Part 1

During the classical republican period of 1763-1778 radical changes in the relationship between government and the people began to occur. The people grew tired of the monarchy and desired to have a government that represented their interests and needs. In order for this too occur the people would have to be intimately involved in the community and the government. With increasing economic pressures from the monarchy the colonists rebelled and sought to establish a new kind of country, one in which all people were equal. As this fledgling democracy began to grow and evolve conflicts of interest between rural and urban populations became defined, divisions between the rich and the poor, landowners and tenants grew over the scarcity of resources and the distribution of power. Their began to arise another aristocracy, that of the wealthy and privileged elite.

From this very tumultuous time the country moved into an era of relative stability with the establishment of the Constitution and the addition of the Bill of Rights. The Federalist era lasted from 1780-1798. The first President was George Washington. Washington established precedence as to what the role of the executive branch would be. Washington was instrumental in maintain the stability of the budding nation; this sentiment was expressed by Abigail Adams, wife of the then Vice President. When speaking of an illness Washington had Abigail Adams wrote: “It appears to me that the union of the states and consequently the permanency of the government depend under Providence upon his life. At this early day when neither our finances are arranged nor our government sufficiently cemented to promise duration, his death would ... have ... the most disastrous consequences[i]” During his tenure Washington saw to the strengthening of the Federal government. It seems that the Reason for the American Revolution could now be applied to this new government, as implied by the Whiskey Rebellion and the comparison drawn to the Boston Tea Party. Increasingly the standards for participating actively in government were based on social status and not citizenship. By setting these boundaries the people became increasingly disillusioned with the new government and in turn reverted to self-serving ends which did not include participation in government, true participation was for the privileged few.

Part II

In 1776 the population of Africans in America was 525,000 with 25,000 being free blacks in the North. During the American Revolution African Americans fought for freedom, their freedom. In exchange for service in the military the British, and begrudgingly the Americans, offered former slaves their freedom. As a result the population of free blacks was nearly 60,000 by the census of 1790 with 690,00 still enslaved. Seeing how freedom and justice were such important concepts to the Americans it would make sense that all slaves would be freed, to the contrary. In the North, beginning with Vermont in 1777 and continuing through the 1820’s, slavery was gradually being eradicated while in the South it was becoming increasingly strong. Due to increased agricultural demands slavery was becoming an essential part of Southern life, for the whites. During this time all slaves were viewed as property and afforded the rights of oxen. While the word free was applied to some blacks reality was far from it. These “free” blacks were only allowed to live in the poorest urban and farming areas, provided limited educational opportunities and segregated for worship services. In response the black community came together and formed churches and aid societies in order to help themselves. Via a wide range of laws many states in the North instituted public policy aimed specifically at disadvantaging free blacks. In the South laws sought to solidify, continue and expand slavery. In the South blacks were treated as sub-human. Slaves were bought and sold as commodities, families separated at the whim of a slave master. Physical abuse and starvation were commonplace for slaves. The arose before dawn to prepare for the day, worked till dark and attempted to maintain their basic humanity at night, without the knowledge of their master.

I feel that the policies concerning the treatment of blacks follow a zigzag pattern that is gradually inclining similar to the one I have here. The peaks represent an increase in positive policy concerning the African American population.

The valleys represent a reversion in Public Policy. Public policy would change in favor of a more permissive attitude towards Negroes, the sudden change in society would scare some people and policy would then take a step back. A good analogy would be two steps forward and one step back.

End of assignment.

If you wan to read it I have included some of my feelings on the framers and their intent.

What caused the exclusion of certain groups of people was the social structure at the time the Constitution was created. If these groups of people hadn’t been excluded it is unlikely that the Constitution would have been ratified. In fact Madison was strongly opposed to slavery at one point calling it “a traffic which has so long and so loudly upbraided the barbarism of modern policy”[ii]. This does not deny the atrocity of slavery as it existed at the time the Constitution was created, but refutes the fallacy that the framers intended to exclude certain peoples. I believe that had the framers had their way all people would have been included. I think that they engineered a document that was flexible and could endure the winds of public opinion with a leaning towards progressiveness.

In order for the Constitution to be ratified and in order to ensure the continued existence of the United States the framers were forced to surrender certain moral ground to achieve a long-term greater good. Please pardon the lengthy section of Federalist Paper 42, which I have included, but it serves to further illustrate the framers true feelings on the topic of slavery. In the Federalist Paper 42 Madison directly addresses the issue of slavery as follows:

“It were doubtless to be wished that the power of prohibiting the importation of slaves had not been postponed until the year 1808, or rather that it has been suffered to immediate operation. But it is not difficult to account either for this restriction on the general government, or for the manner in which the whole clause is expressed. It ought to be expressed as a great point gained in favor of humanity that a period of twenty years may terminate forever, within these States, a traffic which has so long and so loudly upbraided the barbarism of modern policy; that within that period it will receive a considerable discouragement from federal government, and may be totally abolished, by a concurrence of the few States which continue the unnatural traffic in the prohibitory example which has been given by so great a majority of the Union . Happy would it be for the unfortunate Africans if an equal prospect lay before them of being redeemed from the oppression of their European brethren!

Attempts have been made to pervert this clause into an objection against the Constitution be representing it on one side as a criminal toleration of an illicit practice, and on another as calculated to prevent voluntary immigration from Europe to America. I mention these misconstructions not with a view to give them an answer, for they deserve none, but as specimens of the manner and spirit in which some have thought fit to conduct their opposition to the proposed government.”[iii] I think that first and foremost on the framers mind was the establishment of a representative democracy. Included in the Constitution were various mechanisms that would in the long term provide greater liberty for all.