Creating the Constitution, 1781–1791

Independence left Americans with two jobs: govern each state and keep the states together. A constitution is a written plan that assigns powers and sets limits on government.

State governments take shape

Most states adopted constitutions between 1776 and 1780. Connecticut and Rhode Island kept their colonial charters but removed royal authority. Memories of royal governors made Americans cautious about executive power. Most states gave their elected legislatures the strongest role and governors short terms and few powers.

Virginia's Declaration of Rights, written mainly by George Mason in June 1776, protected jury trials and press freedom. It later helped shape the national Bill of Rights. The states also tried different ways to organize power:

John Adams did much of the drafting in Massachusetts. Its constitution remains in force. Writing a plan through a special convention, then seeking public approval, offered a model for the federal Constitution.

Participation had sharp limits. Most states tied voting or officeholding to property or taxes. Women, enslaved people, and Native Americans were generally excluded. New Jersey's broader wording allowed some property-owning women and free Black men to vote until 1807. Northern change was uneven: Pennsylvania's 1780 gradual abolition law kept children born to enslaved mothers in bondage until age 28. Massachusetts court rulings in the early 1780s made slavery unenforceable under its new constitution.

The first national plan

Congress approved the Articles of Confederation in November 1777. They took effect on March 1, 1781, when Maryland became the last state to ratify them. Maryland had held back over other states' western land claims. Agreements to transfer those claims to Congress helped settle the dispute.

A confederation joins states that keep most power. The national government had one legislative house, Congress. Each state had one vote, though it could send two to seven delegates. Major decisions needed nine states; amendments needed all thirteen. There was no separate executive branch or general national court system. Congress could arrange special courts for certain disputes.

Congress could make war and peace, negotiate treaties, borrow and coin money, and run a postal service. It handled relations with Native nations outside state borders. It could request money from states through requisitions, but could not tax people directly, control interstate or foreign trade, or force state obedience.

That weakness was a choice shaped by the Revolution. Americans feared another distant government that could threaten liberty. Small states also valued equal votes. Virginia's 1790 population was about 12.7 times Delaware's, yet each had one vote. A rule that protected small states could leave people in large states feeling underrepresented.

The Confederation kept the states together through the war's end. The Treaty of Paris in 1783 secured British recognition of independence and borders reaching the Mississippi River. Congress also created a lasting way to organize western territory.

Surveying and selling land

States including Virginia and New York transferred western claims to Congress. Land north of the Ohio River and east of the Mississippi became the Northwest Territory. Selling land gave a government without taxing power a source of income.

The Land Ordinance of 1785 set survey and sale rules. A township measured 6 miles on each side:

It contained 36 one-square-mile sections, each holding 640 acres. Thus one township held 23,040 acres. Section 16 was reserved to support public schools. At a minimum price of one dollar per acre, a 640-acre section cost at least 640 dollars. Few ordinary farmers could pay that amount. Land companies and speculators often bought first and resold smaller pieces.

Government before statehood

Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance on July 13, 1787. Congress was meeting in New York while the Constitutional Convention met in Philadelphia. These were separate bodies.

The ordinance described three stages:

1. Congress appointed a governor, secretary, and three judges.
2. At 5,000 free adult men, the territory could elect a legislature and send a nonvoting delegate to Congress.
3. A part reaching 60,000 free inhabitants could seek admission as a state on equal terms with existing states.

The last count included more people than the earlier count: free inhabitants were not just adult men. Congress could also allow earlier admission below 60,000 when the general interest supported it. With 52,000 free inhabitants, a proposed state was 8,000 short of the usual threshold. It was not permanently barred from admission.

Promises and unequal results

The ordinance protected religious freedom and jury trials and encouraged education. It banned slavery except as punishment for crime, limiting slavery's westward spread. Yet it also required the return of people escaping slavery from the original states. Some people already enslaved in the territory remained enslaved in practice.

It promised fair treatment of Native peoples and protection for their lands. The region was already home to Shawnee, Miami, Lenape, Wyandot, Potawatomi, and other Native nations. Settlement brought warfare and treaties that transferred much Native land. A promise in a law and people's experience under that law can differ greatly.

Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin later became states from this territory; part of Minnesota also came from it. New states would join the Union as equals instead of becoming permanent dependencies. The Ohio River helped mark the western boundary between free and slave territory.

Keep the ordinances separate: 1785 organized land sales; 1787 organized territorial government, rights, and statehood. Both were achievements under the Articles.

Congress had responsibilities without enough power to meet them. The states governed daily life, but debt, trade, and defense demanded action across state borders.

Debt without dependable income

War debts were owed to soldiers, American lenders, France, and the Netherlands. Congress could ask states for money, but states often sent only part of the request. Without direct taxes, Congress could not reliably pay interest or veterans. Unpaid debts weakened lenders' trust and added to public anger.

Reform was difficult because amendments needed every state. Congress proposed a 5 percent import tax in 1781. Rhode Island's refusal in 1782 blocked it. Another effort failed when New York rejected the terms of the 1783 proposal. Twelve states could favor a change and still lose to one refusal.

Money itself caused problems. Continental paper currency had lost almost all its value during the war. Congress and states issued money, leaving different currencies in circulation. Buyers, sellers, and creditors faced uncertainty over what payments were worth.

Trade and foreign pressure

Congress could not regulate commerce among states or with other countries. States pursued their own trade policies. New York charged fees on boats carrying goods from New Jersey and Connecticut. A merchant crossing state borders could face barriers inside the same country.

Britain restricted American access to its West Indies ports while selling goods in the United States. The states lacked a united response. British troops also remained in Great Lakes forts after the peace treaty. Britain pointed to American failures to honor treaty terms, including debts owed to British creditors. Spain closed the lower Mississippi at New Orleans to American trade in 1784, hurting western farmers.

Decisions without enforcement

There was no separate executive to carry out national decisions and no general federal court system. Congress could establish special courts for disputes between states, but enforcement remained weak. Poor attendance by state delegations sometimes kept Congress from meeting its voting requirements.

A clear explanation follows the links:

No direct taxing power → unreliable state payments → unpaid debts and soldiers → weaker trust and growing anger.

Each link explains how a rule affected people. Simply calling Congress weak skips the reasoning.

Change and interpretation

The Constitution later gave Congress taxing and trade powers, created a president and federal courts, and made valid national laws supreme over conflicting state laws. Most laws would pass by majorities in both houses. Amendments would use broad support without requiring every state.

Historians disagree about the scale of the crisis. Nineteenth-century writers called the 1780s a critical period when the Union faced collapse. Merrill Jensen later argued that recovery was underway and supporters of a stronger government overstated the danger. Both the government's actual limits and the reformers' purpose matter when judging a claim about crisis.

Farmers in western Massachusetts faced taxes and debts they could not pay. Their uprising frightened national leaders and strengthened an existing movement to change the Articles.

Why farmers closed the courts

Many farmers were veterans. Gold and silver coin was scarce, yet Massachusetts demanded heavy taxes in coin to repay its war debt. Creditors also sought repayment. Courts could order debtors' land sold or send them to jail. Petitions for paper money and relief brought little help.

Starting in late summer 1786, armed groups calling themselves Regulators shut county courts. Closing a court could stop a case that would cost a farmer a home or farm. Daniel Shays, a former Continental Army captain, became one leader. Shays' Rebellion targeted state taxes and courts; Congress had no direct taxing power.

On January 25, 1787, about 1,500 rebels marched toward the federal arsenal at Springfield. William Shepard's state militia fired cannon, killing four rebels. A force led by Benjamin Lincoln, funded by Boston merchants, scattered rebels at Petersham in early February. Congress could not raise and pay an effective force to defend its arsenal.

The rebellion failed militarily, but Massachusetts later eased taxes and debt collection. Voters elected John Hancock governor in 1787, and most rebels received pardons. Shays was pardoned in 1788.

Different views of the same event

A creditor could see closed courts as an attack on lawful debts and property. A farmer could see heavy taxes and ignored petitions as a betrayal of the Revolution. Washington feared spreading disorder. Jefferson, writing from France, viewed occasional resistance more favorably. These positions reflected different experiences and concerns.

For example, a merchant's letter describing danger to property reveals a real fear. It also shows why that merchant might favor stronger enforcement. Reading for perspective means connecting the writer's interests to the argument, then checking the events the writer describes.

A convention was already being planned

Trade disputes had brought delegates from five states to Annapolis in September 1786. With so few states present, the meeting could not solve the wider problems. Hamilton and Madison helped call for a broader convention in Philadelphia.

The sequence matters:

• September 1786: Annapolis delegates call for a broader meeting.
• January 1787: rebels attack the Springfield arsenal.
• February 21, 1787: Congress approves a convention to revise the Articles.
• May 25, 1787: the Philadelphia convention opens.

Annapolis preceded the arsenal attack. Shays' Rebellion added urgency and helped persuade Washington and others to attend, but it was one pressure among several. National debt, trade disputes, and enforcement problems had already led leaders toward reform.

The Philadelphia meeting was called to revise the Articles. Delegates soon chose a much larger task: design a new national government and send it to the people for approval.

Inside the convention

The Constitutional Convention met in the Pennsylvania State House from May 25 to September 17, 1787. Twelve states participated; Rhode Island stayed away. Of 74 men appointed, 55 attended at some point. Washington presided.

Most delegates were wealthy, educated white men. Lawyers, merchants, and planters brought experience in government and war. Many owned enslaved people. Women, African Americans, and Native Americans had no delegates to represent their views directly.

Madison prepared plans and kept detailed notes, earning the nickname Father of the Constitution. Franklin, at 81, was the oldest delegate. Hamilton favored a stronger nation; Sherman worked on compromise; Wilson argued for a single executive. Gouverneur Morris shaped much of the final wording, including the Preamble. Jefferson was serving in France and John Adams in Britain. Patrick Henry declined to attend because he distrusted the meeting.

The debates were secret. Delegates could change positions without facing immediate public pressure. Each state delegation had one vote, and decisions used majorities. Madison's notes, published in 1840 after his death, provide much of our knowledge of the debates.

Ideas meet practical problems

English traditions, including Magna Carta and the English Bill of Rights, offered examples of limits on rulers. Locke stressed natural rights and government by consent. Montesquieu argued for dividing legislative, executive, and judicial power. Colonial self-government, state constitutions, and experience under the Articles supplied practical lessons.

On May 30, delegates voted for a government with three branches. They then argued over who would hold power: large or small states, the nation or states, and slaveholding or other states. They also had to create an executive strong enough to act without making a new king.

The decision to replace the Articles raised a question of authority. Critics said the delegates had gone beyond Congress's instructions. Supporters answered that their work was only a proposal. Elected state conventions would decide whether to approve it. Writing, signing, and ratifying were distinct actions.

Agreement without complete agreement

Thirty-nine delegates signed on September 17. Three present delegates refused: Mason, Gerry, and Randolph. Mason especially objected to the missing bill of rights. Franklin supported signing despite his own objections because he doubted another meeting could produce a better plan. Congress sent the proposal to the states on September 28.

Historians ask what drove these choices. Charles Beard argued in 1913 that economic interests, especially property and credit, shaped the framers' decisions. Later historians challenged a single economic explanation and emphasized political ideas and fear of disorder too. A delegate's wealth helps explain possible interests; evidence from debates is also needed to explain a particular choice.

Representation nearly broke the convention apart. Large states wanted a voice that matched their population. Small states wanted protection from being outvoted by their larger neighbors.

Two plans for national power

Edmund Randolph presented the Virginia Plan, drafted mainly by Madison, on May 29. William Paterson presented the New Jersey Plan on June 15.

Both plans recognized that Congress needed more power. Their disagreement concerned how that power would be shared. Under the Virginia Plan, voters chose the lower house, which chose the upper house.

Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts favored population-based representation. New Jersey and Delaware supported equality among states. Virginia's 1790 population was about 12.7 times Delaware's. That later census illustrates the size difference, though it was not available to delegates in 1787.

The Great Compromise

Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut helped create a combined plan. Adopted on July 16, 1787, the Great Compromise gave Congress two houses:

• The House of Representatives assigned seats by population. Voters chose members for two-year terms.
• The Senate gave every state two senators. State legislatures chose them for six-year terms, and each senator cast an individual vote.

The vote was five state delegations to four, with Massachusetts divided. Revenue bills had to begin in the House. Both houses had to agree before a bill could become law, so strength in one chamber did not give control of Congress. Article V also protected each state's equal Senate vote from removal without that state's consent.

Seeing both kinds of representation

The Constitution assigned the first House 65 seats before a census: Virginia received 10 and Delaware 1. Virginia therefore held ten times Delaware's House seats. Each still had two senators. The first census came in 1790, and later censuses would follow every ten years.

Article I allowed no more than one House member for every 30,000 people, with at least one per state. That was a limit on how many representatives there could be, not a promise of exactly one for every 30,000 people.

The Great Compromise settled the balance between large and small states. The Three-Fifths Compromise addressed a different question: how enslaved people would count toward population for House seats and direct taxes.

The Constitution strengthened the Union while protecting slavery in several ways. Delegates made bargains that increased slaveholders' power and left enslaved people without a political voice.

Counting people without giving them votes

Slavery was legal in most states in 1787. The 1790 census counted nearly 700,000 enslaved people, mostly in the South. South Carolina and Georgia delegates warned that their states would reject a union that threatened slavery. Many northern delegates accepted bargains to secure agreement.

Southern delegates wanted enslaved people fully counted for House seats. Northern delegates objected that people denied votes should not increase slaveholders' representation. The Three-Fifths Compromise counted free people plus three-fifths of the enslaved population for House representation and direct taxes, excluding Native people living in their own nations who were not taxed. The ratio had appeared in a Confederation tax proposal in 1783.

Virginia's 1790 figures show the effect:

1. Free population: 454,983.
2. Enslaved population: 292,627.
3. Three-fifths of the enslaved population: 175,576.2.
4. Population counted for apportionment: 630,559.2, or about 630,559.

At the later ratio of one representative per 33,000 people, Virginia received 19 seats; counting only its free population would have yielded 13. The additional seats also increased its electors, since electors equaled House seats plus senators. The counted enslaved people received no votes. The clause was a formula for political representation and taxes, with power going to slaveholders.

Importation and escape

Article V also barred changing the importation protection before 1808. Congress later passed a ban in 1807 that took effect January 1, 1808. The Constitution did not itself end importation on that date. Buying and selling enslaved people inside the country continued.

These bargains were tied to trade powers. Southern states accepted majority decisions on trade, while the Constitution prohibited export taxes and delayed any importation ban. The fugitive slave clause meant crossing into a free state did not legally secure freedom. It later supported the fugitive slave laws of 1793 and 1850.

Judging the bargains

The original text avoided the words slave and slavery, but its indirect language still protected slavery. Gouverneur Morris condemned the institution. Mason, himself a slaveholder, criticized the trade. South Carolina delegates defended it.

Historians disagree about how to weigh these protections against possible antislavery uses of the document. Frederick Douglass first condemned the Constitution as proslavery and later argued it could support antislavery action. Any interpretation must account for the clauses' actual effects on enslaved people and slaveholding states.

The Articles had no separate executive branch. Delegates wanted someone able to carry out national laws, but they feared giving one person powers resembling a king's.

An energetic office with limits

Randolph favored an executive of three people. Wilson argued that one executive could act decisively and bear clear responsibility. The convention chose a single president, with a four-year term and the possibility of reelection. The original plan set no limit on the number of terms; the two-term limit came in 1951.

Article II required an age of at least 35 and fourteen years of US residence. The president had to be a natural-born citizen, with an exception for people already US citizens when the Constitution was adopted.

The president commanded the armed forces, carried out laws, vetoed bills, negotiated treaties, and nominated judges and officials. Other branches checked these powers. Treaties needed two-thirds Senate approval. Major appointments needed Senate consent. Two-thirds of each house could override a veto. The House could impeach, and the Senate could convict and remove by two-thirds of members present. Delegates' trust that Washington would serve first helped them accept the new office.

Who would choose?

Selection by Congress could make the president dependent on lawmakers. Direct popular election faced objections about the country's size, slow news, and voters' knowledge of distant candidates. Southern states also stood to lose influence because their enslaved populations could not vote.

The final compromise used electors. Each state received a number equal to its House seats plus its senators. State legislatures decided how to choose them. Many legislatures selected electors themselves in the first election. Members of Congress and federal officeholders could not serve as electors.

The original Electoral College

Electors met in their own states. Each cast two votes for president, including at least one for someone from another state. There were no separate presidential and vice-presidential votes.

The leading candidate became president if supported by a majority of all appointed electors. The runner-up became vice president. A tie at the top with a majority sent the presidential choice to the House. If nobody had a majority, the House chose from the five highest candidates. In a House choice, each state delegation had one vote.

Virginia initially had 10 House seats and 2 senators, making 12 electors. Delaware had 1 House seat and 2 senators, making 3. The Senate addition reduced Virginia's advantage from ten times Delaware's House seats to four times its electors. Slaveholding states gained additional influence through their population count.

All 69 electors who voted in the first election cast one vote for Washington. Adams placed second and became vice president. The Jefferson–Burr tie in 1800 exposed a problem once parties developed. The Twelfth Amendment in 1804 introduced separate electoral votes for the two offices.

The Constitution opened with the people as its source of authority. It then divided national power among branches so the government could act without putting every task in the same hands.

Purposes and parts

The Preamble begins with the words “We the People.” Its purposes are a stronger union, justice, peace at home, common defense, public well-being, and liberty for present and future generations. Fears raised by unrest such as Shays' Rebellion help explain the wish for peace at home.

The seven articles organize the plan:

Separating jobs and checking power

Separation of powers gives lawmaking to Congress, enforcement to the president, and judging cases to the courts. Montesquieu's ideas helped shape this division. Checks and balances let one branch restrain another.

Suppose Congress passes a bill that the president opposes. The president may veto it. Congress can still enact it with two-thirds support in both houses. The first decision, the veto, and the possible override are different steps, each assigned to a different part of government.

The Senate also checks treaties and major appointments. Congress can impeach and remove officials. Federal judges serve during good behavior, normally for life, so their jobs do not depend on winning elections. Hamilton defended courts' power to reject unconstitutional laws in Federalist No. 78. The text did not expressly state that power; the Supreme Court asserted judicial review in Marbury v. Madison in 1803.

Principles and participation

Popular sovereignty means government rests on the people's authority. Republicanism means people govern through representatives. Limited government means officials have restricted powers and must obey the law. Individual rights protect people against government abuse. Federalism divides power between national and state governments.

The founding system was a republic with limited participation. Eligible voters directly chose the House. State legislatures chose senators, electors chose the president, and the president appointed judges with Senate consent. State voting rules mostly favored white men who owned property or paid taxes.

The original Constitution protected some rights. It barred laws punishing people without trial and laws punishing actions that were legal when done. It protected federal criminal jury trials and prohibited religious tests for federal office. It protected habeas corpus, a process that brings a detained person before a judge to examine the detention. Suspension was allowed only in rebellion or invasion when public safety required it. Critics wanted a broader, explicit list of rights, setting up the ratification dispute.

Replacing the Articles meant changing the relationship between the nation and the states. The Constitution gave national officials powers they could use directly, while state governments continued to govern much of daily life.

Dividing power between levels

Federalism divides power between national and state governments. Both levels act on people. Under the Articles, Congress had depended much more heavily on the states to act for it.

The necessary and proper clause allows laws needed to carry out granted powers. It became the basis for implied powers. Anti-Federalists feared it could stretch national authority too far. In 1791 Hamilton and Jefferson disagreed over whether Congress could establish a national bank.

National strength has rules

The supremacy clause makes the Constitution, federal laws made under it, and treaties superior to conflicting state law. A federal law must rest on constitutional authority; the clause does not make every action by a national official lawful.

States could not make treaties, coin money, or issue government paper money. They could not make anything except gold and silver coin legal payment for debts. They also faced limits on import taxes and laws that weakened contracts. These rules answered disputes over money and debtor relief in the 1780s.

The Constitution assigned Congress power to regulate trade with Native nations. Its population rule excluded Native people described as Indians not taxed, treating people living in their own nations as outside a state's count for representation. National expansion still put Native sovereignty and lands under pressure.

Changing the plan

Article V sets two stages. A proposal needs either two-thirds of both congressional houses or a convention called after requests from two-thirds of state legislatures. Ratification then needs three-fourths of states, through legislatures or conventions, as Congress specifies.

With thirteen states, three-fourths equals 9.75 states. Ten whole states would be needed. Vermont joined in 1791, bringing the total to fourteen. Three-fourths then equaled 10.5, so eleven states were needed for the Bill of Rights. Rounding down would fall short of the required fraction.

This process required more agreement than an ordinary law but less than the Articles' unanimous amendment rule. People could also take part through House elections where eligible, jury service, petitions, and public debate. The Bill of Rights would protect speaking, publishing, assembly, and petitioning against interference by Congress.

Supporters and opponents of the Constitution both feared tyranny. They disagreed about which danger was greater: a weak union or a powerful national government far from the people.

Who supported which side?

Federalists supported ratification. Madison, Hamilton, Jay, Washington, Franklin, and Wilson were leading supporters. Merchants, creditors, city workers, and craftspeople often welcomed stable trade and stronger national action. Small states also valued their equal place in the Senate.

Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution as written or wanted amendments. Henry, Mason, Richard Henry Lee, George Clinton, Gerry, and Mercy Otis Warren were important critics. Inland farmers and defenders of state authority supplied much support. These were broad groups in a debate, with disagreements inside each side. They were not yet the political parties of the 1790s.

Compare the fears and answers

Federalists could point to unpaid debts, trade barriers, and Shays' Rebellion. They feared that weakness or an unfair majority in a state could threaten liberty. Anti-Federalists could point to the small first House of 65 members and the president's substantial powers. They also feared a permanent peacetime army. Article I's maximum of one representative for every 30,000 people did not reassure critics who wanted closer representation.

Explain an argument fairly

Start with a claim, then identify its reason and the danger it addresses. Mason argued that a declaration of rights was missing. Existing state rights lists would not safely restrain a new government whose valid laws were supreme. His objection therefore concerned protection from national power, not simply loyalty to state officials.

A Federalist answer stressed that a government with separated powers could restrain itself while handling tasks the states could not solve alone. That answer addressed the fear of disorder. It did not remove every concern about government abuse.

Anti-Federalists were not enemies of all government. Many would accept a stronger union with firm protections for rights. Their pressure helped produce amendments. Ratification ended with the Constitution approved and a major criticism partly answered through the Bill of Rights.

Newspapers carried arguments about the new Constitution to readers across the states. Two famous sets of essays offered sharply different accounts of how a large republic would affect liberty.

The Federalist Papers

Hamilton, Madison, and Jay wrote 85 essays under the shared name Publius. Published in New York from October 1787 through 1788, they aimed to win ratification. The usual authorship count is 51 by Hamilton, 26 by Madison, 5 by Jay, and 3 jointly by Hamilton and Madison. Some attributions have been disputed.

The essays were persuasive arguments, not articles of the Constitution or official instructions. They help explain how supporters defended the proposal.

Madison on factions and power

In Federalist No. 10, Madison examined factions: groups whose shared interests could harm others' rights or the common good. Unequal property was an important source of division. Ending liberty to remove faction would destroy what government should protect. His answer was to control faction's effects.

A large republic contained more interests. It would be harder for one oppressive interest to gather a majority across the whole country. Elected representatives could also consider and improve public judgment.

In Federalist No. 51, Madison explained why government needed internal restraints. Officials would pursue power, so the plan should make one part able to check another. Dividing authority among branches and between national and state governments provided two kinds of protection.

Hamilton on offices and rights

These arguments defended different features of the same plan. They did not claim that every official would behave well.

Brutus and other critics

Brutus No. 1, probably by Robert Yates, argued that taxing power, the necessary and proper clause, and national supremacy would allow the central government to absorb the states. A few distant representatives could not understand such a large and varied population. Brutus No. 2 argued for an explicit bill of rights. Mason's objections and Warren's writings also warned about missing rights protections and national power.

Consider the disagreement about size. Madison expected many interests to make oppression harder. Brutus expected distance and limited representation to weaken public control. Both sought liberty; each proposed a different cause-and-effect link.

When reading an essay, identify what the writer wants readers to do and how the reasoning supports it. The popularity of an argument alone does not measure its effect on votes. New York's eventual approval also followed news that New Hampshire and Virginia had ratified.

The delegates' signatures did not put the Constitution into effect. Approval had to come through elected conventions in the states, and several contests were close.

A new approval rule

Ratification means formal approval. Article VII required nine of the thirteen states to approve through special conventions. Eligible voters chose convention delegates. This approach claimed authority from the people while avoiding the Articles' requirement that all thirteen states approve amendments.

States did not vote together in one nationwide election. Each convention debated and decided separately.

Small states welcomed equal Senate representation. Georgia wanted stronger national protection in conflicts involving the Creek Nation and Spanish Florida. Support therefore depended partly on local interests.

Approval with recommended changes

Massachusetts set an important example. Federalists agreed that the convention could ratify and recommend amendments at the same time. Approval did not wait for those amendments to be adopted. This helped win undecided delegates and supplied a path other states followed.

The Massachusetts vote was close: 187 plus 168 made 355 votes, and the winning margin was only 19. About 52.7 percent voted yes. Virginia's margin was ten; New York's was three. These figures show why concessions and promises mattered.

New Hampshire was the ninth state. Its approval met Article VII's threshold, but Virginia and New York were still crucial. A union missing their population, wealth, and location would face major practical problems. Madison argued for ratification in Virginia; Hamilton and Jay worked for it in New York. Both conventions recommended amendments.

The Union before every state joined

The new Congress began meeting in New York in March 1789. Washington took office on April 30. North Carolina joined after Congress proposed amendments in September. Rhode Island, which had rejected the proposal in a popular vote in 1788, approved in 1790 under pressure that included threatened trade restrictions.

The sequence separates three milestones: signing the plan in 1787, winning enough state approvals in 1788, and beginning the new government in 1789. Ratification continued after that government began.

The 1787 Constitution did not include a bill of rights. During ratification, opponents made that omission a central issue. Promised amendments became a way to build support without rewriting the whole plan.

From rejection to commitment

On September 12, 1787, Mason and Gerry proposed adding a bill of rights at the convention. The state delegations rejected it ten to zero. Later, several state ratifying conventions recommended rights amendments. Federalists promised to consider changes after the new government began.

Madison had questioned whether words on paper could stop a determined majority. He came to see other benefits: courts could use written protections, citizens could learn to defend their rights, and amendments could reassure opponents. Jefferson's letters encouraged him. Madison also promised amendments while campaigning for the first House against James Monroe.

Using Congress and Article V could avoid a second convention that might reopen the entire structure of government.

Proposing and revising

Madison introduced proposals in the House on June 8, 1789. He drew on state rights declarations, especially Virginia's, the English Bill of Rights, and state conventions' recommendations.

He first wanted to place changes within the original constitutional text. Congress followed Roger Sherman's view and added them at the end as separate amendments. That approach made it possible to see both the original plan and later changes.

The House approved seventeen amendments. The Senate reduced the proposals to twelve. Congress sent those twelve to the states on September 25, 1789. One House proposal would have prevented states from violating rights of conscience, press freedom, and criminal jury trials. The Senate rejected it. The adopted Bill of Rights therefore restrained the national government at first.

Ratification changes the numbers

By 1791 Vermont had joined, bringing the number of states to fourteen. Three-fourths of fourteen is 10.5, so eleven states were required. Virginia's approval on December 15, 1791, completed ratification of ten amendments. These became the First through Tenth Amendments, the Bill of Rights.

The original list contained twelve proposals, so its numbering differed. Proposals three through twelve became amendments one through ten. The proposal about congressional pay eventually became the Twenty-seventh Amendment in 1992. The proposal about House size has never been ratified.

Follow the decisions in order:

• 1787: the convention rejects adding a bill of rights.
• 1788: states such as Massachusetts ratify while recommending changes.
• June 1789: Madison proposes amendments in Congress.
• September 1789: Congress submits twelve to the states.
• December 1791: ten complete ratification.

Congress's approval was the proposal stage. State approval made the amendments part of the Constitution. Confusing those stages turns twelve proposed changes into twelve adopted ones.

The Bill of Rights restricted government to protect rights its supporters believed people already held. Its first ten amendments cover expression, personal security, fair legal procedures, unlisted rights, and reserved powers.

The ten protections

A grand jury considers whether evidence supports bringing serious criminal charges. A trial jury decides guilt. Due process means government must follow lawful procedures before taking life, liberty, or property. Self-incrimination means giving evidence against oneself. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments protect different parts of a criminal case, while the Seventh concerns certain civil disputes.

Apply the right protection

Suppose federal officials force an accused person to testify against herself in a criminal case. The Fifth Amendment addresses that demand. If the problem is denying her a lawyer at trial, the Sixth applies. A single case can raise more than one rights issue, so identify the government's action first.

The Ninth and Tenth are also different. The Ninth concerns rights the people retain even when unlisted. The Tenth concerns the division of powers. Listing some rights or powers should not be read as granting government control over everything left unlisted.

The limits in 1791

At first the Bill of Rights limited the national government, not states. The Supreme Court confirmed that understanding in Barron v. Baltimore in 1833. Massachusetts retained a tax-supported church until that year. Most protections reached state governments much later through the Fourteenth Amendment and court decisions, mainly in the twentieth century.

Written protections also coexisted with deep inequality. Enslaved people were denied them in practice. Native nations were treated as outside the American political community. State laws and customs limited women and free Black Americans. The Bill of Rights did not establish voting rights; state rules still restricted participation.

The promise and proposal of amendments helped reassure critics and bring remaining states into the Union. Adoption showed that Article V could work. Later abolitionists and movements for women's and civil rights used constitutional protections to press for change. The rights were not unlimited, but they provided lasting grounds for challenging abuses.