EXCLUSION OF NORTH CAROLINA FROM THE UNION. 171

tional ones, should be adopted word for word. The State ran no risk of being excluded from the Union, whenever it might think proper to come in. Virginia, its next neighbor, would make no opposition; for the two States had a common cause and wished the same amendments. To Virginia, North Carolina was of the greatest importance. Virginia would have great weight in Congress and undoubtedly would do everything in her power to bring North Carolina into the Union and South Carolina and Georgia would be also deeply interested in the same result. Without the aid of North Carolina, the Creek nation would overturn those two States. Massachusetts and New Hampshire and most of the States had proposed amendments, as doubtless New York would do, if she ratified; and he concluded with an approval of Jefferson's well-known letter to Madison expressing the wish that nine States should ratify the Constitution in order to preserve the Union, but that the other States should reject it that there might be a certainty of their obtaining amendments.1

The hint which Jones had thrown out that the Federalists need not be in such haste to secure offices under the new government was resented by Johnston, who quickly declared that he had referred to the great offices in the government which would affect the interests of all the States. But Jones, following up his hint, repudiated the motives which had everywhere been assigned to the opponents of the Constitution, that their opposition was due to their fear of the loss of influence if the new government was ratified and the States were to lose their importance.2 Spencer considered it in accordance with

1 Id., 225-226; For Jefferson's letter to Madison, see post, page 213.

2 Id., 227.

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

1 Id., 251-252.

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.

1

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. 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.3 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,