The Constitution's Ratification: Who Wanted It And Why?

The ratification of the Constitution was a highly debated topic in the late 18th century. The Federalists wanted nine states to ratify the Constitution, but they faced opposition from Anti-Federalists in large and powerful states such as Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. The Anti-Federalists demanded amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government. The Federalists knew that the main opposition would come from these large states, so they built momentum toward the nine states they needed to win.

Explore related products

Federalists and Antifederalists: The Debate Over the Ratification of the Constitution (Constitutional Heritage Series)

$35.48 $50

Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788

$13.2 $24

The Debate on the Constitution : Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification : Part One, September 1787-February 1788 (Library of America)

$32.82 $42.5

The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Anti-Federalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification 1787-1788: A Library of America Boxed Set

$79.05 $85

The Federalist Papers (Dover Thrift Editions: American History)

$7.14 $8

The Anti-Federalist: Writings by the Opponents of the Constitution

$33

The Federalists wanted to ratify the Constitution, but faced opposition from Anti-Federalists in large and powerful states

By mid-January 1788, five states (Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) had ratified the Constitution. The Federalists were building momentum toward the nine states they needed to win. However, they knew that the Anti-Federalist opposition in the remaining large and powerful states would be difficult to overcome.

The ratification of the Constitution was a highly debated topic, with some arguing for unanimous state approval and others proposing unique procedures for ratification. The Virginia Plan, submitted to the Constitutional Convention on 29 May 1787, provided that Congress first approve the proposed Constitution and then submit it to the state legislatures, which would then call state conventions to consider ratification. However, this procedure was objected to by Roger Sherman of Connecticut, who preferred to continue using the procedure in the Articles of Confederation.

Additionally, James Madison of Virginia opposed ratification by state legislatures, arguing that the Constitution needed to be adopted directly by the people or their immediate deputies. Despite the opposition, the Federalists worked to influence the delegates in the remaining states, such as New York and Virginia, to ratify the Constitution.

The Anti-Federalists demanded prior amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government

The Federalists wanted to ratify the Constitution, but they knew the main opposition would come from Anti-Federalists in large and powerful states, including Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. The Anti-Federalists demanded prior amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government. They were also mounting an effective opposition in essays and debates.

During the debate in Massachusetts, opposition forced the Federalists to promise to consider amendments protecting the liberties of the people after the Constitution was ratified as written.

The Federalists were building momentum toward the nine states they needed to win. By mid-January 1788, five states (Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) had ratified the Constitution. Two other states, Maryland and South Carolina, met that spring and overwhelmingly ratified the Constitution, bringing the total to eight.

Still, to be considered legitimate, the Constitution would need the support of Virginia and New York, because of their political and economic influence and geographical location, even if the approval of nine other states met the constitutional threshold for the new government to go into operation.

James Madison of Virginia opposed ratification by state legislatures, arguing philosophically that the Constitution needed to be adopted directly by the people or their immediate deputies.

The ratification of the Constitution was debated in Massachusetts, where opposition forced the Federalists to promise to consider amendments protecting the people's liberties

The ratification of the Constitution was hotly debated in Massachusetts, where opposition forced the Federalists to promise to consider amendments protecting the people's liberties. The Federalists were building momentum toward the nine states they needed to ratify the Constitution, but they knew the main opposition would come from Anti-Federalists in large and powerful states, including Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. The Anti-Federalists were also mounting an effective opposition in essays and debates. Some demanded prior amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government.

By mid-January 1788, five states (Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) had ratified the Constitution. However, the Federalists knew that the approval of Virginia and New York was also crucial due to their political and economic influence and geographical location.

The procedure for ratification was a serious consideration when the Constitutional Convention met in May 1787. Knowing that unanimous state approval was impossible, the Convention devised a unique procedure for ratification that comprised the Seventh Article that concluded the Constitution. The Virginia Plan, submitted to the Constitutional Convention on 29 May 1787, provided that Congress first approve the proposed Constitution and then submit it to the state legislatures, which, in turn, would then call state conventions to consider ratification. However, this procedure was objected to by Roger Sherman of Connecticut, who preferred to continue using the procedure in the Articles of Confederation.

James Madison of Virginia also opposed ratification by state legislatures, arguing philosophically that the Constitution needed to be adopted directly by the people or their immediate deputies.

Explore related products

The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Anti-Federalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification 1787-1788 ( Complete )

$15

The Debate on the Constitution : Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles and Letters During the Struggle over Ratification, Part Two: January to August 1788 (Library of America)

$39 $42.5

An Anti-Federalist Constitution: The Development of Dissent in the Ratification Debates (American Political Thought)

$27.3 $42.99

The Federalist

$24.28 $30

The Framework of the Federalist: Visualizing the Structure of the Argumentation

$20

The Federalist Papers Made Easier: The Substance and Meaning of the United States Constitution

$33.86 $39.95

The Virginia Plan, submitted to the Constitutional Convention in May 1787, proposed that Congress first approve the Constitution and then submit it to the state legislatures

The Virginia Plan was notable for its role in setting the overall agenda for debate in the Convention. It was a radical departure from the Articles of Confederation, which had been the procedure for ratification up until that point. Knowing that unanimous state approval was impossible, the Convention needed a new procedure for ratification.

The Virginia Plan was opposed by Roger Sherman of Connecticut, who objected to the idea of moving away from the procedure in the Articles of Confederation. James Madison of Virginia also opposed the Virginia Plan, arguing that the Constitution should be adopted directly by the people or their immediate deputies.

The Federalists were building momentum towards the nine states they needed to ratify the Constitution, but they knew the main opposition would come from Anti-Federalists in large and powerful states, including Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. The Anti-Federalists were mounting an effective opposition in essays and debates, and some demanded prior amendments before they would accept the new government.

James Madison of Virginia opposed ratification by state legislatures, arguing that the Constitution needed to be adopted directly by the people or their immediate deputies

The debate over ratification took place in the context of the Constitutional Convention in May 1787. Knowing that unanimous state approval was impossible, the Convention devised a unique procedure for ratification that comprised the Seventh Article that concluded the Constitution. The Virginia Plan, submitted by Madison, provided for Congress to first approve the proposed Constitution and then submit it to the state legislatures, which would then call state conventions to consider ratification.

By mid-January 1788, five states (Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) had ratified the Constitution. The Federalists were building momentum toward the nine states they needed to win, but they knew the main opposition would come from Anti-Federalists in large and powerful states, including Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. The Anti-Federalists were mounting an effective opposition in essays and debates, demanding prior amendments to be sent to a second convention before they would accept the new government.

To be considered legitimate, the Constitution would need the support of Virginia and New York, because of their political and economic influence and geographical location, even if the approval of nine other states met the constitutional threshold for the new government to go into operation. On March 22, Hamilton and Madison arranged for the first thirty-six Federalist essays to be published in book form and distributed copies to friends in hope of influencing the delegates to the New York and Virginia ratifying conventions.

Frequently asked questions