Brutus Papers

Brutus Papers

If you're familiar with Alexander Hamilton, you know he played a huge role in writingThe Federalist Papers. What if I told you there was another set of essays arguing AGAINST the ratification of theUS Constitution? That's the Brutus Papers.

Between the signing of theUS Constitutionon September 17, 1787, and ratification on June 21, 1788, an essay battle waged between federalists (supporters of ratification) and Anti-federalists (those against ratification) writing essays for and against the ratification of the Constitution in New York newspapers. We of course, know who won the argument but that does not make the Anti-federalists papers any less valuable. The Brutus papers were the most impactful of the Anti-federalists papers and an understanding of them helps to develop an understanding of the origins of some of the problems the United States faces till this day!

Brutus Papers Summary

The Brutus Papers are the most famous 16 of the 85 Anti-Federalist papers, intended to challenge the United States Constitution and prevent it from being ratified. The Brutus Papers were written under the pen name "Brutus" and published in New York. They discuss a wide range of reasons why members of post-colonial American society did not approve of the new government being formed.

TheArticles of Confederation, Author: Alexander Purdie, PD US

TheArticles of Confederation, the governing document that preceded the Constitution, formed a loosely organized group of states without a strong centralized authority. After the American Revolutionary War, there was enormous fear of large, centralized powers that reminded former colonists too much of what they had just experienced under British control. To avoid this problem, the第二个Continental Congresscreated theArticles of Confederationwith an incredibly limited government in mind but the flaws in their logic became apparent within a short period of time.

谢的反叛,Massach的武装起义usetts was the final push needed to reconvene American leaders and draft a new guding document. In 1787 the Constitutional Convention was held in order to draft a new Constitution for the United States of America and after it was drafted, there was the final step of ratifying it. It is this debate around ratification where the Anti-federalists (and thus the Brutus Papers) and the Federalists emerged, each with their own reasons for or against the Constitutions ratification.

If you are interested in learning more about the argument of the federalists, check out our Federalists Papers article!

The Anti-federalists argued against ratifying the Constitution and are believed to include George Clinton, Governor of New York (Cato), Patrick Henry, Samuel Bryan (Centinel), Richard Henry Lee (The Federal Farmer), and Robert Yates (Brutus). They felt a powerful central government would lead to the compromise of freedom and tyranny and that government must be democratic and local. They were fearful of a ruling class dominating political decisions.

Brutus Papers Authors

Like the other Anti-federalist Papers, the Brutus papers were written using a pseudonym. The pen name “Brutus” recalls either Lucius Junius Brutus, who was responsible for ousting Tarquinius Superbus, the last King of Rome, or one of the people who murdered Julius Caesar, Marcus Junius Brutus. The author of the 16 Brutus papers is believed to be Robert Yates, a Delegate to the United States Constitutional Convention.

Differences Between Brutus and Federalist Papers

Portrait of Alexander Hamilton, Author: John Trumbull, Wiki.commons, PD USPortrait of John Jay, Author: Gilbert Stuart, Wiki.commons, CC-PD-MarkPortrait of James Madison, Author: John Vanderlyn, Wiki.commons, CC-PD-Mark

The Federalist Paperswere in support of ratifying the Constitution while the Brutus Papers were against it. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, authors of the Federalist Papers, held the views opposing Brutus. The Federalists saw a powerful central government as a necessary and useful component of the nation’s new government. Brutus, in contrast, preferred to see power in the hands of the states. The Federalists believed thechecks and balances内置在新的政府将保障people from tyranny but Brutus didn’t trust the system of checks and balances and thought power should remain primarily in the hands of the states. He saw no end to the control that the federal government would attempt to seize and wanted to protect states from this kind of abuse.

Brutus Papers Arguments

The Brutus Papers offer a range of criticism regarding the Constitution. Some of its concerns related to theNecessary and Proper Clause, which allowed Congress to create any law it considered necessary “…for executing its other powers and those of the federal government as a whole.” (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8).

Brutus I, V

Brutus I and V are concerned with the implied powers given to the government by theNecessary and Proper Clauseof the Constitution. Brutus I expressed inherent danger in theNecessary and Proper Clauseand believed that states would lose power. Brutus V stated that theNecessary and Proper Clauseempowered Congress to create any law they chose.

Brutus II

In this Anti-federalist paper, Brutus criticizes the Constitution because it doesn’t contain a Bill of Rights that would guarantee certain rights and liberties to people.

Brutus III

Brutus argues that representation isn’t fair under the Constitution, taking issue, especially with the three-fifths clause that counted 3 citizens for every 5 slaves to determine the number of state representatives in Congress. He also believed the Constitution was wrong in allowing slavery to continue.

Brutus IV

Brutus argues that the wealthy would take over the nation by using their status to control elections. This would make voting inaccessible and unfair to average Americans and compromise the integrity of the democratic process.

Brutus VI, VII

Brutus VI and VII highlight concerns about taxes. Brutus VI fears that the unbridled power to tax would empower Congress to overtax states to the point that they wouldn’t be able to function anymore. Brutus VII advocates for limiting the power of Congress to tax.

Brutus VIII, IX, X

Brutus VIII, IX, and X are concerned about the Federal government’s constitutional right to create a military. Brutus VIII speaks out against the federal government's right to create standing armies and national debt. Brutus IX is a reply to Federalist Paper 24 and rebuts the idea that citizens could contain a standing army. Brutus X asserts that standing armies are harmful.

Brutus XI, XII

Brutus XI focuses on the Supreme Court and the potential for the abuse of power by Justices who are free to interpret the Constitution as they choose. Brutus XII addresses the relationship between the Supreme Court and the potential for the judiciary to control Congress. There is a fear that federal courts will overpower courts at the state level.

Brutus XIII

Along with the power to tax, allowing citizens to file lawsuits against states in federal court would impoverish and eliminate the states altogether.

Brutus XIV, XV

Brutus XIV is very significant. It resulted in the addition of parts of the 5th amendment and the entire 6th Amendment in the Bill of Rights. It also argues against establishing a new court. Brutus XV states that the Constitution reinstated destructive aspects of the British system the Americans had just fought against. Brutus XV also advocated for term limits on Supreme Court justices and subjecting courts to legislative review.

Brutus XVI

Brutus XVI fears the long terms of the senate and its role in all three governmental branches.

Brutus I: A Closer Look

Brutus I is the most important of the Anti-Federalist papers. It is not in favor of the Constitution or of a centralized federal government. This paper argues against the ratification of the Constitution and prefers power to be left in the hands of the states as opposed to a large, central government.

Brutus I points out that if power is handed over to a large government, it would likely be impossible to get it back. Ratifying the Constitution is a decision of extreme importance, irreversible, and not to be taken lightly.

Brutus I is concerned with theNecessary and Proper Clause, believing it would give limitless control to the federal government and eliminate state rights. He is against theSupremacy Clausefor the same reason as well, believing it would give too much power to Congress to enact any law it saw fit. Brutus felt these clauses gave too much power, without constraint to the government, which was what Americans had just fought a war to escape.

Brutus I fears that the limited powers that were relegated to the states would eventually be taken away by the central government. The author of Brutus I also takes issue with Congress being allowed to issue taxes, feeling this could lead to an abuse of power. He believed these taxes could provide funds to establish military forces which would compromise the freedom of the people.

Brutus stresses the need for smaller-scale, democratic means of governing a society he felt this was the only way to succeed. He references Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome which were governed effectively until they grew too large and overbearing on the freedoms of their citizens. In summary, Brutus I is for placing the majority of power into the hands of the states, small-scale federal government, and democratic principles.