The Ratification of the Constitution

Newspapers everywhere published a copy of the Constitution. Debates and discussions over the document dominated all other news. Reaction was mixed among the population. Some were angry and others approved, but all were shocked and startled by what had emerged from the convention. This was far from what they expected. This was no mere amendment of the Articles of · Confederation! It appeared to be far beyond what had been requested by the states and was, for that reason, quite controversial.

Opponents quickly pub­lished their critiques and the friends of the Constitution answered. Aseries of articleS

Anti position. The latter protested that they were in fact the federalists and those who supported the Constitution should properly be termed Consolidationists or Nationalists, but to no avaiL The opponents of the Constitution would from thenceforth be known as the Anti-Federalists and open to the charge of being disgruntled patriots while the Federalists were hailed for being affirmative and daring. (Bowen, p. 271) .

The battle over ratification was fierce. Anti-Federalists feared the absence ofa Bill of

defending the Constitution Rights, the federal power to was begun in the papers of tax, the office of Vice­New York signed by Publius-- PreSident, the absence of these would becqme known religious qualification for as The Federalist Papers. They · government officers, no stand were widely read and hotly against slavery, and the power debated--not only by the of the federal courts. There leaders of communities butby . was even some criticism of the farmers and milkmaids aswell. proposal for a Federal City. The Federalists were answered But most of all they feared the by the Anti- Federalists who vague language and the sought to show their potential for the abuse of the arguments wrong-headed and powers granted to the central dangerous. The entire country government. Their arguments was in an uproar. were considered and struck

It is important in any debate deep cords in the people North to have the pOSitive side __ to and South. The suspicion be the affirmative. This little againstanypowerful,far-away fact was not forgotten by the govern-ment was high. proponents of the Delaware was the first state Constitution. Those in favor to ratify on December 7, 1787. of the new government took Pennsylvania, who had been the title Federalists which left rushing to be the first, ratified opponents with the unhappy amidst a storm of controversy

12 t THE COUNSEL of Chalcedon ~ OctoberlNovember, 1997

on December 12. On December 27 a rally was held in Carlisle to celebrate the new Constitution. A mob of Antifeds attacked the guest of honor, James Wilson, and, it was said, would have killed him had not an old soldier thrown himself over his body to protect him. (Bowen, p. 277)

New jersey followed Pennsylvania ratifying the Constitution unanimously on December 18 and Georgia did the same on january 2, 1788. Connecticut ratified on january 9. But things would not go so smoothly in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts was considered to be predom­inantly Antifederalist. Three hundred and fifty-five delegates met in the Brattle Street Church, Boston, with a crowded gallery of spectators. When the debates began the Antifederalists had a majority of arollnd fifty votes. A defeat of the Constitution here would have probably brought 0]1 an Antifederalist triumph in the ratification conflict. Yet because of their lack of organization and a general lack of skill in rhetoric, law, and political theory, they could not hold their own against the gifted Federalist spokesmen.

Their greatest blow perhaps was the loss of Sam Adams who was grief stricken over

the recent death of his son and did not participate in the debates. Their cause also suffered by the change of heart that overtook Governor john Hancock who went over to the Federalists in exchange for their political support. Elbridge Gerry, the leading Antifederalist of the state was not elected as a delegate, since he was from Boston, a leading Federalist district. He was allowed to be on the floor, however, to answer questions ex-officio. This gave the Federalists an overwhelming advantage even though the final vote gave them a majority of only 19 votes.

In a move that would become very important for the future debates, Massachusetts recommended that there be suggested amendments passed along \\' . its official approval .of the Constitution. . This strategy made it easier for the Federalists to succeed in other

1) The Framers, said Pinckney, thought it improper to mention specific rights guaranteed under state law for, as we might perhaps have omitted the enumeration of some of our rights, it might hereafter be said we had delegated to the general government a power to take away such of our rights as we had not enumerated

2) Silence on the subject of rights would keep the general government away from that potentially explosive subject.

3) It would not appear appropriate for South Carolinians to make declarations of human rights when a large part of our property consists in men who are actually born slaves. (Bradford, Original Intentions, p.62)

The decisior:JS of Maryland and South Carolina meant that New Hampshire would be the crocial ninth state needed to

more difficult states. make the Constitution the law

Maryland and South of the land. The New Carolina . followed with relatively easy victories for the Federalists in both states (easier in Maryland than South Carolina). The South Carolina convention did not vote to add a Bill of Rights because of the persuasive argument of General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney. His objections are noteworthy:

Hampshire q:mvention had convened on February 22, 1788. The delegates (and the populace) werepredom­inately Anti-Federalist yet they were out-maneuvered by a Federalist parliamentary procedure. The Federalists made a motion to adjourn the convention on the basis that many delegates were uriwilling

OctoberlNovember, 1997 ~ TIlE COUNSEL of Cbalcedon ~ 13

to follow their electorates Mason, Benjamin Harrison, instructions to reject the Theodorick Bland, John Tyler Constitution! Had the (father of the President), Anti-Federalists called the Edmund Ruffin, James qUC!$tion before the President Monroe, Richard Grayson, JameS, Sullivan accepted the Richard Henry Lee, and most motion, the Constitution of all Patrick lienry. It was a would have been defeated and classic struggle. that would have given . Henrys strategy to defeat momentum to the Anti~ the Constitution was two-fold: Federalist opposition. When 1) to portray it as a practical the convention reconvened, threat to Virginia and 2) to set however, on June 21, the it forth as a contradiction of Federalists won by 11 votes. the Old Dominions highest

Of the first nine states to . values, the English version of ratify only three could be liberty. (Bradford, Against the considered strong states Barbarians, p. 76) (Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Henrys oratory was never and N~w Hampshire). Even more powerful, There willbe though the Constitution Was no checks, no real balances, in nowapproved,everyoneknew this government. What can that all would be lost if Virginia avail your specious, imaginary did not enter the union. If balances, your rope-dancing, Virginia refused, New York and chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal North Carolina would checks and b;dances and doubtless . reject the contrivances? At this point we Constitution as well. Even at are told, a delegate So late a date, if Virginia had involuntarily checked his refused ratification, it may still wrists to assure himself that have defeated the FederalistS the fetters were not already and forced a new convention. pressing his flesh. It was Virginia was the most hotly overwhelming. Even Madison contested of all the ratification confessed that Patrick Henry conventions. could with a pause, a shake of

. The Antifederalists Were the head, Or a striking gesture, stronger in Virginia than any undo an hours work before other state. The leading men uttering a word. (Bowen, op. in the state (excepting cit., p. 198) Washington, Pendleton; On June 24, George Wythe Lighthorse Harry Lee, and moved a resolution for Madison) aligned themse1ves ratification with a Bill of Rights against ratification: George attached along with other

1+ f THE COUNSE~ of Chalcedon f OctoberlNovember, 1997

subsequent amendments to remedy the flaws observed by the Antifederalists. The next day the motion came to a vote and the Constitution was ratified by a scant 10 votes.

The news ofVrrginias action reached the New York convention which had been in session for two weeks, onJuly 2. It was a crushing blow to the Antifederalists. Yet when thevotecame twenty-four days later Ouly 26), they only lost by 3 votes. In Albany there was rioting by Antifederalists supporters with a public burning of Constitution. In New York Oty there was a parade with ten horses pulling a float in. the shape of a ship ( the goo<:\ ship Hamilton) through the streets. rhus, by the end ofJuIy 17SS: eleven of the thirteen states had ratified. North Carolina, which was dominated by Anti-t'ederalists and had delayed its vote in order to give the nation second thoughts, finally adopted the Constitution on November 21, 1789. -

Rhode Island, now officially a foreign country, remained so until it ratified the Constitution on May 29, 1790 (by two votes).

The Anti-Federalists failed in their efforts to prevent ratification or force a re­working of the ConStitution. Bradford points to a .~umber of reasons for this failure:

1. They had no network of communicating their views between the states or sometimes even throughout a single state. Patrick Henry organized opposition in Virginia, as did Governor Clinton in New York, and Williejones in North Carolina, but elsewhere opposition was haphazard.

2. They suffered from a lack of spokesmen and reliable leadership. This was not the case in New York and Virginia but it was plairlly the case in the important Massachusetts debates. In Maryland and South Carolina the Antifederalists lacked both organization and spokesmen. Bradford observes that if South Carolina had delayed its vote after Virginia and had Virginia voted no there would have

to obliterate every opportunity for construction by legislature, Congress, or Supreme Court. (Against the Barbarians, p. 72)

Delaware, New jersey, and Connecticut were compelled by geographical and economic circumstances to ratify. Pennsylvania ratified for economic reasons and Georgia for fear of being left out of the union and being forced to defend itself against hostile foreign and Indian forces. These were not victories based upon principled Federalism, but they were victories nonetheless and they set the tone for the remainder of th~ ratification process and made the prospects for ratification seem hopeful. These early victories gave strength to the Federalist argument that union was inevitable and that the

been no vote on ratification in Constitution was the best South Carolina. means available to affect that

3. Their timing was bad. union. And when Virginia Had North Carolina and ratified the rest of the state

Virginia voted early, and voted no, especially if either New Hampshire or Massachusetts had joined them, then as all serious scholars recognize, the victories of the Federalists in Delaware, New jersey; Georgia, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania would have had no importance. Everyone would have gone back to Philadelphia to remove offensive language and correct vague implications;

conventions ' were mere formalities.

4. They never made clear their own vision for a government which would preserve the liberties of the people. Federalism was not victorious l;>ecause it hurried the busine?s in Pennsylvania, or because it knew how to explOit the lack of leadership among the Antifederalists in Massachusetts but rather by

reason of the failure of the Antifederalists to bring forward an altemativeview of the Union that would better preserve and perfect it. (Ibid. , p. 71)

To concede a Federalist victory; however, is not to grant anything like the revolution­ary conque~t that the modern radicals envision. There is a way in which we can say that the Federalists, such as they were, lost. In the minds of those who adopted the Constitution, they were adopting a document understood in a strictly Anti-Federalist way. In order to persuade the fearful and mistrusting Anti-Federalists, the Federalists were politically compelled to promise that the Constitution by it very nature could not create or sustain anything more than a very limited power, one able to be whatever modest instrument the electorate wanted, but no more than that. (Ibid., p. 63)

Bradford states, In these ratification conventions the friends of the Constitution minimized its scope, and its enemies exaggerated its usefulness to putative tyrants. .. What both strategies suggest is that implied powers are not tolerable, that the narrowest views of what was achieved in Philadelphia are politically the most acceptable, and that future judges (or even

Oct~berlNovember, 1997 ~ THE COUNSEL of Chalcedon ~ 15

legislators)wouldonlyatgreat Delaware -- 12/7/1787 peril discover them in a vague Unanimous but growing Constitution. Pennsylvania -12/1211787 (Ibid., p. 64) 46 -- 23

Sadly, this understanding of New Jersey -- 12118/1787 the limitations upon the Unanimous authority of the new Federal ,Georgia - 112/1788 Government would quickly be-- Unanimous forgotten. Co=ecticut -- 1/9/1788

Here is a table of the states 128 -- 40 in the order in which they Massachusetts -- 2/6/1788

ratified, with the votes at their 187 - 168 conventions: Maryland -- 4128/1788

63 --11

State -- DateJRatified For -- Against

South Carolina --5/23/1788 149 --73

MERICA The First 350 Years

New Hampshire -6121/1788 57 --46 Virginia -- 6126/1 788 89 -79 New York -- 712611788 30 -- 27

I

North Carolina --11121/1789 197 -77 llliode Island -- 5129/1790 34 -- 32

For over 100 years Americans have been subjected to historical misinformation. Wehavebeengivenliesfortruthandmythsfor facts. Modern, unbelieving historians have hidden the truth of our nation's history front us. America: The First 350 Years not only corrects the lies, but also points out things "overlooked" by modern historians. It interprets American I:\istory from a Chris­ti<UI perspective so that you hear not only what happened, by why it happened-and what itmeans to us today. 32 lectures on 16-90 minute cassettes, 200 page notebook, 16 page study

special rate for Counsel of Otalcedon readers--

guide, lecture outlines, index & bibliography. -------------------------------------AMERICA: The First 350 Years-$64.95x -LoUisiana residents add 7% sales tax (/bJ.) = ----

SHlIPPiNG AND HANDLING: Add 10% (15% UPS) = ~---=----

(Check or Money Order) Total Enclosed

(name)

(Street Address or P.O. Box)

(Oty) (State) (Zip)

PLEASE ALLOW 4-6 WEEKS FOR DEllVERY Send se1f-addfessed stamped envelope to receive more infoimation

16 '" THE COUNSEL of Chalcedon '" OctoberlNovember, 1997