Constitutional Aspect of the Debate over Jay's Treaty

Abstract

This study is intended to provide an in-depth account of the constitutional questions debated during the controversy over Jay's Treaty in 1795-1796. The primary objective is to show the significance of this aspect of the struggle over the treaty. The author feels that previous discussions on this formative event in the development of the American party system have tended to overlook the vital role of this split over constitutional interpretation that was involved. The general feeling shared by Federalists and Republicans that the other side were "anarchists" and "monarchists" was greatly enhanced during this debate when each thought that the other sought the destruction of the Constitution. � From this, the a.uthor would make a further conjecture that this event, by the polarization resulting from its bitter atmosphere, tended to have a stagnating effect on the operation of a mature two-party system. Finally, it will hopefully be shown here that the Federalists considered themselves to be as much "republicans" as the Jeffersonian Republicans.