Bill of Rights Importance

[Moe Bedard]

James Madison presented the Bill of Rights as amendments to the US Constitution to pave the way for its ratification because of the strong opposition by Anti-Federalists who feared that the President could assume powers that were similar to those of a king.

(James Madison)

It was George Mason who pointed out on September 12, 1787 that the Constitution had a major defect and that was the absence of a bill of rights. Mason felt that a listing of these natural rights would serve to calm down the fears of the people who thought that a very powerful central government would abuse its powers in the same way that kings had done in the past.

(George Mason)

At that time, the Bill of Rights was important because without it, opposition from the Anti-Federalists would have prevented the ratification of the Constitution. The Anti-Federalists had argued that if the delegates really cared about individual rights, they would have included such provisions. To appease their opponents, the Federalists promised that the issue would be taken up after the ratification of the Constitution and during the First Congress in 1789.

While Madison was against the idea of a list of individual rights at the start, he was finally convinced in the fall of 1788 because of several reasons. He realized that it would help in the establishment of a judiciary that would be charged with the protection of the rights of people from the other government branches, it would have educational purposes, and it could be used by the people later if the government became oppressive.

The Bill of Rights is also important because it specifies the inherent rights of the citizens.

History has shown that governments had the tendency to assume too much power if there is no provision to control it. By listing essential rights, Madison and its other proponents had hoped to protect the people's rights without excluding those that have not been listed.

+ YouTube Video

[Moe Bedard]

The Bill of Rights plays a central role in American law and government, and remains a fundamental symbol of the freedoms and culture of the nation. One of the original fourteen copies of the Bill of Rights is on public display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.

http://www.archives.gov/dc-metro/washington/



Here is an actual PDF Picture of the real version on display in DC.

http://www.archives.gov/historical-d...-of-rights.pdf


Thomas Jefferson to James Madison
15 Mar. 1789Papers 14:659--61





Your thoughts on the subject of the Declaration of rights in the letter of Oct. 17.

I have weighed with great satisfaction. Some of them had not occurred to me before, but were acknoleged just in the moment they were presented to my mind. In the arguments in favor of a declaration of rights, you omit one which has great weight with me, the legal check which it puts into the hands of the judiciary. This is a body, which if rendered independent, and kept strictly to their own department merits great confidence for their learning and integrity. In fact what degree of confidence would be too much for a body composed of such men as Wythe, Blair, and Pendleton? On characters like these the "civium ardor prava jubentium" would make no impression. I am happy to find that on the whole you are a friend to this amendment.

The Declaration of rights is like all other human blessings alloyed with some inconveniences, and not accomplishing fully it's object. But the good in this instance vastly overweighs the evil. I cannot refrain from making short answers to the objections which your letter states to have been raised. 1. That the rights in question are reserved by the manner in which the federal powers are granted. Answer.

A constitutive act may certainly be so formed as to need no declaration of rights. The act itself has the force of a declaration as far as it goes: and if it goes to all material points nothing more is wanting. In the draught of a constitution which I had once a thought of proposing in Virginia, and printed afterwards, I endeavored to reach all the great objects of public liberty, and did not mean to add a declaration of rights. Probably the object was imperfectly executed: but the deficiencies would have been supplied by others in the course of discussion. But in a constitutive act which leaves some precious articles unnoticed, and raises implications against others, a declaration of rights becomes necessary by way of supplement.

This is the case of our new federal constitution. This instrument forms us into one state as to certain objects, and gives us a legislative and executive body for these objects. It should therefore guard us against their abuses of power within the feild submitted to them. 2. A positive declaration of some essential rights could not be obtained in the requisite latitude. Answer. Half a loaf is better than no bread.

If we cannot secure all our rights, let us secure what we can. 3. The limited powers of the federal government and jealousy of the subordinate governments afford a security which exists in no other instance. Answer. The first member of this seems resolvable into the 1st. objection before stated. The jealousy of the subordinate governments is a precious reliance. But observe that those governments are only agents. They must have principles furnished them whereon to found their opposition. The declaration of rights will be the text whereby they will try all the acts of the federal government.

In this view it is necessary to the federal government also: as by the same text they may try the opposition of the subordinate governments. 4. Experience proves the inefficacy of a bill of rights. True. But tho it is not absolutely efficacious under all circumstances, it is of great potency always, and rarely inefficacious. A brace the more will often keep up the building which would have fallen with that brace the less. There is a remarkeable difference between the characters of the Inconveniencies which attend a Declaration of rights, and those which attend the want of it.

The inconveniences of the Declaration are that it may cramp government in it's useful exertions. But the evil of this is shortlived, moderate, and reparable. The inconveniencies of the want of a Declaration are permanent, afflicting and irreparable: they are in constant progression from bad to worse. The executive in our governments is not the sole, it is scarcely the principal object of my jealousy. The tyranny of the legislatures is the most formidable dread at present, and will be for long years.

That of the executive will come in it's turn, but it will be at a remote period. I know there are some among us who would now establish a monarchy. But they are inconsiderable in number and weight of character. The rising race are all republicans.

We were educated in royalism: no wonder if some of us retain that idolatry still. Our young people are educated in republicanism. An apostacy from that to royalism is unprecedented and impossible.

I am much pleased with the prospect that a declaration of rights will be added: and hope it will be done in that way which will not endanger the whole frame of the government, or any essential part of it.