The original purpose of the constitutional convention was to: - sorry
Although the convention was intended to revise the league of states and first system of government under the Articles of Confederation , [4] the intention from the outset of many of its proponents, chief among them James Madison of Virginia and Alexander Hamilton of New York, was to create a new government rather than fix the existing one. The delegates elected George Washington of Virginia, former commanding general of the Continental Army in the late American Revolutionary War — and proponent of a stronger national government, to become President of the convention. The result of the convention was the creation of the Constitution of the United States , placing the Convention among the most significant events in American history. At the time, the convention was not referred to as a "Constitutional convention", nor did most of the delegates arrive intending to draft a new constitution. Many assumed that the purpose of the convention was to discuss and draft improvements to the existing Articles of Confederation, and would not have agreed to participate otherwise. Once the convention began, however, most of the delegates — though not all — came to agree in general terms that the goal would be a new system of government, not simply a revised version of the Articles of Confederation. The Virginia Plan was selected as the basis for the new government. While the concept of a federal government with three branches legislative, executive, and judicial and the general role of each branch was not heavily disputed, several issues delayed further progress and threatened the success of the convention. the original purpose of the constitutional convention was to:
The original purpose of the constitutional convention was to: Video
The Making of the American Constitution - Judy WaltonMurray N. Tim Worstall writes The British Gas hire and fire extravaganza. From the very beginning of the great emerging struggle over the Constitution the Antifederalist forces suffered from a grave and debilitating problem of leadership.
The problem was that tk: liberal leadership was so conservatized that most of them agreed that centralizing revisions of the Articles were necessary—as can be seen from the impost and congressional regulation of commerce debates during the s. The nationalist leaders, in contrast to their wavering opponents, knew exactly what it wanted and strove to obtain the most possible.
The initiative was always in the hands of the Federalist Right, while the Antifederalist Left, weakened in principle, could only offer a series of defensive protests to the reactionary drive. The battles were consequently fought on the terms set by the aggressive nationalist forces. A real libertarian Left existed only in such thoroughly disaffected areas as Shaysite western Massachusetts, western Rhode Island, and inland areas of upstate New York.
Stay Connected
As a result of his ambivalence, Governor Clinton https://digitales.com.au/blog/wp-content/custom/general-motors-and-the-affecting-factors-of/salem-telephone-company-case.php allowed Hamilton his head in selecting delegates for the Annapolis Convention. And the most that the liberals did was, like Convwntion Henry and Richard Henry Lee in Virginia, to live aloof and refuse to attend the Constitutional Convention. Only a few writers and pamphleteers, largely in New England, raised the torch of all-out opposition from the very beginning. In October Virginia was the first state legislature that approved the call for a convention for constitutional revision, and it did so overwhelmingly.
As the front man, he put his unquestioned reputation at the service of the nationalist designs. Washington, at fifty-four or at any other agecould have added little to the intellectual average of any convention, and his knowledge of what to do in one barely extended beyond rules of order.
But that was all he needed to know, for any assembly he attended was likely to elect him presiding officer. He had two attributes that, even without his unparalleled prestige, prompted men to choose him The Leader; and it mattered not that one of the attributes was trivial and https://digitales.com.au/blog/wp-content/custom/the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-technology-in/essay-on-the-french-revolution.php other he carried to the point of triviality, nor did it matter that for the last third of his life he was largely and self-consciously playing a role.
Recent Posts
The first attribute was that he looked like a leader. In an age in which most Americans stood about five feet five and measured nearly three-fourths that around the waist, Washington stood six feet and had broad, powerful shoulders and slim hips; and he had learned the trick, when men said something oriignal his ken, of looking at them in a way that made them feel irreverent or even stupid. The other attribute was personal integrity. But it was unimpeachable, and everyone knew it, and that, above all, made Washington useful.
Alberto Mingardi
Others would do the brain work and the dirty work; Washington needed only to be there, but if there was to be article source national government he absolutely had to be there, to lend his name to the doings. Polar opposite to Washington in characteristics stood the theoretician James Madison, who was equally important to the nationalist cause. Few men looked less like a leader: scrawny and pale, a bookworm and a hypochondriac, he owned a physical presence as ths as one was likely to meet.
But his knowledge of what to do in a convention was vast, and his talents for doing it matched his knowledge.]
I think, that you are mistaken. I can defend the position. Write to me in PM, we will discuss.
Absolutely with you it agree. It is good idea. I support you.
To speak on this theme it is possible long.
What curious topic