During the ratification debates, criticism of the Constitution focused largely on the absence of a “bill of rights.” James Madison responded to this criticism by observing that the Constitution restricted the powers of the national government to those that were clearly defined. He also noted that any enumeration of rights was likely to be incomplete, and thus leave important non-enumerated rights unprotected. This seminar will examine the Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist debate on a bill of rights in the context of modern natural rights theory. In particular, participants will explore how Madison’s position evolved between 1787 and 1789, and how he eventually became the chief architect of the Bill of Rights.
Admission will be decided for each Seminar on a rolling basis throughout the semester. Eligible applicants who cannot be included in a Seminar will be placed on a waiting list for any vacancies that may occur. Early applicants, therefore, will have a better chance of gaining admission. Applications received later in the season will be given full consideration as long as vacancies remain.
These scholars will provide teachers with a foundation in the Constitution, plus a firm grounding in its
U.S. Constitution
origins, purposes,and ongoing relevance today. The seminar will focus on the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and its relationship to the Constitution, the debate over ratification between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists, and the origin of the Bill of Rights. Six permanent constitutional and political principles—liberty, republicanism, federalism, representation, separation of powers, and checks and balances—will also be discussed, as well as a nonpartisan conversation on constitutional interpretation.
The seminar will conclude with a dialogue about the meaning of citizenship under the Constitution.
Admission will be decided for each Seminar on a rolling basis throughout the semester. Eligible applicants who cannot be included in a Seminar will be placed on a waiting list for any vacancies that may occur. Early applicants, therefore, will have a better chance of gaining admission. Applications received later in the season will be given full consideration as long as vacancies remain.
Each of us can come up with our own list of the great ideas that give life to American political and economic institutions. However, we may be surprised at the similarity of our lists. That reflects the power exerted by the ideas debated with such intensity by our founders. Certainly there would be differences in our lists, just as the founders differed. However, over the past five years, we have talked with hundreds of profound students of American history, politics and literature. Whenever we have paused during Miller Summer Institutes or other programs to write such a list, the result has been a short list of seven to twelve great ideas. We hope you will reflect on the great principles cited that follow and perhaps inspire you to draw up your own list. Few exercises can be of more value to you as a citizen of our great nation.
In “A Defense of American Constitutions” (1787) John Adams, on the individual’s right to own private property:
“The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If “Thou shall not covet” and “Thou shall not steal” were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.”
Alexander Hamilton, (Federalist #71, 1788) on the separation of powers in government:
“The same rule which teaches the propriety of a partition between the various branches of power, teaches us likewise that this partition ought to be so contrived as to render the one independent of the other… The representatives of the people, in a popular assembly, seem sometimes to fancy that they are the people themselves, and betray strong symptoms of impatience and disgust at the least sign of opposition from any other quarter, as if the exercise of its rights, by either the executive or judiciary, were a breach of their privilege and an outrage to their dignity.”
Thomas Paine, in Common Sense (1776), on the rule of law:
“But where say some is the king of America? I’ll tell you, he reigns above and doth not make havoc of mankind like the royal brute of Great Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the charter; let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the Word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. For as an absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other.”
George Washington, (Letter to the Hebrew Congregation, Newport, 1790), on the freedom of religion:
“The Citizens of the United States of American have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscious and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoy the exercise of their inherent national gifts. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under it’s protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.”
Abraham Lincoln, (“Reply to Senator Douglas, Chicago” 1858) on the principal of equality:
“We run our memory back over the pages of history for about eighty-two years, and we … find a race of men living in that day whom we claim as our fathers and grandfathers; they were iron men; they fought for the principal that they were contending for… We have-besides these, men descended by blood from our ancestors-among us, perhaps half our people, who are not descendants at all of these men… but when they look through that old Declaration of Independence, they find that those old men say that, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal;” and then they feel that … is the father of all moral principal in them, and that they have a right to claim it as though they were blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh, of the men who wrote that Declaration…”
Regarding individual liberty, George Washington said:
“If the freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
And, the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances… The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated… No person shall be… deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law… In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury…”
Facebook Constitution Day Campaign January 18th, 2012 - Please join us in preparation for the celebration of the 225th Anniversary of the Constitution of the United States. Read more
John Zumbrunnen Joins the JMC Constitution Day Steering Group January 18th, 2012 - The Jack Miller Center is proud to announce that Professor John Zumbrunnen has joined the JMC Constitution Day Initiative Steering Group. Read more
Gordon Wood, What Made the Founders Different: Rhodes College on February 16 2012 19:00 more
AU: Philip B. Lyons on "Statesmanship in Reconstruction: What the Moderate Republicans Were For" on February 17 2012 more
Tocqueville on the Sources of Greatness in Democratic Times: Villanova on March 22 2012 16:00 more