 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
The Soon Coming Judgment Of God Upon America and How To Escape It 560
convention, and proposed those parts of the plan, which, in our opinion, would be
injurious to you, in the best manner we were able; and closed our arguments by
offering the following [14] propositions to the convention.
1.
The right of conscience shall be held inviolable; and neither the legislative,
executive nor judicial powers of the United states shall have authority to alter,
abrogate, or infringe any part of the constitution of the several states, which
provide for the liberty in manners of religion....
1943
All the proposed reservation of rights were rejected. Further, based on the fact that there
objections were not recorded, I believe an inaccurate picture of the Constitutional debates can be
drawn from anything but a exhaustive study of all available sources. Rather than look at the
exhaustive debates presented by each side, let us simply look at where they stood on the
Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The Federalists saw the need for a strong national government and that was reflected in
the Constitution they drafted. The balance of power between the executive, legislative and
judicial branches was unique and possibly a stroke of genius. But the balance of power only
theoretically limits the power of the Federal government. Nothing in the Constitution itself
specifically states what power is reserved for or vested in the States. Herbert J. Storing, in his
book What the Anti-Federalists Were For, hints that there were some nefarious reasons for what
was and was not included in the Constitution. Note: It is important to realize that the original
meaning of “federal” was that the power was vested in the states such as in the Confederacy.
Storing writes:
Luther Martin agreed with [James] Madison that the new Constitution
presented a novel mixture of federal (state oriented) and national elements; but he
found it “just so much federal (state oriented) in appearance as to give its
advocates in some measure, an opportunity of passing it as such upon the
unsuspecting multitude, before they had time and opportunity to examine it, and
yet so predominately national as to put it in the power of its movers, whenever the
machine shall be set agoing, to strike out every part that has the appearance of
being federal (state oriented), and to render it wholly and and entirely a national
government.”
1944
Not only did the Federalists support a strong national government but they also apposed a
Bill of Rights. Alexander Hamilton well demonstrates this in The Federalist, No. 84. The
Federalists are a group of essays that were written by the Federalists and printed in Newspapers
in support of the adoption of the Constitution by the states. Hamilton wrote:
I go further and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent
they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution but
would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers that
are not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to
 |