Charles beard thesis apush

Ivy League educated tutor for Math, History, English and Test Prep Tutor Charles Beard argues that the constitution was written by a group of rich landholders who wanted to protect their property at the expense of the debtors and the poor farmers. The slaveholding, landed class, he believed, was not motivated by philosophy. Rather, they were motived by their own economic self interest.

Charles beard thesis apush

Full Document In fact, the inquiry which follows is based upon the political science of James Madison, the father of the Constitution and later President of the Union he had done so much to create.

Charles beard thesis apush

This political science runs through all of his really serious writings and is formulated in its most precise fashion in The Federalist as follows: The protection of these faculties in the first object of government. From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of society into different interests and parties… The most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property.

Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination, A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views.

The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit and party of faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government.

Those who are inclined to repudiate the hypothesis of economic determinism as a European importation must, therefore, revise their views, on learning that one of the earliest, and certainly one of the clearest, statements of it came from a profound student of politics who sat in the Convention that framed our fundamental law.

The requirements for an economic interpretation of the formation and adoption of the Constitution may be stated in a hypothetical proposition which, although it cannot be verified absolutely from ascertainable data, will at once illustrate the problem and furnish a guide to research and generalization.

It will be admitted without controversy that the Constitution was the creation of a certain number of men, and it was opposed by a certain number of men. Now, if it were possible to have an economic biography of all those connected with its framing and adoption,— perhaps aboutmen altogether,— the materials for scientific analysis and classification would be available.

Such an economic biography would include a list of the real and personal property incumbrances, money at interest, slaves, capital invested in shipping and manufacturing, and in state and continental securities.

Suppose it could be shown from the classification of the men who supported and opposed the Constitution that there was no line of property division at all; that is, that men owning substantially the same amounts of the same kinds of property where equally divided on the matter of adoption or rejection—it would then become apparent that the Constitution had no ascertainable relation to economic groups or classes, but was the product of some abstract causes remote from the chief business of life—gaining a livelihood.

Obviously all the facts here desired cannot be discovered, but the data presented in the following chapters bear out the latter hypothesis, and thus a reasonable presumption in favor of the theory is created.

Of course, it may be shown and perhaps can be shown that the farmers and debtors who opposed the Constitution were, in fact, benefited by the general improvement which resulted from its adoption.

The point is, that the direct, impelling motive in both cases was the economic advantages which the beneficiaries expected would accrue to themselves first, from their action. Further than this, economic interpretation cannot go.

It may be that some larger world process is working through each series of historical events; but ultimate causes lie beyond our horizon. The first firm steps toward the formation of the Constitution were taken by a small and active group of men immediately interested through their personal possessions in the outcome of their labors.

No popular vote was taken directly or indirectly on the proposition to call the Convention which drafted the Constitution. A large propertyless mass was, under the prevailing suffrage qualifications, excluded at the outset from participation through representatives in the work of framing the Constitution.

The members of the Philadelphia Convention which drafted the Constitution were, with a few exceptions, immediately, directly, and personally interested in, and derived economic advantages from, the establishment of the new system. The Constitution was essentially an economic document based upon as recognizing the claim of property to a special and defensive position in the Constitution.

In the ratification of the Constitution, about three-fourths of the adult males failed to vote on the question, having abstained from the elections at which delegates to the state conventions were chosen, either on account of their indifference or their disfranchisement by property qualifications.

The Constitution was ratified by a vote of probably not more than one-sixth of the adult males. It is questionable whether a majority of the voters participating in the elections for the state conventions in New York, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Virginia, and South Carolina, actually approved the ratification of the Constitution.

The leaders who supported the Constitution in the ratifying conventions represented the same economic groups as the members of the Philadelphia Convention; and in a large number of instances they were also directly and personally interested in the outcome of their efforts.

In the ratification, it became manifest that the line of cleavage for and against the Constitution was between substantial personalty interests on the one hand and the small farming and debtor interests on the other.Charles Beard argues that the constitution was written by a group of rich landholders who wanted to protect their property at the expense of the debtors and the poor farmers.5/5.

Jacob Schmidt APUSH Zinn Chapter 5 Part 2 1. What is Charles Beard’s thesis in An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution vis-à-vis the Founding Fathers and the creation of the Constitution?

Charles Beard’s thesis showed that the wealthy had a decision of two things to benefit themselves: they could either single handedly control the government or have control of instituting laws that.

Jacob Schmidt APUSH Zinn Chapter 5 Part 2 1. What is Charles Beard’s thesis in An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution vis-à-vis the Founding Fathers and the creation of the Constitution?

Charles Beard’s thesis showed that the wealthy had a decision of two things to benefit themselves: they could either single handedly control .

50 Documents That Tell America’s Story His father was a farmer, contractor, part-time banker and real-estate speculator. He was expelled from the school for unclear reasons, but graduated from the public Knightstown High School in
First Principles - Charles A. Beard: The Progressive Historian as Inadvertent Conservative Summary[ edit ] An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States argues that the structure of the Constitution of the United States was motivated primarily by the personal financial interests of the Founding Fathers ; Beard contends that the authors of The Federalist Papers represented an interest group themselves.

APUSH Unit 3. STUDY. PLAY. Abigail Adams - second first lady (55 delegates) was the Beard Thesis - Charles and Mary Beard wrote a book called An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution in which they said that the writers of the Constitution were only interested in their own self-interest and protecting their own power; thought that they.

Beard Thesis.

An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States - Wikipedia

Charles Austin Beard wrote that Constitution was written to protect the economic interests of its writers and benefit wealthy financial speculators. Cracking the AP US History Test.

50 terms. APUSH- Period 4 vocabulary. 25 terms. Chapter 38 terms. Chapter 16 History. An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. Charles Beard. Selections. Full Document; In fact, the inquiry which follows is based upon the political science of James Madison, the father of the Constitution and later President of the Union he had done so much to create.

First Principles - Charles A. Beard: The Progressive Historian as Inadvertent Conservative