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. 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.

4 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. 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.

58

THE CONSTITUTION READ.

States yet to ratify. The almost unanimous opinion of the people of the State in favor of the new plan foreclosed debate so that when the convention met it had little more to do than to register the popular will. There was nothing in the proposed plan inimical to the welfare of Maryland. It had borne a conspicuous part in the movement toward a better national government, and the invitation to the States to assemble at Philadelphia had gone out from Annapolis.

The Constitution was read twice, after which it was debated. As in Pennsylvania so in Maryland the opponents of the plan demanded amendments, and William Paca, of Harford, submitted a list on the twenty-fourth. They were intended to remove the objections which Samuel Chase, the leader of the Anti-Federalists, had pointed out. But objections and amendments counted for little with the majority of the members, who, representing eleven federal counties1 and the cities of Baltimore and Annapolis, informed the House on the twenty-fifth, that they had been elected and instructed by the people whom they represented to ratify the Constitution as speedily as possible and to do no other act. Having ratified it, their power would cease, and they did not consider themselves authorized to take up any amendments. Paca was not permitted even to read his amendments, but the AntiFederalists, notwithstanding, continued their objections, and repeatedly called on the Federalists to answer them.

These objections were the familiar ones, that Congress should exert powers expressly delegated; that the Constitution should provide for trial by jury; that the

1 Frederick, Talbot, Charles, Kent, Somerset, Prince George, Worcester, Queen Anne, Dorchester, Calvert and Caroline. Elliot, II, 548. Forty-five members, Documentary History, III,

101-102.

THE ANTI-FEDERALISTS.

59

jurisdiction of the Federal courts should be limited; that provision should be made against unwarrantable searches and seizures, against quartering troops in time of peace in private houses without the consent of the owner; that the freedom of the press should be preserved inviolable, and that the militia should not be subject to national law, except in time of war, rebellion or invasion. Conscious of their strength and satisfied with the new plan as it stood, the Federalists remained inflexibly silent. They called for the vote on the twenty-sixth, and the Constitution was ratified. The vote stood sixty-three to eleven.1 Among those voting against the Constitution were Martin and Mercer; McHenry voted for ratification.

But the Anti-Federalists were not satisfied, and Paca again laid his propositions before the House. He had voted for the Constitution in full confidence that the amendments would be peaceably obtained. If they were not granted, he declared that the people of Harford county and he himself would oppose the new government. As the Federalists had now carried their point, and the Constitution was ratified, they were more favorable to amendments, and it was almost unanimously agreed that they should be referred to a special committee of thirteen,2 of which Paca was made chairman. As a result, thirteen amendments were agreed to by the committee, quite unanimously, but fifteen others were rejected. The rejected articles were dear to the minority, who straightway set the committee into a wrangle, with the result that it made no report whatever. By a vote of nearly two to one, the convention then adjourned without formal action on the

1 Documentary History, III, 105.

2 As the leading Anti-Federalists in the convention, William Paca, Samuel Chase and John Francis Mercer, belonged to this committee it is probable that they were the authors of the amendments.