Why the Articles of Confederation needed to be replaced

United States History 1492-1865

Q.1) Why was it necessary to change the Articles of Confederation?

Drawbacks of the Articles of Confederation

Under the Articles of Confederation, the Congress was given charge of many affairs such as making decisions about war and peace, regulating the postage system and the currency, settling disagreements between various states, conducting foreign affairs, and managing the western lands. Nevertheless, in spite of this authority, the Articles of Confederation did not give Congress the power whereby it could actually put its resolutions into effect.

The basic reason that necessitated changing the Articles of Confederation was their impracticability to offer executable authority to the Congress. Additionally, there were certain other weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation from 1781 to 1789. The Congress found that it was impossible to pass any laws since there was neither an executive, nor a national judiciary. The Congress did not possess any power to raise an army in unison with all the states. Moreover, every state of the Confederation had its own foreign diplomats that it delegated to foreign countries.

Even rivalries existed among all the states in matters of commerce and trade. Additionally, the Congress had no power to collect taxes and each state printed its own money.

The Need for Strong Unification

The self-centered objective of all the states to safeguard and guarantee their own authority under the Articles of Confederation was a major cause of the vulnerable and powerless national government. The confederation framed by the Articles of Confederation was not centered on unification, rather slackened for individual state benefits. The matters of nationalism worsened as residents felt privileged to identify themselves by their state name, instead of being called Americans.

All these shortcomings left the central government of the United States at the clemency of the states, causing the unity to fall in jeopardy. In addition, the unicameral system of government was collapsing due to the representative issues of the small and large states. Thus, the leaders decided to change the legislation and reframe it according to the need of the hour.

Q.2) What compromises were made in Philadelphia to placate the small states and the large states?

The Context

The basic reason why compromises had to be made was the fact that the representatives in the Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia and their states had extensively dissimilar interests. Even if each individual state aimed at forming a government exclusively for its own benefit, it would not have been possible. The thirteen small and large states had varying geography, demographics and public interests according to their economies. For instance, some delegates intended to abolish the slavery convention while others chose to safeguard it. Such disagreements further worsened the situation when different delegates from large states stood against each other on the slavery convention as some supported it while others did not. The same obscurity persisted among the representatives of the small states too, leading the situation into a political deadlock.

The Compromises

Notwithstanding these dissimilarities, most of the pioneers and founding fathers of the American Constitution were determined to establish a powerful national government. The Virginian delegation presented the Virginia Plan at the Constitutional Convention of Philadelphia in 1787 wherein a government was called comprising of the legislative, executive, and the judicial bodies. Unlike in the Articles of Confederation, the legislative division was to be bicameral with population-based representation in both of its houses.

Since representation in the legislative system was based on state population, small states such as New Jersey and Delaware disapproved the Virginia Plan on the reason that they could be easily outvoted in Congress by the large states through this system. In turn, the New Jersey delegation proposed an amendment in the Virginia Plan, calling for a unicameral system of legislature with one vote to each state.

The discussions and arguments continued for weeks, but with no fruitful outcome until the Sherman Compromise saved the convention from disintegration. It proposed a bicameral system of legislature, the two houses known as the House of Representatives and the Senate. Representation in the House of Representatives was proposed to be on the basis of state population. Every thirty thousand people of a state necessitated one representative of the same, elected by the participation of the state's entire vote bank. On the other hand, state representation in the Senate was equal and not population based. Every state could have two senators, nominated by the legislature of that state. The proposition for the House of Representatives satisfied the heavily populated large states while the one for the Senate befriended the less populated small states.

Proposed by Roger Sherman, this proposal is known in the American history as the Great Compromise. Sherman's proposal was approved by the state delegates participating in the Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia on 16th July, 1787.