That attempts had been and would be made to establish an aristocracy was shared by a large number of people, and it became a fundamental assumption of the Antifederalists. The Antifederalists were well aware that there were many men that were skeptical of the common man’s judgment to have any faith in a democratic system. They preferred an aristocracy – that is, government by the better sort of people, meaning themselves. If the new government favored the well-to-do, as some Antifederalists maintained, this was hardly an objection to those who were of the “better sort” themselves. The well-to-do might dislike an aristocracy in theory, but in practice, rule by the educated, well-bred, wellborn few was appealing.

New York Daily Advertiser: “Of all the evils which attend the republican form of government, there are none that seem to have more pernicious effects that the insolence which liberty implants into the lower orders of society.”

The trouble was that, in John Lloyd’s words: “Gentlemen of property” too frequently lost electoral contests to men from the “lower classes”; moreover things were getting worse rather than better as these lower classes demanded economic and political concessions. Shay’s Rebellion frightened the gentlemen badly.

The attempt to strengthen the central government was identical with the attempt to solidify upper class rule, and this they opposed. Antifederalists viewed a strong national government as a threat to liberty. From this standpoint a vital part of the proposed structure of power to be erected by the Constitution was section eight of the first Article, which endowed Congress with the powers once held by the state. This section was studded with such ominous words as “taxes,” “general welfare,” “commerce,” “Armies,” “necessary and proper.” Of them all, it was the first which attracted the most attention.

French Minister to the United States, Louis Otto, observed that the people were aware that an increase of power in the central government would mean a “regular collection of taxes, a strict administration of justice, extraordinary duties on imports, and rigorous executions against debtors – in short, a marked preponderance of rich men and of large proprietors.”

What they feared was not just the abstract transfer of authority from state to national government but the concrete transfer of power from the people to the well born. They were convinced that governments were usually run by an aristocracy, and that this government in particular was so constructed as to be certainly controlled by the few. Therefore they wanted power to be widely distributed among the states. Power concentrated led to aristocracy; power diffused, to democratic rule.

The time might come when Congress would oppress the people; and if anyone dared to defend the people, Congress, pretending to act for the general welfare, could construe their action as sedition. The President had been given too much power. He was, they asserted, an elective king, a prince under a republican cloak, vested with power dangerous to a free people.