The Challenge of Ratification

A Curriculum Unit for A.P. U.S. History

Bill Hocking TAH: A More Perfect Union September 23, 2010

Introduction

When the Confederation Congress called for a meeting to amend the Articles of

Confederation, America was facing numerous challenges as a fledgling nation. Their foreign

relations problems were often economic in nature. Independence from Britain now meant the

loss of most favored nation status, and the expectation of having to pay tariffs. Debts could

only be paid back in gold and silver, a reflection of how little faith people had in the increasingly

worthless paper money circulated in the United States. America’s failure to pay back debts to

British creditors and merchants was a contributing factor to Great Britain’s refusal to withdraw

troops from the Northwest Territories. Loyalists and refugees in Canada wanted to come back

to America in force to reclaim lands seized during the American Revolution. Even America’s

newly acquired western territory was not living up to its economic potential because the

Spanish were requesting that Americans living there must swear an oath of loyalty to their king

if they wanted to ship goods through the lower Mississippi. On the national scene things were

not much better. With no power to coerce state governments to provide financial support to

the confederation, the new nation lacked the funds to handle its numerous foreign and

domestic problems. States openly violated treaties with Native Americans, leading to sporadic

fighting in many of the states. Many states stopped sending delegates to the Congress which

made it impossible to conduct business. In 1787 the United States was anything but united.

New York taxed imports from neighboring states so they wouldn’t have to tax their own

citizens. As a result, neighboring New Jersey and Connecticut suffered significant economic

hardship. Border disputes and regional secessionist movements were found throughout the

country. Even though these numerous crises were threatening the future of the nation, the

Confederation Congress could do little to get the country on the right track. Ultimately the

Confederation decided in February 1787 that a convention to amend the Articles of

Confederation would be held in Philadelphia later that spring. Within a week the delegates had

decided that a new constitution was needed. After nearly four months of often contentious

meetings and numerous compromises, a final draft of the constitution was agreed upon and

sent to the states for their approval. Once nine of the thirteen states approved the new

government it would become the law of the land. While many of its supporters recognized that

this new document was imperfect, they believed it was the best option available given the

diverse interests represented by the delegates. For the next nine months, the federalists and

anti-federalists would argue the merits of this new constitution. The debate over the direction

of this new nation reflects the wide range of interests and concerns present in America at the

end of the eighteenth century. This unit will explore the arguments of the federalists and anti-

federalists and the how the ratification process reflects the concerns of the time.

Time Frame and Frameworks

This unit will take place during five sixty-five minute A.P. American History classes. Students

will have recently examined the weaknesses of the Articles of the Confederation and how the

new constitution attempted to address those problems. This unit will address U.S. History

learning standard 1.8 (Describe the debate over the ratification of the Constitution between

Federalists and Anti-Federalists and explain the key ideas contained in the Federalist Papers on

federalism, factions, checks and balances, and the importance of an independent judiciary).

Student Objectives

1. Students will identify arguments for and against the ratification of the constitution.

2. Students will identify and classify the arguments of the federalists and anti-federalists.

3. Students will debate the issue of whether the constitution should be ratified.

4. Students will identify the factors contributing to the ratification of the constitution.

5. Students will explain how the debate over ratification reflected the political, economic,

and social divisions found in America in the late 18th century.

Background/Preparation

After four months of deliberations and debate the constitution was sent to the states for

ratification, with nine states needed to allow this to become the supreme law of the land. It

took nearly 2 ½ years for all thirteen states to finally approve, an indication that there were

reservations about changing from a weak confederation to a much stronger centralized

national government. In the beginning it looked like many of the smaller states would support

this new government due to the extensive powers given to the Senate, a lawmaking body with

equal representation among all states. In larger states like New York and Virginia there were

great concerns about giving up their power to a much stronger central government. Supporters

of the constitution, the federalists, had several advantages. Many of them were excellent

writers and skilled debaters who were well versed in politics. This is shown in how they labeled

their opposition the anti-federalists, a term which stuck with them throughout this period. The

anti-federalists had numerous disadvantages. “In most states they found themselves on the

defensive, urging voters to be loyal to a government they conceded was in need of repair.

Unfortunately for their cause, they had no effective alternative to offer. Over the next nine

months, they could do little but criticize the Constitution, a strategy that validated their image

as Antis” (Berkin, 175-6). The anti-federalists were typically deeply suspicious of having a

strong centralized government. They were concerned about the federal government’s power

to tax, the president’s command of the army, and the loss of state power. Many of the anti-

federalists had strong positions in local government and feared that they would become

marginalized under this new constitution. Some anti-federalists were upset over a lack of

religious qualification for office. Others believed that such a strong central government would

become tyrannical. Many of these fears were rooted in the recent struggle for independence

from England. Since many of these issues were brought up at the constitutional convention,

the federalists were well-prepared to address these concerns. A series of essays called Publius

were circulated among the colonies in support of ratification. By January 1788 five states had

already approved the new government by large majorities. The next real fight came in

Massachusetts, a state where anti-federalists had a slight advantage. The federalists were able

to answer many of the anti-federalist concerns and even led John Hancock to believe that he

would be the first president if Virginia failed to ratify the constitution, a real possibility at the

time.

Procedures for Each Lesson

Day One: Document Analysis: The Challenge of Ratification

Students will be given a set of primary source documents which illustrate various obstacles to

ratification of the constitution. After reading through the documents students should list these

obstacles and then come up with five conclusions they can make about the challenges of

ratifying the constitution. Obstacles may include loyalty to local government, fear of a powerful

central government, differing local concerns, a desire to protect individual rights, New York

opposition, and potential for violent conflict.

Day Two: Identifying and classifying the arguments of the federalists and anti-federalists

Students will watch clips from Part 6 of “Liberty: The American Revolution”. While watching

the film students will have to identify arguments for and against the ratification of the

constitution. After the film is show, the teacher will ask the students to develop categories and

classify the arguments. The anti-federalist classifications may include fear of centralized power,

sectional loyalties, and prejudices. The federalist classifications may include desire for order,

economic stability, and fear of mob rule.

Day Three: Debating Ratification

Students will use the arguments and classifications developed in day two to debate the merits

of ratification. The class will be divided into federalist and anti-federalist groups. Each group

will be given 10 minutes to come up with the three most significant reasons why the

constitution should or shouldn’t be ratified. After 10 minutes each group will announce their

three main reasons. Each group will then be given 20 minutes to prepare for the debate.

Students should be told to subdivide into two smaller groups with one developing arguments to

support their views on the constitution and the other to rebut the views of their opposition.

The students should be encouraged to use copies of the constitution in their textbook to

support their points. The last half hour of class will be used for debating the six main points.

Students can be given two minutes to present, two minutes to refute, and one minute for

rebuttal.

Day Four: Identifying Factors Contributing to Ratification

Using primary source materials, students will identify important factors contributing to the

ratification of the constitution.

Day Five: Essay Assessment on Ratification

Students will answer an essay question as a final assessment for this unit.

Bibliography

Berkin, Carol. A Brilliant Solution: Inventing the American Constitution. Orlando, FL: Harcourt, 2002. Kammen, Michael. (ed). The Origins of the American Constitution: A Documentary History. New York: Penguin Books, 1986. Kaminski, John P. (ed). A Necessary Evil? Slavery and the Debate Over the Constitution. Madison, WI: Madison House, 1995. Liberty: The American Revolution. Writ., Ronald Blumer. Dir., Ellen Hovde, and Muffie Meyer. Videocassette. PBS, 1997.

"Document Library (Founding Era)." TeachingAmericanHistory.org” Ashbrook Center for Public

Affairs at Ashland University. Web. 18 Sept. 2010. <http://teachingamericanhistory.org/>.

Handouts

Day One: The Challenge of Ratification

Day Two: Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists

Day Four: Ratification of the Constitution

Day Five: Constitution Essay

A.P U. S History Name_________________________ The Challenge of Ratification Directions: Using the documents below, list the obstacles standing in the way of ratification of the constitution. Finally, come up with five conclusions these documents gave you about the challenges of ratifying the constitution.

Document A Document 1

Document B

Document C

The Men who oppose a strong & energetic government are, in my opinion, narrow minded politicians, or are under the influence of local views. The apprehension expressed by them that the people will not accede to the form proposed is the ostensible, not the real cause of opposition…

George Washington to Alexander Hamilton (July 10, 1787)

I must confess I see many objections to the Constitution submitted to the Conventions of the States. That which has the greatest weight with me lies agt. the constitution of the Senate, which being both legislative and Executive and in some respects judiciary is I think radically bad. The President and the Senate too may in some instances legislate for the Union, without. The concurrence of the popular branch as they make treaties and alliances which when made are to be paramount the law of the land.

Joseph Jones to James Madison (October 29, 1787)

…every State has some objection to the present form and these objections are directed to different points. That which is most pleasing to one is obnoxious to the other, and so vice versa. If then the Union of the whole is a desirable object, the component parts must yield a little in order to accomplish it.

George Washington to Bushrod Washington (November 10, 1787)

Document D

Document E

Document F

…How do you like our new constitution? I confess there are things in it which stagger all my dispositions to subscribe to what such an assembly has proposed. The house of federal representatives will not be adequate to the management of affairs either foreign or federal. Their president seems a bad edition of a Polish king. He may be reelected form 4 years to 4 years for life. Reason and experience prove to us that a chief magistrate, so continuable, is an officer for life. When one or two generations shall have proved this is an office for life, it becomes every succession worthy of intrigue, bribery, of force, and even foreign interference…Once in office, and possessing the military force of the union, without either the aid or check of a council, he would not be easily dethroned, even if the people could be induced to withdraw their votes from him.

Thomas Jefferson to John Adams (November 13, 1787)

There is no Declaration of Rights; and the Laws of the general Government being paramount to the Laws and Constitutions of the several states, the Declaration of Rights in the separate States are no security.

George Mason, “Objections to the Constitution of Government Formed by the Convention” (November 1787)

It was painful for me, on a subject of such national importance, to differ from the respectable members who signed the constitution: But conceiving as I did, that the liberties of America were not secured by the system, it was my duty to oppose it. My principal objections to the plan, are, that there is no adequate provision for a representation of the people – that they have no security for the right of election – that some of the powers of the Legislature are ambiguous, and others indefinite and dangerous - that the Executive is blended with and will have an undue influence over the Legislature – that the judicial department will be oppressive – that treaties of the highest importance may be formed by the President with the advice of two thirds of a quorum of the Senate – and that the system is without the security of a bill of rights. These are objections which are not local, but may apply equally to all the States.

Elbridge Gerry to the Massachusetts General Court (October 18, 1787)

Document G

Document H

Obstacles to Ratification of the Constitution

The language of the Antifederalists is that if all other states adopt, New York ought still to hold out. I have the most direct intelligence, but in a manner, which forbids a public use being made of it, that Clinton has in several conversations declared his opinion of the inutility of the UNION…

Alexander Hamilton to James Madison (May 19, 1788)

There has been a disturbance in the City of Albany on the 4th of July which has occasioned bloodshed. The antifederalists were the aggressors & the Federalists the Victors.

Alexander Hamilton to James Madison (July 8, 1788)

List Five Conclusions about the challenges of ratifying the constitution. (List documents

supporting each conclusion)

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

A.P U.S History Name_________________________ Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists Directions: As you watch clips from Liberty: The American Revolution, write down the arguments presented for and against the ratification of the constitution. Arguments in Favor of Ratification Arguments Against Ratification (The Federalists) (The Anti-Federalists)

Part Two: Develop Categories for arguments of the federalists and anti-federalists and place the appropriate arguments under each category. Broad Reasons why the Federalists support the constitution Broad Reasons why the Anti-Federalists oppose the constitution

A.P U.S History Name_________________________ Ratification of the Constitution Directions: Using the documents below, identify factors which contributed to the ratification of the constitution.

Document A

Ratification of the Constitution

State Date Ratified Vote

Delaware Dec 12, 1787 30-0

Pennsylvania Dec 12, 1787 46-23

New Jersey Dec 18, 1787 39-0

Georgia Jan 2, 1788 26-0

Connecticut Jan 9, 1788 128-40

Massachusetts Feb 6, 1788 187-168

Maryland Apr 28, 1788 63-11

South Carolina May 23, 1788 149-73

New Hampshire Jun 21, 1788 57-47

Virginia Jun 25, 1788 89-79

New York Jul 26, 1788 30-27

North Carolina Nov 21, 1789 194-77

Rhode Island May 29, 1790 34-32

Source: www.usconstitution.net

Document B

Document C

With respect to this state, I am far from being decided in my opinion, that they will consent. True it is that the city and its neighborhood are enthusiastic in the cause, but I dread the cold and sour temper of the back counties, and still more the wicked industry of those who have long habituated themselves to live on the public, and cannot bear the idea of being removed from the power and profit of state government, which has been and still is the means of supporting themselves, their families, and dependents, and (which perhaps is equally grateful) of depressing and humbling their political adversaries.

Gouvenour Morris to George Washington (October 30 1787)

So far are the suggestions of Montesquieu from standing in opposition to a general Union of the States that he explicitly treats of a CONFEDERATE REPUBLIC as the expedient for extending the sphere of popular government and reconciling the advantages of monarchy with those of republicanism.

"It is very probable (says he) that mankind would have been obliged at length to live constantly under the government of a SINGLE PERSON, had they not contrived a kind of constitution that has all the internal advantages of a republican, together with the external force of a monarchial, government. I mean a CONFEDERATE REPUBLIC.

"This form of government is a convention, by which several smaller states agree to become members of a larger one, which they intend to form. It is a kind of assemblage of societies that constitute a new one, capable of increasing, by means of new associations, till they arrive to such a degree of power as to be able to provide for the security of the united body.

"A republic of this kind, able to withstand an external force, may support itself without any internal corruption. The form of this society prevents all manner of inconveniences.

"If a single member should attempt to usurp the supreme authority, he could not be supposed to have an equal authority and credit in all the confederate states. Were he to have too great influence over one, this would alarm the rest. Were he to subdue a part, that which would still remain free might oppose him with forces independent of those which he had usurped, and overpower him before he could be settled in his usurpation.

"Should a popular insurrection happen in one of the confederate States, the others are able to quell it. Should abuses creep into one part, they are reformed by those that remain sound. The state may be destroyed on one side, and not on the other; the confederacy may be dissolved, and the confederates preserve their sovereignty.

"As this government is composed of small republics, it enjoys the internal happiness of each; and with respect to its external situation, it is possessed, by means of the association, of all the advantages of large monarchies."

I have thought it proper to quote at length these interesting passages, because they contain a luminous abridgement of the principal arguments in favor of the Union, and must effectually remove the false impressions which a misapplication of other parts of the work was calculated to produce. They have, at the same time, an intimate connection with the more immediate design of this paper, which is to illustrate the tendency of the Union to repress domestic faction and insurrection.

Federalist No. 9 Publius (Alexander Hamilton) November 21, 1787

Document D

Document E

…To guard against the similar calamities of domestic discord of foreign interposition, and effectually to secure our liberties with all the benefits of an efficient Government, is now the important subject that engrosses the attention of all our parts of America. You will doubtless have seen, in the public papers, in what manners the new Constitution has been attacked and defended. There have been some compositions published in its defence, which I think will, at least, do credit to American genius. I dare say its principles and tendencies have, also, before this time been amply discussed in Europe. Here, that is in United America, it is strongly advocated by a great and decided majority of two to one. No other State has yet an opportunity of deciding. New England (with the exception of Rhode Island, which seems itself, politically speaking, to be an exception from all that is good) it is believed will cheerfully and fully accept it: there is little doubt but that the Southern States will do the same. In Virginia and New York its fate is somewhat more questionable: though, in my private opinion, I have no hesitation to believe it will be a Clear majority in its favor, in the former: of the latter I can say nothing from my own knowledge, its advocates, there, generally conclude that they shall carry it. Upon this summary view, you will perceive, my dear Marquis, the highest probability exists that the proposed Constitution will be adopted by more than nine States, at some period early in the coming summer….

George Washington to Marquis de Lafayette (January 10, 1788)

…For my own part the more I can penetrate the views of the Antifederal party in this state, the more I dread the consequences of the non adoption of the Constitution by any of the other states, the more I fear an eventual disunion and civil war. God grant that Virginia may accede. Her example will have a vast influence on our politics. New Hampshire, all accounts give us to expect, will be an assenting state…

Alexander Hamilton to James Madison (June 8, 1788)

Document F

Amendment I. Ratified December 15, 1791

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to

petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Amendment II.

Ratified December 15, 1791 A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear

Arms, shall not be infringed. Amendment III.

Ratified December 15, 1791 No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of

war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Amendment IV.

Ratified December 15, 1791 The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or

affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment V.

Ratified December 15, 1791 No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or

indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in

jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public

use, without just compensation. Amendment VI.

Ratified December 15, 1791 In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the

witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII. Ratified December 15, 1791

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than

according to the rules of the common law. Amendment VIII.

Ratified December 15, 1791 Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX. Ratified December 15, 1791

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X.

Ratified December 15, 1791 The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are

reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Bill of Rights (1791)

What factors contributed to the ratification of the Constitution? (cite documents for evidence)

A.P U.S History Name______________________________

Constitution Essay

Essay Question

“The debates over ratification of the constitution reflected the political, economic, and social divisions found in America in the late 18th century.”

Assess the validity of the above statement

Rubric

Thesis Critical Thought Evidence Writing Style

9-10 Well-developed In depth analysis; confrontation Extensive evidence Well-organized and Thesis is clearly focused and discussion of conflicting to support thesis; evidence well-written; And acknowledges sources and information is relevant to the argument; cogent The complexity of the may include an occasional Question itself insignificant error 7-8 The thesis is consistent Analysis may not be as extensive Evidence supports the Clearly organized And controlled but could be for all parts of the question thesis but may not be as and written; not More focused extensive exceptional but Logical 5-6 The thesis is limited or partially Essay is more descriptive than Evidence is not as Acceptable writing Developed and does not fully analytical and may not discuss the extensive; may contain and organization Address the entire question entire question significant errors 3-4 The thesis is confusing and Essay shows limited understanding Essay provides minimal Essay lacks Unsupported of the question; analysis is ineffective evidence; may contain organization; poor Or inaccurate major errors writing throughout 1-2 No thesis or an irrelevant one Inadequate or inaccurate Almost no evidence; Disorganized and Understanding of the question contains major errors poorly written