“Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”
“A Republic, if you can keep it.” ~ Benjamin Franklin
James Madison, seeing the chaos that was enfolding the country under the weak Articles of Confederation, wanted a strong central government to provide order and stability. "Let it be tried then," he wrote, "whether any middle ground can be taken which will at once support a due supremacy of the national authority," while maintaining state power only when "subordinately useful." The resolute Virginian looked to the Constitutional Convention to forge a new government in this mold.
The convention had its specific origins in a proposal offered by Madison and John Tyler in the Virginia assembly that the Continental Congress be given power to regulate commerce throughout the Confederation. Through their efforts in the assembly a plan was devised inviting the several states to attend a convention at Annapolis, MD, in September 1786 to discuss commercial problems. Madison and a young lawyer from New York named Alexander Hamilton issued a report on the meeting in Annapolis, calling upon Congress to summon delegates of all of the states to meet for the purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. Although the report was widely viewed as a usurpation of congressional authority, the Congress did issue a formal call to the states for a convention. To Madison it represented the supreme chance to reverse the country's trend. And as the delegations gathered in Philadelphia, its importance was not lost to others. The squire of Gunston Hall, George Mason, wrote to his son, "The Eyes of the United States are turned upon this Assembly and their Expectations raised to a very anxious Degree. May God Grant that we may be able to gratify them, by establishing a wise and just Government."
From the National Archives web site:The Federal Convention convened in the State House (Independence Hall) in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787, to revise the Articles of Confederation. Because the delegations from only two states were at first present, the members adjourned from day to day until a quorum of seven states was obtained on May 25. Through discussion and debate it became clear by mid-June that, rather than amend the existing Articles, the Convention would draft an entirely new frame of government. All through the summer, in closed sessions, the delegates debated, and redrafted the articles of the new Constitution. Among the chief points at issue were how much power to allow the central government, how many representatives in Congress to allow each state, and how these representatives should be elected--directly by the people or by the state legislators. The work of many minds, the Constitution stands as a model of cooperative statesmanship and the art of compromise.
220 years ago, this day, the members of the Convention, having finished writing a Constitution that would replace the Articles of Confederation, formally signed the document. Appealing for unity behind the Constitution, Benjamin Franklin declared,
"I think it will astonish our enemies, who are waiting with confidence to hear that our councils are confounded like those of the builders of Babel; and that our States are on the point of separation, only to meet hereafter for the purpose of cutting one another's throats."
Barry Faulkner "Constitution Mural" (1936), Rotunda, National Archives Building
All that remained, following the signing by the delegates, was for nine states to ratify the new Constitution to make it the law of the land. It would not be easy. Americans have always been an independent sort, loathe to hand over what they perceive as their 'god-given' rights. And many were leery of allowing any change in the way the government worked.
From the National Archives: By January 9, 1788, five states of the nine necessary for ratification had approved the Constitution--Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut. But the eventual outcome remained uncertain in pivotal states such as Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. On February 6, with Federalists agreeing to recommend a list of amendments amounting to a bill of rights, Massachusetts ratified by a vote of 187 to 168. The revolutionary leader, John Hancock, elected to preside over the Massachusetts ratifying convention but unable to make up his mind on the Constitution, took to his bed with a convenient case of gout. Later seduced by the Federalists with visions of the vice presidency and possibly the presidency, Hancock, whom Madison noted as "an idolater of popularity," suddenly experienced a miraculous cure and delivered a critical block of votes. Although Massachusetts was now safely in the Federalist column, the recommendation of a bill of rights was a significant victory for the anti-Federalists. Six of the remaining states later appended similar recommendations.
When the New Hampshire convention was adjourned by Federalists who sensed imminent defeat and when Rhode Island on March 24 turned down the Constitution in a popular referendum by an overwhelming vote of 10 to 1, Federalist leaders were apprehensive. Looking ahead to the Maryland convention, Madison wrote to Washington, "The difference between even a postponement and adoption in Maryland may . . . possibly give a fatal advantage to that which opposes the constitution." Madison had little reason to worry. The final vote on April 28 63 for, 11 against. In Baltimore, a huge parade celebrating the Federalist victory rolled. through the downtown streets, highlighted by a 15-foot float called "Ship Federalist." The symbolically seaworthy craft was later launched in the waters off Baltimore and sailed down the Potomac to Mount Vernon.
On July 2, 1788, the Confederation Congress, meeting in New York, received word that a reconvened New Hampshire ratifying convention had approved the Constitution. With South Carolina's acceptance of the Constitution in May, New Hampshire thus became the ninth state to ratify. The Congress appointed a committee "for putting the said Constitution into operation."
In the next 2 months, thanks largely to the efforts of Madison and Hamilton in their own states, Virginia and New York both ratified while adding their own amendments. The margin for the Federalists in both states, however, was extremely close. Hamilton figured that the majority of the people in New York actually opposed the Constitution, and it is probable that a majority of people in the entire country opposed it. Only the promise of amendments had ensured a Federalist victory.
[...]
A bill of rights had been barely mentioned in the Philadelphia convention, most delegates holding that the fundamental rights of individuals had been secured in the state constitutions. James Wilson maintained that a bill of rights was superfluous because all power not expressly delegated to the new government was reserved to the people. It was clear, however, that in this argument the anti-Federalists held the upper hand. Even Thomas Jefferson, generally in favor of the new government, wrote to Madison that a bill of rights was "what the people are entitled to against every government on earth."
By the fall of 1788 Madison had been convinced that not only was a bill of rights necessary to ensure acceptance of the Constitution but that it would have positive effects. He wrote, on October 17, that such "fundamental maxims of free Government" would be "a good ground for an appeal to the sense of community" against potential oppression and would "counteract the impulses of interest and passion."
Madison's support of the bill of rights was of critical significance. One of the new representatives from Virginia to the First Federal Congress, as established by the new Constitution, he worked tirelessly to persuade the House to enact amendments. Defusing the anti-Federalists' objections to the Constitution, Madison was able to shepherd through 17 amendments in the early months of the Congress, a list that was later trimmed to 12 in the Senate. On October 2, 1789, President Washington sent to each of the states a copy of the 12 amendments adopted by the Congress in September. By December 15, 1791, three-fourths of the states had ratified the 10 amendments now so familiar to Americans as the "Bill of Rights."
Benjamin Franklin told a French correspondent in 1788 that the formation of the new government had been like a game of dice, with many players of diverse prejudices and interests unable to make any uncontested moves. Madison wrote to Jefferson that the welding of these clashing interests was "a task more difficult than can be well conceived by those who were not concerned in the execution of it." When the delegates left Philadelphia after the convention, few, if any, were convinced that the Constitution they had approved outlined the ideal form of government for the country. But late in his life James Madison scrawled out another letter, one never addressed. In it he declared that no government can be perfect, and "that which is the least imperfect is therefore the best government."
No, the United States Constitution is not perfect, but it is the best, perhaps, that imperfect Man can produce. It allows amendments, and has a certain minimal flexibility that modern law-makers do not understand. Remember that this is the Federal Constitution, limiting and delimiting the powers and 'rights' of the Federal government. It is not a document which limits we, the people. That is the most fundamental error that government types and the media make. The government does not limit us; we limit the government. And each time we allow the Federal government to do that which is not spelled out in the Constitution we hand over yet another piece of our sovereignty. Perhaps there is a 'penumbra' of rights afforded us, but it isn't by the Constitution. It is God-given. We are the Nation, we are the government. We are the rulers of this Nation. Not the President, not the Congress, not the Supreme Court. We, the People, are supreme.
And the writers of the United States Constitution knew that. Read the document. See for yourself. If you have never perused the Constitution beyond the preamble, then you are woefully uneducated. See for yourself what it says, and how it says it. Next time some fluff-minded talking head spouts off the gibberish about a 'living document', remember that it is not! It was not designed to be everything to everybody. It was designed to be a foundation for the central government, not a playhouse for those who seek power. The Federal government has the power to do anything it wishes, but it does not have the 'right'. Remember that the next time some elected official demands your money to pay for his personal pork-barrel project. He has no Constitutional right. Only the power of the bullet behind him.
Protect your Constitution! Protect your Nation! Vote out those who usurp your rights and take unto themselves that which is not theirs.
In any event: Happy Birthday, United States Constitution!
Information for this post gleaned from the National Archives.
Thanks to Sister Toldjah for the reminder! Patrick at Born Again Redneck remembers, too!
5 comments:
Party at my place!
The Constitution may not be perfect but the Bill of Rights sure is.
I hope you're not bringing that attitude to Brooke's party!
LOL
We are trying to protect our Constitution and our Nation, Benning, but it's hard to tell whether we're making any progress or not.
We're treading water, I think, and growing weaker. *sigh*
Post a Comment