THE COMPROMISE IN DANGER.

53

two days before the convention met and draw up resolutions demanding as on the part of the trades-people of the Commonwealth that the Constitution be ratified. Adams was of the people and depended for his influence upon his constant response to the wishes of the laboring classes. The meeting of the Boston mechanics practically silenced his opposition. Almost at the last moment he proposed additional amendments: for the liberty of the press, the right to bear arms, the prohibition of standing armies, the right of petition and the exemption from unreasonable searches and seizures.

This unexpected move threatened to ruin the compromise. It alarmed the Federalists, lest too much might be demanded, and equally alarmed the Anti-Federalists lest a sufficient demand for amendments had not been made. Quickly detecting the peril in which he had placed the compromise, Adams withdrew his amendments, but another member at once proposed them again, and there was nothing left for Adams to do save to help defeat his own propositions.2 The convention was now ready for the vote and Samuel Stillman, a Baptist clergyman of Boston, to whom, by common consent, the privilege of closing the debate had been given, presented the arguments of both sides in a general review. The numerous and extensive object of the general government, he said, would require a system of biennial elections of Congress. This was sufficiently frequent to prevent perpetuity in office. The powers granted to Congress, though great and extensive, were limited and defined. The people were secure, because all officers were elected, elections were frequent, Congress could have no motive to abuse its powers, every State in the Union was guaranteed a repub

1 February 6, 1788; Debates, 86, 266.

2 Harding, 98.

54

DISTRIBUTION OF THE VOTE.

lican form of government, and every officer in Congress, guilty of malconduct, was liable to impeachment.1

Before putting the question, Hancock declared that he gave his assent to the Constitution, in full confidence that the amendments proposed would soon become a part of it; they were in no wise local, but calculated to give security alike to all the States. The vote stood, one hundred and eighty-seven to one hundred and sixty-eight, a majority of nineteen for the Constitution.2 Among the members voting in the negative were nine of the grand committee, who had given the amendments their final form. Nine delegates were absent, and as they were from Anti-Federalist towns, their votes, had they been recorded, would probably have been against the Constitution. Forty-six towns had not sent delegates, and enough of these were Anti-Federalist to have caused the rejection of the plan, had they been represented.

The distribution of the vote confirms the analysis already made of public sentiment in the State. The four coast counties, Barnstable, Plymouth, Suffolk and Essex, cast one hundred yeas and nineteen nays for the Constitution. The five counties to the west, Middlesex, Bristol, Hampshire, Worcester and Berkshire, cast sixty-six yeas and one hundred and twenty-eight nays. The Maine delegates, from Lincoln, York and Cumberland, were almost equally divided; twenty-five yeas to twenty-one nays. Dukes county cast sixty-two votes for the Constitution, and Barnstable was also solidly in its favor; but Worcester county, accessible to the world neither by sea nor river,

1 Stillman probably meant to say that every officer under the Constitution guilty of mal conduct was liable to impeachment. Debates, 266-273.

2 Debates, 83, 92, 280. For the ratification see Documentary History, III, 90-96.

CEREMONIES OF RATIFICATION.

55

stood forty-three nays to seven ayes; the banner antifederal county of the State. The centers of federal support were the counties of Suffolk and Essex.1 The charge of bribery and corruption made by Anti-Federalist writers against the Massachusetts Federalists in the convention is baseless.2

When the vote was recorded, the ratification was formally proclaimed by Joseph Henderson, high sheriff of the county of Suffolk, and the convention adjourned.3 But this was not the end. The citizens of Boston took up the good news, the bells on the public buildings pealed forth, bonfires were kindled and a concourse of people filled the streets. The artisans and mechanics of the town assembled at Faneuil Hall, where, representing all the trades, and joined by their fellows from adjacent towns, they moved in a grand procession through the streets.

Prominent in the line was the ship Federal Constitution, drawn by thirteen horses and manned by thirteen seamen and marines; with full colors flying in the wind; while astern, followed the old ship Confederation, hauled up for repairs, but evidently quite beyond restoration.* When the plumbers, the cabinet makers, the tinmen and shoemakers, the printers and bookbinders, the tailors, the coach and chaise makers and about thirty other companies in the procession, led by the foresters, and followed by the Republican Volunteers, under Captain Gray, had again reached the Hall, a grand feast was served. A salute of thirteen guns closed the rejoicings. As the procession wended its way through the crooked streets, the printers

1 For the vote see the Debates, 87-92; for the geographical distribution see Libby, Appendix B, and accompanying map; Harding, 99-100.

2 Harding, 101-104.

3 February 7, 1788; Debates, 282.

* Debates, 323-329.

56

EFFECT OF THE VOTE ELSEWHERE.

struck off songs and ballads, which they scattered among the crowd. On one of these, called "The Raising," was an emblematic design of six pillars supporting arches, and in each arch a star, and on each pillar the name of a State that had ratified the Constitution. The seventh pillar, representing New Hampshire, was reclining near the ground, but above it were the prophetic words, "It will yet rise."

Most of the Anti-Federalists in the State received the ratification as final. The policy of conciliation which the Federalists had inaugurated worked admirably. Acquiescence was so general that the efforts of a few radicals to stir up strife failed. But the Anti-Federal strength in the House of Representatives was sufficient to defeat a resolution of the Senate to print the address for the people, which the Convention had prepared in order to win favor for the ratification. The effect of the vote of Massachusetts was felt throughout the Union. Had the Constitution failed there, it might never have been adopted as the supreme law of the land. Ratification by Massachusetts was the turning of the tide. The State was the first formally to propose amendments, and Jefferson, who, like Samuel Adams, had at first disapproved the Constitution, now changed his opinions and advocated the Massachusetts mode of ratification as the only rational one.1

In Maryland, the people of Harford and Anne Arundel counties, and of Baltimore county, outside of the city, were anti-federal in sentiment, but in Baltimore and Annapolis and the remaining portions of the State, public opinion was quite unanimously federal.2 The Maryland delegates to the Federal Convention, were called before the assembly in November, 1787, to give an account of

1 Elliot, V, 573; Note, page 213, post; Harding, 105-116. 2 Libby, 85-86.

AFFAIRS IN MARYLAND.

57

the proceedings in which they had been engaged, and Luther Martin, taking great liberty with his oath of secrecy, if not violating it, occupied the attention of the House for three days, in giving an account of the proceedings at Philadelphia.1 His speech was a fierce assault on the whole plan. His colleague, James McHenry, gave a brief report of his services and was favorable to the Constitution. There was no opposition to calling a convention, and it was ordered that one should meet on the twenty-first of April.2 Martin, McHenry and John Francis Mercer, who had represented the State in the Federal Convention, were among the delegates chosen.

The personal influence of Washington extended into Maryland as did also that of Richard Henry Lee and Patrick Henry. Washington and Madison labored as assiduously to secure ratification in Maryland as in Virginia, and Lee worked with equal zeal to prevent it. The Anti-Federalists sought to postpone the convention, but this evil was easily prevented. The friends of the Constitution well knew that no time was to be lost, as the action of Maryland would have great influence in the

1 The speech is known as Martin's Genuine Information and may be found in Elliot, I, 344-389. It was published more or less widely by the Anti-Federalists and though strongly partisan throws much light upon its subject. Perhaps no detail is more clearly brought out than the solicitous care which the Federal Convention took to preserve the secrecy of its proceedings.

2 The Journal of the Convention, April 21-28, 1788, is reprinted Documentary History, III, 97-122. It consisted of seventysix delegates of whom seventy-four attended; among them were George Plater of St. Mary's county, chosen president; Samuel Chase of Anne Arundel county; Alexander C. Hansen of Annapolis; William Paca of Harford county. A fragmentary account of the proceedings of the convention is given in Elliot, II, 547-556. The adoption of the Constitution by Maryland is the subject of several critical papers, by Bernard C. Steiner, beginning in the American Historical Review, October, 1899.