Chapter 4:
The Constitution in New Hampshire, Maryland, and South Carolina,
February-May 23, 1788

LANGDON, the outgoing chief magistrate of New Hampshire, and Sullivan, his successful competitor, vied with each other in zeal for federal measures; but when, in February 1788, the convention of the state came together there appeared to be a small majority against any change. In a seven days’ debate, Joshua Atherton of Amherst; William Hooper, the minister of Marbury; Matthias Stone, deacon of the church in Claremont; Abiel Parker, from Jaffrey, reproduced the objections that had been urged in the neighboring state; while John Sullivan, John Langdon, Samuel Livermore, Josiah Bartlett, and John Pickering explained and defended it with conciliatory moderation. When zealots complained of the want of a religious test, Woodbury Langdon, lately president of Harvard college, but now a minister of the gospel at Hampton Falls, demonstrated that religion is a question between God and man in which no civil authority may interfere. Dow, from Weare, spoke against the twenty years’ sufferance of the foreign slave-trade; and to the explanation of Langdon that under the confederation the power exists without limit, Atherton answered: "It is our full purpose to wash our hands clear of becoming its guarantees even for a term of years."

The friends of the constitution won converts enough to hold the balance; but these were fettered by instructions from their towns. To give them an opportunity to consult their constituents, the friends of the constitution proposed an adjournment till June, saying, with other reasons, that it would be very prudent for a small state like New Hampshire to wait and see what the other states would do. This was the argument which had the greatest weight. The place of meeting was changed from Exeter, a stronghold of federalism, to Concord; and the adjournment was then carried by a slender majority.

The assembly of Maryland, in November 1787, summoned its delegates to the federal convention to give them information of its proceedings; and Martin rehearsed to them and published to the world his three days’ arraignment of that body for having exceeded its authority. He was answered by McHenry, who, by a concise analysis of the constitution, drew to himself the sympathy of his hearers. The legislature unanimously ordered a convention of the people of the state; it copied the example set by Virginia of leaving the door open for amendments; and by a majority of one the day for the choice and the day for the meeting of its convention were postponed till the next April.

The long delay gave opportunity for the cabalings of the anti-federalists of Virginia. Richard Henry Lee was as zealous as ever; and Patrick Henry disseminated propositions for a southern confederacy; I but Washington, who felt himself at home on the Maryland side of the Potomac, toiled fearlessly and faithfully, with Madison at his side, for the immediate and unconditioned ratification of the constitution by the South.

In the three months’ interval before the election, the fields and forests and towns of Maryland were alive with thought; the merits of the constitution were scanned and sifted in every public meeting and at every hearth; and on the day in 1788 for choosing delegates, each voter, in designating the candidate of his preference, registered his own deliberate decision. In fifteen counties, and the cities of Baltimore and Annapolis, there was no diversity of sentiment. Two counties only returned none but anti-federalists; Harford county elected three of that party and one trimmer.

The day before the convention was to assemble, Washington, guarding against the only danger that remained, addressed a well-considered letter to Thomas Johnson: "An adjournment of your convention will be tantamount to the rejection of the constitution. It cannot be too much deprecated and guarded against. Great use is made of the postponement in New Hampshire, although it has no reference to the convention of this state. An event similar to this in Maryland would have the worst tendency imaginable; for indecision there would certainly have considerable influence upon South Carolina, the only other state which is to precede Virginia; and it submits the question almost wholly to the determination of the latter. The pride of the state is already touched, and will be raised much higher if there is fresh cause."

The advice, which was confirmed by similar letters from Madison, was communicated to several of the members; so that the healing influence of Virginia proved greater than its power to wound. But the men of Maryland of themselves knew their duty, and Washington’s advice was but an encouragement for them to proceed in the way which they had chosen.

On Monday, the twenty-first of April, a quorum of the convention assembled at Annapolis. The settlement of representation in the two branches of the federal legislature was pleasing to all the representatives of fifteen counties, and the cities of Baltimore and Annapolis agreed with each other perfectly that the main question had already been decided by the people in their respective counties; and that the ratification of the constitution, the single transaction for which they were convened, ought to be speedily completed. Two days were given to the organization of the house and establishing rules for its government; on the third the constitution ’was read a first time, and the motion for its ratification was formally made. The plan of a confederacy of slave-holding states found not one supporter; not one suggested an adjournment for the purpose of consultation with Virginia. The malcontents could embarrass the convention only by proposing pernicious amendments.

On the morning of the twenty-fourth, Samuel Chase took his seat, and at the second reading of the constitution began from elaborate notes the fiercest opposition: The powers to be vested in the new government are deadly to the cause of liberty, and should be amended before adoption; five states can now force a concession of amendments which after the national government shall go into operation could be carried only by nine. He spoke till he was exhausted, intending to resume his argument on the following day.

In the afternoon, William Paca of Harford county, a Signer of the declaration of independence, appeared for the first time and sought to steer between the clashing Opinions, saying: "I have a variety of objections; not as conditions, but to accompany the ratification as standing instructions to the representatives of Maryland in congress." To Johnson the request seemed candid; and on his motion the convention adjourned to the next morning. The interval was employed in preparing a set of amendments to the constitution, which were adapted to injure the cause of federalism in Virginia.

On Friday morning a member from each of eleven several counties and the two cities, one after the other, declared "that he and his colleagues were under an obligation to vote for the government;" and almost all declared further that they had no authority to propose amendments which their constituents had never considered, and of course could never have directed. When Paca began to read his amendments, he was called to order by George Gale of Somerset county, the question before the house being still "on the ratification of the constitution." Chase once more "made a display of all his eloquence;" John F. Mercer discharged his whole "artillery of inflammable matter;" and Martin rioted in boisterous " vehemence;" "but no converts were made; no, not one."

The friends to the federal government "remained inflexibly silent." The malcontents having tired themselves out, between two and three o’clock on Saturday, the twenty-sixth, the constitution was ratified by sixty-three votes against eleven, Paca voting with the majority. Proud of its great majority of nearly six to one, the convention fixed Monday, at three o’clock, for the time when they would all set their names to the instrument of ratification.

Paca then brought forward his numerous amendments, saying that with them his constituents would receive the constitution, without them would oppose it even with arms. After a short but perplexed debate he was indulged in the appointment of a committee of thirteen, of which he himself was the chairman; but they had power only to recommend amendments to the consideration of the people of Maryland. The majority of the committee readily acceded to thirteen resolutions, explaining the constitution according to the construction of its friends, and restraining congress from exercising power not expressly delegated. The minority demanded more; the committee fell into a wrangle; the convention on Monday sent a summons for them; and Paca, taking the side of the minority, would make no report. Thereupon the convention dissolved itself by a great majority.

The accession of Maryland to the new union by a vote of nearly six to one brought to the constitution the majority of the thirteen United States, and a great majority of their free inhabitants. The state which was cradled in religious liberty gained the undisputed victory over the first velleity of the slave-holding states to form a separate confederacy. "It is a thorn in the sides of the leaders of opposition in this state!" wrote Washington to Madison. "Seven affirmative without a negative would almost convert the unerring sister. The fiat of your convention will most assuredly raise the edifice," were his words to Jenifer of Maryland.

In his hours of meditation he saw the movement of the divine power which gives unity to the universe, and order and connection to events: "It is impracticable for any one who has not been on the spot to realize the change in men’s minds, and the progress toward rectitude in thinking and acting.

"The plot thickens fast. A few short weeks will determine the political fate of America for the present generation, and probably produce no small influence on the happiness of society through a long succession of ages to conic. Should everything proceed with harmony and consent according to our actual wishes and expectations, it will be so much beyond anything we had a right to imagine or expect eighteen months ago that it will, as visibly as any possible event in the course of human affairs, demonstrate the finger of Providence."

In South Carolina the new constitution awakened fears of oppressive navigation acts and of disturbance in the ownership of slaves. The inhabitants of the upper country, who suffered from the undue legislative power of the city of Charleston and the lower counties, foreboded new inequalities from a consolidation of the union. A part of the low country, still suffering from the war, had shared the rage for instalment laws, paper money, and payment of debts by appraised property; and to all these the new constitution made an end.

The opposition from Virginia intrigued for a southern confederacy, while Madison, in entire unison with Washington, wrote to his friends in behalf of union. They both knew that there was to be resistance to the constitution, with Rawlins Lowndes for its spokesman; and as he could by no possibility be elected into the convention, the chief scene of the opposition could only be the legislature.

In January 1788 the senate unanimously voted thanks to the members from their state in the federal convention for their faithfulness. On the sixteenth, in the committee of the whole house of representatives, Charles Pinckney gave a history of the formation and the character of "the federal republic;" which was to operate upon the people and not upon the states. At once Lowndes objected that the interests of South Carolina were endangered by the clause in the constitution according to which a treaty to be made by two thirds of the senate, and a president who was not likely ever to be chosen from South Carolina or Georgia, would be the supreme law of the land. Cotesworth Pinckney condemned the reasoning as disingenuous. "Every treaty," said John Rutledge, "is law paramount and must operate," not less under the confederation than under the constitution. "If treaties are not superior to local laws," asked Ramsay, "who will trust them?" Lowndes proceeded, saying of the confederation: "We are now under a most excellent constitution—a blessing from heaven, that has stood the test of time, and given us liberty and independence; yet we are impatient to pull down that fabric which we raised at the expense of our blood." Now, Rawlins Lowndes had pertinaciously resisted the declaration of independence; and when, in 1778, South Carolina had made him her governor, had in her reverses sought British protection. He proceeded: "When this new constitution shall be adopted, the sun of the southern states will set, never to rise again. What cause is there for jealousy of our importing negroes? Why confine us to twenty years? Why limit us at all? This trade can be justified on the principles of religion and humanity. They do not like our slaves because they have none themselves, and, therefore, want to exclude us from this great advantage."

"Every state," interposed Pendleton, "has prohibited the importation of negroes except Georgia and the two Carolinas."

Lowndes continued: "Without negroes this state would degenerate into one of the most contemptible in the union. Negroes are our wealth, our only natural resource; yet our kind friends in the North are determined soon to tie up our hands and drain us of what we have."

"Against the restrictions that might be laid on the African trade after the year 1808," said Cotesworth Pinckney on the seventeenth, "your delegates had to contend with the religious and political prejudices of the eastern and middle states, and with the interested and inconsistent opinion of Virginia. It was alleged that slaves increase the weakness of any state which admits them; that an invading enemy could easily turn them against ourselves and the neighboring states; and that, as we are allowed a representation for them, our influence in government would be increased in proportion as we were less able to defend ourselves. ’Show some period,’ said the members from the eastern states, ’when it may be in our power to put a stop, if we please, to the importation of this weakness, and we will endeavor, for your convenience, to restrain the religious and political prejudices of our people on this subject.’ The middle states and Virginia made us no such proposition; they were for an immediate and total prohibition. A committee of the states was appointed in order to accommodate this matter, and, after a great deal of difficulty, it was settled on the footing recited in the constitution.

"By this settlement we have secured an unlimited importation of negroes for twenty years. The general government can never emancipate them, for no such authority is granted, and it is admitted on all hands that the general government has no powers but what are expressly granted by the constitution. We have obtained a right to recover our slaves in whatever part of America they may take refuge, which is a right we had not before. In short, considering all circumstances, we have made the best terms in our power for the security of this species of property. We would have made better if we could; but, on the whole, I do not think them bad."

"Six of the seven eastern states," continued Lowndes, "form a majority in the house of representatives. Their interest will so predominate as to divest us of any pretensions to the title of a republic. They draw their subsistence, in a great measure, from their shipping; the regulation of our commerce throws into their hands the carrying trade under payment of whatever freightage they think proper to impose. Why should the southern states allow this without the consent of nine states? If at any future period we should remonstrate, ’mind your business’ will be the style of language held out toward the southern states." "The fears that the northern interests will prevail at all times," said Edward Rutledge, "are ill-founded. Carry your views into futurity. Several of the northern states are already full of people; the migrations to the South are immense; in a few years we shall rise high in our representation, while other states will keep their present position."

The argument of Lowndes rested on the idea that the southern states are weak. "We are weak," answered Cotesworth Pinckney; "by ourselves we cannot form a union strong enough for the purpose of effectually protecting each other. Without union with the other states, South Carolina must soon fall. Is there any one among us so much a Quixote as to suppose that this state could long maintain her independence if she stood alone, or was only connected with the southern states? I scarcely believe there is. As, from the nature of our climate and the fewness of our inhabitants, we are undoubtedly weak, should we not endeavor to form a close union with the eastern states, who are strong? We certainly ought to endeavor to increase that species of strength which will render them of most service to us both in peace and war. I mean their navy. Justice to them and humanity, interest and policy, concur in prevailing upon us to submit the regulation of commerce to the general government.

Lowndes renewed his eulogy on the old confederation. "The men who signed it were eminent for patriotism and virtue; and their wisdom and prudence particularly appear in their care sacredly to guarantee the sovereignty of each state. The treaty of peace expressly agreed to acknowledge us free, sovereign, and independent states; but this new constitution, being sovereign over all, sweeps those privileges away."

Cotesworth Pinckney answered: "We were independent before the treaty, which does not grant, but acknowledges our independence. We ought to date that blessing from an older charter than the treaty of peace; from a charter which our babes should be taught to lisp in their cradles; which our youth should learn as a carmen necessary, an indispensable lesson; which our young men should regard as their compact of freedom; and which our old should repeat ejaculations of gratitude for the bounties it is about to posterity. I mean the declaration of independence, made in congress the 4th of July 1776. This manifesto, which for importance of matter and elegance of composition stands unrivalled, confutes the doctrine of the individual sovereignty and independence of the several states. The separate independence and individual sovereignty of the several states were never thought of by the enlightened band of patriots who framed this declaration. The several states are not even mentioned by name in any part of it; as if to impress on America that our freedom and independence arose from our union, and that without it we could neither be free nor independent. Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this union by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."

Lowndes sought to rally to his side the friends of paper money, and asked triumphantly: "What harm has paper money done?" "What harm?" retorted Cotesworth Pinckney. "Beyond losses by depreciation, paper money has corrupted the morals of the people; has diverted them from the paths of honest industry to the ways of ruinous speculation; has destroyed both public and private credit; and has brought total ruin on numberless widows and orphans."

James Lincoln of Ninety-six pressed the objection that the constitution contained no bill of rights. Cotesworth Pinckney answered: "By delegating express powers, we certainly reserve to ourselves every power and right not mentioned in the constitution. Another reason weighed particularly with the members from this state. Bills of rights generally begin with declaring that all men are by nature born free. Now, we should make that declaration with a very bad grace when a large part of our property consists in men who are actually born slaves."

Lowndes, following the lead of the opposition of Virginia, had recommended another convention in which every objection could be met on fair grounds, and adequate remedies applied. The proposal found no acceptance; but he persevered in cavilling and objecting. At last John Rutledge impatiently expressed a hope that Lowndes would find a seat in the coming convention, and pledged himself there to prove that all those grounds on which he dwelt amounted to no more than mere declamation; that his boasted confederation was not worth a farthing; than if such instruments were piled up to his chin they would not shield him from one single national calamity; that the sun of this state, so far from being obscured by the new constitution, would, when united with twelve other suns, astonish the world by its lustre."

The resolution for a convention to consider the constitution was unanimously adopted. In the rivalry between Charleston and Columbia as its place of meeting, Charleston carried the day by a majority of one vote.

The purest spirit of patriotism and union and veneration for the men of the revolution pervaded South Carolina at the time of her choice of delegates. Foremost among them were the venerable Christopher Gadsden and John Rutledge, Moultrie and Motte, William Washington, Edward Rutledge, the three Pinckneys, Grimke, and Ramsay; the chancellor and the leading judges of the state; men chiefly of English, Scotch, Scotch-Irish, and Huguenot descent; a thorough representation of the best elements and culture of South Carolina.

The convention organized itself on the thirteenth of May, with Thomas Pinckney, then Governor of South Carolina, as president. The ablest man in the opposition was Edanus Burke; but the leader in support of the Virginia malcontents was Sumter. A week’s quiet consideration of the constitution by paragraphs showed the disposition of the convention, when on the twenty-first Sumter, as a last effort of those who wished to act with Virginia, made a motion for an adjournment for five months, to give time for the further consideration of the federal convention. A few gave way to the hope of conciliating by moderation; but after debate the motion received only eighty-nine votes against one hundred and thirty-five. Three or four amendments were recommended; and then, at five o’clock in the evening of the twenty-third, the constitution was ratified by one hundred and forty-nine votes against seventy-three—more than two to one. As the count was declared, the dense crowd in attendance, carried away by a wild transport of joy, shook the air with their cheers.

When order was restored, the aged Christopher Gadsden said: "I can have but little expectation of seeing the happy effects that will result to my country from the wise decisions of this day, but I shall say with good old Simeon: Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen the salvation of my country."

The delegates of South Carolina to the federal convention received a vote of thanks. Those in the opposition promised as good citizens to accept the result. In 1765 South Carolina was one of the nine states to meet in convention for resistance to the stamp-act; and now she was the eighth state of the nine required for the adoption of the constitution.

When the astonishing tidings reached New Hampshire, her people grew restless to be the state yet needed to assure the new bond of union; but for that palm she must run a race with Virginia.