Charles Beard's Argument Analysis

For decades, historians have debated the purpose of the United States Constitution. Some, such as Charles Beard claim that the constitution is an economic document meant to secure power in the hands of the wealthy. Others, most notably Henry Commager have challenged Beard’s analysis and claim that the Constitution was drafted with political motives instead. To make his point, Beard primarily discusses the writers of the constitution, and only assumes what the document itself will say. Commager makes a more convincing argument since he uses both the Constitution itself and the framers’ words as evidence. From the beginning of his essay, Charles Beard claims that the essence of his argument “is not revealed by an examination of its [the Constitution’s] provisions” (Beard, 152) but rather by prior statements from the framers. The centerpiece of Beard’s argument is that “the overwhelming majority of members [writers]… were economic beneficiaries from the constitution” (Beard 149) who gave themselves the power to “make an economic gain through government functioning.” (Beard, 154-155) Beard attempts to support this claim by citing facts about the “economic interests” and
The majority of these quotes, including one from James Madison, focus on “the rights of property” (Beard, 156) and landowners, which Beard argues are defended in the constitution. Commager’s essay, on the other hand, includes quotations which represent many different opinions. Roger Sherman who believed that “the people immediately should have as little to do…about the government” (Commager, 60) is quoted alongside John Dickinson who was strongly against “the policy of interweaving into [the] constitution a veneration for wealth.” (Commager, 61) Commager’s acceptance of opposing viewpoints adds a nuance to his essay which is sorely missing from Beard’s one-sided