172

IREDELL'S APPEAL FOR RATIFICATION.

every principle of political prudence, that the States should not assent to any new civil obligation till errors in its form were removed.. The State had been confederated with the others by a solemn compact which was not to be dissolved without the consent of every member. North Carolina had not assented to this dissolution, and, if it was dissolved, it would be the fault of the ratifying States. If ratification by four enabled them to exclude the other four, North Carolina might be considered as excluded. Each State was free to come into the Union when it thought proper, but he agreed with Jones that exclusion for a time was less dangerous than an unconditional adoption. The convention had arrived at the critical moment when a decision of some kind must be made.

Iredell made an eloquent appeal for ratification, chiefly on the ground that rejection would occasion animosity between North Carolina and the other States and probably separate it from them forever. The most selfish interests of the State demanded that it should ratify. It was unfit that North Carolina should dictate to the whole Union. While many amendments had been proposed by the ratifying States, it was not probable, nor was it desirable, that all of them should be approved; but the probability of the adoption of some was extremely great, for only three States had ratified unanimously, and, in the others, there was a strong opposition; as in Connecticut and Pennsylvania, where it fully equaled one-third; in South Carolina, where it was yet stronger; and in Virginia, where ratification had been secured only by a bare majority. He, too, repudiated the insinuation which Jones had thrown out that the Federalists favored the Constitution because they had its offices and emoluments in view.1 Davie supported Iredell and compared the sug

1 Id., 233-234.

FORM OF RATIFICATION.

173

gested dictatorial proposition of North Carolina to the Union to the arrogant address of a beggarly bankrupt to an opulent company of merchants, telling them the terms on which he would enter on a co-partnership. North Carolina was not a wealthy State; it had long been delinquent in its quotas, indeed, it stood foremost on the list of delinquent States; at last it might have to come into the Union on humiliating terms.1

The resolution of the Committee of the Whole was then read. It was in the form of a Declaration of Rights, in twenty articles, and of amendments to the Constitution, in twenty-six more.2 It was understood by the AntiFederalists that the declaration and the amendments should be made the condition of ratification. Iredell, for the Federalists, anxious to prevent this calamity, then proposed ratification with the recommendation of six amendments similar to those proposed by New York; but his motion was rejected by a vote of one hundred and eightyfour to eighty-four.3

On the following day, the second of August, the report of the Committee of the Whole was taken up, and, at the suggestion of Thomas Person and John Macon, the question was put whether the convention would concur with the report, and the vote of the previous day was reversed. Those who had opposed Iredell's motion now voted in favor of the anti-federal amendments; but the resolution which Willie Jones had carried in his pocket, recommending the legislature of the State to enact a law collecting an impost equal to that imposed by Congress on imported goods and appropriating the money raised to the use of the general government, was adopted

1 Id., 237-239.

2 Id., 243-247.

3 August 1, 1788, Id., 250-251.

174

HELPLESSNESS OF THE FEDERALISTS.

by a large majority, and it was unanimously agreed that the assembly should be urged to take effectual measures to redeem the paper currency of the State.1

The disappointment and chagrin of the Federalists were intensified by the realization of their helplessness. North Carolina, they said, would become a by-word among the nations.2 Davie did not conceal his disgust at the harangues of Willie Jones on the terror of the judicial power; nor did Hugh Williamson hesitate to say that want of honesty was at the bottom of the opposition to the Constitution. He believed, with other Federalists, that the State should ratify in order to secure the amendments which it desired, and his disappointment at the result was so great that he wrote an apology for North Carolina, which appeared in the northern papers.5

On the day when the State rejected the Constitution, Congress had been wrangling for a month over the question of inaugurating the new government. The Federal Convention had outlined the proper procedure and after ratification by nine States, Congress, in order to carry the new government into execution, had only to designate the time and place for its beginning. The ratification of the Constitution by New Hampshire made up the number of States necessary to carry the Constitution into effect, and, on the second of July, Congress began a discussion of the time and place, but it was not until the thirteenth of September, that the last act necessary to the existence of the new government was passed, and it was agreed that the ratifying States should appoint presidential electors

2 Hooper to Iredell, September 2, 1788; McRee's Iredell, II, 238.

3 Davie to Iredell, Id., 239.

4 Williamson to Iredell, September 22, 1788; Id., 242. 5 New York Daily Advertiser, September 17, 1788.

EFFECT OF THE NEW YORK LETTER.

175

on the first Wednesday of January; that the President should be chosen on the first Wednesday in February, and that the city of New York should be the place, and the first Wednesday in March the time for commencing proceedings.1 The long delay was due to the almost hopeless discord of opinions respecting the establishment of the permanent seat of government. The place chosen was the result of the dilemma, to which the opponents of New York were reduced, of yielding to the choice of that city, or of strangling the government in its birth. The times for appointing electors, of choosing the President and of inaugurating the government were adjusted to the meetings of the State legislatures.2

The New York circular letter, better known by the name of its author, Governor Clinton, was intended, as the Federalists insisted, to do much mischief. The AntiFederalists laid hold of it with eagerness as the harbinger of a second general convention. In Pennsylvania, they speedily gathered at Harrisburg under the leadership of Findlay and Albert Gallatin, and succeeded both in drawing up another set of amendments and also in perfecting their political organization in the State. In Virginia, Patrick Henry welcomed the letter and wielded so great an influence as absolutely to control the legislature, and he succeeded in carrying through an invitation to all the States to meet in a second Federal Convention. But in other States, excepting Rhode Island and North Caro

1 It was decided by the Supreme Court, later, in the case of Owings vs. Speed, et al. (5 Wheaton, 420), that the Constitution of the United States came into operation on the first Wednesday in March, 1789.

2 Documentary History, III, 161-204; Henry Lee to Washington, September 13, 1788; Sparks, IX, 551; Madison to Washington, September 14, 1788, Id., 554.

3 Rive's Madison, II, 646.

176

LAST DAYS OF THE CONFEDERATION.

lina, public sentiment detected dangers of disunion in the letter, and its influence was limited to the minority party. All through the winter of 1789, the supporters of the Constitution were anxious lest in some way its enemies might yet cause delay, or even overthrow the plan.

A few members of the old Congress continued to attend until the first of January, but a quorum met for the last time on the tenth of October, 1788. The first Wednesday of March, when the new government should be inaugurated, fell on the fourth of the month. On the evening of the third, the passing of the Confederation was marked by a parting salute of thirteen guns from the fort in New York City, opposite Bowling Green, and at sunrise, on the fourth, a salute of eleven guns was fired in honor of the States that had now entered into the more perfect Union. When twelve o'clock came, the hour designated for the meeting of Congress, only thirteen Representatives and eight Senators were present in Federal Hall. Not until the sixth of April, when Richard Henry Lee, of Virginia, arrived, were six States represented, making a quorum.1

The House had been able to organize five days before.2 Nearly all the members chosen to both branches had participated in the work of the Federal Convention or in that of the ratifying conventions. Of the Senators who had attended the Federal Convention were John Langdon, of New Hampshire, who was chosen President of the Senate for the express purpose of opening the certificates and counting the electoral votes; Caleb Strong, of Massachusetts; Oliver Ellsworth and William Samuel Johnson, of Connecticut; William Patterson, of New Jersey; Robert Morris, of Pennsylvania; Richard Bassett and 1 Annals of the First Congress, II, 16.

2 Id., 100.