English Bill Of Rights Vs Federalist 10 Analysis
Throughout English and Anglo- American history, the idea of checking and placing limits on political power became necessary after a history of a central government with too much control. During the 17th and 18th centuries, the English Bill of Rights and Federalist 10 were written in hopes of limiting political authority while still placing sufficient power in the hands of the government to maintain order. While both documents outlined power of the central government, they differed in terms of who’s voices mattered in politics. However, both documents focused on how a strong national legislature served as a check against tyranny.
Despite being written 98 years apart, similarities can be found between the two documents in the way each valued …show more content…
In Federalist 10, when balancing government power with preventing tyrannical rule, Madison felt that to create this balance, everyone’s voice in the nation needed to be heard. By direct election of representatives and the focus on “local circumstances”, Federalist 10 enabled the government to “pursue great and national objects” while still taking into consideration the opinions of the people and other branches of government separate from the Legislature (Federalist 10, 5). In the English Bill of Rights, Parliament is favored as it is held supreme rule over the monarch, as is the Protestant religion. This document favored Parliament and protestant citizens, and held Parliament to have the only judgment to be taken into consideration. After Mary, James the II’s wife was removed from the throne for being raised Catholic and giving birth to a son. The fear of Catholicism taking over the throne prompted Mary, James II’s daughters, succession into power. By opening the English Bill of Rights with discussing the Church of England, and because only “subjects which [were} Protestants” had certain rights, like that of bearing arms, the document demonstrated how the voiced of Protestants and Parliament were favored in drawing up a new rule of law (English Bill of Rights,
Despite being written 98 years apart, similarities can be found between the two documents in the way each valued …show more content…
In Federalist 10, when balancing government power with preventing tyrannical rule, Madison felt that to create this balance, everyone’s voice in the nation needed to be heard. By direct election of representatives and the focus on “local circumstances”, Federalist 10 enabled the government to “pursue great and national objects” while still taking into consideration the opinions of the people and other branches of government separate from the Legislature (Federalist 10, 5). In the English Bill of Rights, Parliament is favored as it is held supreme rule over the monarch, as is the Protestant religion. This document favored Parliament and protestant citizens, and held Parliament to have the only judgment to be taken into consideration. After Mary, James the II’s wife was removed from the throne for being raised Catholic and giving birth to a son. The fear of Catholicism taking over the throne prompted Mary, James II’s daughters, succession into power. By opening the English Bill of Rights with discussing the Church of England, and because only “subjects which [were} Protestants” had certain rights, like that of bearing arms, the document demonstrated how the voiced of Protestants and Parliament were favored in drawing up a new rule of law (English Bill of Rights,