From the Declaration to the Articles of Confederation

Grade 12 Social Studies Worksheet - Challenge Me

Circle the best answer.

1. Read this first

   Use this

   Cards A to C on why the Confederation struggled (the excerpts are exact; the readings on card C are made up). Card A, "The Federalist No. 15". Who made it: Alexander Hamilton, writing as Publius. When: December 1, 1787. For whom: the people of New York. Why: to argue that the Confederation was flawed and urge ratification. Excerpt 1: "There was a time when we were told that breaches, by the States, of the regulations of the federal authority were not to be expected; that a sense of common interest would preside over the conduct of the respective members, and would beget a full compliance with all the constitutional requisitions of the Union." Excerpt 2: "Each State, yielding to the persuasive voice of immediate interest or convenience, has successively withdrawn its support, till the frail and tottering edifice seems ready to fall upon our heads, and to crush us beneath its ruins." Card B, "The Articles of Confederation (1781), Articles II and III". Who made it: the Continental Congress. When: ratified in 1781. For whom: the thirteen states. Why: to set up the first national government. Excerpt 1 (Article II): "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled." Excerpt 2 (Article III, in part): "The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare," Card C, "Two readings (made up)". Who made it: written for this sheet; neither is any historian's. Summary in our words, not a quotation: Reading X: the Articles failed because of their design, which let Congress act only on the states and never on individuals. Reading Y: the Articles failed because the states would not comply, and a better design would not have changed that.

2. 1.

   Card A was written to win a vote on ratification. Noah decides how to use Hamilton's essay as evidence for Reading X or Y. What is it best used for?

   • As proof for Reading X, since Hamilton lived through the Confederation and so knew its faults at first hand
   • As worthless, since an essay written to persuade cannot contain a single true fact about the Confederation
   • As proof for Reading Y, since a writer who urges a vote must be exaggerating what he claims to know
   • A claim to check: he wrote to win ratification, so records not written to persuade must support it
3. 2.

   Luz reads Hamilton's excerpts on card A and Article II on card B against Readings X and Y on card C. Which statement is best supported?

   • Reading X only: each State withdrawing its support shows that the design left Congress unable to compel anyone at all
   • Neither reading is supported, since an essay urging ratification cannot be used for or against either reading of events
   • Each finds support: Hamilton reports the States' conduct (Y), and Article II delegates only what is expressly listed (X)
   • Reading Y only: Article II shows nothing about design, since each state simply keeps its own powers in any union of states
4. 3.

   A writer argues Reading Y: states ignored Congress even when they could pay. Esme looks for missing evidence. What would most challenge the writer?

   • Whether Congress could tax individuals directly, which bears on Reading X more than it does on Reading Y
   • Records that states which paid nothing could not raise the money, because of war debts and slow trade
   • How many requests for money Congress sent to the states, since more requests would mean more refusals
   • Hamilton's opinion of the states in excerpt 2, which card A already gives in his own words for a reader
5. 4.

   Claim: "The Articles were doomed from the start." Tala tests it against cards A and B. What is the best verdict?

   • Shown: Hamilton says the edifice is ready to fall, which shows the Articles could not have lasted
   • Shown: Article II left each state its sovereignty, so a national government could not have worked under it
   • Refuted: Article III calls the union a firm league of friendship, so the Articles were sure to succeed
   • Not shown: card B describes a league meant to work, and card A is hindsight from a ratification campaign

6. Use this

   Cards A to D on armies and consent (the excerpts are exact). Card A, "The Declaration of Independence (1776)". Who made it: the Second Continental Congress. When: July 4, 1776. For whom: the king, the colonists and the world. Why: to explain why the colonies were separating. Excerpt 1: "He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures." Excerpt 2: "For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:" Card B, "The Articles of Confederation (1781), Article IX". Who made it: the Continental Congress. When: ratified in 1781. For whom: the thirteen states. Why: to say who decided on the armed forces. Excerpt (in part): "… nor agree upon the number of vessels of war, to be built or purchased, or the number of land or sea forces to be raised, nor appoint a commander in chief of the army or navy, unless nine States assent to the same:" Card C, "The Constitution (1787)". Who made it: the Constitutional Convention. When: September 17, 1787. For whom: the states and the people. Why: to set up the national government. Excerpt 1 (Article I, Section 2): "The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States," Excerpt 2 (Article I, Section 8): "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;" Excerpt 3 (Article II, Section 2): "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;" Card D, "The Third Amendment (1791)". Who made it: Congress proposed it and the states ratified it. When: ratified December 15, 1791. For whom: the people of the United States. Why: to limit the quartering of soldiers. Excerpt: "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

7. 5.

   The Declaration complained of standing armies without consent (card A). Ari reads card C. How does the Constitution answer the complaint?

   • It copies the Articles' nine-State rule for raising forces, so consent still rests with the States themselves
   • Congress may raise armies, but no appropriation for them may run past two years, so consent must be renewed
   • It leaves armies to the President as Commander in Chief, so legislatures give their consent just once
   • It forbids standing armies in time of peace, which is what the Declaration demanded of the king in 1776
8. 6.

   A student says the Constitution made raising an army easier than the Articles did. Zee compares cards B and C. What is the best verdict?

   • Right: nine States was a high bar and Congress needs only a bare majority, which settles the whole matter
   • Wrong: both documents need the approval of a legislature, so nothing about raising armies really changed
   • Wrong: the Constitution makes the President Commander in Chief, which adds a further check over raising any army
   • Partly: no nine-State assent is needed to raise forces, but the money must be renewed at least every two years
9. 7.

   A writer says the two-year limit shows the framers feared armies. Card C also gives House terms of two years. Pia looks for missing evidence. What would most challenge the writer?

   • Whether standing armies grew larger in later centuries, to see if the two-year limit failed in the end
   • How many soldiers the United States kept in 1787, since fear of armies would grow with their numbers there
   • Whether the limit was chosen to match the House's two-year term, so each new House could review the funding
   • Whether the Declaration complained of standing armies in peace, which card A already shows that it did
10. 8.

    Claim: "The Third Amendment answers the Declaration's complaint about quartering." Bo tests it against cards A and D. What is the best verdict?

    • Shown: the amendment bans quartering outright in any case, so the Declaration's complaint was fully answered
    • Plausible but not shown: both concern quartering, but the cards do not say the framers meant it as an answer
    • Refuted: the Declaration complained of troops among the colonists, not of quartering in any house
    • Untestable: the amendment came fifteen years after 1776, so it cannot respond to the Declaration's complaint

11. Use this

    Cards A to C on the road to the Convention (the excerpts are exact; card C is a summary in our words). Card A, "The Annapolis report (September 1786)". Who made it: the commissioners who met at Annapolis, Maryland, from New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Virginia. When: September 1786. For whom: the legislatures of those five states. Why: to report that their meeting on trade could not proceed. Excerpt 1: "…to report to the several States such an Act, relative to this great object, as when unanimously ratified by them would enable the United States in Congress assembled effectually to provide for the same." Excerpt 2: "That appointments of Commissioners have also been made by the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and North Carolina, none of whom however have attended; but that no information has been received by your Commissioners, of any appointment having been made by the States of Connecticut, Maryland, South Carolina or Georgia." Excerpt 3: "…Your Commissioners did not conceive it advisable to proceed on the business of their mission, under the Circumstance of so partial and defective a representation." Excerpt 4: "If in expressing this wish, or in intimating any other sentiment, your Commissioners should seem to exceed the strict bounds of their appointment, they entertain a full confidence, that a conduct, dictated by an anxiety for the welfare, of the United States, will not fail to receive an indulgent construction." Card B, "The call of Congress (February 21, 1787)". Who made it: the Congress of the Confederation, as quoted by James Madison in The Federalist No. 40. When: February 21, 1787. For whom: the states. Why: to call the Convention. Excerpt: "Resolved, That in the opinion of Congress it is expedient, that on the second Monday of May next a convention of delegates, who shall have been appointed by the several States, be held at Philadelphia, for the sole and express purpose OF REVISING THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION, and reporting to Congress and the several legislatures such ALTERATIONS AND PROVISIONS THEREIN, as shall, when agreed to in Congress, and confirmed by the States, render the federal Constitution ADEQUATE TO THE EXIGENCIES OF GOVERNMENT AND THE PRESERVATION OF THE UNION." Card C, "What followed (summary)". Who made it: written for this sheet from standard histories. Summary in our words, not a quotation: The Convention met in Philadelphia from May to September 1787. It wrote a new Constitution rather than a revision of the Articles. Its Article VII said that nine states would be enough for it to take effect among them.

12. 9.

    Jun counts the states in excerpt 2 on card A, then reads excerpt 3. Which statement about the commissioners' decision is best supported?

    • Five states attended, four appointed commissioners who stayed away, and four sent word of none, so most were missing
    • Nine states were missing, so the meeting lacked the nine that Article IX asks for major acts of Congress
    • They did not proceed because the five states disagreed on trade, which excerpt 3 calls a defective plan of action
    • Eight states attended, since four more appointed commissioners, which was enough to proceed on trade alone that year
13. 10.

    Annapolis admits it may exceed its bounds (card A, excerpt 4); Congress limits the Convention (card B). Tala compares them. Which statement is best supported?

    • Congress widened what Annapolis proposed, since it called a Convention on far more than the subject of trade
    • Both gave the delegates free powers, since each says the aim is the preservation of the Union itself
    • Annapolis acted within its commissions, so excerpt 4 merely repeats the terms of its appointment
    • Annapolis only asked for a wider meeting; Congress then tied the Convention to revising the Articles