solely through the journal of the debates kept by James Madison. With the submission of the Constitution to the States, the public discussion began. Much of the ablest part of this took the form of newspaper articles and pamphlets, such as The Federalist, written by Hamilton, Madison and Jay, and the Letters of the Federal Farmer, written against the Constitution by Richard Henry Lee: these are omitted as outside the scope of this collection. In the State conventions, however, many notable orations were delivered which were stenographically (though imperfectly) reported; and a selection from these speeches constitutes the subject-matter of this section. Three speeches are presented for the "new plan," and one against it. In selecting the former, it seemed best to take discussions which deal with the general structure of the Constitution and the need of adopting it, rather than with those particular details which are more fittingly discussed in a constitutional treatise. In illustrating the AntiFederalist attitude, the choice of materials is somewhat limited; for though the objections raised by the opposition range from grave to frivolous, the serious criticisms are directed in the main to particular details, and the frivolous speeches seem unworthy of preservation. The general character of many of the opposition's efforts was well expressed in the following receipt for an Anti-Federalist essay: "Take Well-born nine times; Aristocracy eighteen times; Liberty of the Press thirteen times repeated; Liberty of Conscience once; Negro Slavery once mentioned; Trial by Jury seven times; Great Men six times repeated; Mr. Wilson forty times; and lastly George Mason's right hand in a cutting box nineteen times [Mason, of Virginia, had said that he would have lost his hand rather than sign the Constitution.] Put them all together, and dish them up at pleasure." (Pennsylvania Gazette, November 14, 1787.) A similar point of view is expressed in an article in the American Museum for April, 1788, in which the author satirically says: "I would submit to any candid man, if in this Constitution there is the least provision for the privilege of shaving the beard? or is there any mode laid down to take the measure of a pair of breeches?" The contest over the ratification was chiefly fought out in the States of Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Virginia, and New York. The action of the Massachusetts Federalists in conciliating the powerful Anti-Federalist interests in that State, and accepting the proposal to ratify with the recommendation of amendments desired (in place of rejection, or of conditional ratification), was probably decisive of the contest; all States which acted subsequently to Massachusetts followed this course. The ratification by New Hampshire gave the nine States necessary to secure the Constitution, and September 13th Congress voted to put the new government into operation. The following table showing the progress of ratification will be of service for reference: 1787, Sept. 17. The Constitution reported by the Conven tion. Sept. 28. The Constitution transmitted by Congress to the States. Dec. 6. (1) Delaware ratifies, unanimously. Jan. 9. (5) Connecticut ratifies, 128 to 40. April 26. (7) Maryland ratifies, 63 to 11, the mi- amendments. May 23. (8) South Carolina ratifies, 149 to 73, and proposes four amendments. June 21. (9) New Hampshire ratifies, 57 to 46, and proposes twelve amendments. The Constitution assured. June 26. (10) Virginia ratifies, 89 to 79, and proposes a bill of rights and twenty amendments. July 26. (11) New York ratifies, 30 to 27, and proposes thirty-two amendments. Sept. 13. Congress votes to put the Constitution into operation. 1789, Nov. 21. (12) North Carolina ratifies, 192 to 75, and proposes a bill of rights and twenty-six amendments. 1790, May 29. (13) Rhode Island ratifies, and proposes a bill of rights and twenty-one and amendments. The union completed. For the study of this period the following books are valuable: Curtis, Constitutional History of the United States; Bancroft, History of the Constitution; McLaughlin, Confederation and Constitution; Schouler, History of the United States, Vol. I; McMaster, History of the People of the United States, Vol. I; Hunt, James Madison; Lodge, Alexander Hamilton; Tyler, Patrick Henry. 6. JAMES WILSON, OF PENNSYLVANIA. FOR THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION (Delivered in Philadelphia, November 26, 1787.) THE FIRST and by far the most bitter contest over the adoption of the Federal Constitution occurred in Pennsylvania, the supporters of whose extremely democratic and impracticable State constitution became Anti-Federalists almost to a man, because the new Federal plan was supported by their opponents in State politics. The preponderance in numbers, however, as well as in ability, was with the Federalists, among whom James Wilson clearly ranked first. Born in Scotland and educated in its universities, he had shown himself, in the language of the historian McMaster, "undoubtedly the best prepared, by deep and systematic study of the history and science of government," of all the fifty-five members of the Federal Convention. He had there taken a stand, with Randolph of Virginia, and others, for a truly national government, with a single executive; he had opposed the equal representation of the States in the Senate; and had advocated the election of Senators directly by the people. In an address to the citizens of Philadelphia, delivered October 6, 1787, he had convincingly answered the objection (so often to be raised by the Anti-Federalists) that the Con JAMES WILSON. Born in Scotland, 1742; educated at the universities of St. Andrews, Glasgow, and Edinburgh; emigrated to America, 1763; member of the Pennsylvania convention, 1774; of the Continental Congress, 1775-77, 1782, and 1785; of the Federal Convention, 1787; of the Pennsylvania ratifying convention, 1787; appointed judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1789; died 1798. stitution menaced liberty by its omission of a "bill of rights"; he pointed out that whereas in a State constitution all powers are granted which are not specifically withheld, in the proposed Federal Constitution "everything which is not given is reserved," and hence such guarantees are needless. The speech given below was delivered in the Pennsylvania ratifying convention on November 26, 1787. It is generally regarded as “one of the most comprehensive and luminous commentaries on the Constitution" which has come down to us from that period. Of Wilson's power as a speaker, Alexander Graydon said, "He produced greater orations than any man I have heard." The final ratification of the Constitution by Pennsylvania, however, was carried by only 46 yeas to 23 nays-a vote which showed exactly the same alignment of delegates (except for one man) that had been revealed by the first test vote at the beginning of the convention. The conversion of this one man, therefore, was the net result of all the able oratory and arguments on the Federal side. (See Harding, "Party Struggles Over the First Pennsylvania Constitution," in Report of American Historical Association for 1894, p. 394.) |