ARP358 Presidential Election of 1789

Last week we discussed the implementation of the new Federal government as the Confederation Congress faded out of existence.  The states elected Senators and Representatives who would meet at the First Congress in New York in March of 1789.  The other big election was that of president, which was held separately from the congressional elections.

Presidential Election

The presidential elections of 1789 were nothing like elections today.  For starters, no states chose their presidential electors the way almost all states do today, that is the candidate with the most votes statewide gets all the electoral votes for that state.

In fact, many states did not have an election at all.  The constitution left it up to each state to decide how to choose electors.  Connecticut, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Georgia simply had the state legislature choose the electors for their states.

In the states that did have elections, people did not vote for candidates.  They voted for electors.  These were men with well known political views who would independently make a decision as to whom they would select as president and vice president.  Most electors publicly pledged to vote for a particular candidate.  Some states elected a slate of electors statewide.  Others opted to let each congressional district vote for one elector.

Those states that got their act together in time held their elections on January 7, 1789, as had been directed by the Confederation Congress four months earlier.  We don’t have complete records of the popular vote, but turnout does seem to have been surprisingly low.  Some newspapers report turnout of between 20% and 50% of eligible voters - and, of course, voter eligibility was much harder to obtain back then.  Across the six states that held popular votes, there appear to have been less than 30,000 total votes cast for electors.

North Carolina and Rhode Island, which had not yet ratified the Constitution, were unable to participate in the elections.  New York had ratified, but never passed a state law that would specify how electors would be chosen.  The anti-federalist majority in the General Assembly voted for one method.  The federalist majority in the Senate voted for a different method.  The result was a deadlock, with neither side willing to compromise.  This deadlock remained until after the electoral college met and selected a president, meaning that New York simply did not put forward any electors who participated in the election

For the ten states that chose electors, those electors met in each of the state capitals to vote.  The states had elected a total of 73 electors, but two votes from Maryland and two from Virginia were never cast.  In Virginia one of the districts simply failed to turn in any results.  Another delegate, Warner Lewis, simply failed to show up to vote.  In Maryland, two of the delegates, George Plater and William Richardson, were present for the electoral vote, but did not cast their votes.

There was no nomination process for the presidency, nor were there any candidates who ran for election.  Running would have been considered unseemly.  Americans would have been skeptical of anyone who campaigned for office.  They did not want someone who wanted power for themselves.

Besides, everyone knew who the first president would be.  At the Constitutional Convention and at all the various ratifying conventions, pretty much everyone assumed that George Washington would fill that role. In addition to being the man who had won the Revolutionary War, Washington had earned national respect by retiring at the end of the war.  This proved he was not a man who grasped for more power.  Rather, he simply did his duty for his country, then retired to his plantation.  This convinced voters that Washington would not use the presidency as a stepping stone to becoming king.  That remained a real fear in America at this time.

Perhaps the only other person with good positive name recognition was Benjamin Franklin.  Although Franklin served as Pennsylvania’s President until November of 1788, he was too old and infirm for any service in the new government.  He had been carried to the Constitutional Convention meetings in 1787 and, even at that time, was often too weak even to give speeches.  Following the convention, Franklin was rarely seen in public.  He mostly remained in his sick bed.  He was in no condition to be considered for any office, let alone president.

Most other possible contenders for the office were regional favorites.  John Adams was popular in New England, but not so much elsewhere.  Other candidates might be popular within their states, but no one had Washington’s national appeal. In the end, Washington received the unanimous election of every elector who cast a vote, a total of 69 votes.

The vice presidential election was another story.  There was no nationwide figure to take on that role, but John Adams was the odd-on favorite.  Adams had been an important leader in the Continental Congress, and had been a key negotiator of the peace treaty that ended the war.  He remained in Europe after the war, serving as America’s first Ambassador to Britain.

Adams only returned to America in the summer of 1788, after Massachusetts had already ratified the Constitution.  He returned to his farm and to his life as a private citizen.  He did not campaign for any office and did not advocate for himself.  That said, he did not discourage others from putting him forward as a candidate.

Adams seemed like a good choice to many.  In addition to his credentials and experience, Adams was from New England, which provided regional balance to Washington as a southern candidate.  Adams seemed to be in line with Washington’s views.  Both men generally believed in the new Constitution and supported a stronger federal government.  As a result, Adams quickly became the consensus candidate for vice president.

This raised some concerns though.  Under the Constitution, each elector would cast two votes.  Based on the final results the recipient of the most votes became president.  The second-place finisher would become vice president.  There was no way for electors to specify that they were casting one vote for president and the other for vice president.

Some insiders feared that politicians might use this process to bypass Washington.  Alexander Hamilton very much wanted Washington to become the first president.  He began writing to others that, if pretty much all the electors voted for Washington and Adams, that just a small handful of electors might withhold their votes for Washington, and allow Adams to get the most votes, thus becoming president.

Hamilton wrote about his concerns to several other leaders around the country.  He noted that the Adams faction in New England had often allied itself with the Lee faction in Virginia to win various political battles in Congress.  In fact, the two factions had once before teamed up against George Washington in the Conway Cabal, an effort in 1777 to replace Washington with Horatio Gates as Commander in Chief of the Continental Army.

There was no actual basis for such a conspiracy to snatch the presidency from Washington, but that did not get in the way of Hamilton’s paranoia.  Hamilton did not really have any political disagreements with Adams.  The two men generally found themselves on the same side of most policy matters.  But Hamilton still feared that politics might somehow get in the way of electing Washington.

Hamilton reached out to seven or eight electors in Connecticut, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, asking them to vote for someone other than Adams on their second vote.  This, he thought, would be enough to ensure that Washington would receive more votes.

Hamilton had nothing to worry about.  While the electors voted unanimously for Washington, they showed no such unanimity with their second votes.  The Connecticut electors that Hamilton had contacted voted for Samuel Huntington, Governor of Connecticut.  Two Pennsylvania delegates voted for John Hancock, Governor of Massachusetts.  New Jersey delegates only gave one vote to Adams and five to John Jay of New York.  So more that those contacted there chose other candidates.  Other electors across the continent gave various votes to others, casting votes for a total of eleven candidates for their second vote.

The result was that Adams only received 34 votes, one vote shy of a majority.  Even though he received nearly four times the vote of the next highest candidate, Adams felt humiliated by his poor showing.  He called it a stain on his character, and even considered declining the office.  At the time, he did not know about the political scheming behind the vote.  When he later found out about Hamilton’s role in all of this, it created a rupture between the two men, which never healed.

Despite his private disappointment, Adams retained his cheerful public demeanor and accepted his election as vice president.  He also congratulated George Washington on his victory and praised the new president's talents.

According to the schedule created by the Confederation Congress, the elections were supposed to take place in January, 1789.  The electors would vote in early February, and Congress would convene for the first time on March 4.  One of their first official acts would be to confirm the electoral college vote and notify the new president and vice president.

When the newly elected members of Congress assembled at Federal Hall on the morning of March 4, they discovered that they were pretty lonely.  Only eight out of twenty-two senators were present, and only thirteen out of fifty-nine representatives had made it to New York.  All but two of those were from just three states, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. None of the New York delegation was present because that state had held late elections and still did not have the results of those elections.  Several other elections were still being challenged in the courts. In other cases, members either hadn’t bothered to leave on time, or had travel problems that delayed their arrival.  

Without a quorum to do business, Congress could do nothing.  The members who had arrived simply hung round the city waiting for more of their colleagues to show up.  Ten days later, on March 14, James Madison finally arrived in town.  By that time, only two other congressmen, and no additional senators had arrived.  Madison wrote to Washington that nothing could be done.  They couldn’t even count the votes for president.

Massachusetts Representative Fisher Ames called the situation “mortifying” and wondered if “the public will forget the government before it is born.”  The secretary of Congress, still holding that position from the Confederation Congress, Charles Thomson, began writing to absent Senators and Representatives, begging them to come.  He wrote to Senator George Read of Delaware: 

As a friend, [I] entreat you to lay aside all lesser concerns & private business and come on immediately. Those who feel for the honor and are solicitous for the happiness of this country are pained to the heart, while those who are averse to the new constitution and those who are unfriendly to the liberty & consequently to the happiness and prosperity of this country, exult at our languor.

Thomson was pretty much running the government on his own until the new Congress could reach a quorum.  John Jay, who had been appointed Secretary for Foreign Affairs in the Confederation Congress, was still managing foreign policy issues.  Henry Knox, another confederation holdover, was still managing the military, which consisted of only a few hundred soldiers.

The French Minister to the US, the Comte de Moustier wrote back to officials in Paris that “Congress, like their predecessors, suffer from the general indifference toward public service when it comes to actually doing their part.” The absence of a quorum for weeks proved this point.  He believed that the new country could not survive without foreign protection, and that if France did not provide it, Britain would find a way to take back into control of its former colonies.

Those members who did arrive could not conduct official business, but they could hang out in taverns and begin discussing things informally.  Rather than talk about pressing issues, like creating a judiciary, or establishing a new system of tariffs, they mostly fought over where they should move the seat of government.  The Pennsylvania delegation, which was one of the few states that showed up on time, had a plan to call for an adjournment as soon as the presidential election was counted, and move the Congress to Philadelphia.

After four long weeks, the House finally got to a quorum on April 1.  Twenty-nine of the fifty-five representatives were present, just over half of the body.  Meeting in chambers that were still under construction, they elected Frederick Muhlenberg of Pennsylvania as speaker, and began organizing the House rules and committees.

It would take another week, until April 6, before enough senators arrived, giving that body a quorum.  At that point, Congress could finally count the electoral votes and proclaim George Washington to be the first president, and John Adams vice president.

Everyone had known for weeks how the electors had voted.  But until the official count by Congress, there was nothing official. George Washington remained home at Mount Vernon.  He did not want to appear eager or desirous of the presidency.  In fact, there is good reason to believe that this was not simply a show of false modesty.  Washington really wanted to remain retired from public life.  During the elections, Washington said nothing to encourage others, and several times angrily silenced people who discussed the elections in his presence. 

On April 1, a month after the electoral college should have met, Washington wrote to Henry Knox, expressing relief at the delay.

I feel for those Members of the new Congress, who, hitherto, have given an unavailing attendance at the theatre of business. For myself, the delay may be compared to a reprieve; for in confidence I can assure you—with the world it would obtain little credit—that my movements to the chair of Government will be accompanied with feelings not unlike those of a culprit who is going to the place of his execution: so unwilling am I, in the evening of a life nearly consumed in public cares, to quit a peaceful abode for an Ocean of difficulties, without that competency of political skill—abilities & inclination which is necessary to manage the helm.

Leaders like Hamilton and Madison, and even Lafayette in France, had written letters to Washington, imploring him to accept the presidency, fearing the government would fail without him, and with that failure the entire United States was at stake.  Comments like those of the Comte de Moustier made clear that Europeans were ready to pounce if the new government proved ineffective.

Washington resigned himself to the idea that he would have to serve as president for at least a few years to get the new government going.  In late March, he wrote to Madison in New York, asking him to find appropriate accommodations.  He asked for a small home or apartment.  He wanted to avoid a larger mansion since he wanted to avoid having to hold large receptions for guests in his home.  He also believed a smaller residence would help to reduce criticisms that he was effectively taking on the role of a king. Publicly, however, Washington took no steps to assume he had won the election.  He remained at home, continuing with his regular life.  

After Congress confirmed the electoral vote on April 6, they dispatched Secretary Charles Thomson to ride to Virginia and inform Washington.  The trip to Mount Vernon took a week.  On April 14, Thomson met with Washington to inform him of his election.  Washington had prepared for this moment by writing out his response, which he read to Thomson and then sent back to Congress:

Sir, I have been long accustomed to entertain so great a respect for the opinion of my fellow citizens, that the knowledge of their unanimous suffrages having been given in my favour scarcely leaves me the alternative for an Option. Whatever may have been my private feelings and sentiments, I believe I cannot give a greater evidence of my sensibility for the honor they have done me than by accepting the appointment.

I am so much affected by this fresh proof of my country’s esteem and confidence, that silence can best explain my gratitude—While I realize the arduous nature of the task which is conferred on me and feel my inability to perform it, I wish there may not be reason for regreting the choice. All I can promise is only that which can be accomplished by an honest zeal.

Washington also informed them that he would leave for New York within two days.  Washington had already prepared for his trip.  The reason for a delay was that he rode to Fredericksburg to visit his mother, who was dying of breast cancer.  He spent the night at his mother’s house before returning to Mount Vernon the following day.

Short on cash, Washington had to borrow money for his trip to New York.  Charles Thomson accompanied the president, along with his aide, David Humphreys, his secretary, Tobias Lear, and his personal servant Billy Lee.  Martha did not go with him.  She would join him a month later.  She does not seem to have been happy at Washington’s new role.  Days after he left, she wrote to her nephew saying:

I am truly sorry to tell that the General is gone to New York, Mr. Charles Thompson came to express to him, on the 14th - when or wheather he will come home again, god only knows, - I think it was much too late for him to go in to publick life again, but it was not to be avoided.

Washington did his best to avoid pomp, not wanting to appear as a new king.  He often tried to leave towns early in order to avoid parades, and tried to downplay all of the celebrations. But he had little luck with this. The people wanted to celebrate this grand event.

Each city celebrated Washington as he passed through towns on his way to New York. Celebrations honored the new president with celebrations in each town.  Parades, bells, military escorts, and musket fire celebrated the new leader.  In Trenton, thirteen young maidens threw flower petals at his feet while singing “Welcome, mighty Chief”.  In Philadelphia, they placed a laurel wreath on his head, as had been done for Roman emperors.  He may not have wanted to appear as a king, but the people seemed to want to honor him as such.

The group finally arrived in Elizabethtown, New Jersey on April 23, where a committee of elected officials met him, along with an honor guard to carry him aboard a large ferry across the Hudson River to a welcome celebration.  

With the new president having arrived in the capital, the new government could get to work.  

Next week: the new government gets to work.

- - -

Next Episode 359 The Federal Government Begins

Previous Episode 357 Implementing the Constitution

 Contact me via email at mtroy.history@gmail.com

 Follow the podcast on X (formerly Twitter) @AmRevPodcast

 Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast 

 Join American Revolution Podcast on Quora 

 Discuss the AmRev Podcast on Reddit

American Revolution Podcast Merch!

T-shirts, hoodies, mugs, pillows, totes, notebooks, wall art, and more.  Get your favorite American Revolution logo today.  Help support this podcast.  https://merch.amrevpodcast.com

Click here to donate

DONATE

American Revolution Podcast is distributed 100% free of charge. If you can chip in to help defray my costs, I'd appreciate whatever you can give.  Make a one time donation through my PayPal account. You may also donate via Venmo (@Michael-Troy-20).

Click here to see my Patreon Page

You can support the American Revolution Podcast as a Patreon subscriber.  This is an option making monthly pledges.  Patreon support will give you access to Podcast extras and help make the podcast a sustainable project.

An alternative to Patreon is SubscribeStar.  For anyone who has problems with Patreon, you can get the same benefits by subscribing at SubscribeStar.

Visit the American Revolution Podcast Bookshop.  Support local bookstores and this podcast!

https://bookshop.org/shop/ARP

Signup for the AmRev Podcast Mail List

* indicates required

Email*       

First Name 

Last Name 

Further Reading

Websites

Presidential Election of 1789 https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/presidential-election-of-1789

Presidential Electors in Maryland: https://msa.maryland.gov/msa/speccol/sc2600/sc2685/html/electors.html

1789 President of the United States, Electoral College https://elections.lib.tufts.edu/catalog/zp38wf06k

1789 Electoral College Results https://www.archives.gov/electoral-college/1789

Documentary History of the First Federal Congress https://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/default.xqy?keys=FFCP-print&mode=TOC

“From George Washington to James Madison, 30 March 1789,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-01-02-0362.

“From George Washington to Benjamin Harrison, 9 March 1789,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-01-02-0286

“From George Washington to Henry Knox, 1 April 1789,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-02-02-0003

 Address to Charles Thomson, 14 April 1789,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/05-02-02-0057

President Washington's Inauguration in New York City https://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/the-first-president/inauguration/new-york

Free eBooks
(from archive.org unless noted)

Documentary History of the Constitution of the United States of America, Vol 2, Washington: Dept. of State, 1894. 

This Constitution: From Ratification to the Bill of Rights, Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc. 1988 (borrow only). 

Brant, Irving James Madison: Father of the Constitution, 1787-1800. Bobbs-Merrill Co. 1950 (borrow only). 

Ford, Paul L. Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, Brooklyn, NY: 1888. 

Renwick, Henry B. Lives of John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, 1817-1895, New York: Harper & Brothers, 1840. 

Rutland, Robert A. The Ordeal of the Constitution: The Antifederalists and the Ratification Struggle of 1787-1788, Northeastern University Press, 1983 (borrow only). 

Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Bradford, M.E. Original Intentions: on the Making and Ratification of the United States Constitution, Univ. of GA Press, 1993 (borrow on archive.org). 

Elkins, Stanley M. and Eric McKitrick, The Age of Federalism: The Early American Republic, 1788–1800, Oxford Univ. Press, 1993. 

Ellis, Joseph J. The Quartet: Orchestrating the Second American Revolution 1783-1789, Alfred A. Knopf, 2015.

Leibiger, Stuart (ed) A Companion to James Madison and James Monroe, Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. 

Jensen, Merrill The Documentary History of the First Federal Elections, 1788-1790, Vol. 1 Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 1976.

Morris, Richard B. Witnesses at the Creation: Hamilton, Madison, Jay and the Constitution, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1985. 

Rossiter, Clinton Alexander Hamilton and the Constitution, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. 1964 (borrow on archive.org). 

Schlesinger Arthur, et al History of American Presidential Elections 1789-2008, Facts on File 2011.  

Slonim, Shlomo Forging a new Nation, 1787-1791, Palgrave Macmillan 2017. 

Smith, Craig R To Form a More Perfect Union: The Ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, 1787-1791, University Press of America, 1993 (borrow on archive.org) 

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

ARP357 Implementing the Constitution

Last time we covered the ratification in New York which succeeded by the slimmest margin yet, and over the objections of most of the state leaders.  New York became the eleventh state to join the union, with only Rhode Island having rejected it in a statewide referendum.

North Carolina

So for those of you proficient in math, you are probably saying to yourself, 11+1=12, and keen observers must be aware that there are 13 original states, so there’s got to be one more ratification story.  Well right you are.  The one state we haven’t discussed yet is North Carolina.

Governor Richard Caswell received a report on the Constitution within days of its publication in the fall of 1787.  Caswell appears to have favored ratification, but like many governors, was reluctant to take a strong public stand before the voters had time to consider it.  He did not call a special session of the legislature, perhaps knowing that the current legislature was inclined to oppose the Constitution.  Instead, federalists in the state worked to get more favorable representatives elected during the normal legislative elections that took place in November. 

These efforts were unsuccessful, the new legislature still contained an anti-federalist majority.  The members were willing to hold a convention, but pushed it back quite a bit to let other states consider the matter first.  In early December, the General Assembly set an election for late March, with the ratifying convention itself scheduled to start on July 21 in Hillsborough.

This gave time for copies of the Constitution to circulate, along with articles and pamphlets discussing the pros and cons.  The convention was one of the largest that was held among all the states.  Each county could send five delegates, along with some towns, for a total of nearly 300 delegates.  As we’ve seen in other states, coastal merchants favored ratification, while farmers, particularly in the west, opposed it.

The convention elections were contentious, and in some cases turned violent. An account from New Bern County relates that when the federalist candidate realized they were losing overwhelmingly, they pulled out clubs and began a riot to prevent the election from completing.  They beat the sheriff and stole the ballot box to prevent a conclusion to the vote count.

When the convention delegates met in July, the anti-federalists were in a majority of about 2-1.  They elected the newly-elected Governor Samuel Johnston as the chair of the convention.  Johnston was a federalist who supported ratification, but was not an outspoken advocate.

The anti-federalists, seeing their advantage, wanted a quick vote and an end to the convention.  The federalists, however, hoping to change things, demanded some debate, including going through the document clause by clause.  With the encouragement of Governor Johnston, the delegates agreed to the lengthy review of each clause.

Federalists hoped that, like in other states, once the anti-federalists realized the new government was moving forward with or without them that they would compromise and accept some form of ratification with a record of their reservations and concerns.  

The delegates were aware of the state of things from the beginning.  On day one of the convention, the delegates were well aware that ten states had ratified and that the Constitution was already going into effect.  The anti-federalist farmers, however, were not convinced that going with the other states was best for them.  These were men who had lived through the regulator movement twenty years earlier.  They were meeting at the same spot where six regulators had been hanged for resisting corrupt tax policies.  Several of the federalist leaders at the convention had helped to crush their regulator movement.

Since then, North Carolina had adopted a state constitution that protected their rights.  If this new Federal Constitution threatened to bring on a new distant government that could tax them into poverty again, they did not want to take that chance.

Debates at the convention were nothing that other states hadn’t argued.  Delegates complained about the absence of a bill of rights, and too much power to the federal government, including direct taxing authority.  It would also prevent the issuance of more state paper money, which had benefitted the indebted farmers.

Once the convention completed its review, Governor Johnston moved that the delegates ratify the constitution, and propose amendments.  This was the only way North Carolina would have a say over these amendments which could go through the new federal congress.  That argument had worked in New York.  

A leading anti-federalist, Willie Jones, objected,  He moved that the convention consider proposing amendments before any ratification.  This came to a vote which carried, 183 to 84.  The anti-federalists proposed a twenty part bill of rights, as well as twenty-six other proposed amendments.

Once again, Johnston opposed this plan.  He noted that calling a second convention and adopting a bill of rights, could take up to two years, during which time North Carolina would not be represented in the new government.  On August 1, the federalists again moved to ratify the constitution unconditionally with the proposal of six important amendments.  This failed overwhelmingly, and the convention voted not to ratify by 184 to 83.  North Carolina did not expressly reject the Constitution, but also refused to ratify it.  Anti-federalists argued that their refusal would pressure the new government to adopt the appropriate amendments to get North Carolina to agree to join the new Union.  But for now, North Carolina was out.  The convention concluded and the delegates returned home.

Second Convention

As North Carolina was still in debate, Pennsylvania began having second thoughts about its ratification.  On July 3, 1788 anti-federalists in Pennsylvania sent out a circular letter that raised concerns that Pennsylvania had acted too precipitously.  Unlike other states that gave greater consideration, the keystone state had not proposed any amendments, nor a bill of rights.

Concerned Pennsylvanians held their own unofficial convention in Harrisburg to discuss necessary changes to the constitution.  While they were not trying to take back the state’s ratification vote, they wanted to encourage the changes that they and other states wanted.  They circulated a petition that called for a second constitutional convention to consider these amendments.

Pennsylvania’s petition was in line with New York’s circular letter, which also had called for a second convention to consider necessary amendments to the proposed constitution. This movement also appealed to Virginia governor Edmund Randolph, who had refused to sign the Constitution because he wanted a second convention to consider amendments.

Madison saw this movement as a threat.  In a letter to Jefferson, Madison wrote: 

the circular letter from the Convention of New York, has somewhat changed the aspect of things and has given fresh hopes and exertions to those who opposed the Constitution. The object with them now will be to effect an early Convention composed of men who will essentially mutilate the system

This second convention movement could have a fatal impact on the new government, essentially weakening it back to the level under the Articles of Confederation.  Madison had little objection to a bill of rights, which many states had demanded.  He saw it as unnecessary, but rather redundant. 

Of greater concern was the demand to remove federal authority over direct taxation.  Madison and others believed this was critical to the new federal government.  Washington agreed.  In August of 1788, he said 

there are scarcely any of the amendments which have been suggested, to which I have much objection, except that whch goes to the prevention of direct taxation—and that, I presume, will be more strenuously advocated and insisted upon hereafter than any other.

Federalists were happy to consider some amendments. But they did not want to open up a whole second convention which could decimate all of the compromises that had been made to make the proposed constitution work for most people, and yet still be effective in overcoming the weaknesses of the Articles.

Election Ordinance

Whatever the results of this effort to call a second convention, the process for implementing the Constitution, as is, was moving forward. News of New Hampshire’s unconditional ratification as the ninth date arrived at the confederation Congress on June 24, 1788.  The official forms arrived on July 1.  The following day, Congress received word that Virignia had ratified as the tenth state.  They voted to submit the matter to a committee for plans to put the new constitution into effect.  Of the eleven states present, nine voted to approve.  The Rhode Island delegation did not vote.  The New York Convention was still meeting at the time.  Abraham Yates was the only “no” vote in Congress.  His no vote split the delegation, meaning New York also refused.

A week later, on July 9 Congress received a committee report calling for the first presidential election to take place on the first Wednesday in December.  The electors would then meet in their home states to vote in January, 1789, and that Congress would assemble on the first Wednesday in February, and would confirm the vote of the electors.  The committee did not specify a place for these meetings.  New York’s ratifying convention was still ongoing at the time, and Congress did not want to make any decisions on location until New York decided whether it would join the union.

Even if New York ratified, there was no guarantee that the new government would meet in New York.  Southern delegates had been pushing for a location further south.  Various delegates were pushing for a move back to Trenton, Philadelphia, or Lancaster.  Others wanted Wilmington, Delaware, Baltimore, or even somewhere on the banks of the Potomac River.

Beyond being too far to travel and parochial concerns, delegates raise issues like a capital being too close to the coast could make it easier for foreign navies to attack.  Some delegates raised questions about a location that would not allow them to bring their slaves.  Others were concerned about the costs of continually moving the capital.

This actually turned out to be the most contentious issue for Congress in agreeing to the new elections.  Delegates debate moving the seat of Congress, either temporarily or permanent.  In the end though, a majority of delegates wanted to keep everything in New York, at least for the moment.

On September 12, 1788, Henry Lee of Virginia moved that the current location of the Confederation Congress in New York should be the first meeting place of the new federal Congress.  Fellow Viriginan, James Madison, who usually pushed any expedient to keep this process moving, proposed an alternative - moving the seat of government  to a more central location.  He called for a vote to move anywhere other than New York, hoping that disagreement of a final location would keep the anti-New York delegates together.  Even so, his motion was defeated, and Congress voted nine to one to keep the location in New York.  Only Delaware dissented.  The Maryland delegates were so angry that the delegates walked out before the vote.

Despite the vote on location, many southerners objected that the situation would not give them enough time to implement new elections and then travel back to New York to start the new government.  As a compromise, Congress pushed back their schedule by a month.  Selecting presidential electors in January, voting in February, and the meeting of the first Congress in March.

The Confederation Congress continued to meet and do business for another month, mostly dealing with issues related to the army and the Northwest territory.  On Friday, October 10, 1788, the delegates took a vote related to land warrants for veterans, which failed.  The significance of that vote was that it was the last vote the Confederation congress would ever take.  The following week, the Congress failed to gain a quorum.

The President of Congress, Cyrus Griffin, came to open a new session on November 15.  When only two other delegates showed up, Griffin resigned his office and went home.  A few delegates showed up over the next few months, but left when they realized nothing was happening.  The final log in the journal is for March 2, 1789 when Phillip Pell of New York came to an empty hall and recorded his presence.  The Confederation Congress simply faded out of existence.

Anti-Federalists On Board

The nation was focused on the new elections.  Each state prepared to hold their own elections. for members of the House of Representatives on their own timetable.  Senators were selected by the state legislatures.

The anti-federalists who had opposed implementation of the new Constitution so vehemently at the convention and during the ratification process mostly got on board and were willing to participate in the new federal government.  They did not continue to fight after the battle had been lost.  

Massachusetts delegate John Taylor, who had fought hard to oppose ratification said after the fact that he had been “fairly beaten” and returned home with a desire “to infuse a spirit of harmony”. Fellow delegate William Widgery, declared that he had been defeated “by a majority of wise and understanding men” and would also focus on “union and peace among the people he represented”

Others who had voted against ratification, including James Monroe and Richard Henry Lee of Virginia as well as Samuel Adams and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, accepted their loss and ran for office.  New York Governor George Clinton received a few electoral votes for Vice President.

In the end, Anti-federalists made up about 30% of the Senate and over 40% of the first House of Representatives.  These men were realists. They accepted the fact that the majority and implemented the new constitution. Their only option was to operate under it, and do their best to make sure the new Federal government did not do the things that concerned them so much during the ratification process.

Congressional Elections

Since each state could decide when to hold its elections, they were spread out over months.  Several states got the ball rolling by having the state legislatures choose Senators.  Pennsylvania was first out of the gate, choosing Robert Morris and William MacLay on September 30, 1788, just over two weeks after the Confederation Congress had authorized elections.  A total of six state legislatures had selected US Senators by the end of the year.

House elections were more difficult since the Constitution required actual elections by voters, not legislative appointments.  States not only had to schedule dates for elections, but had to pass election laws to determine how candidates would be elected.

South Carolina managed to beat Pennsylvania by holding its elections on November 24 and 25.  Two anti-federalists, Thomas Sumter and Thomas Tudor Tucker won unopposed in the western part of the state.  A third anti-federalist, Aedenus Burke was challenged, but won with more than 99% in another western district. Two federalists, William Smith and Daniel Huger, won the eastern districts

Pennsylvania, where federalists still dominated the state legislature, did note create voting districts.  Instead, had the entire state vote for eight at-large candidates, hoping to shut out the anti-federalists, thinking that a majority state-wide would support a federalist slate. Even so, the anti-federalists managed to pick up two of the eight seats.

New Hampshire also held elections for its three representatives.  In its elections on December 15, no candidate received a majority of votes.  As a result, the top six candidates were selected for a second round.  All six candidates were federalists, so New Hampshire sent a 100% federalist delegation to the first Congress.  Similarly, Connecticut also held at-large elections sending five federalists to the House of Representatives.  Among them was Roger Sherman, who played such an important role in the creation of the Constitution.

Massachusetts held elections on December 18, but failed to get a majority in four of its eight elections.  It held another election on January 28, 1789, but managed to fill only two of the four remaining seats.  It filled another in March, but the final district went through multiple rounds before finally choosing a candidate in May, two months after the Congress had begun meeting.

The rest of the states did not begin their elections until 1789.  Delaware kicked off the year with a vote on January 7.  

The federalists were not the only ones to play games with the election rules to their own advantage.  In Virginia, Patrick Henry not only ensured that Madison would not be selected as a Senator, he made sure the district lines were drawn in such a way that Madison’s home was in a heavily anti-federalist district.  Henry also encouraged James Monroe to oppose Madison for the seat.  Despite these efforts, Madison managed to win with 57% of the vote, but only after promising voters that he personally would draft and introduce a bill of rights for the new Constitution.

Of the eleven states that had ratified the Constitution, New York, the final state to ratify was also the final state to hold elections.  A political impasse between the federalists in the State Senate and the anti-federalists in the General Assembly resulted in an inability to pass a state election law for nearly six months.

In the end New York held its House elections on March 3-4, the same day that the first US Congress convened to start business.  The results of the New York elections were not ready until April, meaning the delegation missed out on the early votes.  New York also did not get around to appointing Senators until July.

So, with rather confused and contentious elections, the states managed to select the first Congress, which met on March 3, 1789.

Next week, we will cover the first Presidential elections.

- - -

Next Episode 358 Presidential Election of 1788-1789 

Previous Episode 356 New York and the Federalist Papers 

 Contact me via email at mtroy.history@gmail.com

 Follow the podcast on X (formerly Twitter) @AmRevPodcast

 Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast 

 Join American Revolution Podcast on Quora 

 Discuss the AmRev Podcast on Reddit

American Revolution Podcast Merch!

T-shirts, hoodies, mugs, pillows, totes, notebooks, wall art, and more.  Get your favorite American Revolution logo today.  Help support this podcast.  https://merch.amrevpodcast.com

Click here to donate

DONATE

American Revolution Podcast is distributed 100% free of charge. If you can chip in to help defray my costs, I'd appreciate whatever you can give.  Make a one time donation through my PayPal account. You may also donate via Venmo (@Michael-Troy-20).

Click here to see my Patreon Page

You can support the American Revolution Podcast as a Patreon subscriber.  This is an option making monthly pledges.  Patreon support will give you access to Podcast extras and help make the podcast a sustainable project.

An alternative to Patreon is SubscribeStar.  For anyone who has problems with Patreon, you can get the same benefits by subscribing at SubscribeStar.

Visit the American Revolution Podcast Bookshop.  Support local bookstores and this podcast!

https://bookshop.org/shop/ARP

Signup for the AmRev Podcast Mail List

* indicates required

Email*       

First Name 

Last Name 

Further Reading

Websites

Howard, Thomas L. “The State That Said No: The Fight for Ratification of the Federal Constitution in North Carolina.” The North Carolina Historical Review, vol. 94, no. 1, 2017, pp. 1–58. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/45184801

“From James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, 23 August 1788,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-11-02-0171

“From George Washington to Thomas Jefferson, 31 August 1788,” Founders Online, National Archives, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Washington/04-06-02-0440

Congressional Election of 1789 (Madison v. Monroe) https://www.montpelier.org/the-congressional-election-of-1789

Boyd, Steven R. “Antifederalists and the Acceptance of the Constitution: Pennsylvania, 1787-1792” Publius, vol. 9, no. 2, 1979, pp. 123–37. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/332973

Free eBooks
(from archive.org unless noted)

Journals of the Continental Congress 1774-1789 - Volume 34 Jan. 21, 1788 - March 2, 1789 https://archive.org/details/journals-of-the-continental-congress-1774-1789-vol-34-jan-21-1788-mar-2-1789

Documentary History of the Constitution of the United States of America, Vol 2, Washington: Dept. of State, 1894. 

This Constitution: From Ratification to the Bill of Rights, Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc. 1988 (borrow only). 

Brant, Irving James Madison: Father of the Constitution, 1787-1800. Bobbs-Merrill Co. 1950 (borrow only). 

Ford, Paul L. Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, Brooklyn, NY: 1888. 

Renwick, Henry B. Lives of John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, 1817-1895, New York: Harper & Brothers, 1840. 

Rutland, Robert A. The Ordeal of the Constitution: The Antifederalists and the Ratification Struggle of 1787-1788, Northeastern University Press, 1983 (borrow only). 

Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Bradford, M.E. Original Intentions: on the Making and Ratification of the United States Constitution, Univ. of GA Press, 1993 (borrow on archive.org). 

Conley, Patrick T & John P. Kaminski The Constitution and the States: The Role of the Original Thirteen in the Framing and Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Madison House, 1988 (borrow on archive.org).

Jensen, Merrill The Documentary History of the First Federal Elections, 1788-1790, Vol. 1 Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 1976.

Maier, Pauline Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788. Simon & Schuster, 2010. 

Morris, Richard B. Witnesses at the Creation: Hamilton, Madison, Jay and the Constitution, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1985. 

Rossiter, Clinton Alexander Hamilton and the Constitution, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. 1964 (borrow on archive.org). 

Smith, Craig R To Form a More Perfect Union: The Ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, 1787-1791, University Press of America, 1993 (borrow on archive.org) 

Storing, Herbert J. What the Anti-Federalists Were For: The Political Thought of the Opponents of the Constitution, Univ of Chicago Press, 1981. 

Van Doren, Carl The Great Rehearsal: The story of the making and ratifying of the Constitution of the United States, Viking Press, 1948. (borrow on archive.org) 

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

AR-SP35 In Search of Molly Pitcher, with Linda Grant Depauw

Our American Revolution Round Table discusses Molly Pitcher, and other various topics with Dr. Linda Grant DePauw, History Professor Emeritus of George Washington University.

This discussion features an interview with Linda Grant DePauw, Professor Emerita of George Washington University and author of several books on the American Revolution, including Founding Mothers, Seafaring Women, and Battle Cries and Lullabies. The conversation centers around her book, "In Search of Molly Pitcher," which is described as a fictional account of a student's quest to uncover the true origins of the Molly Pitcher story.

DePauw decided to write "In Search of Molly Pitcher" because people continually asked her about the legendary figure, even after she had dedicated sections in her non-fiction works to the topic. Realizing that traditional scholarly articles or books weren't reaching the public effectively due to a deep resonance people have with Molly Pitcher, DePauw chose to write a storybook.

The book is a fictional account, mostly dialogue, about a stubborn grade school girl named Peggy McAllister who researches Molly Pitcher for a school contest with the help of her retired private investigator great-grandpa. A significant purpose of the book is to explain good and bad methods of historical research, helping readers understand how to find better sources and navigate the frustrations of historical inquiry.

The Myth and Reality of Molly Pitcher

The book aims to explain the confusion surrounding Molly Pitcher's identity and origins, highlighting that there wasn't a lot of easy fact-checking in early history, leading to various stories being copied from potentially unreliable sources.

The story of Molly Pitcher is depicted as having various and contradictory sources from its early beginnings. She has been "located" at different battles, including Brandywine and Fort Washington, though the well-known story is associated with the Battle of Monmouth.

The name "Molly Pitcher" itself doesn't appear in sources until an 1848 drawing by Currier & Ives, by which time anyone who might have known her personally would likely have been deceased.

The discussion suggests that Molly Pitcher may not be one specific person but rather a composite figure, with elements from various real women like Mary Ludwig Hayes and Margaret Corbin, whose stories became conflated into the myth.

Modern educational materials for children are sometimes criticized for oversimplifying or even making up dramatically inaccurate facts about Molly Pitcher, such as her fighting and dying heroically at the Battle of Saratoga.

DePauw and the host discuss the evolution of research methods, contrasting the "old fashion technology" of interlibrary loans (which involved significant time and potential for drama) with modern internet and computer research.

Despite technological advancements, the challenges of finding accurate direct sources, dealing with mixed-up facts, and identifying copied misinformation persist in the internet age.

The importance of visiting historical sites like battlefields is emphasized, as it provides a deeper understanding of the environment and potentially unearths local sources or perspectives not available online.

The conversation touches on the difficulty of proving historical facts, especially for less well-known figures, and how different perspectives can lead to genuinely varied accounts of the same event.

Historical fiction and mediums like the musical Hamilton are seen as valuable tools for making history "come alive" and sparking interest in the past, even if they take liberties for entertainment.

DePauw's specialty in early American history shifted to military women after a museum exhibit catalog featured a woman with a musket, prompting questions about women carrying weapons. This led her to establish the Minerva Center to encourage the study of women in war.

Her book, "Founding Mothers," was specifically aimed at a middle school audience, distinguishing it from other historians' works written for academic peers.

DePauw is in the early planning stages of an audio version of "In Search of Molly Pitcher," envisioning a fully historically accurate production with a voice cast, including her dream of having Margaret O'Brien play the lead role of Peggy McAllister.

* * * 

Get a copy of ⁠In Search of Molly Pitcher⁠. 

Join the American Revolution Podcast Mailing List: ⁠https://mailchi.mp/d3445a9cd244/american-revolution-podcast-by-michael-troy⁠

Join the Revolution on Patreon: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.patreon.com/AmRevPodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

 

AR-SP34 Bunker Hill w/HUB History

This discussion, hosted by Jake Sconyers of the Hub History podcast and featuring Mike Troy of the American Revolution Podcast, commemorates the upcoming 250th anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, detailing the battle itself and discussing the American Revolution Podcast.  What follows is a summary of the discussion: 

The Battle of Bunker Hill: Context and Prelude The Battle of Bunker Hill, fought on June 17, 1775, was the largest Revolutionary War battle in the Boston area and the bloodiest for the British side. Following the April outbreak of war and the siege of Boston, the British initially expected the American provincial army to disperse. However, the arrival of British reinforcements in late May, along with three new senior generals—William Howe, Henry Clinton, and Johnny Burgoyne—changed the dynamic. These generals, who arrived on a ship named the Cerberus (a three-headed dog guarding the gates of hell in mythology, a detail not lost on anyone at the time), brought instructions from London for General Gage to take more aggressive action. Gage, having faced the Americans at Lexington and Concord, understood their resolve, but the new generals and London believed the militia were pushovers. There was also internal pressure on Gage, as the new generals were "gunning for his job," prompting him to be more aggressive.

The British developed an offensive plan to capture two key areas of high ground: Bunker Hill to the north and Dorchester Heights to the south, to prevent Americans from bombarding Boston or its harbor. News of this plan leaked to the provincials via an anonymous merchant, prompting them to act first.

Jake Sconyers

American Preparations and Command The provincial army was a "complete mess," consisting of ununited militia groups from various states, nominally headed by Massachusetts's Artemis Ward. Despite higher-ranking generals, Colonel William Prescott, a veteran of King George's War and the Seven Years War (where he fought in the siege of Louisbourg and was even offered a commission in the regular army), was chosen to lead the ground operation.

Initially, the goal was to occupy Bunker Hill, but upon surveying the terrain, the forces decided to build their entrenchments on the more aggressive Breeds Hill, closer to the water for potential cannon fire against ships. They constructed a main redoubt, approximately 136 feet square, and breastworks (dirt walls) on either side. While they did not bring artillery overnight, cannons were brought in the morning, and a portal was improvised by firing a cannonball through the mud wall. The American forces, initially 1,200 men, dwindled to about 500 by morning due to desertions. These were largely exhausted farmers and civilians, not professional soldiers. Logistics were severely lacking, with no water, food, or consistent ammunition resupply.

Despite the disorganization, key officers made strategic adjustments on the field:

• Colonel Stark (New Hampshire militia) recognized the American left flank along the Mystic River was exposed. He positioned his men behind a picket fence and supplemented them with field cannons, admonishing them to hold fire until the British were very close (about 30 feet), a tactic similar to the famous "whites of their eyes" instruction.
• General Israel Putnam focused on placing artillery on Bunker Hill to protect the American right flank, deterring a British attack from that direction. He even taught infantrymen to operate cannons in real-time, using soup ladles to load powder due to mismatched cannonball sizes.
• Major General Joseph Warren, though titular head of the provincial congress and suffering from migraines, arrived before the main British attack and served as a volunteer infantryman, commanding about 50 men. Crossing Charles Town Neck was dangerous due to British chainshot fire.

The British Assaults The British were aware of the American activity overnight but decided to wait until daylight to attack. General Howe, the senior officer, opted for a direct frontal assault over Clinton's flanking strategy. Initially, 2,300 troops were committed, with reserves joining throughout the day, bringing the total to 3,000-3,500. Before the infantry assault, British ships and a battery at Cops Hill fired on the American defenses, but this artillery bombardment was largely ineffective, causing only one American casualty. The British also burned Charles Town to dislodge American sharpshooters.

• First Assault: General Howe ordered a two-pronged attack. Brigadier General Robert Pigot led a frontal "feint" on the redoubt to distract, while the main British force aimed for Stark's men on the American left flank. Stark's disciplined fire, holding until close range and firing in volleys from three rows, decimated the British lines, with some units suffering 90% casualties. Prescott's men at the redoubt used similar tactics, causing heavy British losses. Both prongs were repelled.
• Second Assault: Happened quickly after the first, with "full-throated assaults" on both the center and flank. General Howe personally led this wave, miraculously escaping injury while many officers around him were shot. Despite significant casualties, the British again faced devastating fire from the entrenched Americans.
• Third Assault: By this point, the American defenders in the redoubt had dwindled to about 120, and most were critically low on ammunition, resorting to using gunpowder from broken artillery shells or even pebbles as projectiles. General Howe changed tactics:
  1. He sent his soldiers up in three columns instead of lines, making it easier to maintain formation on the uneven terrain and presenting less of a target line.
  2. He ordered soldiers to remove their heavy packs.
  3. Crucially, he ordered them not to load their guns but to fix bayonets and charge, relying on the Americans' lack of ammunition and bayonets. The Americans, though exhausted, showed "amazing discipline," holding fire until the British were within 15 feet. The initial volley was "relentless" and "devastating," causing the British assault to stall. However, Major John Pitcairn's Marines, leading the charge, broke through after Pitcairn himself was shot and killed. With the redoubt breached and out of ammunition, most Americans retreated, using muskets as clubs to hold off the British. Joseph Warren, fighting in the rear guard with Colonel Prescott, was shot in the head and bayoneted multiple times, his body "completely obliterated". Stark's men also retreated, and the heaviest American casualties occurred during the mad rush to escape across Charles Town Neck, under fire from the British Navy. The British did not pursue further, having achieved their objective of taking Bunker Hill.

Aftermath and Legacy Technically a British victory, as they gained the Charles Town Peninsula and set up defensive lines on Bunker Hill. However, the cost was staggering. It was the bloodiest battle for the British in the Revolutionary War, with over 1,000 casualties (dead or wounded) out of 5,000-6,000 total troops in Boston. Many wounded later died due to poor medical care. The heavy losses forced the British to abandon their plan to take Dorchester Heights.

Bunker Hill had a profound impact on both sides' strategies:

• For the British: It disabused Generals Howe, Clinton, and Burgoyne of the notion that American militia were pushovers, confirming Gage's warnings. It made them much more cautious, keeping them on the defensive in Boston until their final evacuation. Clinton himself reportedly remarked that "one more victory like this and it's all over for us British".
• For the Americans: It significantly boosted morale, proving that militia would stand and fight toe-to-toe with regulars. American officer Nathaniel Greene famously quipped, I would love to sell the British another hill at a similar price.

If you want to learn more about the Hub History Podcast, go to HUBhistory.com

ARP356 Federalist Papers and New York

Last week we covered the ratification of the Constitution by the largest state, Virginia, bringing the total to 10 states.  The other really critical state remaining was New York.

New York is Reluctant

The empire state was skeptical of the new constitution before it was even written.  Governor George Clinton had dominated New York politics for years.  He had served as governor since 1777, when the position was first established.  Before that he has served in the New York’s General Assembly, the Continental Congress, and as a general in the Continental Army.  He was extremely popular, and was even elected both governor and lieutenant governor in 1777.

NYC Celebrates Ratification

Clinton was also a political opponent of Alexander Hamilton.  The newcomer to New York Politics inherited Clinton’s wrath by marriage.  While Hamilton and Clinton had gotten along well as fellow Continental officers during the war, Hamilton had married the daughter of Philip Schuyler, who was probably Clinton’s strongest political opponent in earlier times.  Hamilton took up many of the same political causes that Schuyler had advocated once Hamilton began serving in the NY state legislature and the Confederation Congress.

When Hamilton introduced a motion to send five delegates to the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Clinton was skeptical.  The governor had his supporters in the legislature reduce the number of delegates to three, and sent Hamilton along with two strong ideological opponents of a stronger federal government, State Senator Abraham Yates, Mayor of Albany John Lansing.  These two delegates assured that New York would oppose Hamilton’s vision of a much more powerful federal government.  Both of these men left the Convention early to inform Clinton about what was happening.  Their absence meant that New York could not vote on anything else at the convention since it required at least two votes.  Hamilton would be the only NY delegate to sign the Constitution.

Clinton found his base of political power in the small yeoman farmers of New York.  These were opposed to the merchants in the city, and the large land owning aristocratic leaders like Phillip Schuyler.  Clinton also acted as a moderate.  Keeping in mind his political base, he still tried to put forward moderate policies that would benefit everyone.  New York had avoided much of the strife and economic difficulties that New England experienced in the post war era.  This had allowed him to continue serving as a popular four term governor by 1788.  

Doctors Riot

New York still had its issues.  In 1786, Clinton had called out the militia to help suppress some spillover from Shays’ Rebellion.  In 1788, while in the middle of the debate over ratification, Clinton had to call out the militia again.  This time for the doctor’s riot in New York City.  The doctor’s riot had nothing to do with the Constitution or national politics, but it is an interesting story, that happened at this time, so I suppose I should give it a quick mention.

There is some question about the story that sparked the riot.  While it seems to have some basis in fact, parts of it may have been made up or exaggerated.  In any event, I’ll give you the story and you can decide.

In April of 1788, a group of boys were playing near a lab at New York Hospital and saw a medical student dissecting a woman.  The boys wondered who the woman was, the student responded in a particularly “New York” way, and told them the body was “your mother”.  By coincidence, one of the boys had recently lost his mother.  He went home to tell his father.  His father then picked up a shovel and dug up his wife’s grave.  It was empty.  There is no evidence that the body the med student was working on was actually this same person.  Medical students had, for years, been digging up fresh graves for dissection.  More accurately, they would often pay grave robbers for bringing them fresh bodies, no questions asked.

Typically robbers would take bodies from the Negro Burial Ground, or the potter’s field for poor people, which did not raise much fuss, at least not among people who had the power to do anything about it. But in February, 1788, a newspaper reported that a white woman’s body had been stolen from Trinity Churchyard.  So when this event happened in April, New Yorkers were already primed for action.  

A mob quickly formed and stormed the hospital, causing doctors and medical students to flee.  The mob found three bodies, one boiling in a kettle to remove flesh from the bones, and two others cut up, with parts hanging around the room.  The mob destroyed the rooms, and took much of the specimens into the street, where they were burned in a large fire.  There was some effort to throw a couple of medical students who had been captured into the fire as well.  But the sheriff arrived and removed them to jail for their own protection.

After discussing the matter further that evening, probably in taverns, many memes of the public decided that more action was needed.  A mob of hundreds of people surrounded Columbia College.  Alexander Hamilton appeared and tried to calm the mob.  They pushed him aside and entered the areas where they thought they might find bodies or body parts.  The staff had removed them the night before.  Still unhappy, the mob, which grew to about 5000, broke into the houses of several doctors, searching for bodies.  

They finally ended up at the jail, demanding access to the medical students who had been arrested the day before.  The prisoners had to fend off attacks with rocks and bricks.  When one of the rioters got inside the jail, the guards killed him, which only angered the rioters even more.  Several more prominent leaders tried to quell the violence.  John Jay was hit in the head with a rock.  The former general Baron von Steuben, was hit with a brick.  Hundreds of militia rushed to the jail.  Clinton had sent them with strict orders not to fire on the mob.  However, when the mob attack the militia, they fired in self defense.  At least three rioters and three militiamen were killed in the fight, although some observers put the death count at twenty.

In the following days, many doctors published ads proclaiming that they had never taken a body from anywhere in the city.  This, of course ignored the fact that potter’s field and the Negro Burying ground were outside the city limits.  Vigilantes formed “Dead Guard Men” armed groups that patrolled the cemeteries night and day to prevent grave robbing.  A grand jury investigated the riots, but never resulted in any convictions.  

The issue seemed to subside after that, and there is no evidence that this had any impact on the debates over ratification, although the riots took place only a week or two before the elections of delegates to New York’s ratifying convention.

Antifederalist Arguments

Despite the occasional riot, New York was doing pretty well and things were pretty stable, especially when compared to New England.  Even so, New York had a divide similar to those in other states. The merchant class, particularly in New York City, favored the new constitution, which they believed would improve trade and establish more economic stability across the continent.  

At the same time farmers throughout the state opposed the constitution.  One reason New York was doing well was because of the massive revenues from tariffs collected in New York City.  This allowed the state to keep other taxes lower, meaning small farmers were not hit as hard with state taxes.  The new constitution would give those tariff revenues to the federal government, meaning the state would likely have to increase property taxes, hitting hard on struggling farmers.  New York had also confiscated a large amount of land from loyalists.  The new constitution was seen as a way for these loyalists to sue for the return of their property, pursuant to the peace treaty of 1783.  Patriot farmers who may have obtained this land a decade ago, might find themselves thrown off of their farms.

Governor Clinton’s political base rested with these farmers who opposed the new constitution.  He was in no hurry to get behind it.  He also did not come out forcefully against it.  In the fall of 1787 the state assembly was not in session, and Governor Clinton saw no reason to call a special session to consider the constitution.

The two New York delegates who had opposed Hamilton at the Constitutional Convention, Yates, and Lansing, began writing articles and essays in opposition to the Constitution, arguing that it would destroy New York’s sovereignty.  We see many of the arguments made in other states: the Convention in Philadelphia had exceeded its authority, there was no bill of rights, and so on.  One very local objection was giving up the revenue from the Port of New York.  Opponents also seized on the Senate in particular as being an aristocratic body.

Federalist Papers

Of course, the federalists fought for ratification in the state.  Leading that fight was Alexander Hamilton.  As early as July of 1787, two months before the convention in Philadelphia even ended, Hamilton had published an anonymous article criticizing the governor’s lack of support for the convention.  He argued the governor was more concerned about protecting his own power than the national good.

Beginning in late October, about a month after the Philadelphia Convention had ended, Hamilton published his first essay in favor of ratification and extolling the virtues of the new Constitution.

Hamilton hoped to recruit others to help write a series of articles explaining the benefits of the Constitution and encouraging New Yorkers to support its ratification.  The first man he sought for help was fellow New Yorker John Jay.   

Hamilton also reached out to William Duer, another New York finance guy. Duer wrote one or two essays.  Hamilton, however, did not consider his work up to the task, and removed him from the project.  Hamilton also reached out to Gouverneur Morris.  Morris had been a Pennsylvania delegate to the Convention, but had lived most of his life in New York, and had recently purchased a new home in the state.  Morris, however, was too busy to get involved in the project.  Hamilton then turned out of state, to James Madison of Virginia.

Hamilton, Jay, and Madison worked out a plan to divide the essays into their areas of expertise.  Jay, who had served as a diplomat in Europe and who had negotiated several treaties, focused on foreign relations.  Madison had long studied the history of ancient republics.  Many of his essays focused on historical reasons for why the Constitution had certain features.  The author of the Virginia plan also focused on the many checks and balances in the new government, and how they would prevent factions that were prevalent in many state governments from being able to take control of federal power.  Hamilton focused more on the executive branch, the judiciary, as well as taxation and the military.

It was common practice for both advocates and opponents to publish their essays under pseudonyms, usually drawn from ancient Rome.  Antifederalists in New York commonly published under the name Brutus or Cato.  Some historians suspect that Governor Clinton himself was Cato. Initially, Hamilton had begun publishing simply as “Citizen of New York”.  However, once Madison joined the team from Virginia, that would no longer work.  The team chose to publish under the pseudonym “Publius” after  Publius Valerius Poplicola.  He was one of the leaders of the effort to overthrow the Roman monarchy and helped form the Roman Republic around 500 BC.

Jay only ended up writing only a few essays.  He wrote four of the first five, but then fell sick in early December and could not really contribute over the next few critical months.  Some authors say that Jay was absent because he was injured in the Doctors Riot.  In truth, Jay had a flare up of rheumatism that prevented more activity.  He did write one more essay toward the end of the series.

Hamilton wrote the majority of the papers, with 51 credited to his pen, and 29 to Madison.  Another 16 essays are in dispute, with many scholars arguing they were jointly written by both Madison and Hamilton.  Since all were published anonymously, there is no clear record on the point.  They were published first as individual essays in New York papers.

A first volume of essays was published in March of 1788 containing the first 36.  A second volume at the end of May included the later essays, 37-77, with essays 78-85 published for the first time in that volume.  These were influential in explaining the benefits of the new Constitution and have been used by Constitutional scholars ever since, but it’s not clear how much of an impact they had on New York voters.

Ratifying Convention

Governor Clinton did not call for a special session in the fall of 1787.  Instead, he waited until the regular opening of the new session in January of 1788.  He sent the legislature, not only the constitution, but the letters he had received from Yates and Lansing explaining why they had left the convention early and including all of their criticisms.  Clinton did not say anything for or against the Constitution at that time, but simply handed it to the legislature.

For several weeks, advocates were concerned that the legislature might not even call a convention at all.  There were several close votes on how to characterize the convention.  But in the end, the legislators agreed overwhelmingly that this was a decision for the people and that it would be an abuse of their power not to call a convention at all.  They voted in February to hold elections two months later, in late April and early May.  This was the same time that legislative elections were held. They also opened the elections to all adult free white males, eliminating the property requirement that existed for electing legislators. The convention would take place in Poughkeepsie beginning on June 17.  

New York had two pretty well-organized political parties, even if they did not really have names.  They centered around politicians, with one faction backing Governor Clinton, and the other centered around Schuyler and Hamilton.  Those in favor were called federalists. Those opposed sometimes called themselves antifederalists, but also went by the name republicans.

There were twelve newspapers in New York state, all of which were run by federalists.  Only one newspaper printed a substantial number of anti-federalist articles.  The anti-federalists published their own pamphlets which they distributed statewide.

Because of the highly partisan nature of the debate, when the delegate votes were released in late may, there were 46 antifederalist delegates and only 19 federalists.  All of the federalist delegates came from New York City and the surrounding counties.  The rest of the state voted overwhelmingly anti-federalist.

The federalists then put their hopes in the fact that other states were likely to bring the Constitution into effect without New York.  That would mean the question would turn from keeping the Confederation or the new federal government to New York could choose to join the new union or not.  The confederation would be dead.

The federalists hoped to draw out convention debate in order to buy time for news from other states to arrive.  This seemed to work.

When the Convention began, there were still only eight states which had ratified.  On June 24, the Convention learned that New Hampshire became the 9th state to ratify, thus bringing the Constitution into effect.  A week later, on July 2, delegates learned of Virginia’s ratification.

Albany Riot

News of Virginia’s ratification just before Independence Day had varied reactions.  The Anti-federalists saw the new Constitution as a threat to their liberty and independence.  On July 4, a group of anti-federalists in Albany held a public burning of the Constitution.  In response, the federalists held a parade celebrating the Constitution that evening.

The Anti-federalists formed a mob, armed with clubs stones, and bayonets, to stop the parade.  These were not just local thugs.  Yates and Lansing were among those in the anti-federalist mob.  Both sides had been drinking heavily.  The federalists outnumbered the anti-federalists who retreated into a nearby house.  The federalists then besieged the house for some time before the defenders surrendered and were arrested.  

The riots resulted in about 18 seriously injured and one man killed by a bayonet. Despite the violence, work at the convention continued.

Ratification

Word of Virginia’s ratification began to divide the anti-federalist majority at the Convention.  As we saw in Virginia, the debate at the convention turned from yes or no to the Constitution to one of either voting for ratification, or voting for an alternative with lots of amendments to make the new government more acceptable.  New York did not want to be outside the Union, especially with a hostile British Army on its northern border in Quebec.  New Yorkers recognized the continued need for participation in the Union.  

There was also the issue of whether New York would remain the seat for the new federal government.  Obviously if New York refused to join, Congress would move to another state.

The Convention came up with a whole range of amendments to the Constitution.  They also voted to send a circular letter to the other states calling for a second convention to consider amendments. Like other states we’ve discussed, New York wanted a bill of rights, as well as a whole range of other more substantive changes.

Then the debate turned to whether ratification would be unconditional or conditional on these amendments.  Lansing proposed a vote on conditional ratification.  Federalists argued that without an unconditional ratification, New York would have no say in writing any amendments since it would not join the Union until after they were passed.  It would be much better to have New York participate in the amendment process as part of the Union. Federalists also raised the argument that if the convention refused to ratify, that New York City and its surrounding counties might secede from the state of New York and join the United States on their own.

One July 23, the delegates broke the fighting when several anti-federalists agreed to change their proposal to vote for ratification “on express condition” of the adoption of amendments to “in full confidence” that the amendments would be adopted.  This made the vote for ratification unconditional and allowed New York to join the new government.  On July 23, the convention voted 31 to 29 in favor of the new wording, despite the opposition of Governor Clinton and other anti-federalist leaders like Yates and Lansing.  Three days later, the delegates voted 30 to 27 to finalize ratification.

New York would become the 11th state to join the union.

Next week, the Confederation Congress begins the process of establishing the new federal government.

Next Episode 357 First Elections

Previous Episode 355 Virginia Ratification

 Contact me via email at mtroy.history@gmail.com

 Follow the podcast on X (formerly Twitter) @AmRevPodcast

 Join the Facebook group, American Revolution Podcast 

 Join American Revolution Podcast on Quora 

 Discuss the AmRev Podcast on Reddit

American Revolution Podcast Merch!

T-shirts, hoodies, mugs, pillows, totes, notebooks, wall art, and more.  Get your favorite American Revolution logo today.  Help support this podcast.  https://merch.amrevpodcast.com

Click here to donate

DONATE

American Revolution Podcast is distributed 100% free of charge. If you can chip in to help defray my costs, I'd appreciate whatever you can give.  Make a one time donation through my PayPal account. You may also donate via Venmo (@Michael-Troy-20).

Click here to see my Patreon Page

You can support the American Revolution Podcast as a Patreon subscriber.  This is an option making monthly pledges.  Patreon support will give you access to Podcast extras and help make the podcast a sustainable project.

An alternative to Patreon is SubscribeStar.  For anyone who has problems with Patreon, you can get the same benefits by subscribing at SubscribeStar.

Help Support this podcast on "BuyMeACoffee.com"

Visit the American Revolution Podcast Bookshop.  Support local bookstores and this podcast!

https://bookshop.org/shop/ARP

Signup for the AmRev Podcast Mail List

* indicates required

Email*       

First Name 

Last Name 

Further Reading

Websites

Lovejoy, Bess “The Gory New York City Riot that Shaped American Medicine” Smithsonian Magazine, June 17, 2014:  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gory-new-york-city-riot-shaped-american-medicine-180951766

Anatomy of a Riot, 1788: https://www.sciencehistory.org/stories/magazine/the-anatomy-riot-of-1788

New York & Ratification of the Federal Constitution https://history.nycourts.gov/about_period/federal-constitution

Brawl between Federalists and anti-Federalists, July 4, 1788 https://www.gilderlehrman.org/sites/default/files/00259_SPS.pdf

Violence and the Ratification of the U.S. Constitution in New York City https://www.gothamcenter.org/blog/violence-and-the-ratification-of-the-us-constitution-in-new-york-city

Ratification Riots: https://csac.history.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/281/2020/11/Violence-in-the-Ratification-Debate_Essay.pdf

New York Ratifies the Constitution, 26 July 1788 https://archive.csac.history.wisc.edu/ny_ratifies_the_constitution.pdf

VIDEO: The Struggle for Ratification: New York’s Role in Shaping the U.S. Constitution  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOTfjhwcz6o

Free eBooks
(from archive.org unless noted)

Documentary History of the Constitution of the United States of America, Vol 2, Washington: Dept. of State, 1894. 

This Constitution: From Ratification to the Bill of Rights, Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, Inc. 1988 (borrow only). 

New York Circular letter, 1788. 

Brant, Irving James Madison: Father of the Constitution, 1787-1800. Bobbs-Merrill Co. 1950 (borrow only). 

Ford, Paul L. Pamphlets on the Constitution of the United States, Brooklyn, NY: 1888. 

Headly, J.T. The Great Riots of New York, 1712 to 1873, New York: E.B. Treat, 1873. 

Kaminski, John, et. al (eds) The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution: Virginia (Vol 18-23) 2003-2009.

Renwick, Henry B. Lives of John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, 1817-1895, New York: Harper & Brothers, 1840. 

Jay, John Address to the people of the state of New-York on the subject of the Constitution, New York: Samuel Loudon, 1788. 

Madison, James, Alexander Hamilton & John Jay The Federalist, New York: Random House Modern Library, 1937.

Rutland, Robert A. The Ordeal of the Constitution: The Antifederalists and the Ratification Struggle of 1787-1788, Northeastern University Press, 1983 (borrow only). 

Books Worth Buying
(links to Amazon.com unless otherwise noted)*

Bailyn, Bernard (ed) The Debate on the Constitution : Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification, Part One, Library of America, 1984 (borrow on archive.org). 

Bradford, M.E. Original Intentions: on the Making and Ratification of the United States Constitution, Univ. of GA Press, 1993 (borrow on archive.org). 

Conley, Patrick T & John P. Kaminski The Constitution and the States: The Role of the Original Thirteen in the Framing and Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Madison House, 1988 (borrow on archive.org).

De Pauw, Linda Grant The Eleventh Pillar: New York State and the Federal Constitution, Cornell Univ. Press, 1966 (borrow on archive.org). 

Faber, Michael J. An Anti-Federalist Constitution: The Development of Dissent in the Ratification Debates, Univ. Press of Kansas, 2019. 

Kaminski, John P George Clinton: Yeoman Politician of the New Republic, Madison House, 1993 (borrow on archive.org) 

Maier, Pauline Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788. Simon & Schuster, 2010. 

Morris, Richard B. Witnesses at the Creation: Hamilton, Madison, Jay and the Constitution, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1985. 

Rossiter, Clinton Alexander Hamilton and the Constitution, Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. 1964 (borrow on archive.org). 

Smith, Craig R To Form a More Perfect Union: The Ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, 1787-1791, University Press of America, 1993 (borrow on archive.org) 

Storing, Herbert J. What the Anti-Federalists Were For: The Political Thought of the Opponents of the Constitution, Univ of Chicago Press, 1981. 

Van Doren, Carl The Great Rehearsal: The story of the making and ratifying of the Constitution of the United States, Viking Press, 1948. (borrow on archive.org) 

* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.