I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. —Alexander Hamilton, the Federalist Paper 84 What point is Alexander Hamilton making? A. The Constitution is stronger with a bill of rights.
B. A bill of rights should include only certain rights.
C. The Constitution did not need a bill of rights.
D. A bill of rights was necessary for ratification.

in all honesty, it really hasn't. except that hitler killed himself.

answer; i believe that the correct answer is (tobacco);

both are true, the congress does have the power to create banks, even if this power is not specifically described in the constitution, since there is nothing restricting it and there is power given to the congress to make "all laws which shall be necessary and proper". maryland was not allowed to tax a branch of the national bank operating there, and the supreme court decided that no state could. both of these topics were discussed in a decision of the mcculloch v. maryland case in 1819.

the answer is a. hope this