws, and not of men.”This document, along with his Defence of the

Constitutions of Government ofthe United States of America,containing a strong case for checksand balances in government,were well known to the delegateswho attended the ConstitutionalConvention of 1787.

James Wilson, one of theforemost legal scholars of thefounding period and a delegatefrom Pennsylvania at theConstitutional Convention, agreedwith Adams’ insistence that thepower of government should bedivided to the end of advancingthe peace and happiness of the

people. In the words of Wilson, “In government,the perfection of the whole depends on the balanceof the parts, and the balance of the parts consists inthe independent exercise of their separate powers,and, when their powers are separately exercised,then in their mutual influence and operation onone another. Each part acts and is acted upon,supports and is supported, regulates and isregulated by the rest.”

Both the Articles of Confederation and theConstitution of the United States provided forgovernments with limited powers. As John Jay haddiscovered as America’s secretary of foreign affairs,the power of the central government was severelylimited under the Articles and, hence, could betrusted to a unitary legislative department. Fear ofgovernmental tyranny and a desire to preserve thepower enjoyed by the new states resulted in thecreation of a central government that could noteffectively oversee interstate commerce or do otherthings that were critical to ensuring the safety andhappiness of the people. In a letter to EdmundRandolph at the end of 1786, George Washingtonbemoaned the “awful situation of our affairs”which he attributed to “the want of sufficient power

LIMITED GOVERNMENT� �


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

03 008-010 Found2 Limit 9/13/07 10:54 AM Page 8

in the foederal head.”Washington quickly joined themovement to create a new governmental systemthat was equal to “the exigencies of Union,” toquote from the instructions given the delegates tothe Constitutional Convention of 1787.

The Constitution of 1787 grew out of a plandrafted largely by James Madison during the winterand spring before the Convention. The “VirginiaPlan” proposed a central government that wassupreme over the states. Evidence that the nationalgovernment was to be entrusted with considerablepower could be found in the provisions for abicameral legislature andindependent executive andjudicial departments.

The delegates whoattended the ConstitutionalConvention were sufficientlyversed in modern politicaltheory to understand thatthey would have to dividethe power of the national government if theyintended to entrust it with real authority over thelives of the people and the states. They understoodthe dangers of imparting considerable politicalpower to a unitary sovereign. In this connection,there was never any doubt in their minds that theyshould create a government of “delegated andenumerated” powers, that is, that the governmentshould only be entrusted with specified(enumerated) powers that derived directly fromthe people. While they worried about the“turbulence and follies” of democracy, theyrecognized that government had to be based on theconsent of the people to be legitimate.

The Virginia Plan anticipated the bicamerallegislature and independent executive and judicialdepartments found in the United States Constitutiontoday. Building on Madison’s model, the delegatesassigned responsibilities to the departments basedon their peculiar characteristics. The six-year termof senators, for example, seemed to make this aproper institution to involve in foreign policy (e.g.,ratification of treaties) since senators would havemore time than members of the House ofRepresentatives to acquaint themselves withinternational affairs and their longer terms andlarger constituencies (entire states) also would givethem more freedom to attend to matters otherthan the immediate interests of constituents backhome. The House of Representatives was entrustedwith the important power to initiate revenue(taxation) bills precisely because the members of

this chamber are tied so closely to the people byshort terms and small districts.

In addition to matching powers andgovernmental responsibilities, the delegates werecareful to position each department to “check andbalance” the other departments. Examples are the executive’s veto power, the congressionalimpeachment power, and the judicial review powerentrusted to the Supreme Court, the only nationalcourt formally established by the Constitution.Although in good Lockean fashion the legislativedepartment was designed to be the preeminent

department, it was stillsubjected to checks by theother branches of thegovernment. Separation ofpowers as well as the systemof checks and balances weredevices for reducing the threatof governmental tyranny, notexcluding legislative tyranny.

However, the constitutional arrangement, putinto its final wording by Gouverneur Morris, wasnot driven entirely by a desire to eliminate thethreat of tyrannical government. The system ofseparated and divided powers also was intended topromote competence in government. Thepresident can employ his veto not only to checklegislative action that he considers irresponsible,but to provoke Congress to improve a legislativeenactment. The Senate can use its authority toratify presidential nominations of cabinet officersor judges to ensure that qualified candidates arenamed to fill these positions.

Writing in Federalist No. 9, Alexander Hamiltonidentified the principle of separated and dividedpowers, along with checks and balances, as amongthe inventions of the new science of politics thathad made republican government defensible.Madison described in Federalist No. 51 the benefitsof the governmental arrangement represented inthe new Constitution: “In the compound republicof America, the power surrendered by the people isfirst divided between two distinct governments,and then the portion allotted to each subdividedamong distinct and separate departments. Hence adouble security arises to the rights of the people.The different governments will control each other,at the same time that each will be controlled byitself.” Significantly, Anti-Federalists as well asFederalists agreed that governmental powersshould be limited and that these powers should besubject to internal as well as external checks.

Limited Government

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

There was never any doubt in theirminds that they should create agovernment of “delegated and

enumerated” powers . . .


It is important to emphasize that the Framerssettled on an arrangement that divided yet blendedthe legislative, executive, and judicial powers. Thisfacilitates interdepartmental checking whilepromoting mature deliberation. Their aim was tocreate a decent and competent democracy, somethingbeyond mere non-tyrannical government. Theyplaced the whole of the government, and even thepeople, under constitutional limitations. TheConstitution is the supreme law of the land, notthe enactments of Congress or the order of thepresident or the momentary will of the people. AsChief Justice Marshall declared in Marbury v.Madison (1803), “The distinction between agovernment with limited and unlimited powers isabolished, if those limits do not confine the personson whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibitedand acts allowed, are of equal obligation.” Even the

desires of the people are held in check by theConstitution. The political system still meets thecriteria of democratic government, however, sincethe people hold the power, through theirrepresentatives, to amend the Constitution.

The paradigm of constitutional governmentembraced by the American people in 1787, that is,limited government based on the consent of thepeople and committed to the protection offundamental rights, has become the dominant modelthroughout the world. The rhetoric of rights, whethercouched in the language of natural rights or humanrights, is universally appealing. Also universallyaccepted is the argument that rights are most securewhen governmental powers are limited in scopeand subject to internal and external checks.

David E. Marion, Ph.D.Hampden-Sydney College


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

Suggestions for Further ReadingFrohnen, Bruce (ed.). The American Republic: Primary Sources. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2002.Kurland, Philip B. and Ralph Lerner (eds.) The Founders’ Constitution. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1987.Mansfield, Harvey C., Jr. Taming the Prince. New York: The Free Press, 1989.McDonald, Forrest. A Constitutional History of the United States. New York: Franklin Watts, 1982.Storing, Herbert J. What the Anti-Federalists Were For. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981.Wood, Gordon. The Creation of the American Republic, 1776–1787. New York: W.W. Norton, 1969.


Liberty was the central political principle of theAmerican Revolution. As Patrick Henry, one of itsstaunchest supporters, famously intoned, “Give meliberty or give me death.” Henry was not alone in his rhetorical fervor. Indeed, no ideal wasproclaimed more often in the eighteenth-centuryAnglo-American world than liberty.

The idea of liberty defendedby the American Founders camefrom several sources. The mostvenerable was English commonlaw. Beginning in the latemedieval period, writers in thecommon law tradition developedan understanding of libertywhich held that English subjectswere free because they livedunder a system of laws whicheven the Crown was bound torespect. Leading English juristsargued that these legal limits onroyal power protected thesubject’s liberty by limiting the arbitrary use ofpolitical power.

Under English common law, liberty alsoconsisted in the subject enjoying certain fundamentalrights to life, liberty and property. William Blackstone(1723–1780), the leading common lawyer of theeighteenth century, argued that these rights allowedan English subject to be the “entire master of hisown conduct, except in those points wherein thepublic good requires some direction or restraint . . .”For Blackstone, these English rights further protectedthe subjects’ liberty by making them secure in theirpersons from arbitrary search and seizure, and byensuring that their property could not be takenfrom them without due process of law.

In order to preserve these fundamental rights,the English common law allowed the subject theright to consent to the laws that bound him byelecting representatives to Parliament whose consentthe monarch had to obtain before acting.

Common lawyers in the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries did not view these rights andthe liberty they protected as the gift or grant of themonarch; rather, they believed that they were anEnglishmen’s “birthright,” something that inheredin each subject and that therefore could not betaken away by royal prerogative.

This common law understanding of libertywas central to the seventeenth-century strugglesagainst the Stuart monarchy. Prominent jurists andParliamentarians such as Edward Coke (1552–1634)took the lead in the attempt to limit what they sawas the illegal and arbitrary nature of the Stuarts’ rule.This struggle culminated in the Glorious Revolution

of 1689 and the triumph ofParliamentary authority over theCrown. For champions of Englishliberty, the result of this century-long struggle was the achievementof political liberty. They furtherargued that, as a result of thisstruggle, Britain in the eighteenthcentury had the freest constitutionin the world. According to theFrench writer Montesquieu(1689–1755), Britain was “theonly nation in the world, wherepolitical and civil liberty” was “thedirect end of the constitution.”

This seventeenth century struggle betweenroyal power and the subject’s liberties made a greatimpression on the American Founders. Theyabsorbed its lessons about the nature and importanceof liberty through their reading of English historyas well as through their instruction in English law.

A second and equally influential understandingof liberty was also forged in the constitutionalbattles of the seventeenth century: the idea thatliberty was a natural right pertaining to all. Theforemost exponent of this understanding of libertyin the English-speaking world was John Locke(1632–1704). Locke’s political ideas were part of awider European political and legal movement whichargued that there were certain rights that all menwere entitled to irrespective of social class or creed.

Like the common lawyers, Locke saw liberty ascentrally about the enjoyment of certain rights.However, he universalized the older Englishunderstanding of liberty, arguing that it applied toall persons, and not just to English subjects. Lockealso expanded the contemporary understanding ofliberty by arguing that it included other rights—in particular a right to religious toleration (orliberty of conscience), as well as a right to resistgovernments that violated liberty. In addition,Locke argued that the traditional English common

Liberty

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

LIBERTY� �

02 005-007 Found2 Liberty 9/13/07 10:30 AM Page 5

law right to property was also a natural right, andwas an important part of the subject’s liberty.

Locke began his political theory by arguing thatliberty was the natural state of mankind. Accordingto Locke, all men are “naturally” in a “State ofperfect Freedom to order” their “Actions, anddispose of their Possessions, and Persons as theythink fit, within the bounds of the Law of Nature,without asking leave, or depending upon the Willof any other Man.”

However, Locke did not argue that this naturalliberty was a license to do whatever we want.“Freedom is not,” he argued,“A Liberty for every Man todo what he lists (For whocould be free, when everyother Man’s humour mightdomineer over him?).”Rather, Locke held that sinceall men are “equal andindependent, no one oughtto harm another in his Life, health, Liberty, orPossessions.” According to Locke, each of us has“an uncontroulable Liberty to dispose of ourpersons and possession,” but we do not have theright to interfere with the equal liberty of others todo the same.

In Locke’s political theory, men enter intosociety and form governments to better preservethis natural liberty. When they do so, they create apolitical system where the natural law limits onliberty in the state of nature are translated into alegal regime of rights. In such a system, Lockeargued, each person retains his “Liberty to dispose,and order, as he lists, his Person, Actions,Possession, and his whole Property, within theAllowance of those Laws under which he is; andtherein not to be subject to the arbitrary Will ofanother, but freely follow his own.”

For Locke, as for the common lawyers, the ruleof law was necessary for liberty. In Locke’s view,“the end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but topreserve and enlarge Freedom.” According to Locke,“Where there is no Law, there is no Freedom. ForLiberty is to be free from restraint and violence fromothers which cannot be, where there is no law.”

Building on both the English common law andon Locke’s ideas, the eighteenth-century Englishwriter Cato argued “that liberty is the unalienableright of mankind.” It is “the power which everyMan has over his own Actions, and his Right toenjoy the Fruit of his Labour, Art, and Industry, asfar as by it he hurts not the Society, or anymembers of it, by taking from any Member or by

hindering him from enjoying what he himselfenjoys.” Cato was the pseudonym for two Britishwriters, John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon.Their co-authored Cato’s Letters (1720–1723) werewidely read in the American colonies.

On the eve of the American Revolution, then,the received understanding of liberty in the Anglo-American world was a powerful amalgam of boththe English common law and the liberal ideas ofwriters like Locke and Cato. On this view, libertymeant being able to act freely, secure in your basicrights, unhindered by the coercive actions of others,

and subject only to thelimitation of such laws as youhave consented to. Central tothis idea of liberty was theright to hold property and tohave it secure from arbitraryseizure. In addition, under theinfluence of Locke, liberty wasincreasingly being seen on

both sides of the Atlantic as a universal right, onenot limited to English subjects. Equally influentialwas Locke’s argument that if a government violatedits citizens’ liberty the people could resist thegovernment’s edicts and create a new politicalauthority. However, despite the gains that had beenmade since the seventeenth century, manyEnglishmen in the eighteenth century still worriedthat liberty was fragile and would always beendangered by the ambitions of powerful men.

Since the first settlements were established in the early seventeenth century, the Americancolonists shared in this English understanding ofliberty. In particular, they believed that they hadtaken their English rights with them when theycrossed the Atlantic. It was on the basis of theserights that they made a case for their freedom ascolonists under the Crown. In addition, in theeighteenth century, the colonists were increasinglyinfluenced by the Lockean idea that liberty was anatural right. As a result, when they were confrontedwith the policies of the British Crown and Parliamentin the 1760s and 1770s to tax and legislate for themwithout their consent, the colonists viewed them asan attack on their liberty.

In response, the colonists argued that theseBritish taxes and regulations were illegal because theyviolated fundamental rights. They were particularlyresistant to the claims of the British Parliament, asexpressed in the Declaratory Act of 1766, to legislatefor the colonies “in all cases whatsoever.” By 1774,following the Boston Tea Party organized by SamuelAdams and John Hancock, and the subsequent


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

No ideal was proclaimed more often in the eighteenth-century

Anglo-American world than liberty.


Coercive Acts, many leading colonists such asThomas Paine and James Otis argued that they hada natural right to govern themselves, and that sucha right was the only protection for their liberty. Inaddition to several essays in defense of rights,including Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania,John Dickinson wrote the first patriotic song, “TheLiberty Song.”

This colonial thinking about liberty and rightsculminated in the Declaration of Independenceissued by the Continental Congress in 1776, whichproclaimed that, because their liberty wasendangered, the colonists had a natural right toresist the English King and Parliament.

Having made a revolution in the name of liberty,the American challenge was to create a form ofgovernment that preserved liberty better than thevaunted British constitution had done. In doing so,the founders turned to the ancient ideal of republicanself-government, arguing that it alone could preservethe people’s liberty. They further argued that themodern understanding of liberty as the possession ofrights needed to be a central part of any properrepublican government. Beginning in 1776, in themidst of the Revolutionary War, all of the formercolonies began to construct republican governmentswhich rested on the people’s consent and whichincluded bills of rights to protect the people’s liberty.

Since there was widespread consensus amongthe Founders that liberty required the protection ofrights and the rule of law, much of the politicaldebate in the crucial decades following the AmericanRevolution revolved around the question of whichinstitutional arrangements best supported liberty.Was liberty best protected by strong stategovernments jealously guarding the people’s libertiesfrom excessive federal authority, as leading Anti-Federalists like George Mason contended; or, wasan extended federal republic best able to preservethe freedom of all, as leading Federalists like JamesMadison and Alexander Hamilton argued?

The era of the American Revolution also gavebirth to a further series of important debates aboutliberty. Was slavery, as some Americans in theeighteenth century were beginning to recognize, anunjust infringement upon the liberty of AfricanAmericans? Were women, long deprived of basiclegal rights, also entitled to have equal liberty withtheir male fellow citizens? By making a Revolutionin its name, the Founders ensured that debatesabout the nature and extent of liberty wouldremain at the center of the American experimentin self-government.

Craig Yirush, Ph.D.University of California, Los Angeles

Liberty

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

Suggestions for Further ReadingBailyn, Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967.Kammen, Michael. Spheres of Liberty: Changing Perceptions of Liberty in American Culture. Madison:

University of Wisconsin Press, 1986.Reid, John Phillip. The Concept of Liberty in the Age of the American Revolution. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press, 1988.Skinner, Quentin. Liberty Before Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.Wood, Gordon. The Creation of the American Republic, 1776–1787. Chapel Hill: University of North

Carolina Press, 1969.


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

Commerce

Commerce� �

Although the modern United States is the preeminentexample of a nation dedicated to free enterpriseand commercial activity, the relationship betweenrepublican government and commerce was one ofthe central problems that confronted the Foundersin the late eighteenth century. In order to understandthe Founders’ attitudes toward commerce, we needto understand both the role thatcommercial activity played in theAmerican colonies in the centurybefore the Revolution, as well asthe important arguments aboutthe legitimacy of commercialsocieties that animated Englishand European thinkers in the twocenturies before the AmericanFounding.

The American coloniesoriginated in part as commercialenterprises. From the firstsettlements in the early seventeenthcentury until the eve of theRevolution, British and Europeansettlers saw America as a placewhere they could come and make a better life forthemselves. By the mid-eighteenth century, theBritish colonies in America were prosperous placesheavily engaged in production and trade. Althoughthe population was still overwhelmingly rural,colonial farmers were increasingly engaged incommercial agriculture. In all regions, theyproduced more than was needed for subsistence,trading their surplus with other colonies as well asengaging in a growing transatlantic trade withBritain and Europe. The Southern coloniesproduced valuable staple crops for export (tobacco,rice, indigo, wheat); farmers in the Middle colonieshad a flourishing agricultural economy which wasalso involved in trade with the wider world; and, bythe eighteenth century, the New England colonieswere building ships, selling timber, and tradingproduce with the British Caribbean sugar islands.As a result of these extensive Atlantic tradingnetworks, all of the colonial economies grewenormously in the eighteenth century. In addition,the main colonial port cities—Boston, New York,Philadelphia, and Charles Town (Charleston)—grewin size and importance. This burgeoning commercial

society also had a large merchant class, withpowerful and wealthy men like John Hancock inBoston involved in far-flung commercial ventures.

The pre-Revolutionary American colonieswere also consumer societies that eagerly usedtheir growing wealth to purchase goods from allover the world. And, as the Revolution approached,

a growing number of whitesettlers not included in thepolitical and economic elite wereincreasingly able to participatein this consumerism. Indeed,such was the widespreadprosperity of these colonies thatmany modern historians havereferred to them as the first middleclass societies in the world.

All of this commercialactivity, however, had a darkside. The Atlantic trade that thecolonists engaged in with suchprofit was founded in part onthe movement of African slavesto the New World. Once there,

these slaves were responsible for producing thelucrative staple crops that the colonies sold toEngland and Europe in exchange formanufactured goods. In addition, the ever-expanding agricultural economy of the coloniesdepended on the removal of the Native Americanpopulation from their lands.

Several strands of thought providedintellectual justification for the increasinglycommercial world of the eighteenth-centuryBritish Atlantic. The long tradition of Englishcommon law stressed the importance of propertyrights, which it saw as central to liberty, and whichit protected from arbitrary seizure by preventinggovernments from taking property without thesubject’s consent. By stressing the sanctity ofperson and property, the English common lawprovided a legal infrastructure which supported acommercial society.

Seventeenth-century English Puritanism alsoprovided a justification of commercial activity.According to Puritanism, God wanted people towork hard and prosper. To do so was a sign thatyou were one of the “elect,” destined to be “saved”

05 017-021 Founders Commerce 7/17/04 9:51 AM Page 17

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute


and not “damned.” This Puritan work ethicremained a powerful force in American life wellpast the Revolution.

The political theory of the English writer JohnLocke (1632–1704), and in particular his ideas abouta natural right to liberty and property, also providedjustification for a commercial society. Like thecommon law, it placed a value on the liberty of theperson, including the liberty to engage in productionand trade. In addition, Locke offered an elaboratetheoretical defense of an individual’s right to property.According to Locke, individuals were not givenproperty rights by the state;rather, they generated a rightto private property by theirown labor. Locke defendedcommercial societies basedon private property byarguing that they producedgreater wealth for all thandid those societies whicheschewed private property and exchange. Bymaking this case, Locke helped to legitimizecommercial activity in the face of age-olddenunciations that it was sinful. Building on theseseventeenth-century ideas, English people on bothsides of the Atlantic in the eighteenth centuryincreasingly viewed themselves as free, Protestant,and deeply commercial.

By the time of the Revolution, the AmericanFounders had also encountered the ideas of aninfluential group of eighteenth-century Enlightenmentwriters who offered a sophisticated defense ofcommercial societies. The French writer Montesquieu(1689–1755) argued that commerce “cures destructiveprejudices” by fostering peaceful trade amongpeoples rather than war. Many Scottish writers inthe eighteenth century made a similar defense ofcommerce. They argued that commercial societiesconstituted the highest stage of civilization andwere the most conducive to human well-being,fostering political and religious liberty, peacefulrelations among nations, higher standards ofliving, science, and the arts. The moral philosopherand economist Adam Smith (1723–1790), writingin the same year as the American Revolution, arguedthat self-interest was beneficent, and that thosewho sought private wealth were simultaneouslybenefiting society. All of these thinkers celebratedthe modern commercial world in which they livedas superior to previous ages which, they argued,were characterized by feudal and aristocraticinequality, constant warfare, and religious fanaticism.

However, the ideas that influenced theFounders were not all supportive of commerce.Christianity, even in its Puritan form, could beused to denounce moneymaking. In New Englandin the seventeenth century, the merchant RobertKeayne was put on trial on charges of usury. In theyears after independence, this Christian critiquecombined in the Founders’ thought with that ofthe republican thinkers of Greece and Rome whoshared a similar skepticism about commerce. Theyargued that a society dedicated to commerce andself-interest would produce citizens overly concerned

with private matters andinsufficiently attentive to thepublic good. These classicalrepublican thinkers wereparticularly concernedabout the political effects ofluxury, worrying that libertywould be lost if people weretoo focused on the pursuit

of material gain. To the extent that republicanthinkers defended property rights, they did soprimarily as a means to the end of ensuring thatthere was an independent citizenry capable of actingfor the public good. These classical ideas about thedangers of commerce to republican governmentinfluenced the Founders in the late eighteenthcentury. In particular, the ideas led some of them tobe suspicious of the new institutions of commercialbanking and public and private debt that supportedthe eighteenth-century commercial world.

The Revolution initially fostered theseanticommercial sentiments in the colonial populace.In their attempts to harm the British economy, thecolonies organized widespread nonimportationagreements in the 1760s and 1770s. Drawing onboth the Christian and the classical republicancritique of commerce, some colonists argued thatthis withdrawal from trade would also create amore virtuous citizenry, one less likely to succumbto luxury and self-interest. Writing his influential“Thoughts on Government” in 1776, a guide forlawmakers in the newly independent republicanstate governments, John Adams openly called forlegal restrictions on consumption (called “sumptuarylaws” in the eighteenth century), arguing that “thehappiness of the people might be greatly promotedby them.”

Following the Revolution, the experience ofboth the new state governments and that of theContinental Congress operating under the Articlesof Confederation brought these questions about

According to Puritanism, God wantedpeople to work hard and prosper.

To do so was a sign that you were oneof the “elect,” destined to be “saved”

and not “damned.”


Commerce

the relationship between republican governmentsand commercial activity to the fore. By ending theold British trading system, the Revolution alsoushered in a debate about the commercial relationsbetween the United States and the rest of the world.

The newly independent United States facedsevere economic difficulties in the 1780s. Thestates found themselves with limited access to thelucrative British markets. They also owed money tothose who had financed the war. But the ContinentalCongress lacked the legal power to compel the stategovernments to agree on a common commercialpolicy. It also lacked theauthority to requisition thetaxes necessary to pay off theRevolutionary War debtfrom the state governments.Robert Morris, who servedas Congress’ superintendentof finance from 1781–1783,was reduced to pleadingwith the state governors to send money to thenational government.

The war had also left the individual states withlarge debts to repay. In order to pay these debts off,many states raised taxes and issued paper moneythat rapidly depreciated. In addition, many of thestates began to interfere with the free movementsof goods within the United States.

The drafting of the new Constitution inPhiladelphia in 1787 set out to address the economicproblems of the 1780s by creating a nationalgovernment that would have the authority to imposetaxes, regulate foreign trade, and, most importantly,create a common commercial policy between thevarious state governments. In the Federalist Papers,James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, the mostprominent defenders of the new Constitution,argued forcefully that the federal governmentneeded these expanded powers in order to create alarge free trading area within the continentalUnited States. They, along with their coauthorJohn Jay, also argued for a vigorous commercialpolicy to open up markets for foreign trade.

In making these arguments, the framers wereheavily influenced by the Enlightenment defense ofcommerce discussed above. The Framers furtherargued that republican government, by allowingboth political and economic freedom, would fostervirtuous behavior in its citizens. Freed from theburden of supporting monarchs and aristocrats,ordinary people in a republic would have theincentive to be industrious and productive, secure

in the knowledge that they would be able to reapthe benefits of their labor.

Although the new Constitution laid thegroundwork for an extended commercial republic,it did not end the debates among the Foundersover the legitimacy of commerce. In the 1790s, theFederalists argued for a government-led programof commercial expansion, involving investments ininfrastructure as well as the creation of a nationalbanking system. However, the Democratic-Republican Party under Thomas Jefferson wasmuch more divided on the merits of commercial

republicanism. One strandof Jeffersonian thought wasskeptical of extensivecommercial activity,preferring instead a societyof independent yeomanfarmers whose landed statuswould give them a securematerial base for republican

citizenship. In making this argument, theJeffersonians echoed the republican thinkers ofantiquity who valued landed property overcommercial property because it alone enabled thevirtuous citizen to act in the public interest. Thisaspect of Jeffersonian thought was also skeptical ofmanufacturing and wage labor, fearing that apopulace engaged in such pursuits would not be ableto obtain the independence required of republicancitizens. Finally, Jeffersonians were very concernedabout the modern institutions of banking andpublic and private debt, fearing that they wouldenable powerful men to undermine republicangovernment by setting up an aristocracy of money.

However, Jeffersonian thought also had astrong laissez-faire element, one that becameincreasingly important as the eighteenth centurycame to a close. Although still preferringcommercial agriculture over manufacturing,Jeffersonians were ardently in favor of free labor,free trade, and free markets. On this view,commerce was a liberating, even equalizing force,allowing the common people to benefit from thefruits of their own labor. In addition, thisJeffersonian policy of laissez-faire was veryskeptical of the Federalist plans for extensive state-directed commerce, preferring instead to letindividuals make their own economic decisions.This element of the Jeffersonian attitude towardcommerce expressed the powerful desire of theAmerican populace for material improvement, adesire which had deep roots in the colonial past.

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

Although the new Constitution laid thegroundwork for an extended commercial

republic, it did not end the debatesamong the Founders over the

legitimacy of commerce.


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute


Jefferson’s election in 1800 did not end thesedebates about the propriety of commercial activity.Most Americans agreed that republican libertyincluded the right to own property and to enjoythe fruits of one’s labor. However, as Jefferson’s“empire of liberty” expanded west, this vision offree men and free labor clashed with the institutionof slavery as it became an increasingly profitableform of commercial activity, and one that wassometimes defended as an expression of the

American commitment to private property. Alongwith the relationship between slavery and freelabor, the question of the place of manufacturingin a republican society, the role of banks, the issueof free trade, and the desirability of stateintervention in the economy remained pressingquestions in the increasingly commercial UnitedStates well into the nineteenth century.


Suggestions for Further ReadingAppleby, Joyce. Capitalism and a New Social Order: The Republican Vision of the 1790s. New York: New York

University Press, 1984.Heyrman, Christine. Commerce and Culture: The Maritime Communities of Colonial Massachusetts,

1690–1750. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1984.Innes, Stephen. Creating the Commonwealth: The Economic Culture of Puritan New England. New York: W.

W. Norton & Co., 1995.Lerner, Ralph. “Commerce and Character.” In The Thinking Revolutionary: Principle and Practice in the New

Republic. Ithaca, N.Y. : Cornell University Press, 1987.McCoy, Drew R. The Elusive Republic: Political Economy in Jeffersonian America. New York: W. W. Norton &

Co., 1982.Nelson, John R. Liberty and Property: Political Economy and Policymaking in the New Nation, 1789–1812.

Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987.


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

In 1760, what was to become the United States ofAmerica consisted of a small group of coloniesstrung out along the eastern seaboard of NorthAmerica. Although they had experienced significanteconomic and demographic growth in theeighteenth century and had just helped Britaindefeat France and take control of most of NorthAmerica, they remained politically and economicallydependent upon London. Yet, in the next twenty-five years, they would challenge the political controlof Britain, declare independence, wage a bloody war,and lay the foundations fora trans-continental, federalrepublican state. In thesecrucial years, the colonieswould be led by a newgeneration of politicians,men who combinedpractical political skillswith a firm grasp ofpolitical ideas. In order to better understand theseextraordinary events, the Founders who madethem possible, and the new Constitution that theycreated, it is necessary first to understand thepolitical ideas that influenced colonial Americansin the crucial years before the Revolution.

The Common Law and the Rightsof EnglishmenThe political theory of the American colonists inthe seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was deeplyinfluenced by English common law and its idea ofrights. In a guide for religious dissenters written inthe late seventeenth century, William Penn, thefounder of Pennsylvania, offered one the bestcontemporary summaries of this common-lawview of rights. According to Penn, all Englishmenhad three central rights or privileges by commonlaw: those of life, liberty, and property. For Penn,these English rights meant that every subject was“to be freed in Person & Estate from ArbitraryViolence and Oppression.” In the widely usedlanguage of the day, these rights of “Liberty andProperty” were an Englishman’s “Birthright.”

In Penn’s view, the English system of governmentpreserved liberty and limited arbitrary power byallowing the subjects to express their consent to thelaws that bound them through two institutions:

“Parliaments and Juries.”“By the first,” Penn argued,“the subject has a share by his chosen Representativesin the Legislative (or Law making) Power.” Penn feltthat the granting of consent through Parliamentwas important because it ensured that “no new Lawsbind the People of England, but such as are bycommon consent agreed on in that great Council.”

In Penn’s view, juries were an equally importantmeans of limiting arbitrary power. By serving onjuries, Penn argued, every freeman “has a share in theExecutive part of the Law, no Causes being tried, nor

any man adjudged to loose[sic] Life, member orEstate, but upon the Verdictof his Peers or Equals.” ForPenn, “These two grandPillars of English Liberty”were “the Fundamentalvital Priviledges [sic]” ofEnglishmen.

The other aspect of their government thatseventeenth-century Englishmen celebrated was asystem that was ruled by laws and not by men. AsPenn rather colorfully put it: “In France, and otherNations, the meer [sic] Will of the Prince is Law, hisWord takes off any mans Head, imposeth Taxes, orseizes a mans Estate, when, how and as often as helists; and if one be accussed [sic], or but so much assuspected of any Crime, he may either presentlyExecute him, or banish, or Imprison him atpleasure.” By contrast, “In England,” Penn argued,“the Law is both the measure and the bound ofevery Subject’s Duty and Allegiance, each manhaving a fixed Fundamental-Right born with him,as to Freedom of his Person and Property in hisEstate, which he cannot be deprived of, but eitherby his Consent, or some Crime, for which the Lawhas impos’d such a penalty or forfeiture.”

This common law view of politics understoodpolitical power as fundamentally limited byEnglishmen’s rights and privileges. As a result, itheld that English kings were bound to ruleaccording to known laws and by respecting theinherent rights of their subjects. It also enshrinedthe concept of consent as the major means to theend of protecting these rights. According to Pennand his contemporaries, this system ofgovernment—protecting as it did the “unparallel’d

Explaining the Founding

Introductory Essay:Explaining the Founding

� �

01 001-005 Founders Intro 7/17/04 9:37 AM Page 1

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

Priviledge [sic] of Liberty and Property”—hadmade the English nation “more free and happythan any other People in the World.”

The Founders imbibed this view of Englishrights through the legal training that was commonfor elites in the eighteenth-century Anglo-Americanworld. This legal education also made them awareof the history of England in the seventeenth century,a time when the Stuart kings had repeatedlythreatened their subjects’ rights. In response, manyEnglishmen drew on the common law to argue thatall political power, even that of a monarch, should belimited by law. Colonial Americans in the eighteenthcentury viewed the defeat of the Stuarts and thesubsequent triumph of Parliament (which was seen asthe representative ofsubjects’ rights) in theGlorious Revolution of 1688as a key moment in Englishhistory. They believed that ithad enshrined in England’sunwritten constitution therule of law and the sanctityof subjects’ rights. Thisawareness of English history instilled in theFounders a strong fear of arbitrary power and aconsequent desire to create a constitutional formof government that limited the possibility of rulersviolating the fundamental liberties of the people.

The seriousness with which the colonists tookthese ideas can be seen in their strong opposition toParliament’s attempt to tax or legislate for themwithout their consent in the 1760s and 1770s. Afterthe Revolution, when the colonists formed their owngovernments, they wrote constitutions that includedmany of the legal guarantees that Englishmen hadfought for in the seventeenth century as a means oflimiting governmental power. As a consequence,both the state and federal constitutions typicallycontained bills of rights that enshrined coreEnglish legal rights as fundamental law.

Natural RightsThe seventeenth century witnessed a revolution inEuropean political thought, one that was to proveprofoundly influential on the political ideas ofthe American Founders. Beginning with the Dutchwriter Hugo Grotius in the early 1600s, severalimportant European thinkers began to construct anew understanding of political theory that arguedthat all men by nature had equal rights, and thatgovernments were formed for the sole purpose ofprotecting these natural rights.

The leading proponent of this theory in theEnglish-speaking world was John Locke (1632–1704).Deeply involved in the opposition to the Stuartkings in the 1670s and 1680s, Locke wrote a book onpolitical theory to justify armed resistance toCharles II and his brother James. “To understandpolitical power right,” Locke wrote, “and derive itfrom its original, we must consider, what state allmen are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfectfreedom to order their actions, and dispose of theirpossessions and persons, as they think fit, within thebounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, ordepending upon the will of any other man.” ForLocke, the state of nature was “a state also ofequality, wherein all the power and jurisdiction is

reciprocal, no one havingmore than another.”

Although thispregovernmental state ofnature was a state of perfectfreedom, Locke contendedthat it also lacked animpartial judge or umpire toregulate disputes among

men. As a result, men in this state of naturegathered together and consented to create agovernment in order that their natural rightswould be better secured. Locke further argued that,because it was the people who had created thegovernment, the people had a right to resist itsauthority if it violated their rights. They could thenjoin together and exercise their collective orpopular sovereignty to create a new government oftheir own devising. This revolutionary politicaltheory meant that ultimate political authoritybelonged to the people and not to the king.

This idea of natural rights became a centralcomponent of political theory in the Americancolonies in the eighteenth century, appearing innumerous political pamphlets, newspapers, andsermons. Its emphasis on individual freedom andgovernment by consent combined powerfully withthe older idea of common law rights to shape thepolitical theory of the Founders. When faced withthe claims of the British Parliament in the 1760sand 1770s to legislate for them without theirconsent, American patriots invoked both thecommon law and Lockean natural rights theory toargue that they had a right to resist Britain.

Thomas Jefferson offers the best example ofthe impact that these political ideas had on thefounding. As he so eloquently argued in theDeclaration of Independence: “We hold these


The political theory of the Americancolonists in the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries was deeplyinfluenced by English common

law and its idea of rights.


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

truths to be self-evident, that all men are createdequal, that they are endowed by their Creatorwith certain unalienable Rights, that among theseare Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.That to secure these rights, Governments areinstituted among Men, deriving their just powersfrom the consent of the governed, That wheneverany Form of Government becomes destructive ofthese ends, it is the Right of the People to alter orabolish it, and to institute new Government,laying its foundations on such principles andorganizing its powers in such form, as to themshall seem most likely to effect their Safety andHappiness.”

This idea of natural rights also influenced thecourse of political events inthe crucial years after 1776.All the state governments putthis new political theoryinto practice, basing theirauthority on the people,and establishing writtenconstitutions that protectednatural rights. As GeorgeMason, the principal author of the influentialVirginia Bill of Rights (1776), stated in thedocument’s first section: “All men are by natureequally free and independent, and have certaininherent rights, of which, when they enter into astate of society, they cannot, by any compact, depriveor divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment oflife and liberty, with the means of acquiring andpossessing property, and pursuing and obtaininghappiness and safety.” The radical implications ofthis insistence on equal natural rights would slowlybecome apparent in postrevolutionary Americansociety as previously downtrodden groups began toinvoke these ideals to challenge slavery, argue for awider franchise, end female legal inequality, and fullyseparate church and state.

In 1780, under the influence of John Adams,Massachusetts created a mechanism by which thepeople themselves could exercise their sovereignpower to constitute governments: a specialconvention convened solely for the purpose ofwriting a constitution, followed by a process ofratification. This American innovation allowed theideas of philosophers like Locke to be put intopractice. In particular, it made the people’s naturalrights secure by enshrining them in a constitutionwhich was not changeable by ordinary legislation.This method was to influence the authors of thenew federal Constitution in 1787.

Religious Toleration and theSeparation of Church and State

A related development in seventeenth-centuryEuropean political theory was the emergence ofarguments for religious toleration and theseparation of church and state. As a result of thebloody religious wars between Catholics andProtestants that followed the Reformation, a fewthinkers in both England and Europe argued thatgovernments should not attempt to force individualsto conform to one form of worship. Rather, theyinsisted that such coercion was both unjust anddangerous. It was unjust because true faithrequired voluntary belief; it was dangerous becausethe attempts to enforce religious beliefs in Europe

had led not to religiousuniformity, but to civil war.These thinkers furtherargued that if governmentsceased to enforce religiousbelief, the result would becivil peace and prosperity.

Once again the Englishphilosopher John Locke

played a major role in the development of these newideas. Building on the work of earlier writers, Lockepublished in 1689 A Letter Concerning Toleration, inwhich he contended that there was a natural rightof conscience that no government could infringe.As he put it: “The care of Souls cannot belong to theCivil Magistrate, because his Power consists only inoutward force; but true and saving Religion consistsin the inward perswasion [sic] of the Mind, withoutwhich nothing can be acceptable to God. And suchis the nature of the Understanding, that it cannotbe compell’d to the belief of any thing by outwardforce. Confiscation of Estate, Imprisonment,Torments, nothing of that nature can have anysuch Efficacy as to make Men change the inwardJudgment that they have formed of things.”

These ideas about the rights of conscience andreligious toleration resonated powerfully in theEnglish colonies in America. Although thePuritans in the seventeenth century had originallyattempted to set up an intolerant commonwealthwhere unorthodox religious belief would beprohibited, dissenters like Roger Williamschallenged them and argued that true faith couldnot be the product of coercion. Forced to flee bythe Puritans, Williams established the colony ofRhode Island, which offered religious toleration toall and had no state-supported church. As thePuritan Cotton Mather sarcastically remarked,


Natural rights became a centralcomponent of political theory in theAmerican colonies . . . , appearing in

numerous political pamphlets,newspapers, and sermons.


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

Rhode Island contained “everything in the worldbut Roman Catholics and real Christians.” Inaddition, Maryland, founded in the 1630s, andPennsylvania, founded in the 1680s, both providedan extraordinary degree of religious freedom bythe standard of the time.

In the eighteenth century, as these arguments forreligious toleration spread throughout the English-speaking Protestant world, the American colonies,becoming ever more religiously pluralistic, provedparticularly receptive to them.As a result, the idea thatthe government should not enforce religious beliefhad become an important element of Americanpolitical theory by the lateeighteenth century. After theRevolution, it was enshrinedas a formal right in many ofthe state constitutions, aswell as most famously in theFirst Amendment to thefederal Constitution.

Colonial Self-GovernmentThe political thinking of the Founders in the lateeighteenth century was also deeply influenced bythe long experience of colonial self-government.Since their founding in the early seventeenthcentury, most of the English colonies in theAmericas (unlike the French and Spanish colonies)had governed themselves to a large extent in localassemblies that were modeled on the EnglishParliament. In these colonial assemblies theyexercised their English common law right toconsent to all laws that bound them.

The existence of these strong local governmentsin each colony also explains in part the speed withwhich the Founders were able to create viableindependent republican governments in the yearsafter 1776. This long-standing practice of self-government also helped to create an indigenouspolitical class in the American colonies with therequisite experience for the difficult task of nationbuilding.

In addition to the various charters and royalinstructions that governed the English colonies,Americans also wrote their own Foundingdocuments. These settler covenants were an earlytype of written constitution and they provided animportant model for the Founders in the lateeighteenth century as they sought to craft a newconstitutional system based on popular consent.

Classical RepublicanismNot all the intellectual influences on the Foundersoriginated in the seventeenth century. Becausemany of the Founders received a classicaleducation in colonial colleges in the eighteenthcentury, they were heavily influenced by thewritings of the great political thinkers andhistorians of ancient Greece and Rome.

Antiquity shaped the Founders’ politicalthought in several important ways. First, itintroduced them to the idea of republicanism, orgovernment by the people. Ancient political thinkersfrom Aristotle to Cicero had praised republican

self-government as the bestpolitical system. Thisclassical political thoughtwas important for theFounders as it gave themgrounds to dissent from theheavily monarchical politicalculture of eighteenth-centuryEngland, where even thecommon law jurists who

defended subjects’ rights against royal powerbelieved strongly in monarchy. By reading theclassics, the American Founders were introducedto an alternate political vision, one that legitimizedrepublicanism.

The second legacy of this classical idea ofrepublicanism was the emphasis that it put on themoral foundations of liberty. Though ancientwriters believed that a republic was the best formof government, they were intensely aware of itsfragility. In particular, they argued that because thepeople governed themselves, republics required fortheir very survival a high degree of civic virtue intheir citizenry. Citizens had to be able to put thegood of the whole (the res publica) ahead of theirown private interests. If they failed to do this, therepublic would fall prey to men of power andambition, and liberty would ultimately be lost.

As a result of this need for an exceptionallyvirtuous citizenry, ancient writers also taught thatrepublics had to be small. Only in a small andrelatively homogeneous society, they argued,would the necessary degree of civic virtue beforthcoming. In part, it was this classical teachingabout the weakness of large republics thatanimated the contentious debate over theproposed federal Constitution in the 1780s.

In addition to their reading of ancient authors,the Founders also encountered republican ideas in


By reading the classics, the AmericanFounders were introduced to an

alternate political vision, one thatlegitimated republicanism.


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

the political theory of a group of eighteenth-century English writers called the “radical Whigs.”These writers kept alive the republican legacy ofthe English Civil War at a time when mostEnglishmen believed that their constitutionalmonarchy was the best form of government in theworld. Crucially for the Founding, these radicalWhigs combined classical republican thought withthe newer Lockean ideas of natural rights andpopular sovereignty. They thus became animportant conduit for a modern type ofrepublicanism to enter American political thought,one that combined the ancient concern with avirtuous citizenry and the modern insistence onthe importance of individual rights.

These radical Whigs also provided theFounders with an important critique of theeighteenth-century British constitution. Instead ofseeing it as the best form of government possible,the radical Whigs argued that it was both corrupt

and tyrannical. In order to reform it, they called fora written constitution and a formal separation ofthe executive branch from the legislature. Thisclassically inspired radical Whig constitutionalismwas an important influence on the development ofAmerican republicanism in the late eighteenthcentury.

ConclusionDrawing on all these intellectual traditions, theFounders were able to create a new kind ofrepublicanism in America based on equal rights,consent, popular sovereignty, and the separation ofchurch and state. Having set this broad context forthe Founding, we now turn to a more detailedexamination of important aspects of the Founders’political theory, followed by detailed biographicalstudies of the Founders themselves.



Suggestions for Further ReadingBailyn, Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University

Press, 1967.Lutz, Donald. Colonial Origins of the American Constitution: A Documentary History. Indianapolis, Ind.:

Liberty Fund, 1998.Reid, John Phillip. The Constitutional History of the American Revolution. Abridged Edition. Madison: The

University of Wisconsin Press, 1995.Rossiter, Clinton. Seedtime of the Republic: The Origins of the American Tradition of Political Liberty. New

York: Harcourt Brace, 1953.Zuckert, Michael. Natural Rights and the New Republicanism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,

1994.

01 001-005 Founders Intro 7/29/04 2:28 PM Page 5

Visual Assessment1. Founders Posters—Have students create posters for either an individual Founder,

a group of Founders, or an event. Ask them to include at least one quotation(different from classroom posters that accompany this volume) and one image.

2. Coat of Arms—Draw a coat of arms template and divide into6 quadrants (see example). Photocopy and hand out to theclass. Ask them to create a coat of arms for a particularFounder with a different criterion for each quadrant (e.g.,occupation, key contribution, etc.). Include in the assignmentan explanation sheet in which they describe why they chosecertain colors, images, and symbols.

3. Individual Illustrated Timeline—Ask each student to create a visual timeline ofat least ten key points in the life of a particular Founder. In class, put the studentsin groups and have them discuss the intersections and juxtapositions in each oftheir timelines.

4. Full Class Illustrated Timeline—Along a full classroom wall, tape poster paper inone long line. Draw in a middle line and years (i.e., 1760, 1770, 1780, etc.). Putstudents in pairs and assign each pair one Founder. Ask them to put together tenkey points in the life of the Founder. Have each pair draw in the key points on themaster timeline.

5. Political Cartoon—Provide students with examples of good political cartoons,contemporary or historical. A good resource for finding historical cartoons on theWeb is <http://www.boondocksnet.com/gallery/political_cartoons.html>. Askthem to create a political cartoon based on an event or idea in the Founding period.

Performance Assessments1. Meeting of the Minds—Divide the class into five groups and assign a Founder to

each group. Ask the group to discuss the Founder’s views on a variety of pre-determined topics. Then, have a representative from each group come to the frontof the classroom and role-play as the Founder, dialoguing with Founders fromother groups. The teacher will act as moderator, reading aloud topic questions(based on the pre-determined topics given to the groups) and encouragingdiscussion from the students in character. At the teacher’s discretion, questioningcan be opened up to the class as a whole. For advanced students, do not provide alist of topics—ask them to know their character well enough to present himproperly on all topics.

2. Create a Song or Rap—Individually or in groups, have students create a songor rap about a Founder based on a familiar song, incorporating at least five keyevents or ideas of the Founder in their project. Have students perform their songin class. (Optional: Ask the students to bring in a recording of the song forbackground music.)

Web/Technology Assessments1. Founders PowerPoint Presentation—Divide students into groups. Have each

group create a PowerPoint presentation about a Founder or event. Determine thenumber of slides, and assign a theme to each slide (e.g., basic biographicinformation, major contributions, political philosophy, quotations, repercussionsof the event, participants in the event, etc.). Have them hand out copies of theslides and give the presentation to the class. You may also ask for a copy of the

ADDITIONAL CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES


19 180-186 Founders EM 7/17/04 11:03 AM Page 180

presentation to give you the opportunity to combine all the presentations into anend-of-semester review.

2. Evaluate Web sites—Have students search the Web for three sites related to aFounder or the Founding period (you may provide them with a “start list” from theresource list at the end of each lesson). Create a Web site evaluation sheet thatincludes such questions as: Are the facts on this site correct in comparison to othersites? What sources does this site draw on to produce its information? Who are themain contributors to this site? When was the site last updated? Ask students tograde the site according to the evaluation sheet and give it a grade for reliability,accuracy, etc. They should write a 2–3 sentence explanation for their grade.

3. Web Quest—Choose a Web site(s) on the Constitution, Founders, or Foundingperiod. (See suggestions below.) Go to the Web site(s) and create a list of questionstaken from various pages within the site. Provide students with the Web addressand list of questions, and ask them to find answers to the questions on the site,documenting on which page they found their answer. Web site suggestions:

• The Avalon Project <http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/avalon.htm>• The Founders’ Constitution <http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/>• Founding.com <http://www.founding.com/>• National Archives Charters of Freedom

<http://www.archives.gov/national_archives_experience/charters.html>• The Library of Congress American Memory Page <http://memory.loc.gov/>• Our Documents <http://www.ourdocuments.gov/>• Teaching American History <http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org/>

A good site to help you construct the Web Quest is: <http://trackstar.hprtec.org>

Verbal Assessments1. Contingency in History—In a one-to-two page essay, have students answer the

question, “How would history have been different if [Founder] had not beenborn?” They should consider repercussions for later events in the political world.

2. Letters Between Founders—Ask students to each choose a “CorrespondencePartner” and decide which two Founders they will be representing. Have themread the appropriate Founders essays and primary source activities. Over a periodof time, the pair should then write at least three letters back and forth (with a copybeing given to the teacher for review and feedback). Instruct them to be mindfulof their Founders’ tone and writing style, life experience, and political views inconstructing the letters.

3. Categorize the Founders—Create five categories for the Founders (e.g., slave-holders vs. non-slaveholders, northern vs. southern, opponents of theConstitution vs. proponents of the Constitution, etc.) and a list of Foundersstudied. Ask students to place each Founder in the appropriate category. Foradvanced students, ask them to create the five categories in addition tocategorizing the Founders.

4. Obituaries and Gravestones—Have students write a short obituary or gravestoneengraving that captures the major accomplishments of a Founder (e.g., ThomasJefferson’s gravestone). Ask them to consider for what the Founder wished to beremembered.

5. “I Am” Poem—Instruct students to select a Founder and write a poem that refersto specific historical events in his life (number of lines at the teacher’s discretion).



Each line of the poem must begin with “I” (i.e., “I am…,” “I wonder…,” “I see…,”etc.). Have them present their poem with an illustration of the Founder.

6. Founder’s Journal—Have students construct a journal of a Founder at a certainperiod in time. Ask them to pick out at least five important days. In the journalentry, make sure they include the major events of the day, the Founder’s feelingsabout the events, and any other pertinent facts (e.g., when writing a journal aboutthe winter at Valley Forge, Washington may have included information about thetroops’ morale, supplies, etc.).

7. Résumé for a Founder—Ask students to create a resume for a particular Founder.Make sure they include standard resume information (e.g., work experience,education, skills, accomplishments/honors, etc.). You can also have them researchand bring in a writing sample (primary source) to accompany the resume.

8. Cast of Characters—Choose an event in the Founding Period (e.g., the signing ofthe Declaration of Independence, the debate about the Constitution in a stateratifying convention, etc.) and make a list of individuals related to the incident.Tell students that they are working for a major film studio in Hollywood that hasdecided to make a movie about this event. They have been hired to cast actors foreach part. Have students fill in your list of individuals with actors/actresses (pastor present) with an explanation of why that particular actor/actress was chosen forthe role. (Ask the students to focus on personality traits, previous roles, etc.)

Review Activities1. Founders Jeopardy—Create a Jeopardy board on an overhead sheet or handout

(six columns and five rows). Label the column heads with categories and fill in allother squares with a dollar amount. Make a sheet that corresponds to the Jeopardyboard with the answers that you will be revealing to the class. (Be sure to includeDaily Doubles.)

a. Possible categories may include:• Thomas Jefferson (or the name of any Founder)• Revolutionary Quirks (fun Founders facts)• Potpourri (miscellaneous)• Pen is Mightier (writings of the Founders)

b. Example answers:• This Founder drafted and introduced the first formal proposal for a

permanent union of the thirteen colonies. Question: Who is BenjaminFranklin?

• This Founder was the only Roman Catholic to sign the Declaration ofIndependence. Question: Who is Charles Carroll?

2. Who Am I?—For homework, give each student a different Founder essay. Ask eachstudent to compile a list of five-to-ten facts about his/her Founder. In class, askindividuals to come to the front of the classroom and read off the facts one at atime, prompting the rest of the class to guess the appropriate Founder.

3. Around the World—Develop a list of questions about the Founders and plot a“travel route” around the classroom in preparation for this game. Ask one studentto volunteer to go first. The student will get up from his/her desk and “travel”along the route plotted to an adjacent student’s desk, standing next to it. Read aquestion aloud, and the first student of the two to answer correctly advances to thenext stop on the travel route. Have the students keep track of how many placesthey advance. Whoever advances the furthest wins.

ADDITIONAL CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES



Common Good: General conditions that are equally to everyone’s advantage. In arepublic, held to be superior to the good of the individual, though its attainment oughtnever to violate the natural rights of any individual.

Democracy: From the Greek, demos, meaning “rule of the people.” Had a negativeconnotation among most Founders, who equated the term with mob rule. The Foundersconsidered it to be a form of government into which poorly-governed republicsdegenerated.

English Rights: Considered by Americans to be part of their inheritance as Englishmen;included such rights as property, petition, and trials by jury. Believed to exist from timeimmemorial and recognized by various English charters as the Magna Carta, the Petitionof Right of 1628, and the English Bill of Rights of 1689.

Equality: Believed to be the condition of all people, who possessed an equality of rights.In practical matters, restricted largely to land-owning white men during the FoundingEra, but the principle worked to undermine ideas of deference among classes.

Faction: A small group that seeks to benefit its members at the expense of the commongood. The Founders discouraged the formation of factions, which they equated withpolitical parties.

Federalism: A political system in which power is divided between two levels ofgovernment, each supreme in its own sphere. Intended to avoid the concentration ofpower in the central government and to preserve the power of local government.

Government: Political power fundamentally limited by citizens’ rights and privileges.This limiting was accomplished by written charters or constitutions and bills of rights.

Happiness: The ultimate end of government. Attained by living in liberty and bypracticing virtue.

Inalienable Rights: Rights that can never justly be taken away.

Independence: The condition of living in liberty without being subject to the unjustrule of another.

Liberty: To live in the enjoyment of one’s rights without dependence upon anyone else.Its enjoyment led to happiness.

Natural Rights: Rights individuals possess by virtue of their humanity. Were thought tobe “inalienable.” Protected by written constitutions and bills of rights that restrainedgovernment.

Property: Referred not only to material possessions, but also to the ownership of one’sbody and rights. Jealously guarded by Americans as the foundation of liberty during thecrisis with Britain.


© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

AN EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY GLOSSARY

18 164-165 Found2 Glos 9/13/07 11:28 AM Page 164

Reason: Human intellectual capacity and rationality. Believed by the Founders to be thedefining characteristic of humans, and the means by which they could understand theworld and improve their lives.

Religious Toleration: The indulgence shown to one religion while maintaining aprivileged position for another. In pluralistic America, religious uniformity could not beenforced so religious toleration became the norm.

Representation: Believed to be central to republican government and the preservationof liberty. Citizens, entitled to vote, elect officials who are responsible to them, and whogovern according to the law.

Republic: From the Latin, res publica, meaning “the public things.” A government systemin which power resides in the people who elect representatives responsible to them andwho govern according to the law. A form of government dedicated to promoting thecommon good. Based on the people, but distinct from a democracy.

Separation of Church and State: The doctrine that government should not enforcereligious belief. Part of the concept of religious toleration and freedom of conscience.

Separation of Powers/Checks and Balances: A way to restrain the power of governmentby balancing the interests of one section of government against the competing interestsof another section. A key component of the federal Constitution. A means of slowingdown the operation of government, so it did not possess too much energy and thusendanger the rights of the people.

Slavery: Referred both to chattel slavery and political slavery. Politically, the fate that befellthose who did not guard their rights against governments. Socially and economically, aninstitution that challenged the belief of the Founders in natural rights.

Taxes: Considered in English tradition to be the free gift of the people to the government.Americans refused to pay them without their consent, which meant actual representationin Parliament.

Tyranny: The condition in which liberty is lost and one is governed by the arbitrarywill of another. Related to the idea of political slavery.

Virtue: The animating principle of a republic and the quality essential for a republic’ssurvival. From the Latin, vir, meaning “man.” Referred to the display of such “manly”traits as courage and self-sacrifice for the common good.

© T

he B

ill o

fRi

ghts

Inst

itute

An Eighteenth-Century Glossary

18 164-165 Found2 Glos 9/13/07 11:28 AM Page 165

Answer Key

Answer Key

in Pennsylvania, “The Liberty Song,” the“Petition to the King,” the Declarationof the Causes of Taking Up Arms, andthe Articles of Confederation.

5. Some students may suggest that Dick-inson’s opposition to the Declaration ofIndependence has excluded him fromthe pantheon of heroes of the Ameri-can independence movement. Othersmay note that his moderation hadmade him less interesting than moreextreme figures in the debates aboutindependence and the new Constitu-tion. Still others may note his bad luckin being sick during the ConstitutionalConvention and thus being unable toparticipate fully in the debates. He alsoretired from politics in 1788.

Handout B—Vocabulary andContext Questions1. Vocabulary

a. coloniesb. existc. locatedd. designede. for bothf. dealingsg. members ofh. hurtfuli. revenuej. usedk. taxingl. new ideam. hopeless

2. Contexta. John Dickinson wrote this

document.b. This document was written in

1768.c. This is an essay.d. The audience for this document

was the colonists and, since itwas read in England, perhapsthe British government.

Handout C—In His Own Words: John

Dickinson on the Townshend Acts• Likely appeal to British Parliament and

Loyalist Americans: Paragraph 2;Paragraph 3, lines 1–5

• Likely to appeal to Patriots: Paragraph 1;Paragraph 5, line 1; Paragraph 6

Alexander HamiltonHandout A—Alexander Hamilton(1757–1804)1. Hamilton was a leading critic of the

Articles of Confederation during the1780s. In 1787 he was chosen as amember of the New York delegation tothe Constitutional Convention. Thoughhe played a minor role in the debatesat Philadelphia, he took the lead in thecampaign for ratification in New York.In 1787–1788 he joined with Madisonand John Jay in writing The FederalistPapers, a series of essays supportingthe Constitution.

2. Hamilton pressed for the establish-ment of a national bank, funding ofthe national debt, and assumption ofstate war debts. He also favored a tariffto protect manufacturing and the cre-ation of a standing army and navy.Hamilton wanted to change the basisof wealth in America from land tomoney. Money, he held, was the greatequalizer. Anyone could amass it andthereby advance up the economic andsocial ladder.

3. Hamilton’s economic plan alarmedmany who feared government power.Secretary of State Thomas Jeffersonbecame the leader of the opposition toHamilton. The first American partysystem formed around these two men.The Federalists supported the Hamil-tonian program. The Democratic-Republicans (or simply, Republicans)worked for its defeat.

17 150-163 Found2 AK 9/13/07 11:27 AM Page 153

Answer Key


4. Some students will say that an indus-trial society allows people to earnmoney regardless of land ownership,whereas an agrarian society requiresthat people own land and have theability to cultivate it. Other students,on the other hand, may point out thatindustrial societies are likely to takeadvantage of workers.

5. Some students will say that a strongerfederal government is better able toprotect individual liberty because itcan stop states from abridging citi-zens’ rights. These students may pointto federal civil rights legislation andJim Crow laws. Others may say that astrong federal government has morepotential to intrude into personal lib-erty by interfering in matters thatshould rightly be handled by states, orinto those in which no governmentshould be involved.

Handout B—Vocabulary andContext Questions1. Vocabulary

a. supportersb. active and forcefulc. poord. appropriatenesse. pacifyf. rivalryg. hostilityh. fearfuli. uncertain

2. Contexta. Alexander Hamilton wrote this

document.b. This document was written in

1788.c. This document is addressed to

The People of the State of NewYork, but was intended to beread by the country as a whole.

d. This document was written toraise support for theConstitution.

Handout D—Analysis: AlexanderHamilton and Federalist No. 70A. A strong and single executive is the

most important quality for an effec-tive government.

1. It is vital to protecting againstforeign attacks.

2. It is important for consistentadministration.

3. It is needed to protect property.4. It protects against people with

personal desires to overtake.5. It protects against divisive groups.6. It prevents chaos.

B. Intelligent and respected men approveof a single executive and a legislatureof many.

1. They believe executive poweris most important for “singlehand.”

2. A legislative body composed ofmany lawmakers is better ableto deliberate and gain the con-fidence of the people.

C. If two or more people share power,arguments are more likely.

1. Two equals in power are likelyto be jealous or mistrustful ofeach other.

2. These disputes lessen the dig-nity of the government.

3. The community may also splitalong the lines as thegovernment.

D. Having a large executive is actually athreat to liberty.

1. It is safer for the public to haveonly one individual to watchand guard.

2. People banded together are bet-ter able to abuse power.

17 150-163 Found2 AK 9/13/07 11:27 AM Page 154