Jeffersonian Republicans Vs Federalists Essay

George Washington himself wanted to avoid a party system in America. Unfortunately, even when saying this he was part of the beginning of one of the first parties in United States politics. There have been many different parties surface since the beginning of the American political system. They all have different thoughts, policies, and motivations. Each party has come and gone, some have made significant contributions and others have not. The first split, and beginning of the party system, came with the differentiation between the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans. These two parties were extremely different in thought, design, and status of people involved. This paper, will deal with

During the time period of 1801 to 1817, there were multiple issues in the United States ranging from wars to political boundaries. This time period saw the termination of the Federalist party. The conflicts were between two parties called the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Federalist party was officially started by John Adams. John Adams was also a loose constructionist just like all the other Federalists. Federalists were in favor of a strong central government. On the other side, was Thomas Jefferson who was in office from 1801 to 1809. Jefferson started the Jeffersonian Republican party. The Jeffersonians were strict constructionists who believed in states rights. They said that anything that is not stated in

Despite the fact the founding fathers advised contrary to the establishment of political factions as the Constitution withstood the ratification process, a rift amongst men in President George Washington’s cabinet instituted the move toward the conception of political party. During the time period between 1791 and 1833, a two-party system had begun that demonstrated the philosophy of the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans. Although these two political groups were unyielding in their original ideas and beliefs, both had to change a few of their initial standpoints on numerous topics as they dealt with the truth of the government.

Though both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson served as members of President Washington’s cabinet, the two held very different views on the newly founded U.S. government, interpretation of its constitution, and the role of the “masses” in that government. These conflicting views would develop in two political parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans led by Jefferson. Although both political parties presented enticing aspects, Hamilton’s views were much more reasonable and fruitful when compared Jefferson’s views; idealistic and too strict in reference to the constitution.

Jefferson states his strict constructionist views in a letter he writes to Gideon Granger (Doc. A). In Jefferson's letter he also states the Federalists views of loose interpretation. Through Jefferson's perspective the Federalists belief in loose interpretation of the Constitution would lead to a superior government that would take away from the states rights which are laid out in the Constitution. Jefferson also reflects his strict interpretation of the Constitution in a letter to Samuel Miller where he emphasizes on the Constitution's declaration of religious freedom (Doc. B). Jefferson's strict constructionist views are reflected throughout his presidency, including his disapproval of a national bank since he views it to be unconstitutional. However, throughout Jefferson's presidency, Jeffersonian Republicans and their strict interpretation of the Constitution take a turn for the betterment of the nation. The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 is an example of how this characterization of strict constructionism was inaccurate during this time period. After 1802 when the Spanish intendant at New Orleans forbade the practice settled in the Pinckney Treaty in 1795, which allowed Americans to deposit cargoes in New Orleans for transfer to oceangoing vessels, the US negotiated with Napoleon Bonaparte and purchased the entire Louisiana

Although Republicans and Federalists were characterized as having particular views towards the implementation of the Constitution, the Jefferson and Madison presidencies prove that even though virtually they believe one thing, realistically they could very possibly act another way.

Thomas Jefferson the third president of the United States was looking into buying New Orleans and Louisiana territory to expand the country’s current territory to nearly double of what it already was. Napoleon Bonaparte was a French Statesmen and a military leader he wished to sell a lot of land due to him needing more funds for warfare against the United Kingdom and thus a bargain initiated. The bargain extended from just to a port city to any adjacent lands, there were some oppositions to the purchase from the Federalist party saying that buying the land was unconstitutional, but President Jefferson negotiated that the land was soon needed.

The United States began as a weak, newborn nation that grew into a large, self-supporting country with a governing body unique to this time period. As the government grew and the nation prospered, the rise of leaders and political figures came about and with this, conflicting principles and ideology spawned, thus creating the first of the political parties; the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. Although the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans ideology and stances on the power of the federal government, domestic economic policies and the group of constituents they represented differed vastly, members of both parties often compromised their own beliefs for the nation’s best interest as a whole.

The origins of the Federalist and Democratic-Republican parties can be traced back to the early 1790s. Initially, the Federalists, or broad constructionists, favored the growth of federal power and a strong central government. The Federalists promulgated a loose interpretation of the Constitution, which meant that they believed that the government could do anything by the implied powers of the Constitution or that congress had the right to interpret the Constitution based on connotation. On the contrary, the Democratic-Republicans favored the protection of states’ rights and the strict containment of federal power. The Democratic-Republicans were strict constructionists and they

As the young colonies of America broke away from their mother country and began to grow and develop into an effective democratic nation, many changes occurred. As the democracy began to grow, two main political parties developed, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists.      Each party had different views on how the government should be run. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict construction of the Constitution. The Federalists opted for a powerful central government with weaker state governments, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. Throughout the years, the political parties have grown, developed, and even dispersed into

After the colonies gained independence, the founding fathers soon found that becoming a new independent nation was going to be a difficult task. The biggest task was deciding on the division of power in the government. This issue divided the people into two groups, the federalists and the Jeffersonian republicans. Alexander Hamilton led the federalists and Thomas Jefferson led the republicans. These two important men in history would later show how the challenges of becoming a new nation. In this essay I will be analyzing the ideas of Linda K. Kerber’s “The Fears of the Federalists,” to Drew R. McCoy’s “The Fears of the Jeffersonian Republicans.” Furthermore, comparisons will be made about both essays to gain a better understanding of the struggles of government in early America.

By 1817 the great American experiment was in full swing. America was developing into an effective democratic nation. However as the democracy continued to grow, two opposing political parties developed, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict interpretation of the Constitution. The Federalists saw it differently. They opted for a powerful central government with weaker state governments, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. The seemingly solid divide between Federalist and Republican would begin to blur during the presidencies of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. For, neither Republican president was able lead

When it comes to the understanding of the Constitution, Jeffersonian Republicans are generally characterized as strict constructionists who were opposed to the broad constructionism of the Federalists. This characterization however, fails to take into account the complexities of the domestic and foreign policies supported during the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison, as well as ideas held by the Federalists support the idea that they supported some principles of a strict constitutional interpretation when it suited their cause. Between 1801 and 1817 it is clear to see that both parties to some extent crossed their political lines when it was the best way to achieve their political agendas.

Although Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were two great leaders in United States history, they both had deeply contrasting views of government and economy. After America achieved independence from Great Britain in 1783, the fledgling nation needed its people to guide it towards a firm and steady future. The two political parties — the Hamiltonian Federalists and the Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans — under their respective leaders Hamilton and Jefferson, each had a differing vision for the nation’s future, planting the seeds of new political parties for generations to come. While Hamilton preferred less individual and states’ rights, as well as a national bank, Jefferson, on the other hand, preferred more states’ rights and

The early years of the Constitution of the United States were full of political strife. The two prominent political ideals were complete opposites. The Jeffersonian Republicans were focused on giving power to the people and maintaining a pastoral economy, while the Federalists supported the control of the government by the elite class, and maintaining “positive” democracy. Both parties feared the influence and effect the other party would have on the public. In Linda K. Kerber's article, “The Fears of the Federalists”, the major concerns Federalists held in the early 19th century are described. Ever since the war with and separation from England, the citizens of America were seen to be continually drive to “patriotic rebellion” as a way to