Ratifying the
Constitution
|
T |
he Constitution encountered stiff opposition.
The vote was 187 to 168 in Massachusetts, 57 to 47 in New Hampshire, 30 to 27
in New York, and 89 to 79 in Virginia. Two states, North Carolina and Rhode Island,
refused to ratify the new plan of government.
Those who opposed the adoption of the
constitution were known as the Antifederalists. Many feared centralized power.
Many doubted the ability of Americans to sustain a continental republic. Some
Antifederalists were upset that the Cosntitution lacked a religious test for
officeholding. Others were concerned that the Cosntitution failed to guarantee
a right to counsel and a right not to incriminate oneself in criminal trials,
or to prohibit cruel and unusual punishments.
Several arguments were
voiced repeatedly during the ratification debates:
· That the Convention had exceeded its authority in producing a new
constitution.
· That the Constitution established the basis
for a monarchical regime.
· That the Constitution lacked explicit
protections for individual and states rights.
Some Antifederalists
saw no need for the Constitution’s intricate system of separation of powers.
Some wanted to know whether the elastic clause would sanction a broad
interpretation of national powers at the expense of the states.
|
F |
rom October 1787 to
March 1788, Madison, Hamilton and John Jay wrote a series of 85 essays that
appeared in New York newspapers. In these essays, they argued that the powers
of the national government distributed and balanced in a ways that would
sustain limited government. They also argued that there were sufficient
guarantees to ensure that the national government respect the boundaries of
state authority and that individuals would be secure against federal
encroachments.
In the end, even some of the most outspoken
Antifederalists, like Melancton Smith of New York, ultimately voted for the
Constitution. They feared that the only alternative to the Constitution was the
breakup of the Union.