Building Blocks for History Lab:
SS.6.A.3.11 Analyze support and opposition (Federalists, Federalist Papers, Anti-Federalists, Bill of Rights) to the ratification of the Constitution.
Essential Question: Should the Constitution have been ratified in 1787 without the Bill of Rights?
Before introducing this history lab to students, they must be familiar with the positions Federalists and Anti-Federalists held on the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. This should also include an understanding of the need to revise or abolish the Articles of Confederation and establish a new form of government. Students should understand how the promise to include the Bill of Rights encouraged states to support the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Students will need to be able to identify/define the following prior to conducting the lab.
· Federalist
· Ant-Federalist
· Bill of Rights
· Articles of Confederation
· Constitution
· Constitutional Convention
· Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers
· Ratification
· Federalism
· Relinquish*
*Difficult terms found within the History Lab
Name ______Period _____ Date ______
SS.6.A.3.11 Analyze support and opposition (Federalists, Federalist Papers, Anti-Federalists, Bill of Rights) to the ratification of the Constitution.
Correlation: SS.7.C.1.8 Explain the viewpoints of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists regarding the ratification of the Constitution and inclusion of a bill of rights.
Essential Question: Should the Constitution have been ratified in 1787 without the Bill of Rights?
Source / Main Idea / Message / Important Details / How does this document answer the essential question?Source 1
Excerpt of James Wilson’s Speech 1787
Source 2
Excerpt of Mercy Otis Warren’s letter to Catharine Macaulay, (Sept. 1787)
Source 3
Excerpt of The Federalist Papers No. 84 by Alexander Hamilton
Source 4
Infographic on the Bill of Rights, from www.kidsdiscover.com
Thesis: ______
Source 1 – Excerpt of speech by James Wilson to the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention, 1787
“I am satisfied that anything nearer to perfection could not have been accomplished. If there are errors, it should be remembered that the seeds of reformation are sown in the work itself and the concurrence of two-thirds of the Congress may at any time introduce alterations and amendments. Regarding it, then, in every point of view, with a candid and disinterested mind, I am bold to assert that it is the best form of government which has ever been offered to the world.”Source 2 – Excerpt of political writer and propagandist Mercy Otis Warren’s letter to English historian Catharine Macaulay, (Sept. 1787)
“Our situation is truly delicate & critical. On the one hand we are in need of a strong Federal Government founded on principles that will support the prosperity & union of the colonies. On the other we have struggled for liberty & made lofty sacrifices at her shrine: and there are still many among us who revere her name too much to relinquish (beyond a certain medium) the rights of man for the Dignity of Government.”Source 3 – Excerpt of The Federalist Papers, No. 84 by Alexander Hamilton, (1788)
I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?Source: http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa84.htm
Source 4 – Infographic on the Bill of Rights, from
www.kidsdiscover.com