Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

By late 1786, it was clear to the states that the Articles of Confederation could no longer provide for an adequate government, an essential function to promote the prosperity of the fledgling country. To fix this problem, delegates from all states except Rhode Island congregated in Philadelphia in an attempt to revise the Articles of Confederation. During the convention, the delegates had a variety of views on how the government should function, which led to lengthy and, at times, acrimonious debates. In the end, however, some kind of compromise would always be reached; then another issue would be brought about and the whole cycle repeats over and over again. Sleepless nights and smoke filled rooms followed one after another. Little did the
One of these is the Virginia Plan, also called the Large State Plan, which advised that the representation in a bicameral legislature be proportional to property or population. The other is the New Jersey Plan, which called for equal representation for all states regardless to population in a unicameral legislature. Had the Virginia Plan been adopted entirely, large states would always have a dominant voice over the smaller states. On the other hand, if the New Jersey plan had been adopted entirely, bigger states with bigger needs would never prevail. When the delegates began to discuss this issue, they willingly agreed that a bicameral legislature is necessary for the new national government. They differed widely, however, in the representation of the two houses. Bitter debates followed until, finally, the compromise of equal representation in the House and proportional representation in the Senate was reached. In Henry Steele Commager 's article, "The Constitution, Was It an Economic Document?", he remarked that the framers "feared the powers of the majority, as they feared all power unless controlled" (141); the compromise of the representation of the houses underscores exactly this point because it prevents an absolute body majority which would prove to be fatal to the country had they had a malevolent intent. Furthermore, the compromise effectively appealed to all states and therefore
The Northerners opposed slavery, whereas the agriculture dependent Southerners supported it. It was on this issue that the most acerbic debates took place. For the unity and efficiency of the whole country, both sides gave in and made the most famous of the compromises, the Three-Fifth Clause, which won unanimous approval. Not wanting to loose the valuable revenues from the South, the Northerners compromised again in the Constitution by prohibiting Congress from outlawing the slave trade for at least twenty years in order to appeal to the masses. Was this necessarily the right and just decision? No. But it undeniably guaranteed the South as a part of the