I would not agree that the general government under the Articles of Confederation failed. In fact it succeeded for what it was intended. When peace ensued new possibilities came to the fore which generated the question, what was the desired relationship between the colonies come States. It became obvious that for the States to maintain some common functions some changes were needed. To create a strong central government was not something to which there was a great deal of agreement.
For many, such as Patrick Henry, there was a primary need to retain the sovereign position of the States which was reflected not only in the Articles of Confederation but also in the Treaty of Peace signed in Paris [1783] between Great Britain and the United States. Here, in Article One, each State was mentioned and identified as Free, Independent and Sovereign. Even so, there were some who desired a much stronger common general government, such as Alexander Hamilton.
A series of events led to the calling of a convention to develop proposed changes to the Articles of Confederation. Even so, not all States (Rhode Island) sent delegates to this convention. Of those delegates who attended such alterations to the Articles of Confederation were not the primary goal, with some wanting no changes and some wanting a Constitution.
Little different from our times, this was a political contest in which those best prepared had the advantage. Individuals who wanted a Constitution (such as Alexander Hamilton and James Madison) were well prepared. Enough of the other delegates dissatisfied with the Articles of Confederation and, concerned as to the future and, desired enhanced relationship and cooperation between the States, that dialog leading to the Constitution was quickly the main path. Even so, it was no sure goal with States of varying social and economic conditions as well as (to some small degree) differing historical roots. However, concern about future pressure from Europe was a driving factor.
Even after the Constitution was developed and propose to the Continental Congress it was no sure thing, but that congress did propose (with no recommendation) the new Constitution to the States for possible ratification. That it eventually was ratified was a near thing and could just as easily have not been ratified, again the art of politics won the day.
2007-10-10 16:20:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Randy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Constitution was needed after the failure of the first government, The Articles of Confederation. They realized that a strong, centralized government to run a country and the AOC could not cut it, especially after it could not put down Shay's Rebellion.
After long compromises and fights, the Constitution was drafted and the new government passed its first test, putting down the Whiskey Rebellion
2007-10-10 13:46:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by browncoat_llama 2
·
0⤊
0⤋