Rise Of Political Parties In The 1790s Essay

Great Essays
In 1787, the Continental Congress was brought together in the Philadelphia Convention to revise the Articles of Confederation. The Constitution was written and since people had different views on how to interpret it, two political parties were eventually formed: The federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. The main reason for the rise of political parties during the 1790s was because each of the parties favored different political and economical reforms needed as a new, developing country. Alexander Hamilton led the Federalists and they favored a loose interpretation of the Constitution, while Thomas Jefferson and the Democratic-Republican Party favored strict interpretation. The Federalists wanted to create a national economy by creating …show more content…
The Democratic-Republicans felt that there should be a strict interpretation, which meant that the Constitution should be followed word for word. Both parties also had different views on the government. “Therefore it was that the Constitution restrained them to the necessary means, that is to say, to those means without the grant of the power would be nugatory (useless)” (Document A). Thomas Jefferson’s strict interpretation is demonstrated in this statement. He does not believe that the collection of taxes is necessary because it was not specifically stated in the Constitution. Jefferson’s point of view is that he thinks that the Federalists are making claims that are not in the Constitution and he thinks their power is useless. “…Cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government…” (Document C). In George Washington’s Farewell Address, he claimed that the government should try its best to not develop political parties. He warned that overtime it would hurt the government because they would not be able to make decisions. “And be it farther enacted, That if any …show more content…
The Democratic-Republican Party felt they should become allies with the French, while the Federalists wanted to create a foreign policy with Britain. The political cartoon of Jefferson (Document F) was considered a Federalists outlook of the situation. They viewed Jefferson as an atheist who favored French involvement. The image explains that Jefferson and the eagle are fighting over the Constitution in regards to the French Revolution. The Federalists opposed this position because they did not want to become allies with the French because they were pro-British. “The United States in the mean Time at Their discretion extending their settlements to any part within the said boundary line, except within the precincts or Jurisdiction of any of the said Posts” (Document B). Jay’s Treaty was signed and discussed to avoid the war with Britain. It states that the British government withdrew all of the threats against United States’ sailors. The Federalists strategy was to strengthen the economic ties with Britain. They wanted to settle the pre-war claims and debts with them before anything got out of hand. The Democratic-Republicans did not agree with this treaty because they believed nothing was accomplished and they did not want to become allies with Britain after they just broke free from them. The point of view of this treaty was that the Federalists wanted to

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    These two parties had varying policies relating to foreign relations, the Alien and Sedition Acts, and Hamilton's economic plans. When it came to foreign relations, the Federalist preferred the British and the Democratic-Republicans preferred the French. For instance, Federalists opposed the French Revolution and was against Americans giving support. For the Democratic-Republicans, it was the opposite; they wanted to give their support towards the French cause. Similarly, Federalists favored Jay’s Treaty because they hoped to cultivate a stronger relationship with Great Britain.…

    • 520 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Jim Crow Laws In America

    • 1024 Words
    • 4 Pages

    However Wilson wanted to keep the treaty and some legislatures opposed the acceptance. Example of one who opposed the paris treaty was Senator Henry Cabot Lodge his overall claim was “Mankind suddenly virtuous by a statute or written constitution, “ basically saying that people were not ready to accept coherency with good heart no matter if its instituted by a written document. for it was wilson who assured the nation that joining the League of Nations would prevent war simply because a majority of the world was a part of such league. However it is people such as Lodge who opposed the league saying they would have rather remained with the theory of isolationism. seeing as to how it was working for them until this point in time.…

    • 1024 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Paine says that reconciliation would bring “The ruin of the Continent.” This does not mean that Pain wants America and Britain to forever be at war, but he is saying that in order to bring overall peace, America needs to be its own nation in order to thrive on its own and prevent further fighting. This will prevent emigrants from going to their colony of bad governing and constant fighting. One of his reasons is that the British has a monarchy rule with an unfair kind, and America wants to be a democracy. Paine does not think that the king has the right to tell everyone that “[They] shall make no laws but what [he pleases]” He then states that with all of the fighting and tension, it would be nearly impossible to move forward and the two colonies would eventually just…

    • 567 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Then king George III did not want anything to do with the patriots. The colonies were furious when the king called them out in open rebellion. The king thought that if he would side with the colonist he would not be liked on the Britain. The king worried about him would be peaceful with the colonist they would use that to their advantage. The king worried that if the colonist used their bond to their leverage the king would not hear the end of it from the British colonist.…

    • 752 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He understood that “sometimes good people do bad things and bad people do good things”, this gave Hamilton an advantage because Jefferson did not recognize this. Hamilton wanted to form a national government to help them get out of debt resulting from the American Revolution, he planned to borrow money from European banks then pay it back. He believed our national government had to be strong enough in order to defend ourselves. Jefferson completely disagreed with Hamilton’s ideas of government. Jefferson wanted to accomplish a small, weak government that is not to powerful.…

    • 829 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Henry argued that the constitution would jeopardize state sovereignty and the rights of the people. He also did not support it because it did not contain a Bill of Rights. Other arguments made by Henry were that Congress may destroy suffrage and elections will soon not matter and those in Congress would not follow same laws that the citizens would have to follow. Henry stated, “ If you make citizens of this country agree to become subjects of one great consolidated empire of America, your government will not have sufficient energy to keep them together.” James Madison argued back with popular opinions because states were ready for a change. He argued that an army was necessary, and argued taxes was not for the direct taxation but for tariffs and indirect taxes.…

    • 813 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Those that desired to separate were known as patriots. Those that hoped to maintain relations with Britain were known as loyalists. Loyalists believed that a strong and unified Britain was beneficial for everyone and that without Britain the colonies would be too weak to survive on their own. Additionally loyalists concluded that because they were British subjects that were obligated to obey British laws and pay British taxes. Loyalists were of the opinion that because the colonies were so far away from Britain it would be impractical to have representation in British parliament.…

    • 1793 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Paine shows that there is a fault in this argument by stating if the king must be monitored than he cannot be trusted, and that if he is being monitored by the people, than the people are better fit for the crown than the king is. Additionally, Paine suggest that the English constitution needs no mention of a king, since he believes a country without a king could be more prosperous and peaceful. He supports this with Holland’s period of no kings in which during that time there was more peace than any monarchy in Europe. Paine also mentions that a king is not supported by the rights of nature or scripture, and creates the question of what really justifies a monarchy, and even includes it as a sin of the Jewish. By denouncing the king, Paine expunges the basis of English government, which makes it easier for the American people to understand and agree with Paine’s opinion.…

    • 1037 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Maier, when discussing earlier greivances over the White Pines Act, investigated why the colonists opposed this form of government intervention so much. The White Pines Act, although only a legislature that was meant to reserve all white pine trees for the Crown, still bothered colonists because it stepped into their economic and social world and allowed Parliament to make decisions. “The community’s immediate welfare was at stake, not the satisfaction of any anti-British prejudices,” was how Maier described colonial thought. Nothing in the opposition of specific interventions said that the colonists disliked Parliament or negated their power. Colonists just disagreed with where and how Parliament could impose its powers, (Greene, 28–29; Maier,…

    • 1409 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    had not officially joined the League, however members of the cabinet were associated with the Leagues actions. The main problem with the League of Nations was that the Monroe Doctrine was violated. America was not supposed to interfere with European nations because it was an act of aggression. If the U.S. joined the League of Nations it would have brought the U.S. into foreign disputes, which would cause the violation. The Monroe Doctrine was established “to prevent European intervention in the Western Hemisphere and American intervention in European affairs” (Justice).…

    • 778 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays