Page View
Kaminski, John P.; Saladino, Gaspare J.; Leffler, Richard; Schoenleber, Charles H.; Hogan, Margaret A.; Reid, Jonathan M. (ed.) / Ratification of the Constitution by the states: New York (5)
23 (2009)
VII-D. New York recommends the calling of a second constitutional convention, pp. 2501-2530
Page 2506
VII. AFTERMATH OF NEW YoRK RATIFICATION See also Washington's letters to Alexander Hamilton and Benjamin Lincoln on 28 August [both VII-B, above].). Like Washington, Madi- son was also surprised that the letter was adopted unanimously, and he concluded that the manner of New York's ratification "will prove more injurious than a rejection would have done" (to Washington, 24 August [VII-B, above]). Madison expressed his concern to Thomas Jefferson that another general convention "would terminate in discord, or in alterations of the federal system which would throw back essential pow- ers into the State Legislatures. The delay of a few years will assuage the jealousies" and reveal the faults in the system that called for amend- ments (10 August [VII-B, above]. See also Madison to Jefferson, 23 August, and Madison to Edmund Randolph, 22 August [Rutland, Madi- son, XI, 237, 238-39].). Some out-of-state newspapers severely criticized the circular letter and New York's amendments. On 6 and 13 August widely circulated items in the Pennsylvania Gazette charged that the New York amendments "would annihilate the Constitution," bring back anarchy to America, and "introduce poverty, misery, bloodshed, and slavery into every state in the Union." The authors of the amendments were compared to "the lawless Indians" who did not "understand a system of government fit for a civilized nation." The circular letter was described as "imperti- nent" and it merited "the severest treatment from all the friends of good government." The Pennsylvania Gazette asked that the Constitu- tion be given a fair trial and, if found faulty, it could be amended (DHFFE, I, 46). "X," addressing the governors of the states, chided New York for dictating to the other states in the Union (Connecticut Gazette, 15 August [DHFFE, I, 46-47]). (For a commentary by a New York Antifederalist on such attacks, see De Witt Clinton to Charles Clin- ton, 19 September [VII-B, above].) Beginning in September Federalist fears about a general convention began to subside. John Jay, the principal author of the New York cir- cular letter, believed that if a general convention were obtained "im- mediately .. . its friends will be satisfied, and if convened three years hence, little danger, perhaps some good, will attend it" (to Edward Rutledge, 15 October [VII-B, above]). Jay believed that a majority of Antifederalists would be satisfied with a delay. If a delay were obtained, a general convention was not to be feared, especially if people were impressed by the operation of the new government (to George Wash- ington, 21 September [VII-B, above]). By the end of September, George Washington was less fearful about the calling of a general convention since "all honest men, who are friends to the new Constitution" wanted to give it a chance and those who were "slily" trying to subvert the 2506
Copyright 2009 Wisconsin Historical Society Press.| For information on re-use see: http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/Copyright