Page View
Kaminski, John P.; Saladino, Gaspare J.; Moore, Timothy D. (Historian); Lannér-Cusin, Johanna E.; Schoenleber, Charles H.; Reid, Jonathan M.; Flamingo, Margaret R.; Fields, David P. (ed.) / Ratification of the Constitution by the states: Maryland (1)
11 (2015)
I. The debate over the Constitution in Maryland, 17 September-30 November 1787, pp. 3-67
Page 20
I. DEBATE OVER CONSTITUTION Editors' Note The Maryland Reprinting of James Wilson's State House Speech, 16-25 October 1787 On 6 October 1787 Pennsylvania Federalist James Wilson, one of the Constitutional Convention's most prolific and influential debaters and a signer of the Constitution, spoke before "a very great concourse of people" at a public meeting in the Pennsylvania state house yard called to nominate candidates to represent the city of Philadelphia in the Pennsylvania General Assembly. Wilson's speech, first printed in an ex- tra issue of the Pennsylvania Herald on 9 October, advanced arguments explaining and defending the Constitution that were often reiterated by Federalist writers and speakers throughout America. The Herald also reprinted the speech the next day. Wilson's concept of reserved powers was the most controversial part of his speech. He declared that "in delegating foederal powers ... the congressional authority is to be collected, not from tacit implication, but from the positive grant expressed in the instrument of union. Hence it is evident, that ... every thing which is not given, is reserved." The concept of reserved powers, according to Wilson, demonstrated that a bill of rights was unnecessary. As an example, he asserted that Congress could not violate the freedom of the press because it had not been given power over the press. The day before Wilson's speech the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer had published "Centinel" I (CC:133), the first in a series of eighteen Antifederalist essays by Samuel Bryan of Philadelphia that would be widely reprinted throughout America. In particular, "Centinel" criti- cized the lack of a bill of rights in the Constitution. Wilson did not explicitly refer to "Centinel," but there is no doubt that the speech was, in part, a reply to "Centinel." (For a discussion of the significance, circulation, and the defense and criticism of the "Centinel" essays, see CC:133. For the reprinting of "Centinel" I and II in Maryland and an extended criticism of them, see "Aratus: To the People of Maryland," post-2 November 1787 [below].) The Pennsylvania Herald described Wilson's speech as "the first au- thoritative explanation of the principles" of the Constitution. By 29 December the speech was reprinted in thirty-four newspapers in twenty- seven towns, in the October issue of the nationally circulated monthly Philadelphia American Museum, in a broadside, and in a pamphlet an- thology. Among the newspapers were five Philadelphia newspapers (in- cluding a German-language newspaper). The broadside was also printed 20
Copyright 2015 by the State Historical Society of Wisconsin.| For information on re-use see: http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/Copyright