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 (ed.) / Ratification of the Constitution by the states: Delaware, New Jersey, Georgia, Connecticut
(1978)

VI. The Connecticut Convention, 3-9 January 1788,   pp. 535-562


Page 560

tion being generally called for, was formally proposed, and explicitly
answered, by yea and nay, as appears by the foregoing roll, and the
following authenticated Ratification or exemplification, viz.
[Form of Ratification]
The foregoing Ratification being engrossed, duplicates on parch-
ments were subscribed and certified accordingly, the one to be trans-
mitted to Congress and the other lodged in the office of the secretary
of this state. [Weekly Monitor, 14 January]
1. The proceedings and debates of this day are from the Connecticut Courant
and the Weekly Monitor of 14 January. The Courant's account was also printed in
the American Mercury on 14 January and in six other Connecticut newspapers by
25 January. Outside Connecticut, the Courant's account was reprinted in full in the
New York journal, and in part in twenty-six other newspapers from Maine to
Georgia by 28 February. The Philadelphia American Museum reprinted the day's
three major speeches in its August 1788 issue. (For the background of the Museum's
publication, see Mfm:Conn. 97.)
2. General Huntington, a Norwich alderman, became sheriff of New London
County in October 1788 and state treasurer in January 1789.
3. Governor Huntington's speech is also printed as CC:428. Although Huntington
did not use the term "bill of rights," it seems that he was answering delegates who
argued that a bill of rights was necessary. In a letter dated 23 September 1788,
Huntington reported: "The Convention in this state, at the time they ratified
the new Federal Constitution, would have preferred some alterations and amend-
ments rather than the present form, if I may judge from the sentiments that were
thrown out in discussing the subject; but deemed it too dangerous to hazard delays
under a tottering constitution, until every difficulty should be removed so as to
obtain a constitutiion which would meet the entire approbation of all the states in
the Union, which it is not probable would ever be the case" (to Governor Samuel
Johnston of North Carolina, Mfm:Conn. 99).
4. Evidently there was opposition to the Constitution because it did not require
a religious qualification for officeholding. "Landholder" VII on 17 December (V
above) went to great lengths in arguing that such a "test" was unnecessary. For
the post-Convention controversy between "Landholder" and William Williams over
Williams' remarks in the Convention about "Landholder" VII and "religious tests,"
see The Debate over Religion and the Constitution, 28 January-10 March, VII:B
below.
5. Wolcott's speech is also printed as CC:428.
6. Law's speech is also printed as CC:428.
The Connecticut Form of Ratification, 9 January1
In the Name of the People of the State of Connecticut.
We the Delegates of the People of sd. State in general Convention
assembled, pursuant to an Act of the Legislature in October last,
Have assented to and ratified, and by these presents do assent to, rati-
fy and adopt the Constitution., reported by the Convention of Dele-
gates in Philadelphia, on the 17th day of September AD. 1787. for
the United States of America.
Done in Convention this 9th. day of January AD. 1788. In witness
whereof we have hereunto set our hands.
CONNECTICUT/9 JAN.
560


Go up to Top of Page