'1985 DBQ AP United States History Essay Essay\r'

'As the first formal document that defined the United States organisation, the Articles of bond both reflected the principles and view points of the American vicissitude and emphasized the practical uncertainties of democratic organization. To feel out that the Articles of fusion provided the United States with an legal presidential term, would be over-exaggerating quite a bit. The Congress was debile, and was designedly designed to be weak. They were purposely score up as a weak government so that the government could be less threatening. The American government didn’t want to be a autocrat like that of the British government. The Articles of coalitions initial function was to provide a loose alliance or â€Å"firm league of friendship.” thirteen independent postulates were in that respectfore linked in concert for joint action in transaction with foreign affairs. in outrage of their fragility, the Articles proved to be a contributemark in governmen t, and at that time a model of what a loose confederation should be.\r\nThe Articles of Confederation had much accomplishments and specialtys. It ended the Revolutionary War. The U.S. government could exact some(prenominal) credit for the ultimate conquest of Washington’s army and for negotiating favourable terms in the treaty of sleep with Britain. It kept the areas unified during the war, and dealt successfully with westward lands. The Land Ordinance of 1785 was set up to pay off debt, distributed land in an orderly fashion, and provided land for public education. The northwestward Ordinance of 1787was probably the greatest domesticated success of the Articles; stated that 60,000 people was require to become a state. This would prevent proximo problems for western colonies, and it forbade sla very(prenominal). [Document E] The Articles of Confederation maintained reign and equality among states(each having one vote in Congress,) and had power to respond to for eign affairs, concur war, appoint military officers, and coin money. Despite the Articles of Confederations strengths, they were also relatively weak.\r\nUnder the Articles of Confederation nine out of thirteen states must(prenominal) agree to pass legislation, and all thirteen must agree to amend advanced articles; which were basically impossible. Neither did Congress give birth any executive power to bring down its own fairnesss. Congress couldn’t check trade between states and foreign nations, reqruit a military force, nor uniform currency. Each state had it’s own currency, which made move around and trade difficult.\r\nTrade regulations varied from state to state which created further difficulties. In a letter from the Rhode Island Assembly to Congress in 1782, it showed that under the Articles, the central government could not levy imposees. To create a tax or change a law required a unanimous vote. Rhode Island listed a few reasons why they did not main tenance the new-fangled tax. Some states refused to pay taxes. States argued round land and how some states received more land than the others. These issues led to Shay’s Rebellion; where many an(prenominal) farmers lost land overdue to foreclosure and tax delinquency. Hundreds rebelled demanding cheap penning money. This period in time showed the government was too weak.\r\nAnother problem the government faced due to the lack of strength of the Articles were Britain trying to take advantage of that fact. The British maintained troops along the Canadian border and in the United States occupation posts because the British knew that the Americas couldn’t do anything due to lack of military. In John Jay’s Instructions to the U.S. Minister to Great Britain, he describes the need of the minister to convince Britain to slay its troops. This caused great fear and troubled the Americans. The Americans brainsick that the British were unwilling to accept the acco rd of Paris and were plotting revenge. John Jay instructed the minister to be unyielding with the British. Britain and Spain didn’t go most conquering America because the Americans owed them money. Eventually Spain seized the gumshield of the Mississippi which cut trading routes.\r\nIn Rawlin Lowndes’ speech to the South Carolina House of Re fork overatives, he was debating the adoption of a federal constitution. Rawlin Lowndes believed that alternatively of just adopting a completely new constitution, they should just make new additions to the already existing Articles of Confederation. Many Anti-Federalists had the same views as Rawlin Lowndes. When the Federalists finally agreed to add the throwaway of Rights to the Constitution, they were able to win a very narrow majority. This proximity of the race showed that many people approved of the Articles and thought that they were an effective form of government.\r\nIn Thomas Jefferson’s words, â€Å"This exam ple of changing the constitution by assembling the wise men of the state, quite of assembling armies, will be worth(predicate) as much to the world as the former examples we have given it.” former to this, nearly all constitutions or laws end-to-end the world were either immutable or worse, were changed on a whim (by the king, for example). The alone way to affect change, or the changes you wanted, were by force. The system set forth by the founders was one in which the laws were binding, yet there was an orderly and defined process by which they could be amended, by means of semipolitical process, not force.\r\nThomas Jefferson was expressing that this example would interruption throughout the world as come apart way to govern, and he was right. In spite of their defects, the Articles of Confederation were a significant stepping-stone toward the present Constitution. They clearly outlined the general powers that were to be exercised by the central government, such as making treaties, and establishing a postal service. Although some aspects of the Articles of Confederation were signs of an effective government, the facts prove that the Articles of Confederation were not an effective form of government because they lacked political stability, economic growth and a productive foreign policy.\r\n'