From “The Ordeal of the Constitution” by Robert Allen Rutland, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma; 1966; p. 14.

I have thought it unsafe within the wind of hurricane to utter a Sylable about it: but to you Sir I may venture to Say that in my oppinion the day on which we adopt the present proposed plan of government, from that moment we may Justly date the loss of American liberty.  Perhaps my fears hath contributed principlely to this oppinion.  I will change the moment that I See better.  My dear Sir why is not the liberty of the press provided for?  Why will the Congress have power to alter the plan or mode of chusing Representatives?  Why will they have power to lay direct Taxes?  Why will they have power to keep Standing Armies in time of peace?  Why will they have power to make laws in direct contradiction to the forms of government established in the Several States?  Why will they have power to collect by law ten Dollars for ever German or Irishman which may come to Settle in America?  Why is the Trial by Jury destrod in Civil causes before Congress?  And above all I cannot imagine why the people in this city are So verry anxious to have it adopted instantly before it can be digested or deliberatly considered.  If you were only here to See and hear those people, … but I think the measures pursued here is a Strong evidence that these people know it will not bear an examination and therefor wishes to adopt it first and consider it afterward.  … I Sincerely hope that Such Gentlemen as were Members of Convention, and who have Seats in Congress may not be considered as verry proper Judges of their own Works. …”

     I have waited until now to answer your favor of September 10th from Philadelphia, that I might inform you how the Convention plan of government was entertained by Congress.  Your prediction of what would happen in Congress was exactly verified.  It was with us, as with you, this or nothing; and this urged with a most extreme intemperance.  The greatness of the powers given, and the multitude of places to be created produce a coalition of monarchy men, military men, aristocrats and drones, whose noise, impudence and zeal exceeds all belief.  Whilst the commercial plunder of the South stimulates the rapacious trader.  In this state of things the patriot voice is raised in vain for such changes and securities as reason and experience prove to be necessary against the encroachments of power upon the indispensable rights of human nature.  Upon due consideration of the Constitution under which we now act, some of us were clearly of opinion that the Thirteenth Article of the Confederation precluded us from giving an opinion concerning a plan subversive of the present system, and eventually forming a new Confederacy of nine instead of thirteen States.  The contrary doctrine was asserted with great violence in expectation of the strong majority with which they might send it forward under terms of much approbation.  Having procured an opinion that Congress was qualified to consider, to amend, to approve or disapprove, the next game was to determine that though a right to amend existed, it would be highly inexpedient to exercise that right, but merely to transmit it with respectful marks of approbation.  In this state of things I availed myself to the right to amend, and moved the amendments, a copy of which I send herewith, and called the ayes and nays to fix them on the journal.  This greatly alarmed the majority and vexed them extremely; for the plan is to push the business on with great dispatch, and with as little opposition as possible, that it may be adopted before it has stood the test of reflection and due examination.  They found it most eligible at last to transmit it merely, without approving or disapproving, provided nothing but the transmission should appear on the journal.  This compromise was settled and they took the opportunity of inserting the word unanimously, which applies only to simple transmission, hoping to have it mistaken for an unanimous approbation of the thing.  It states that Congress having received the Constitution unanimously transmit it, &c.  It is certain that no approbation was given.  This Constitution has a great many excellent regulations in it, and if it could be reasonably amended would be a fine system.  As it is, I think ‘tis past doubt, that if it should be established, either a tyranny will result from it, or it will be prevented by a civil war.  I am clearly of opinion with you that it should be sent back with amendments reasonable, and assent to it withheld until such amendments are admitted.  …  It is certainly the most rash and violent proceeding in the world to cram thus suddenly into men a business of such infinite moment to the happiness of millions.  …      Suppose when the Assembly recommended a Convention to consider this new Constitution they were to use some words like these : It is earnestly recommended to the good people of Virginia to send their most wise and honest men to this Convention that it may undergo the most intense consideration before a plan shall be without amendments adopted that admits of abuses being practised by which the best interests of this country may be injured, and civil liberty greatly endangered.  This might perhaps give a decided tone to the business.      Please to send my son Ludwell a copy of the amendments proposed by me to the new Constitution sent herewith.

As the stamp act does absolutely direct the property of the people to be taken from them, without their consent, expressed by their representatives; and as, in many cases, it deprives the British American subject of his right to be tried by jury, we do determine, at every hazard, and paying no regard to danger or to death, to exert every faculty to prevent the execution of the said stamp act, in every instance whatever, within the colony of Virginia; and every abandoned wretch, who shall be so lost to virtue and public good, as wickedly to contribute to introduce the said act into this colony, by using stamp paper, or by any other means, will, with the utmost expedition, be convinced, that immediate danger and disgrace shall attend his prostitute purpose.

A person ... had accepted the office of stamp collector.  When Mr. Lee was informed of these circumstances, according to the fourth article of the association, he gave notice to as many of the members of it as he could, and summoned his company of horse.  They proceeded to the residence of the stamp collector, and required him to bring out his commission, and all the paper he had in his house, and deliver it to them; and also to bind himself, by an oath, neither directly nor indirectly to promote the sale or use of stamp paper.  The collector expostulated, hesitated, and at length refused.  A stout and fierce-looking man of the troop advanced at this moment to him, and with a stern look and penetrating voice addressed him, “Swear.”  The terrified collector pronounced the oath, and brought out his commission and stamp paper, which were solemnly burnt in his presence.

In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give away places; which in plain terms, is to impoverish the nation and set it together by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowed eight hundred thousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain! Of more worth is one honest man to society and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived.

I found the Convention at Phila. Very busy & very secret, it would seem however, from variety of circumstances that we shall hear of a Government not unlike the B. Constitution – That is, an Execu[tive] with 2 branches composing a federal Legislature, and possessing adequate Tone.  This departure from Simple Democrocy seems indispensably necessary, if any government at all is to exist in N. America – Indeed the minds of men have been so hurt by the injustise, folly, and wickedness of the State Legislatures ; & State Executives – that people in general seem ready for any thing. -- …

I found the Convention at Phila. Very busy & very secret, it would seem however, from variety of circumstances that we shall hear of a Government not unlike the B. Constitution – That is, an Execu[tive] with 2 branches composing a federal Legislature, and possessing adequate Tone.  This departure from Simple Democrocy seems indispensably necessary, if any government at all is to exist in N. America – Indeed the minds of men have been so hurt by the injustise, folly, and wickedness of the State Legislatures ; & State Executives – that people in general seem ready for any thing. -- …

     I have waited until now to answer your favor of September 10th from Philadelphia, that I might inform you how the Convention plan of government was entertained by Congress.  Your prediction of what would happen in Congress was exactly verified.  It was with us, as with you, this or nothing; and this urged with a most extreme intemperance.  The greatness of the powers given, and the multitude of places to be created produce a coalition of monarchy men, military men, aristocrats and drones, whose noise, impudence and zeal exceeds all belief.  Whilst the commercial plunder of the South stimulates the rapacious trader.  In this state of things the patriot voice is raised in vain for such changes and securities as reason and experience prove to be necessary against the encroachments of power upon the indispensable rights of human nature.  Upon due consideration of the Constitution under which we now act, some of us were clearly of opinion that the Thirteenth Article of the Confederation precluded us from giving an opinion concerning a plan subversive of the present system, and eventually forming a new Confederacy of nine instead of thirteen States.  The contrary doctrine was asserted with great violence in expectation of the strong majority with which they might send it forward under terms of much approbation.  Having procured an opinion that Congress was qualified to consider, to amend, to approve or disapprove, the next game was to determine that though a right to amend existed, it would be highly inexpedient to exercise that right, but merely to transmit it with respectful marks of approbation.  In this state of things I availed myself to the right to amend, and moved the amendments, a copy of which I send herewith, and called the ayes and nays to fix them on the journal.  This greatly alarmed the majority and vexed them extremely; for the plan is to push the business on with great dispatch, and with as little opposition as possible, that it may be adopted before it has stood the test of reflection and due examination.  They found it most eligible at last to transmit it merely, without approving or disapproving, provided nothing but the transmission should appear on the journal.  This compromise was settled and they took the opportunity of inserting the word unanimously, which applies only to simple transmission, hoping to have it mistaken for an unanimous approbation of the thing.  It states that Congress having received the Constitution unanimously transmit it, &c.  It is certain that no approbation was given.  This Constitution has a great many excellent regulations in it, and if it could be reasonably amended would be a fine system.  As it is, I think ‘tis past doubt, that if it should be established, either a tyranny will result from it, or it will be prevented by a civil war.  I am clearly of opinion with you that it should be sent back with amendments reasonable, and assent to it withheld until such amendments are admitted.  …  It is certainly the most rash and violent proceeding in the world to cram thus suddenly into men a business of such infinite moment to the happiness of millions.  …      Suppose when the Assembly recommended a Convention to consider this new Constitution they were to use some words like these : It is earnestly recommended to the good people of Virginia to send their most wise and honest men to this Convention that it may undergo the most intense consideration before a plan shall be without amendments adopted that admits of abuses being practised by which the best interests of this country may be injured, and civil liberty greatly endangered.  This might perhaps give a decided tone to the business.      Please to send my son Ludwell a copy of the amendments proposed by me to the new Constitution sent herewith.

... Having procured an opinion that Congress was qualified to consider, to amend, to approve or disapprove, the next game was to determine that though a right to amend existed, it would be highly inexpedient to exercise that right, but merely to transmit it with respectful marks of approbation.  In this state of things I availed myself to the right to amend, and moved the amendments, a copy of which I send herewith, and called the ayes and nays to fix them on the journal.  This greatly alarmed the majority and vexed them extremely; for the plan is to push the business on with great dispatch, and with as little opposition as possible, that it may be adopted before it has stood the test of reflection and due examination.  They found it most eligible at last to transmit it merely, without approving or disapproving, provided nothing but the transmission should appear on the journal.  This compromise was settled and they took the opportunity of inserting the word unanimously, which applies only to simple transmission, hoping to have it mistaken for an unanimous approbation of the thing.  It states that Congress having received the Constitution unanimously transmit it, &c.  It is certain that no approbation was given.  This Constitution has a great many excellent regulations in it, and if it could be reasonably amended would be a fine system.  As it is, I think ‘tis past doubt, that if it should be established, either a tyranny will result from it, or it will be prevented by a civil war.  I am clearly of opinion with you that it should be sent back with amendments reasonable, and assent to it withheld until such amendments are admitted.  …  It is certainly the most rash and violent proceeding in the world to cram thus suddenly into men a business of such infinite moment to the happiness of millions.  …      Suppose when the Assembly recommended a Convention to consider this new Constitution they were to use some words like these : It is earnestly recommended to the good people of Virginia to send their most wise and honest men to this Convention that it may undergo the most intense consideration before a plan shall be without amendments adopted that admits of abuses being practised by which the best interests of this country may be injured, and civil liberty greatly endangered.  This might perhaps give a decided tone to the business.      Please to send my son Ludwell a copy of the amendments proposed by me to the new Constitution sent herewith.

“They are called the Antifederalists, but it should be made clear at once that they were not antifederal at all.  In reality, they were determined to preserve the Confederation, and the name, far from being their own choice, was imposed upon them by their opponents, the so-called “Federalists.” -- Jackson Turner Main, 1961, “The
Anti-Federalists: Critics of the Constitution”

The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles; Lesley Brown, Editor; Clarendon Press; Oxford; 1993.

The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles; Lesley Brown, Editor; Clarendon Press; Oxford; 1993.

J.T.Main p. 126

The Federalist-inclined but fair-minded Providence newspaper printed a prayer of deliverance:      “ O Lord have mercy upon us . . . And deliver us, we pray they, from STANDING ARMIES, and CINCINNATI OFFICERS.” Oswald’s newspaper printed what appeared to be damaging answers to the query, Who is to profit from Constitutional ratification? “The military profession will then be respectable, and the Floridas may be conquered in a campaign -- The spoils of the West-Indies and South America may enrich the next generation of Cincinnati.”

The Federalist-inclined but fair-minded Providence newspaper printed a prayer of deliverance:      “ O Lord have mercy upon us . . . And deliver us, we pray they, from STANDING ARMIES, and CINCINNATI OFFICERS.” Oswald’s newspaper printed what appeared to be damaging answers to the query, Who is to profit from Constitutional ratification? “The military profession will then be respectable, and the Floridas may be conquered in a campaign -- The spoils of the West-Indies and South America may enrich the next generation of Cincinnati.”

“The election of delegates was rushed into before the greater part of the people had sufficiently recovered from their surprise to know what part to take in, or how to give their suffrages,” one statement from chagrined voters charged, “they therefore remained inactive.” “In a surly mood, Antifederalists took no part in the parade their opponents hurriedly assembled to celebrate their triumph, for the last thing in their minds was acceptance of ratification with good grace.  While the cheers still rang in the streets, bitter Antifederalists held a rump session, drafted a bill of exceptions, and sent it to the newspaper.  Titled “The Address and Reasons of Dissent of the Minority of the Convention of the State of Pennsylvania to their Constituents,” the report was replete with sarcasm and dire predictions.  It asserted that the 46 ratification votes came from men elected by only 6,800 voters out of 70,000 eligible citizens. …  Antifederalists doubtlessly intended to broadcast copies of the “Address” in an attempt to cause grave concern about ratification news, but this hope was somewhat thwarted by the temporary breakdown of public mail service.  Federalist Boston knew in a few days that Pennsylvania had ratified, but it was months before the “Address” found its way to the slopes of Beacon Hill.”

“…as General Knox reported to Washington in a survey of the Massachusetts situation.”

   ~ Patrick Henry’s Opening Speech: A Wrong Step Now and the Republic Will Be Lost Forever; June 4, 1788

From “The Ordeal of the Constitution” by Robert Allen Rutland, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma; 1966; p. 29. Footnote 18: Charleston South Carolina State Gazette, January 28, 1788, quoted in L. M. Miner, Our Rude Forefathers, 204.

Cherokee Chief John Ross (1807 - 1839) fought the removal in the courts, ultimately receiving a Supreme Court ruling in 1832 that “the laws of Georgia can have no force” on Cherokee lands.  The decision meant that Georgia could not force the Cherokee from their land. “[Supreme Court Justice John Marshall has made his decision.  Now let him enforce it.” “[I] witnessed the execution of the most brutal order in the History of American Warfare.  I saw helpless Cherokees arrested and dragged from their homes…   I saw them loaded like cattle or sheep into 645 wagons and started toward the West.”    ~ pp. 466-467  “A New Nation”  McGraw Hill; N.Y.C.; 2000; James A. Banks et al.