Suchergebnisse
Suchergebnisse:
Federalist No. 84 is notable for presenting the idea that a Bill of Rights was not a necessary component of the proposed United States Constitution. The constitution, as originally written, is to specifically enumerate and protect the rights of the people. It is alleged that many Americans at the time opposed the inclusion of a bill ...
4. Jan. 2002 · “The Federalist No. 84, [28 May 1788],” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0247. [Original source: The Papers of Alexander Hamilton , vol. 4, January 1787 – May 1788 , ed. Harold C. Syrett.
The Federalist Papers : No. 84. From McLEAN's Edition, New York. To the People of the State of New York: IN THE course of the foregoing review of the Constitution, I have taken notice of, and endeavored to answer most of the objections which have appeared against it. There, however, remain a few which either did not fall naturally under any ...
15. Sept. 2021 · This is the second longest essay in The Federalist, a collection of newspaper essays by Publius (Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay; Hamilton wrote number 84) published in New York City to support adoption of the Constitution. It summarizes Federalist arguments that the proposed Constitution does not need a bill of rights.
Federalist 84 is best known for its opposition to a Bill of Rights, a viewpoint with which the work's other author, James Madison, disagreed. Madison's position eventually won out in Congress, and a Bill of Rights was ratified on December 15, 1791.
The Argument Against the Bill of Rights. In Federalist No. 84, Alexander Hamilton, under the pseudonym “Publius,” argues that a bill of rights is not only unnecessary in a well designed constitution but is even dangerous.
Alexander Hamilton, Federalist, no. 84, 575--81 28 May 1788 The most considerable of these remaining objections is, that the plan of the convention contains no bill of rights.
