The United States has always been a nation that has been able to adapt to its needs. The founding fathers saw that the Articles of Confederation were not working and thus, met in Philadelphia in 1787 in order to invent a staple set of laws, which would unify the nation under a stronger central government. Throughout this ordeal, States leaders emerged. These men took it upon themselves to question, modify and invent a document which would create a fluid form of government while at the same time hindering any possibility of a monarchy from reemerging in the western hemisphere. Naturally, because the making of the constitution was such a trailblazing event, differences of opinions arose. Three different political figures of the time, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Patrick Henry; all of whom had contrasting views on the Constitution.
Alexander Hamilton was a leading Federalist before his death at the hands of Aaron Burr.
His Federalist Party believed in a strong central government with a large military, as well as the power to tax the nation's people. In his Article in the New York paper the Federalist, which purpose was to obtain support for the Constitution, that needed unanimous support in Congress, Hamilton sates that without the power to tax and raise a military, there is no point to having a government.
James Madison was the author of the constitution as well as a writer for The Federalist. In his article from the Federalist, he states the need for a Constitution, but also for a working system of checks and balances. It is interesting to view his interpretation of a central government because he was not the average Federalist; this was due to the fact that he had Republican ties. It is because of this that his backing...