2
1. “Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version,” Bible Gateway, accessed
March 3, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
2. Jon Kukla, “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
3. Robert E. Thomas, “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution,” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
4. Thomas J Wern, “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985),
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
The debate between federalism and anti-federalism during Virginia's Ratifying
Convention in 1788 laid the foundation for ongoing discussions about the balance of power
between the federal government and the states. The differing viewpoints on the role of
government continued to shape political discourse in Virginia during the Antebellum era, with
tensions flaring over issues such as states' rights and slavery. These debates resurfaced in the
20th century, influencing political discussions on topics such as civil rights, education, and
healthcare in Virginia. The debate between federalism and anti-federalism has left a lasting
impact on the state's political landscape, shaping the way Virginians view the relationship
between state and federal authority.
Federalists believed that ratifying the Constitution would result in a stronger central
government capable of responsibly managing the nation. Anti-Federalists, on the other hand,
were opposed to the Constitution because they believed it would damage the independence of
states and lead to a consolidation of power in the federal government. According to the paper, the
struggle was more sectional than class-based, as both Federalists and Anti-Federalists came from
similar social backgrounds, primarily the upper classes. This bible quote speaks about how
everyone should listen to the government but there’s no authority except for God and the
government that is here are cause by God “Let everyone submit to the governing authorities,
3
1. “Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version,” Bible Gateway, accessed
March 3, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
2. Jon Kukla, “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
3. Robert E. Thomas, “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution,” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
4. Thomas J Wern, “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985),
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
since there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are instituted by God.
Geographical divisions had an impact on Virginia's voting trends. Ratification was opposed by
the western regions, which had more small farming payers, and was backed by the Tidewater
region, which had a greater number of major landowners and business owners. However, the text
contends that while both sectors have personal interests and small farming debts, this geographic
difference is not always associated with a clear class struggle.
During the Antebellum period, contrasting opinions regarding the role of the federal
government remained common, as the document highlights that the struggle was not just about
class but also about sectional interests. Given that both Federalist and Anti-Federalist party
leaders belonged to the same noble class, it is possible that the conflict still had an impact on
Virginia politics. One thing that occurred was slave owners who supported the new government
in Robert Thomas' journal, the part where it discusses the antebellum period, it states “Was a
substantial majority of Virginia's approximately 290,000 slaves owned by those who voted to
support the new government, were they more or less equally divided between the two parties, or
did the weight of Virginia's most extensive personality lie with the Anti-Fed- realists”. The
document suggests that the fundamental disagreements from the ratification debate influenced
later political discussions, especially those related to the distribution of power between state and
4
1. “Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version,” Bible Gateway, accessed
March 3, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
2. Jon Kukla, “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
3. Robert E. Thomas, “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution,” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
4. Thomas J Wern, “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985),
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
federal authorities, even though it does not specifically describe any political conflict in Virginia
in the 20th century.
The Federalists argued that a strong federal government was important for upholding law
and order and solving the problems the country faced after gaining independence. Anti-
Federalists thought that central government could achieve peace and successful resource
management. Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution, thinking that a powerful federal
government would steal state authority and threaten individual liberty. They showed the
importance of local control and were suspicious of central power, seeing it as a potential cause of
tyranny. Wrens Journal speaks about how this new government is going to have a lot of
corruption in it “as wide a door for corruption as in any government in Europe. There is the same
inducement for corruption, there is the same room for it, in this government, which they have in
the British government” The debates eventually led to the ratification of the United States
Constitution in Virginia, but not without much opposition and worry from the Antifederalists.
They expressed fear about federal overreach and the loss of state power.
Federalists, like George Washington and "Light-Horse Harry" Lee, supported the
Constitution unchanged. They contended that a strong central government was necessary for
national development and security. Washington described the Constitution as "the best... that can
5
1. “Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version,” Bible Gateway, accessed
March 3, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
2. Jon Kukla, “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
3. Robert E. Thomas, “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution,” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
4. Thomas J Wern, “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985),
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
be obtained at this Epocha," pointing out the significance of ratification in avoiding discord.
Antifederalists, including Patrick Henry and Benjamin Harrison, feared that the Constitution
would lead to a concentration of power, jeopardizing individual liberty and state autonomy. They
demanded a bill of rights and expressed concern that the language of the Constitution would
establish tyranny over the states. They argued that a bill of rights was required to defend
individuals' rights against potential government overreach. Despite the fears of the
antifederalists, The Constitution was eventually passed, with the promise of creating a bill of
rights through amendments. This agreement helped to calm some of the issues about the
distribution of power in the federal government, paving the way for the United States to become
a powerful and solid country.
The argument resulted in Virginia's narrow ratification of the Constitution on June 25,
1788, with the understanding that amendments would be pursued to resolve the antifederalists'
concerns. This compromise represented the complicated political situation of Virginia, where
several delegates were inclined to adopt the Constitution but desired promises about the
protection of individual rights and state authorities. Throughout the Antebellum era, Virginia was
influenced by opposing views on the function of the federal government vs the state government.
The tensions between federal power and state rights remained, influencing political discussions,
6
1. “Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version,” Bible Gateway, accessed
March 3, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
2. Jon Kukla, “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
3. Robert E. Thomas, “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution,” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
4. Thomas J Wern, “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985),
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
and resulting in major disagreements, especially over subjects such as slavery and economic
policy.
In the twentieth century, these basic problems emerged in many political battles in
Virginia, mostly over civil rights and the balance of power between the state and federal
governments. The legacy of the ratification wars continues to shape discussions about
government and individual liberty, reflecting the enduring influence of federalist and
antifederalist viewpoints. The civil rights movement in Virginia pitted those pushing for equal
rights for all residents against those seeking to maintain a system of segregation and
discrimination. Furthermore, conflicts over states' rights against federal authority have
influenced other policy issues, including healthcare and education spending. Finally, the
continued conflict of these basic beliefs points to the continuing importance of the Federalist and
Antifederalist perspectives in shaping Virginia's politics.
Members of the convention represented a range of opinions; some favored the
Constitution in its current form, while others favored changes before ratification. This diversity
demonstrated the democratic process in action and brought to light the heated public debate
surrounding the Constitution at the time. Attendees were able to have civil and helpful
discussions regardless of the different points of view, which improved their understanding of the
7
1. “Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version,” Bible Gateway, accessed
March 3, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
2. Jon Kukla, “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
3. Robert E. Thomas, “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution,” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
4. Thomas J Wern, “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985),
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
document's remnants. People used the convention as a place to express their worries and push for
the reforms they thought were required for a better union. A deeper look at the Constitution's
advantages and disadvantages was made possible by this free discussion and exchange of ideas,
which resulted in a better-informed decision-making process. As leaders from other states
discussed ideas and concerns, agreements were reached on important topics like the balance of
power between the federal and state governments, the protection of individual rights, and the
structure of the legislative branch. Through this collaborative effort, the convention was able to
create a document that reflected the collective wisdom and ideals of the American people.
This constant conflict has often ended in clashes between the state and federal
governments, with Virginia often acting as the center of national political debates. The state's
history of balancing its independence with federal authority has made it a battleground for
important issues like gun control, immigration, and environmental restrictions. These conflicts
continue to form Virginia's political identity, with both residents and politicians debating where
the line should be drawn between state and federal power.
8
1. “Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version,” Bible Gateway, accessed
March 3, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
2. Jon Kukla, “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
3. Robert E. Thomas, “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution,” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
4. Thomas J Wern, “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985),
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
Bibliography
“Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version.” Bible Gateway. Accessed
March 3, 2025. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
Kukla, Jon. “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788.” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
Thomas, Robert E. “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution.” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63. https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
Wern, Thomas J. “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788.” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985).
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
9
1. “Bible Gateway Passage: Romans 13 - New International Version,” Bible Gateway, accessed
March 3, 2025, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13&version=NIV.
2. Jon Kukla, “A Spectrum of Sentiments: Virginia’s Federalists, Antifederalists, and ‘Federalists
Who Are for Amendments,’ 1787-1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 96,
no. 3 (July 1988): 276–96, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4249023.
3. Robert E. Thomas, “The Virginia Convention of 1788: A Criticism of Beard’s an Economic
Interpretation of the Constitution,” The Journal of Southern History 19, no. 1 (February 1953):
63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2954311.
4. Thomas J Wern, “The Ideology of Court and Country in the Virginia Ratifying Convention of
1788,” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 93, no. 4 (October 1985),
https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/4248841.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
