University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
The History Collection

Page View

Jensen, Merrill; Kaminski, John P.; Saladino, Gaspare J. (ed.) / Ratification of the Constitution by the states: Pennsylvania
2 (1976)

B. The Carlisle Riot and its aftermath, 26 December 1787-20 March 1788,   pp. 670-708

Page 690

utility, as they served to keep the members who were advocates for
the proposed constitution, 8cc. in countenance when reason anad argu-
ment had deserted them3-In a word were it not for the mob the new
constitution would not yet have been adopted in Pennsylvania; and
our Carlisle rejoicers would have wanted this cause '"to be pleased,"
and to assemble in a mobocratical manner, to express that pleasure.
They further say "one of the captains had not slept off hi, night's
drunkenness;" what more dirt yet, will the fluxion never cease. It
is notoriously known that the person here alluded to, maintains a
character the very reverse of what they represent; and that his opposi-
tion to the rejoicing, proceeded from that love of freedom which
stimulated him, to expose himself to perils and dangers, during the
late struggle for American independence; when their old man, and
other ringleaders of these pretended federalists, basely sculked be-
hind the curtain. They say, "the other was unfit to appear as he
had provoked a federalist, to bung his eyes on Wednesday evening;"
I expected shame would have deterred them from mentioni ag false-
hood, as the federalist carryed the bung [for?] one of his eyes to the
sham rejoicing [that?] day; and although the order appeared publick-
ly, no such thing was to be [---] but every thing combines to prove
"the dirt came out."
The passage in one of the people, which says, "that the rejoicers
had weapons and numbers more than sufficient," seems to give the
dagger a violent thrust, and consequently draws forth a great eruption
of dirt; they endeavour to represent it as an inconsistency with the
passage, which says, "the rejoicing was contrary to the minds of three
fourths of the inhabitants;" but I would wish to know where the in-
consistency lies; might not three fourths of the inhabitants be against
the rejoicing, and yet not one eighth of them be on the spot to oppose
it; very few of the inhabitants knew any thing of the rejoicing, (the
spunging club at the glimmering attorney's excepted), until it was ripe
for execution; so that only a few who catched the report by chance,
were on the ground to oppose it. They say, "that some of the new
comers are respectable characters, and reprobate the conduct of their
apostate countrymen." Yes! such of them as are under petticoat gov-
ernment which is certainly a very respectable situation; I think those
who submit to it, may be pretty easy what constitution is the "supreme
law of the land." They say "the threat in the concluding paragraph is
the most despicable; they knew or might have known the authors by
applying to the printers." What! is it granted that the old man was
not the author, then it seems, one of the people was right in his con-
jecture, that the piece was a bastard, and the old man only the adopting
father, or rather grand-father.-Gentlemen, apply your own proverb,
"lyers should have good memories," applying to the printers for the

Go up to Top of Page