Life in early America was a period of experimentation. With the Revolution over, colonies began drafting their state constitutions, and America worked on the Articles of Confederation. This new country was eager to construct a smooth- running government, but the poorly constructed document only led to problems. Due to a lack of national powers, which ultimately led to an uprising and other difficulties, it was only a matter of time before the United States would need to make corrections to the government. These two men had different views on how America should be governed. Patrick Henry who was against the new Constitution and sided with the Anti-Federalists.
Articles Of Confederation Vs. The Constitution Essay
Comparing The Articles Of Confederation And The Constitution | Bartleby
The difference between the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution is that the Articles of Confederation lasted from They were also replaced with a more informed government that gave them power for the federal government. So basically, to sum it up they had no power to do whatever and the states made their own decisions. On the other hand, the Constitution had almost all the rights that could get because they were able to do what they wanted in which it made their whole lives become better for the whole community.
Compare And Contrast Articles Of Confederation And Constitution
At the end of the American Revolution the free states needed some sort of control that would generate to a unified country. Issues arose such as: How should power be divided between local and national governments? How should laws be made, and by whom? Who should be authorized to govern those laws?
John Brown, Frederick Douglass and Harriet Beecher Stowe were all individuals who disagreed with the institution of slavery and put an effort in order to abolish it. Each individual used distinct tactics to get the message across. Some wrote novels describing the harsh treatment slaves underwent while others lead protests and created movies. Speaking of unfair treatment, Dred Scott, a slave who worked for his master Sanford considered himself a freeman because he lived where slavery was illegal. However, when the case reached to to the Supreme Court the court declined his argument.