United States, - declared him "the first of every assembly of which he was a member." Mr. Gallatin, who served with him in the House of Representatives of the United States during the memorable and most important sessions of 1795-96 and 1796-97, in which he himself was a most distinguished actor, recalling, in the evening of his days, those who had been and were most eminent in the deliberative assemblies of the nation, pronounced Mr. Madison to be, in his judgment, the ablest man that ever sat in the American Congress.

CHAPTER XXXVI.

Convention of New Hampshire re-assembles, and ratifies Constitution This Fact not known to Convention of Virginia, at Time of its Action - Brief Review of Leading Objections urged against Adoption of the Constitution - Consolidation - Aristocracy — Objections viewed in Light of Experience, as well as Philosophy - Testimony of De Tocqueville-Actual Working of the Constitution the reverse of Aristocratic-Power of mere Numbers - Warning of Jefferson - Rejoicings at Acceptance of Constitution by Virginia - Convention of New York - Divisions in that Body-Opposition to Constitution headed by Governor Clinton and Messrs. Yates, Lansing, and Melancthon Smith -Its Leading Advocates, Hamilton, Jay, Chancellor Livingston, and Duane - Large Majority of Convention opposed to Constitution — Expedients to obtain a Ratification Right to secede, in certain Contingencies, proposed Strong Protest against it in Letter from Mr. Madison to Colonel Hamilton - Call of another Convention agreed to as Price of Ratification - Deprecated by General Washington and Mr. Madison Signal for Renewed Opposition to the Constitution in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Rhode Island— Legislature of Virginia, under Lead of Mr. Henry, recommences War upon the Constitution - New York gives no Vote in Presidential Election, and fails to appoint Senators during First Session of Congress-Proceedings of Congress for putting New Government into Operation-Efforts of Colonel Hamilton and his Colleagues, to obtain Seat of Government for New York, finally succeed-Letters of Mr. Madison to General Washington on this Subject - Correspondence between Mr. Madison and Mr. Jefferson on Bill of Rights - Secret History of Opposition to the Constitution in certain Quarters - Proposed Amendments - Mr. Madison's Opinions on the Subject-Mr. Henry carries Resolutions through Legislature of Virginia for Call of another Convention-Letter of Colonel Carrington to Mr. Madison,

giving an Account of these Proceedings-Friends of Mr. Madison put him in Nomination for Senate of United States - His Preference for House of Representatives - Letter on the Occasion to Governor Randolph-Course of Mr. Henry in the Senatorial Election - Endeavors to defeat Mr. Madison's Election to House of Representatives by gerrymandering his Congressional District- Animated Canvass between Mr. Madison and Mr. Monroe for Congress - Mr. Madison elected - General Result of the Elections in Virginia.

THE Convention of New Hampshire, which adjourned, as we have seen, in February, 1788, to meet again on the third Wednesday in June, reassembled at the appointed time, and, on the 21st day of that month, ratified the Constitution by a vote of fifty-seven to forty-six. This, however, was not known to the convention of Virginia, when, on the 25th day of June, it pronounced its final decision in favor of ratification; so that its determination was taken under a full sense of the responsibility involved in the consideration, that on its voice alone might depend the momentous question of the establishment of the Constitution as an operative system of government by the concurring votes of nine States, which was required for the purpose. The establishment of the Constitution being now secured by the accession of one more than the requisite number of States, we are naturally led to pause for a moment, and consider coolly the weight of the objections put forward with so much zeal at the time against its adoption.

The leading objections urged against it in the convention of Virginia, as shown by the record of its debates, and the same were urged elsewhere,

-rested on supposed dangers to the public liberty from two sources: first, consolidation, or the annihilation and absorption of the State governments by the central authority; secondly, aristocracy, or the subversion of the equal rights of the masses of the people by undue power placed in the hands of the few. In regard to the first, it was said that the State governments would be swallowed up, or reduced to insignificance, having nothing left for them to do but "to take care of the poor, make and repair highways, erect bridges, and so on;" with respect to the second, that the very provision made in the Constitution for the representation of the people would "lead to an aristocracy, instead of supporting democratical principles."1

What has been the verdict of experience upon both of these objections? Every impartial student of American history must say, that down to the present time, embracing seventy years of varied and eventful experience, whatever tendencies have

2

1 The language cited in the text was that of Mr. Henry in his speeches of the 9th and 12th of June. The same themes were dwelt on habitually by him, and were frequently and warmly enforced by Colonel Mason and Mr. Grayson. Mr. Henry is supposed to have very much modified, if not abandoned, his early objections to the Constitution, after witnessing its practical operation; which he did for a period of ten years, and, towards the close of his life, became a zealous supporter of the Federal government in some of its strong

est and most questionable exertions of power. Colonel Mason and Mr. Grayson died too soon-the latter in March, 1790, the former in October, 1792- to have had the opportunity of revising their opinions by the lights derived from the actual working of the Constitution.

2 The observations here made were written previous to the unhappy intestine convulsion of 18611865, and must be understood, therefore, as referring to the regular peaceful operation of the Constitution, under the direction of its own inherent and salutary princi

been shown, at certain periods, to encroach on the province of the State governments, the latter have maintained their full efficiency and salutary vigor, and evinced an inherent power to vindicate their rightful prerogatives. In the many fierce conflicts of interest and opinion to which American institutions have been subjected during that time, it has been demonstrated, to the entire justification of the views asserted by the advocates of the adoption of the Constitution, that the vital and predominant force of the system, in its regular and normal operation, abides in the State governments. On this once much-litigated point, the testimony of a most enlightened and impartial foreign observer, who combined with the profound speculations of his countryman Montesquieu the practical philosophy of Locke, carries with it a decisive and irresistible weight.

After a profound analysis of the constitutional allotment of power between the States and the Union, he says: "The Union is a vast body, which presents no definite object to patriotic feeling. The forms and limits of the State are distinct

ples. Whether the perturbation of its orbit, which has arisen from that unnatural and deranging influence, is likely to survive the cause, and become permanent, is a question whose solution is hidden in the future. It does not fall within the province of the writer to attempt to lift the veil. But he cannot but express the sincere and sanguine hope, that, with the re-establish

ment of peace, the system founded by our wise and virtuous ancestors will quietly revert to its original principles and beneficent operation, and continue to vindicate to future ages, and the enlightened judgment of the world, the comprehensive statesmanship and enlarged and noble patriotism in which it was conceived.