HIST 107
January 18, 2018
Why did Alexander Hamilton oppose adding a bill of rights to the constitution?
Amid the late eighteenth century, the Antifederalists contended against the constitution in light of the fact that it didn't contain a bill of rights. They trusted that without a rundown of individual flexibilities, the new national government may mishandle its forces and that the states would be inundated by an all to prevailing and persuasive national government. The Antifederalists stressed that the cutoff points on coordinate voting and the long terms of the president and legislators, provided by the constitution, would make a populace of elites and blue-bloods, which thus would in the end take away power from the general population. They additionally expected that the president may turn into another ruler. At the end of the day, the Antifederalists eventually felt that the new Constitution was undemocratic
The Bill of Rights was a piece of the Massachusetts Compromise. At the point when the Constitution should have been approved by congress it should have been passed by 9 out of 13 …show more content…
There was a contention that a bill of rights was pointless, that clearly individuals had natural individual rights and that our constitution officially ensured those rights. It was additionally contended that by posting our rights we would at last be constraining our rights to what was recorded, barring different rights that we as of now had by exclusion. In the event that you have confidence in the idea of individual rights you additionally trust that those rights are not conceded by a legislature. You just have those rights being a Human, and it is the administration's duty to secure those rights, not offer them to you or take those rights