CHAPTER I.

THE STRUGGLE OVER THE CONSTITUTION.

THE Constitution of the United States, as is well known, was framed during the summer of 1787, by a convention of delegates from twelve States. The convention sat in the old State House at Philadelphia, and after a stormy session of four months, ended its labors on September 17th, 1787. On the afternoon of that day, the constitution duly signed by thirty-nine of the members, some resolutions, and a letter from Washington, were ordered to be sent to Congress, to be by it transmitted to the States.

While these things were taking place in a lower room of the State House, the Legislature of Pennsylvania was in session in a room above, and to it, on the morning of September 18th, the constitution was read. Copies were then given to the press, and the next day the people of Philadelphia were reading the new plan in the "Packet," the "Journal," and the "Gazetteer." For a few days nothing but praise was heard. But, before a week was gone, a writer made bold to attack it in the "Freeman's Journal;" answers were made to him in the "Gazetteer;" more attacks followed, the community was split into two great parties, the names Federal and Antifederal were formally assumed, and a struggle, the most interesting in the early history of the constitution, was commenced.

The new frame of government meanwhile had been pre-, sented to Congress, and there, too, had been strongly opposed. Led on by Melanchthon Smith, the New York delegates opposed it to a man. William Grayson, of Virginia, denounced it as too weak. Richard Henry Lee hated it for being too strong, and with him went Nathan Dane, of Massachusetts. To submit such a document to Congress, they held, was absurd. Congress could give it no countenance whatever.

The proposed constitution was a plan for a new government; a new government could not be set up till the old had been pulled down, and to pull down the old was out of the power of Congress. They were reminded that Congress had sanctioned the meeting of the convention, and told that, if Congress could approve the convention, it could approve the work the convention did. But they would not be convinced,

and on September 26th, Lee moved a bill of rights and a long list of amendments. He would have no Vice-President, a council of state to be joined with the President in making appointments, more representatives, and more than a majority to pass an act for the regulation of commerce. His bill and his amendments were not considered, and the next day Lee came forward with a new resolution. This was, that the acts of the convention should be sent to the executives of the States, to be by them laid before their legislatures. Instantly a member from Delaware moved to add the words: "In order to be by them submitted to conventions of delegates to be chosen agreeably to the said resolutions of the convention." The question was taken, and of the twelve States on the floor, all were for the motion save New York, and all save New York and Virginia were so unanimously. It was then moved to urge the legislatures to call state conventions with all the speed they could; but Congress rose, and the matter went over to the next day.

It was now quite clear that neither party could have its own way. The Federalists wished to send the new plan to the States by the undivided vote of Congress. But this they could not do while the New York delegates held out. Lee and his followers wished to send it, if sent at all, without one word of approval. But this they could not do unless the Federalists were willing. When, therefore, Congress again assembled at noon on the 28th, each party gave up something. The Federalists agreed to withhold all words of approval. The Antifederalists agree to unanimity. The amendments offered by Lee on the 26th, and the vote on the 27th, were then expunged from the journal, and the constitution, the resolutions of the convention, and the letter of Washington, were formally sent to the States.

William Bingham of Pennsylvania at once sent off an express to Philadelphia with the news. But the rider had not crossed the ferry to Paulus Hook when the Legislature of Pennsylvania began to act. The Assembly had resolved to adjourn sine die on Saturday, September 29th. But the Federalists had determined that before adjournment a state convention to consider the constitution should be called. When, therefore, the day drew near, and no word of approval came from Congress, they took the matter into their own hands, and on Friday morning George Clymer rose in his place, and moved that a state convention of deputies be called, that they meet at Philadelphia, and that they be chosen in the same manner and on the same day as the members of the next General Assembly. Mr. Whitehill, who sat for Cumberland, objected, moved to put off consideration of the matter till afternoon, and provoked a long and bitter debate. The people, it was said, in the State at large knew nothing about the new plan. To inform them before election would be impossible. The matter should be left to the next Assembly. Congress besides had taken no action, and till Congress did, no State could act: the articles of confederation forbade them; they must keep on federal ground. The motion again was unparliamentary. The custom of the Assembly had always been, when important business was to be brought on, to give notice beforehand, have the matter made the order of the day, and have the bill read three times. To now bring on business so important by surprise, and hurry it through without debate, was clearly to serve some bad end.

Such argument, however, could not bring over a single Federalist, and the first of the resolutions,* that calling the convention to meet at Philadelphia, was carried by a vote of forty-three to nineteen. The Assembly then adjourned till four in the afternoon.

Not a few of the minority lodged in the house of Major Boyd, on Sixth street, and there it is likely a plan was laid that came very near being successful. The Assembly consisted of sixty-nine members. Forty-six made a quorum. If, there

*Chap. II., p. 28.

fore, nineteen kept away there would be no quorum, and if there was no quorum the house would be forced to adjourn with the day for the election of delegates unfixed, and the manner of choosing the members unsettled. It was accordingly arranged that not one of the nineteen should go to the afternoon session, and not one did.

At four o'clock the Assembly met, with the Speaker and every federal member in his place. But all told, they counted only forty-four, and the business could not go on. After waiting a while and no more coming in, the Speaker sent out the sergeant-at-arms to summon the absentees. None would obey, and the house was forced to adjourn to 9 o'clock on Saturday morning.

Meanwhile, the rider sent on by Mr. Bingham came spurring into town with the resolution of Congress submitting the constitution to the States. This, when the Speaker had taken the chair on Saturday, was read to the house. Hoping that the opposition of the minority would now be removed, the sergeant-at-arms and the assistant clerk were dispatched to hunt up the malcontents, show them the resolution, and summon them to attend. The two officers went first to Major Boyd's, where were James M'Calmont, who sat for Franklin, and Jacob Miley, from Dauphin. They were shown the resolution, and stoutly said they would not go. The people, however, decided that they should; broke into their lodgings, seized them, dragged them through the streets to the State House, and thrust them into the assembly room, with clothes torn and faces white with rage. The quorum was now complete.

When the roll had been called and a petition praying for a convention presented and read, Mr. M'Calmont rose, complained of his treatment, and asked to be excused. Some debate followed, in the course of which the rules touching the matter were read. It then appeared that every member who did not answer at roll-call was to be fined 2s. 6d. But when a quorum could not be formed without him, a fine of 5s. was to be imposed. Thereupon Mr. M'Calmont rose, and, taking some silver from his pocket, said, "Well, sir, here is your 5s.

to let me go."

The gallery broke into a laugh, the Speaker refused the money, and the debate went on till the vote was about to be taken, when Mr. M'Calmont left his seat and made for the door. Instantly the gallery* cried out, "Stop him." The crowd about the door did so; Mr. M'Calmont returned to his seat; the house refused to excuse him, and appointed the first Tuesday in November for the election of delegates.

While these things were happening in the Assembly, the minority were busy preparing an address to the people, which sixteen of the nineteen signed.

The objections of these men were ten in number. The new plan was offensive because it was too costly, because it was to be a government of three branches, because it would ruin state governments or reduce them to corporations, because power of taxation was vested in Congress, because liberty of the press was not assured, because trial by jury was abolished in civil cases, and because the federal judiciary was so formed as to destroy the judiciary of the States. There ought to have been rotation in office, in place of which representatives were to be chosen for two years and senators for six. There ought to have been a declaration of rights, and provision against a standing army. They were at once answered in verse, in squibs, in mock protests, in serious and carefully drawn replies. One such reply came from six of the majority. Another, the longest and the most elaborate of all, was written by Pelatiah Webster. Webster was born at Lebanon, Connecticut, in 1725, and seems to have possessed the traditional versatility of the New England people. At twenty-one he was graduated from Yale college, studied theology, and for two years preached in the town of Greenwich. Wearying of this he turned business man, and went to Philadelphia in 1755. Either the profits were small or the business not to his taste, for in 1763 he accepted the place of

*This word occurs in the newspapers of the day. But the Assembly room contained no gallery. The term, therefore, must be understood in a parliamentary sense, and as referring to the people who stood in a crowd along the wall and around the door.