In this Federalist Paper, Hamilton addresses other
issues that people have raised with the Constitution that have either been
addressed in passing or not at all. The main objection that Hamilton addresses is
the lack of a Bill of Rights to the Constitution. Hamilton starts by noting
that several states lack a Bill of Rights as well. Second, he argues that there
are various provisions (mostly in Article IV and V) that limit the powers of
the federal government against the individual. In addition, Hamilton writes
that having a Bill of Rights could be dangerous since the various provisions
would suggest powers that the federal government did not have in the first
place. Lastly, he argues that words on a piece of power will not stop a
government bent on abridging the liberties of its citizens.
Brandon White: Strangely, Hamilton does not mention the most powerful reason against a Bill of Rights. A codified list of rights would highly suggest that those not listed are not rights protected by the Constitution. Madison would make this argument and it was powerful (at least to Jefferson, even if Jefferson still ultimately disagreed). What is also interesting is that he mentions something that from a selling standpoint, is odd. He acknowledges that written prohibitions do not guarantee freedom. Considering that one of the main framing elements undertaken by himself, Madison and Jay is consistently pointing to limitations of the federal government in the text of the Constitution, it seems misplaced here. Honest but misplaced.
ReplyDelete