In Debating the Constitution, it describes the turn of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as a debate over the role of equality in American life. It became the center of American principles and interests. The struggle between the Anti-Federalists and Federalists over the adoption of the U.S. Constitution would arise major conflicts, such as: the meaning of the phrase “natural aristocracy”, the concept of “democracy”, and the establishment for a national bank. All three conflicts were pointed out as arguments in the ratification of the Constitution. The elite Anti-Federalists were known as, the strict constitutionists who were opposed to a strong centralized (federal) government. Among this group was the Secretary of State, Thomas Jefferson. Who also believed that there should be a limited power of Federal government. The Anti-Federalists were opposed to the Elastic Clause, which gave Congress the authority to establish a National Bank. The Elastic Clause would allow Congress to pass laws that were needed as time changes. The clause allows the execution of powers already delegated in the Federal Constitution.  No additional principal authorities are granted by this clause. Anti-Federalists were against this because this meant the nation would be closer to following a national law. The phrase “natural aristocracy” was another argument disputed between the Anti-Federalists and Federalists. Anti-Federalists denoted the term “natural aristocracy” as people who were born into wealth, and therefore were socially superior to others. The Anti-Federalists believed many of the Federalists belonged to this group. This was a problem because many of the Federalists would act upon their own interests. They argued that many “natural aristocrats” have no morals, are ambitious, and often have temptations that are inclined by habit (125). Anti-Federalists were afraid the rights of the people would not be protected if “natu