The utility of bills of rights; and provision of constitutionally

Hamilton argues, in Federalist 84, that "bills of rights ... are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous:' What arguments does Hamilton make to substantiate this claim? Do you find these arguments persuasive? Specifically address the following 2 queries in your response: (1) how much is the idea of liberty separable from the idea of rights, or, how much so as to cast doubt upon the utility of bills of rights? (2) is the provision of constitutionally-enumerated rights, in your view, a necessary component of republican government?