The Federalists

The arguments in favor of the Constitution are well-known; the supporters of ratification were troubled by the lack of energy and authority in the national government under the Articles of Confederation. They saw a stronger national government as the answer to a host of persistent problems — the lack of a common currency, constant trade disputes between the states, lack of unity in trade, and defense policies being only the most notable of them.

The features of the Constitution, the Federalists argued, would provide sufficient energy in the national government to address these problems while still preserving a large degree of independence in the states and protecting the rights and liberties of the people.

The Anti-federalists

In general, the Anti-federalists were opposed to the Constitution because they were much less optimistic than the Federalists about the ability of civic virtue and auxiliary precautions to keep the national government in check. Their lists of objections to the Constitution went well beyond those concerns, however. First and foremost, Anti-federalists argued (correctly) that the Convention had exceeded the authority granted to it by the Confederal Congress. Instead of amending the Articles of Confederation, they had abolished them. This, they argued, made the proposed Constitution invalid. As to the document itself, they complained that its scheme of representation was inadequate, that there were not enough restrictions on the authority of the national government — the Constitution merely offered “paper checks,” they argued — and that states were stripped of the ability to protect their economic interests through tariffs.