Ratification 49guarantees of civil liberties. In short, they feared that the national government
would become tyrannical. This concern was summarized in Brutus 1, an
Anitifederalist paper believed to have been written by Robert Yates, a New York
judge and delegate to the Constitutional Convention: the Constitution would
create a federal government that will “possess absolute and uncontrollable
power... ”^16 The doubts about the single central executive were expressed by
Patrick Henry, a leading Antifederalist. Speaking to the Virginia ratifying
convention, Henry was mocking in his indictment: “Your president may easily
become a king.... There will be no checks, no real balances in this government.”^17
Even Thomas Jefferson complained that the president would control the armed
forces and could be reelected indefinitely.^18 State power and the ability to regulate
commerce were also central concerns. States such as New York would lose
substantial revenue if they could no longer charge tariffs on goods that came into
their ports. Other states were concerned that they would pay a disproportionate
share of national taxes.
The Antifederalists’ foremost objection was to the lack of protections for civil
liberties in the new political system. During the last week of the convention,
Elbridge Gerry and George Mason offered a resolution “to prepare a Bill of Rights.”
However, the resolution was unanimously defeated by the state delegations.
Some believed that the national government posed no threat to liberties, such as
freedom of the press, because it did not have the power to restrict them in the first
place. Others thought that because it would be impossible to enumerate all rights,
it was better to list none at all. Federalists such as Roger Sherman argued that
state constitutions, most of which protected freedom of speech, freedom of the
press, right to a trial by jury, and other civil liberties, would be sufficient to protect
liberty. However, many Antifederalists still wanted assurances that the national
government would not trample their rights.A lady asked Dr. [Benjamin]
Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what
have we got—a republic or a
monarchy?”
“A republic,” replied the Doctor,
“if you can keep it.”—James McHenry, The Records
of the Federal Convention of 1787This engraving by Amos Doolittle
titled The Looking Glass for 1787
satirizes some of the issues raised in
the debate over the ratification of the
Constitution. The wagon in the center
is carrying Connecticut and sinking
into the mud under the weight of debts
and paper money as “Federalists” and
“Antifederalists” try to pull it out.Full_03_APT_64431_ch02_030-069.indd 49 16/11/18 1:31 PM