Ratification of the Constitution

by

Alan Gibson, Novia Liu

• LAST MODIFIED: 20 August 2024
• DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199756223-0375

Introduction

The ratification of the Constitution remains one of the most important events in the American Founding. This boisterous, dramatic, and dynamic political contest gave legitimacy and legality to the new plan and prompted the first expositions of its meaning. Marked by shrewd maneuvers by both Federalists and Anti-Federalists, these debates featured a substantive and, for its day, inclusive “great national discussion” (see The Federalist No. 1, 5, in Cooke 1961, cited under Printed Primary Sources). Ordinary Americans and elite statesmen alike debated the proposed government in diverse private and public venues, most notably newspapers and the state ratifying conventions. Participants employed every form of communication then available, including editorials, broadsides, pamphlets, sermons, doggerels, and public speeches. Exchanges between Federalists and Anti-Federalists ranged from the lowest assaults on character to discussions of the most speculative political theories. They not only debated the meaning and likely effect of specific clauses, but what a constitution was in the first place. Essential for understanding this important historical event, the study of ratification likewise casts light on the origins of the Bill of Rights, the original understanding of the Constitution, and the beginnings of national politics. Until the late 20th century, however, this study was hindered by the paucity of published primary sources. Scholars had to scour the archives of numerous libraries to access the voluminous material on this subject. Today, with a comprehensive record of ratification available in print and online in The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution, the issue of access is less pressing. The study of ratification remains difficult, however, because of the complexity of the task at hand. Article VII of the proposed constitution stipulated that upon its affirmation by nine states, the plan would go into effect among them. Ratification was thus staged as a series of unique state contests. Understanding each contest requires a tactile knowledge of the state’s history, political culture, economic conditions, factional alignments, and political leaders. Ratification was also, however, a national event. The context of ratification shifted with each state’s approval. Federalists and Anti-Federalists alike traded information across state lines. Scholars hoping to understand ratification must therefore also account for its continental character. Increasingly, they have confronted this challenge. Their studies are the product of extensive research. They highlight the economic, demographic, and ideological differences between Federalists and Anti-Federalists, the peculiarity of each state contest, the unfolding dynamics of the national contest, and the consequences and legacies of ratification.

Printed Primary Sources

During much of the 19th and 20th centuries, published primary sources on ratification were dispersed in library archives, historical societies, and private collections across the nation. Elliot 1836 reprinted some of the notes of the debates in the state ratifying conventions. This compilation, known as Elliot’s Debates, remained the principal source of primary material for the study of ratification until the late 20th century. Similarly, only a smattering of the public debate over the Constitution was available to scholars, including a small selection of Anti-Federalist writings in Ford 1968 and Kenyon 1966 for example, and several edited versions of The Federalist, most importantly Cooke 1961. Volumes of Jensen, et al. 1976– began being published in 1976. This project is now almost complete, making a comprehensive record of the ratification debates conveniently available in both print and electronic form. This accomplishment promises to spark a torrent of scholarship on ratification by placing its documentary record in the hands of anyone willing to tackle it. More selective collections of Federalist and Anti-Federalist writings, public commentaries on the Constitution, and speeches in the state ratifying conventions, such as Storing 1981, Sheehan and McDowell 1998, Bailyn 1993, Siemers 2003, and Zuckert and Webb 2009 have also been subsequently published.

• Bailyn, Bernard, ed. The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters during the Struggle over Ratification. New York: The Library of America, 1993.

  Compiled by one of the premier historians of the American Founding, this two-volume collection contains a carefully selected sample of public commentaries and speeches from the state ratifying conventions. Appendices to both volumes include important founding documents, useful biographical notes of the speakers, writers, and letter recipients featured in the volumes, notes on the state constitutions from 1776–1790, and a chronology of events from 1774 to 1804.

• Elliot, Jonathan, ed. The Debates in the Several State Conventions, on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution . . . 2d ed. 4 vols. Washington, DC: Printed for the editor, 1836.

  Now superseded by the The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (DHRC, Jensen, et al. 1976–) Elliot’s Debates was the central primary source for the study of ratification throughout the 19th and much of the 20th centuries. It featured some of the notes of the debates in the state ratifying conventions taken by private reporters and published in newspapers between 1787 and 1788.

• Ford, Paul Leicester, ed. Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States. New York: Da Capo Press, 1968.

  This pioneering collection brought attention to the pamphlet as a distinctive form of political communication in 18th-century America and also provided access to a sprinkling of Anti-Federalist writings at a time when few had been published. It remains interesting for Ford’s analysis of the pamphlet as a distinctive form of communication and persuasion. Originally published in 1888.

• Hamilton, Alexander, James Madison, and John Jay. The Federalist. Edited by Jacob E. Cooke. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1961.

  DOI: 10.4159/harvard.9780674332133

  Numerous editions of The Federalist have been published but Cooke’s remains the best and most widely used. Includes an introduction and notes.

• Jensen, Merrill, John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, et al., eds. Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution. 34 vols to date. Madison: Wisconsin Historical Society Press, 1976–.

  Widely recognized as the greatest editorial accomplishment of Founding era materials, the DHRC is the indispensable source for the study of ratification. Since the project began under Jensen, it has grown to over fifteen thousand pages of public and private documents, constituting a comprehensive historical record of the contest. Kaminski now leads the effort to publish additional volumes and digitize the existing collection, also available transcribed by subscription to the Rotunda.

• Kenyon, Cecelia, ed. The Antifederalists. Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1966.

  Contains a small but representative sample of Anti-Federalist essays carefully edited by Kenyon, one of the leading authorities on the opponents of the Constitution. The introductory essay for this volume is a rewritten version of her classic essay “Men of Little Faith: The Anti-Federalists on the Nature of Representative Government.”

• Sheehan, Colleen A., and Gary L. McDowell, ed. Friends of the Constitution: Writings of the “Other” Federalists 1787–1788. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1998.

  This collection includes the writings and speeches of those who favored ratification other than the authors of The Federalist. An extension of a project begun by Herbert Storing, it seeks to establish arguments in favor of the Constitution by representative Federalists on the presumption that while they did not achieve the clarity or insight of Publius, they were nevertheless important for ratification.

• Siemers, David J. The Antifederalists: Men of Great Faith and Forbearance. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.

  This collection of Anti-Federalist writings also includes extensive commentary that sets forth a typology of Anti-Federalism. Siemers provides selected writings from the delegates to the Constitutional Convention who opposed ratification, the most widely published Anti-Federalist writings, and representative writings from “middling class,” “virulent populist,” and “elite” Anti-Federalists.

• Storing, Herbert, ed. The Complete Anti-Federalist. 7 vols. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1981.

  This broad collection of Anti-Federalist writings and speeches was compiled by the leading student of their political thought. Volume 1 is an extended essay that sets forth Storing’s important interpretation of Anti-Federalist political thought.

• Zuckert, Michael P., and Derek A. Webb, eds. The Anti-Federalist Writings of the Melancton Smith Circle. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2009.

  Features the Anti-Federalist writings of “Brutus” and “the Federal Farmer.” Important introduction argues that Brutus was the most astute Anti-Federalist political thinker. Proposes a solution to the problem of determining the authorship of “the Federal Farmer” essays, arguing that they were written by Melancton Smith and a circle of Anti-Federalists who surrounded him.