Antifederalists have been described as agrarian populists, who were worried that the Constitution would entrench the power of economic and political elites.
Would America be a nation of bankers or a nation of farmers?
To avoid the problem of unanimous consent, something that hamstrung the execution of law under the Articles of Confederation, only nine states had to ratify the Constitution.
In June of 1788, New Hampshire was the ninth to approve the Constitution; the success of the overall system remained far from secure.
I am persuaded that it is the best which our political situation, habits, and opinions will admit, and superior to any the revolution has produced. A nation, without a national government, is, in my view, an awful spectacle.
The establishment of a Constitution, in time of profound peace, by the voluntary consent of a whole people, is a prodigy, to the completion of which I look forward with trembling anxiety.
67 to 77, about the powers of the executive branch—like the president’s commander-in-chief and pardoning powers, in No. Madison, too, wrote essays on the fundamental powers of the federal and state governments: in Nos.
41, 42, and 43, describing the general powers of the federal government (to declare war; to borrow money; “to make treaties; to send and receive ambassadors …
For instance, either Madison or Hamilton wrote a series of articles on the House of Representatives—Federalist Nos. 62 and 63, describing the Senate.) Today, scholars typically refer to the collective essays as the “Federalist Papers.” Written by two of the Constitution’s Framers (Madison and Hamilton), they are an authoritative resource for academics, lawyers, and judges—including Supreme Court justices—to use to interpret the Constitution and to determine its original, or historic, meaning. 1, Alexander Hamilton challenged his audience to consider the impact of ratification: “It seems to have been reserved to the people of this country … 78, the plan for the federal judiciary, including its lifetime appointment (“the judiciary …
to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.” Hamilton went on to write a majority of the articles, including: No. is in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as permanency in office”); and Nos. 84, Hamilton defended the Constitution despite its lack of a bill of rights.