Volume I Part 8 (2/2)
The debates in the Virginia Convention were long and animated. Some of the most eminent and most gifted men of that period took part in them, and they have ever since been referred to for the exposition which they afford of the interpretation of the Const.i.tution by its authors and their contemporaries. Among the members were Madison, Mason, and Randolph, who had also been members of the Convention at Philadelphia. Mr. Madison was one of the most earnest advocates of the new Const.i.tution, while Mr. Mason was as warmly opposed to its adoption; so also was Patrick Henry, the celebrated orator. It was a.s.sailed with great vehemence at every vulnerable [pg 109] or doubtful point, and was finally ratified June 26, 1788, by a vote of 89 to 79-a majority of only ten.
This ratification was expressed in the same terms employed by other States, by ”the delegates of the people of Virginia ... in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia.” In so doing, however, like Ma.s.sachusetts, New Hamps.h.i.+re, and South Carolina, Virginia demanded certain amendments as a more explicit guarantee against consolidation, and accompanied the demand with the following declaration:
”That the powers granted under the Const.i.tution, being derived from the people of the United States, may be resumed by them, whenever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, and that every power not granted thereby remains with them and at their will,” etc., etc.
Whether, in speaking of a possible resumption of powers by ”the people of the United States,” the Convention had in mind the action of such a people in the aggregate-political community which did not exist, and of which they, could hardly have entertained even an ideal conception-or of the people of Virginia, for whom they were speaking, and of the other United States then taking similar action-is a question which scarcely admits of argument, but which will be more fully considered in the proper place.
New York, the eleventh State to signify her a.s.sent, did so on July 26, 1788, after an arduous and protracted discussion, and then by a majority of but three votes-30 to 27. Even this small majority was secured only by the recommendation of certain material amendments, the adoption of which by the other States it was at first proposed to make a condition precedent to the validity of the ratification. This idea was abandoned after a correspondence between Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Madison, and, instead of conditional ratification, New York provided for the resumption of her grants; but the amendments were put forth with a circular letter to the other States, in which it was declared that ”nothing but the fullest confidence of obtaining a revision” of the objectionable features of the Const.i.tution, ”and an invincible reluctance to separating from our [pg 110] sister States, could have prevailed upon a sufficient number to ratify it without stipulating for previous amendments.”
The ratification was expressed in the usual terms, as made ”by the delegates of the people of the State of New York ... in the name and in behalf of the people” of the said State. Accompanying it was a declaration of the principles in which the a.s.sent of New York was conceded, one paragraph of which runs as follows:
”That the powers of government may be rea.s.sumed by the people, whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not, by the said Const.i.tution, clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the Government thereof, remains to the people of the several States, or to their respective State governments, to whom they may have granted the same; and that those clauses in the said Const.i.tution which declare that Congress shall not have or exercise certain powers, do not imply that Congress is ent.i.tled to any powers not given by the said Const.i.tution, but such clauses are to be construed either as exceptions to certain specified powers or as inserted for greater caution.”
The acceptance of these eleven States having been signified to the Congress, provision was made for putting the new Const.i.tution in operation. This was effected on March 4, 1789, when the Government was organized, with George Was.h.i.+ngton as President, and John Adams, Vice-President; the Senators and Representatives elected by the States which had acceded to the Const.i.tution, organizing themselves as a Congress.
Meantime, two States were standing, as we have seen, unquestioned and unmolested, in an att.i.tude of absolute independence. The Convention of North Carolina, on August 2, 1788, had rejected the proposed Const.i.tution, or, more properly speaking, had withheld her ratification until action could be taken upon the subject-matter of the following resolution adopted by her Convention:
”Resolved, That a declaration of rights, a.s.serting and securing from encroachment the great principles of civil and religious liberty, and the unalienable rights of the people, together with amendments [pg 111] to the most ambiguous and exceptionable parts of the said Const.i.tution of government, ought to be laid before Congress and the Convention of the States that shall or may be called for the purpose of amending the said Const.i.tution, for their consideration, previous to the ratification of the Const.i.tution aforesaid on the part of the State of North Carolina.”
More than a year afterward, when the newly organized Government had been in operation for nearly nine months, and when-although no convention of the States had been called to revise the Const.i.tution-North Carolina had good reason to feel a.s.sured that the most important provisions of her proposed amendments and ”declaration of rights” would be adopted, she acceded to the amended compact. On November 21, 1789, her Convention agreed, ”in behalf of the freemen, citizens, and inhabitants of the State of North Carolina,” to ”adopt and ratify” the Const.i.tution.
In Rhode Island the proposed Const.i.tution was at first submitted to a direct vote of the people, who rejected it by an overwhelming majority. Subsequently-that is, on May 29, 1790, when the reorganized Government had been in operation for nearly fifteen months, and when it had become reasonably certain that the amendments thought necessary would be adopted-a convention of the people of Rhode Island acceded to the new Union, and ratified the Const.i.tution, though even then by a majority of only two votes in sixty-six-34 to 32. The ratification was expressed in substantially the same language as that which has now been so repeatedly cited:
”We, the delegates of the people of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, duly elected and met in convention, ... in the name and behalf of the people of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, do, by these presents, a.s.sent to and ratify the said Const.i.tution.”
It is particularly to be noted that, during the intervals between the organization of the Federal Government under the new Const.i.tution and the ratification of that Const.i.tution by, North Carolina and Rhode Island, respectively, those States [pg 112] were absolutely independent and unconnected with any other political community, unless they be considered as still representing the ”United States of America,” which by the Articles of Confederation had been declared a ”perpetual union.” The other States had seceded from the former union-not in a body, but separately, each for itself-and had formed a new a.s.sociation, leaving these two States in the att.i.tude of foreign though friendly powers. There was no claim of any right to control their action, as if they had been mere geographical or political divisions of one great consolidated community or ”nation.” Their accession to the Union was desired, but their freedom of choice in the matter was never questioned. And then it is to be noted, on their part, that, like the house of Judah, they refrained from any attempt to force the seceding sisters to return.
As ill.u.s.trative of the relations existing during this period between the United States and Rhode Island, it may not be uninstructive to refer to a letter sent by the government of the latter to the President and Congress, and transmitted by the President to the Senate, with the following note:
”United States, September 26, 1789.
”Gentlemen of the Senate: Having yesterday received a letter written in this month by the Governor of Rhode Island, at the request and in behalf of the General a.s.sembly of that State, addressed to the President, the Senate, and the House of Representatives of the eleven United States of America in Congress a.s.sembled, I take the earliest opportunity of laying a copy of it before you.
(Signed) ”GEORGE WAs.h.i.+NGTON.”
Some extracts from the communication referred to are annexed:
”State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, In General a.s.sembly, September Session, 1789.
”To the President, the Senate, and the House of Representatives of the eleven United States of America in Congress a.s.sembled:
”The critical situation in which the people of this State are placed engages us to make these a.s.surances, on their behalf, of their attachment and friends.h.i.+p to their sister States, and of their [pg 113] disposition to cultivate mutual harmony and friendly intercourse. They know themselves to be a handful, comparatively viewed, and, although they now stand as it were alone, they have not separated themselves or departed from the principles of that Confederation, which was formed by the sister States in their struggle for freedom and in the hour of danger....
”Our not having acceded to or adopted the new system of government formed and adopted by most of our sister States, we doubt not, has given uneasiness to them. That we have not seen our way clear to it, consistently with our idea of the principles upon which we all embarked together, has also given pain to us. We have not doubted that we might thereby avoid present difficulties, but we have apprehended future mischief....
”Can it be thought strange that, with these impressions, they [the people of this State] should wait to see the proposed system organized and in operation?-to see what further checks and securities would be agreed to and established by way of amendments, before they could adopt it as a Const.i.tution of government for themselves and their posterity?...
<script>