Summary
The first Congress under the Constitution convened in New York, the new
capitol, on March 1, 1789. George Washington had been elected as the
nation's first president, and took the oath of office on April 30. The founding
members of the national government found there were many details that the
constitution had left to them to work out. Issues requiring immediate attention
included the setting of the legislative agenda, defining the role and details of
operation of the cabinet, the establishment of the judicial branch, and meeting
the popular call for a bill of rights.
By way of interaction with Congress, George Washington did very little. He
suggested few laws, leaving the setting of legislative agenda to the Congress.
He only rarely spoke publicly on the topic of public policy, leaving domestic
policy in the hands of Congress alone. Instead, Washington focused primarily on
matters of finance, diplomacy, and the military. Washington only vetoed two
bills in all eight years of his presidency.
The form and function of the President's cabinet was left up to the first
Congress to determine. The first cabinet consisted of four departments, headed
by the secretaries of state, war, and treasury, as well as the attorney general.
Washington's initial cabinet consisted of Thomas Jefferson as Secretary of
State, Henry Knox as Secretary of War, Alexander Hamilton as Secretary
of Treasury, and Edmund Randolph as Attorney General.
Similarly, the federal-court system was left in the hands of Congress to shape.
Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789 to create the federal-court
system. The act established a federal district court in each state that ran
according to local legal tradition. The Supreme Court exercised final
jurisdiction in all legal matters. The federal-court system, and the Supreme
Court specifically, had to wait until the mid 1790s to fully explore their
powers. In Hylton v. US in 1796, the Supreme Court first established its
power to determine the constitutionality of congressional statutes. This was
only the first of many decisions important in the evolution of the Supreme Court
as a government body.
Perhaps the most important item on the national agenda was the drafting of a
bill of rights to guarantee the civil rights of US citizens. James Madison
led the group that drafted the first ten amendments to the Constitution,
collectively known as the Bill of Rights, which the state legislatures
ratified in December 1791. The First Ameendment guaranteed freedom of
expression. The Second gave each state the right to form a citizens' militia,
and the third protected the citizens from the imposition of a standing army.
The Fourth through Eighth Amendments dealt with fair treatment in judicial
proceedings. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments restricted the powers of the
national government by declaring that the enumeration of Constitutional rights
could not be used to deny citizens of other rights, and that all power not
explicitly delegated to the national government fell to the states.
Commentary
More than anything else, the creation of the executive office worried those who
feared despotic government. Many feared the president would amass too great an
amount of power and turn into an unstoppable tyrant. Many aspects of the
presidency were left vague by the Constitution, and the nation watched in great
anticipation to see how Washington and Congress would interpret the role of the
president. Washington's reluctance to interfere with Congress sprang largely
from his knowledge of the fears of the people, and his desire to avoid setting
any precedent that might lead future presidents to overstep their bounds. The
creation of the cabinet was undertaken carefully for similar reasons, and the
establishment of four distinct departments was part of the effort on the part of
both Washington and Congress to clearly define the domain of the executive
branch. The cabinet departments, especially those of treasury and state, would
play heavily into the functioning of the Washington administration.
The solution to the problem of establishing a federal-court system was a
compromise between the desire for broad access to federal justice and the desire
on the part of citizens to maintain state traditions. Many citizens feared the
extension of a federal-court system would do away with the unique procedures
that had operated at the state level for decades. Many citizens therefore
initially rallied against the development of the federal-court system within the
states. Bearing in mind these fears and objections, Congress passed the
Judiciary Act of 1789, which both increased access to federal justice and
assuaged fears that state traditions would be lost.
The demand for the Bill of Rights sprang from the fear, stoked by the Anti-Federalists, that a strong central government would neglect the rights of
citizens in the pursuit of what officials thought to be the greater good. While
the Anti-federalists had not been able to stop the creation of a strong national
government, they hoped the Bill of Rights would serve to limit the powers of the
government and protect individuals from despotism and tyranny. The
Federalists, on the other hand, insisted that the Bill of Rights, while
guaranteeing personal liberties, would not deprive the national government of
powers essential to the fulfillment of its duties.
The Ninth and Tenth Amendments seem to be the only major concessions made by the
Federalists in the drafting of the Bill of Rights. However, their wording was
vague enough that it left loopholes that would allow the national government to
avoid the restriction of any significant power. The Tenth Amendment especially,
leaving all power to the states not explicitly granted the national government,
seemed a great success for the Anti-federalists. However, it would prove far
less useful than its wording suggested. Time after time the national government
avoided adherence to the Tenth Amendment by invoking what became known as the
elastic clause of the Constitution, which granted Congress the authority to
pass any measure which was "necessary and proper." A loose interpretation of
this clause allowed the national government to effectively ignore the Tenth
Amendment. The interpretation of the elastic clause would prove to be a bone of
much contention during the Washington administration and well beyond.
