While most leaders and others agreed that the articles of confederation and perpetual union were insufficient for running the country, there was disagreement as to the structure of the proposed constitution.

While most leaders and others agreed that the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union were insufficient for running the country, there was disagreement as to the structure of the proposed constitution. Debate raged over what the proposed constitution would include or omit. One point of debate was the absence of protections of personal rights.
The Federalist Papers, essays in favor of the proposed constitution were written by Alexander Hamilton of New York, James Madison of Virginia, and John Jay of New York. These essays were first published in October of 1787 in the Independent Journal, New York Packet, and Daily Advertiser, all of New York, and eventually published in book form as The Federalist: A Collection of Essays, Written in Favour of the New Constitution, as Agreed upon by the Federal Convention, September 17, 1787
Countering the Federalist Papers, a series of essays written by anti-Federalists in opposition, known as Letters from a Federal Farmer, authored by Richard Henry Lee of Virginia and others, were first published in the New York Journal.
In Federalist 84, Hamilton that enumerated of rights was unnecessary and even dangerous, as “They would contain various exceptions to powers which as not granted” (to the federal government). Further, by listing particular rights, would other rights not listed be unprotected? James Madison was also against a set of rights being added to the proposed Constitution.
In Letter I of Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican written October 8th, 1787, Lee agreed that a “federal government of some sort is necessary” but that he could not consent to any government which “is not calculated equally to preserve the rights of all orders of men in the community.”
Prompt:
Using Lee′s letter I and Federalist 84, compare and contrast the respective arguments, and defend the one with which you agree, using the authors’ argument and at least two outside historical sources.
Focus on their times, their concerns. Not ours.