CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES

A written document executed by representatives of the people of the United States as the absolute rule
of action and decision for all branches and officers of the government, and with which all subsequent laws and ordinances must be in accordance unless
it has been changed by a constitutional amendment by the authority that created it.
For over 200 years, the Constitution of the United States has served as the foundation for U.S. government. Created in 1787, the U.S. Constitution establishes and defines the basic outlines
of a national government that joins the states in
an effective political union. The U.S. Constitution
has been and remains one of the most enduring
political agreements in the history of the world.
Throughout its existence, it has served as an
inspiring example of the potential of constitu-
tional government, causing many other countries
and peoples to emulate its provisions.
According to Article VI of the Constitution,
the U.S. Constitution is “the supreme Law of the
Land.” All other laws and judicial decisions are
subject to its mandates. The Constitution there-
fore has higher authority than all other laws in
the nation, including statutes and laws passed by
Congress and state legislatures. Unlike those
other laws, the Constitution may be changed, or
amended, only in special ways that reflect its
character as a demonstration of the people’s will.
The original document of the U.S. Constitu-
tion is held at the National Archives, in Wash-
ington, D.C.

History of the Constitution
When the United States declared itself a country separate from Great Britain in 1776, it did not have a written constitution. Instead, the
13 former colonies each had their own sovereignty
and separate bodies of law.How the newly
formed United States would act as one nation
remained uncertain and undefined. The CONTINENTAL
CONGRESS, the first national legislative
body of the new nation, attempted to address
this state of affairs by drafting the nation’s first
constitution, the ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION,
which were ratified in 1781, the same year that
hostilities in the Revolutionary War against
Britain came to an end at Yorktown, Virginia.
The Articles of Confederation proved an
ineffective national constitution. That document
did not provide for a strong federal, or
central, government and allowed each state its
own “sovereignty, freedom and independence”
(art. II). It also did not provide the federal government
power to tax or regulate commerce.
The problems of a weak federal government
with insufficient funds for operation became
apparent as a number of problems developed in
the 1780s: harmful economic warfare between
states, inadequate commercial treaties with foreign countries, and the inability to raise an army
to oppose British troops in the Northwest Territory.
Particularly disturbing for many critics of
the Confederation was the lack of a federal
response to Shays’s Rebellion in 1786–87, an
armed uprising by debtor farmers in western
Massachusetts directed against courts of law.
GEORGE WASHINGTON reacted to this lack of
response with words that expressed his strong
desire for a better union of the states:
I am mortified beyond expression when I
view the clouds that have spread over the
brightest morn that ever dawned upon any
country. You talk of employing influence to
appease the present tumults in Massachusetts.
Influence is no government. Let us have
a government by which our lives, liberties
and properties will be secured; or let us know
the worst at once.
Seeking to address the inadequacies of the
Articles of Confederation, the Continental Congress
called for the Constitutional Convention
to create a better basis for union between the
states. The convention began in Philadelphia on May 25, 1787, with the original intention of
amending the Articles of Confederation. However,
the delegates—including BENJAMIN FRANKLIN,
ALEXANDER HAMILTON, JAMES MADISON,
and George Washington—soon planned an
entirely new constitution.
Fifty-five delegates representing 12 states (all
but Rhode Island) discussed different plans for a
federal government. They agreed to create a government
consisting of three separate branches—
executive, legislative, and judicial—with checks
and balances to keep any one branch from
becoming too powerful. However, they disagreed
strongly over particulars.
For example, two plans for representation in
a national legislature competed for the loyalty of
delegates. The so-called Virginia Plan, presented
by EDMUND RANDOLPH and designed by James
Madison, called for a bicameral, or two-house,
legislature. Representation in the lower house
would be proportional to population, and representation
in the upper house would be elected
by the lower house. Delegates from small states
felt that such a plan would give too much power to large states. They favored the New Jersey Plan,
which called for a unicameral legislature with
equal representation to each state. Delegates
settled the issue by voting for a compromise
plan—called the Great Compromise, or the
Connecticut Compromise—which established a
Senate that gave each state two representatives
and a House of Representatives that granted
each state a number of representatives proportional
to its population.
On September 17, 1787, 39 delegates signed
the completed Constitution. In subsequent
months, the document went before each of the
states for ratification. The ratification process
was accompanied by a spirited debate on the
merits of the Constitution. The Federalists, on
one side of the debate, supported ratification.
Federalist leaders Alexander Hamilton, JOHN
JAY, and James Madison argued eloquently on
behalf of the Constitution in a series of newspaper
essays that were published as The Federalist
papers. Those opposed to the Constitution were
called Anti-Federalists.
The ratification process, as contained in
Article VII of the Constitution, required that
nine of the 13 states approve the Constitution in
special conventions.Within ten months after the
Constitution was completed, ten states had ratified
it. Rhode Island was the last of the 13 states
to ratify the Constitution, on May 29, 1790, officially
making the Constitution the highest law of
the land.
Contents of the Constitution
The Constitution is divided into seven articles,
or divisions, each addressing a different
topic. Each article is divided into sections. The
Constitution begins with a preamble that states
the purpose of the document and the source of
its power:
We the People of the United States, in Order
to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice,
insure domestic Tranquility, provide for
the common defence, promote the general
Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty
to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United
States of America. The Preamble is not
strictly considered a part of the Constitution
and is not legally binding on issues relating to
either government power or private right
(Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 25 S.
Ct. 358, 49 L. Ed. 643 [1905]).
Article I Article I of the Constitution deals
with the legislative branch of government. It
establishes the bicameral Congress, consisting of
a Senate and a House of Representatives, and it
delineates the means by which Congressional
members shall be elected, the length of their
terms, and the requirements for membership,
including age. It also sets forth guidelines for
legislative procedure, including a requirement
that bills of revenue, or taxation, must originate
in the House; requirements for the process by
which bills pass from Congress to the president;
and the procedures in case of presidential VETO,
or refusal to sign a bill into law.
Article I, Section 2, prescribes for the means
of APPORTIONMENT, or the method by which
representatives are allocated to the states.
Because political power would inevitably flow to
the states with the most congressional representatives,
this topic was controversial at the time of
the framing of the Constitution. Whereas each
state receives two votes in the Senate, the number
of representatives each state receives in the
House is determined by an enumeration, or census,
to be conducted every ten years.
According to this same section, a state’s population
is to “be determined by adding to the
whole Number of free Persons, including those
bound to Service for a Term of Years, and
excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all
other Persons.” Thus, an indentured servant was
counted as a whole person, and an African
American slave was counted as only three-fifths
of a person. This last provision arose out of differences
between slave and nonslave states.
Counting slaves as equal persons would have
given southern states a greater number of representatives
and more power in Congress. Northern
states vigorously opposed such a scheme,
and the resulting compromise was called the
Three-fifths Compromise.
Article I, Section 8, gives Congress some of
its delegated powers, many of them crucial powers
that had been denied to the Congress of the
Confederation. These include the powers to “lay
and collect Taxes,” “borrow Money,” “coin
Money,” “establish Post Offices,” “declare War,”
“raise and support Armies,” “provide and maintain
a Navy,” and “make all Laws which shall be
necessary and proper for carrying into Execution”
all the other powers. This last clause is
called the NECESSARY AND PROPER CLAUSE and
has been used to justify later expansion of congressional
activity not specifically mentioned in
the Constitution. The clause has also been called
the elastic clause or implied powers clause.
Article I, Section 8, also gives Congress the
power to “regulate Commerce with foreign
nations, and among the several States, and with
the Indian Tribes.” This is called the COMMERCE
CLAUSE. And Article I, Section 8, gives Congress
power over a district to “become the Seat of the
Government of the United States,” later established
as the District of Columbia, or Washington,
D.C.
Article I, Section 9, limits congressional
powers, forbidding the passage of laws prohibiting
the “Migration or Importation” of persons
before the year 1808. This provision was
designed as a concession to slaveholding states,
ensuring that the practice of SLAVERY would not
be challenged for at least 20 years. Section 9 also
prohibits Congress from passing any EX POST
FACTO, or retroactive, laws, and from granting
any “Title of Nobility.”
Article I, Section 10, limits the powers of the
states, prohibiting, for example, the states to
enter into foreign treaties and coin money.
Article II Article II concerns the EXECUTIVE
BRANCH, or the presidency. Section 1 establishes
the ELECTORAL COLLEGE as the means of electing
the president, identifies the requirements for
holding presidential office, and outlines the procedure
in case a president is removed from office
or dies. It also contains the oath that the president
must take before entering the office, which
explicitly requires that the president support the
Constitution: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm)
that I will faithfully execute the Office of President
of the United States, and will to the best of
my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the
Constitution of the United States.”
Article II, Section 2, names the president as
commander in chief of the armed forces. It
also gives the president the power to grant pardons
or reprieves; make treaties with foreign
powers, subject to approval by the Senate; and
appoint ambassadors and Supreme Court justices.
Article II, Section 4, allows for removal and
IMPEACHMENT of the president and “all civil
Officers of the United States” in cases of conviction
for “Treason, BRIBERY, or other High
Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
Article III Article III establishes the
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES as the
highest judicial power. Section 2 defines the
jurisdiction of the federal judiciary. Section 3
defines and limits prosecution for TREASON. The
power of JUDICIAL REVIEW, whereby the
Supreme Court may declare laws and regulations
of government to be unconstitutional, is
not explicitly declared in the Constitution and
was not established by the Supreme Court until
the case of MARBURY V. MADISON, 5 U.S. (1
Cranch) 137, 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803).
Article IV Article IV defines the relations
between the states. It requires each state to give
“full Faith and Credit” to the laws of the other
states; establishes that citizens are entitled to the
same “Privileges and Immunities,” or liberties
and rights, as citizens in every other state; provides
for EXTRADITION between states of persons
charged with crimes; provides for and
limits the admission of new states; gives Congress
full power over U.S. territories that are not
yet states; and guarantees each state “a Republican
Form of Government” and protection
against invasion or “domestic Violence.”
Article V Article V sets forth a two-step
procedure for amending the Constitution: proposal
of amendments, followed by ratification.
Amendments may be proposed in two ways: by
a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress or
by a special convention called by two-thirds of
the state legislatures. Amendments are ratified
by one of two methods, determined by Congress:
approval of three-fourths of the state legislatures
or approval of three-fourths of special
state conventions.
Article VI Article VI declares the Constitution
and the laws and treaties made by the U.S.
government under its authority to be “the
supreme Law of the Land.” This provision is
called the SUPREMACY CLAUSE. Article VI also
requires that all judges in every state be subject
to the provisions of the Constitution, that all
state and federal officeholders swear an oath
supporting the Constitution, and that “no religious
Test shall ever be required as a Qualification
to any Office” of the United States.
Amendments The Constitution has been
amended 26 times. The first ten amendments
were ratified in 1791 and are called the BILL OF
RIGHTS.
Principles of the Constitution
The Constitution defined a number of the
fundamental and enduring principles of U.S.
government, particularly the concepts of SEPARATION
OF POWERS, checks and balances, and
FEDERALISM.
Separation of powers refers to the division of
power between the legislative, executive, and
judicial branches of government. Checks and
balances refers to a system whereby each branch
of government retains some of the powers of the
other branches, which it may use to control
other branches. Thus, the president may veto
bills passed by Congress, the Senate may vote
down presidential appointments, and the
Supreme Court may strike down laws approved
by Congress or regulations put forth by the executive.
Such actions keep the separate branches of
government in balance and prevent any one of
them from becoming too powerful.
The inclusion of the concepts of separation
of powers and checks and balances in the Constitution
owes much to James Madison, who has
been called the Father of the Constitution. The
U.S. system of government has often been
referred to as the Madisonian Model. According
to Madison, a system in which the different elements
of government competed against one
another, each preventing the other from becoming
too powerful, was the best system to prevent
the rise of a tyrannical government that would
abuse the rights of the people. As he wrote in
The Federalist, No. 51:
In framing a government, . . . the great difficulty
lies in this: You must first enable the
government to control the governed; and in
the next place, oblige it to control itself. A
dependence on the people is, no doubt, the
primary control on the government; but
experience has taught the necessity of auxiliary
precautions. The Constitution, with its
separation of powers and checks and balances,
provided just such “auxiliary precautions”
to be used in controlling government.
The Constitution is also guided by the concept
of federalism in the way that it constructs
the U.S. government. Federalism is a system in
which smaller political entities—such as states,
counties, cities, and localities—are united in a
larger political organization. Federalism intends
to protect the liberties of people in these smaller
political units by providing them with a great
degree of freedom in governing themselves. The
federal, or larger, government is then a limited
government that cedes many decision-making
responsibilities—including, for example, the
creation of most criminal and civil laws, municipal
codes, regulations for administering school
districts, and the like—to states and localities,
while leaving itself other responsibilities. In
short, federalism is a partnership in which a central
government shares authority and power
with regional or local governments.
The U.S. Constitution gives the federal government—
made up of the executive, legislative,
and judicial branches—power to make decisions
regarding such issues as war, national
defense, and trade with foreign countries. The
federal government also retains the right to overrule laws or decisions of lower units of government
when they are in violation of the Constitution.
Thus, for example, the federal
government took on responsibilities in the oversight
of local school districts after the Supreme
Court, in BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION, 347
U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Ed. 873 (1954), ruled that segregating children in different public schools by race violated the EQUAL PROTECTION
CLAUSE of the FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
to the Constitution, which says, “No State shall
. . . deny to any person . . . the equal protection of
the laws.”

FURTHER READINGS
Black, Eric. 1988. Our Constitution: The Myth That Binds Us.
Boulder, Colo.:Westview Press.
Browne, Ray B., and Glenn J. Browne. 1986. Laws of Our
Fathers: Popular Culture and the U.S. Constitution.
Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green Univ. Press.
Corwin, Edward S. 1978. The Constitution and What It
Means Today. 14th ed. Rev. Harold W. Chase and Craig
R. Ducat. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press.
Hamilton, Alexander, James Madison, and John Jay. 1787–
88. The Federalist Papers. Ed. Clinton Rossiter. Reprint,
New York: New American Library of World Literature,
1961.
Harrigan, John J. 1984. Politics and the American Future.
Reading,Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Levy, Michael B. 1982. Political Thought in America: An
Anthology. Homewood, Ill.: Dorsey Press.
Marshall, Burke, ed. 1987. A Workable Government?: The
Constitution after 200 Years. New York: Norton.
Maxwell, James A., ed. 1982. You and Your Rights. Pleasantville,
N.Y.: Reader’s Digest.
McGuire, Robert A. 2003. To Form a More Perfect Union: A
New Economic Interpretation of the United States Constitution.
Oxford, New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
Rawle, William. 2003. A View of the Constitution of the
United States of America. 2d ed. Clark, N.J.: Lawbook
Exchange.

Story, Joseph. 2001. Constitution of the United States: With a
Preliminary Review of the Constitutional History of the
Colonies and States, Before the Adoption of the Constitution
Union, N.J.: Lawbook Exchange.

CROSS-REFERENCES
Congress of the United States; “Constitution of the United
States” (Appendix, Primary Document); Constitutional
Amendment; Constitutional Law; Federalist Papers; Full
Faith and Credit Clause; Presidential Powers.

Federalists versus Anti-Federalists

After the Constitution was signed
and approved by delegates of the
Constitutional Convention of 1787, it
had to be ratified by the states. As determined
by Article VII of the Constitution,
ratification required the approval of nine
special state conventions. States that did
not ratify the Constitution would not be
considered a part of the Union and
would be separate countries.
Passage of the Constitution by the
states was by no means certain in 1787.
Indeed, many people at that time
opposed the creation of a federal, or
national, government that
would have power over the
states. These people were
called Anti-Federalists. They
included primarily farmers
and tradesmen and were less
likely to be a part of the
wealthy elite than were members
of their opposition, who called
themselves Federalists. The Anti-Federalists
believed that each state should have a
sovereign, independent government.
Their leaders included some of the most
influential figures in the nation, including
PATRICK HENRY and GEORGE
MASON, leading national figures during
the Revolutionary War period. Many
Anti-Federalists were local politicians
who feared losing power should the Constitution
be ratified. As one member of
their opposition, EDMUND RANDOLPH,
said, these politicians “will not cherish
the great oak which is to reduce them to
paltry shrubs.”
The Federalists favored the creation
of a strong federal government that
would more closely unite the states as one
large, continental nation. They tended to
come from the wealthier class of merchants
and plantation owners. Federalists
had been instrumental in the creation of
the Constitution, arguing that it was a
necessary improvement on the ARTICLES
OF CONFEDERATION, the country’s
first attempt at unifying the states in
a national political arrangement. Leaders
among the Federalists included
two men who helped develop
the Constitution, JAMES
MADISON and ALEXANDER
HAMILTON, and two national
heroes whose support would
greatly improve the Federalists’
prospects for winning,
GEORGE WASHINGTON and BENJAMIN
FRANKLIN.
Between September 17, 1787, the day
the Constitution was signed by the Constitutional
Convention, and May 29,
1790, the day Rhode Island became the
thirteenth and last state to ratify the Constitution,
the Federalists and Anti-Federalists
engaged in a fierce national debate
on the merits of the Constitution. This
debate occurred in meeting halls, on
streets, and on the printed page. Both
sides in the argument had a considerable
following. Many of the questions raised
remain with us today: What is the best
form of government? What rights must
the government protect? Which government
powers should be granted to the
states, and which to the federal government?
The Anti-Federalists The Anti-
Federalists found many problems in the
Constitution. They argued that the document
would give the country an entirely
new and untested form of government.
They saw no sense in throwing out the
existing government. Instead, they
believed that the Federalists had overstated
the current problems of the country.
They also maintained that the
Framers of the Constitution had met as
an elitist group under a veil of secrecy and
had violated the provisions of the Articles
of Confederation in the means selected
for ratification of the Constitution.
In making their arguments, the Anti-
Federalists often relied on the rhetoric of
the Revolutionary War era, which
stressed the virtues of local rule and associated
centralized power with a tyrannical
monarch. Thus, the Anti-Federalists
frequently claimed that the Constitution
represented a step away from the democratic
goals of the American Revolution
and toward the twin evils of monarchy
and aristocracy. The Anti-Federalists
feared that the Constitution gave the
president too much power and that the
proposed Congress would be too aristocratic
in nature, with too few representatives for too many people. They also criticized
the Constitution for its lack of a
BILL OF RIGHTS of the kind that had
been passed in England in 1689 to establish
and guarantee certain rights of Parliament
and of the English people against
the king. Moreover, the Anti-Federalists
argued that the Constitution would spell
an end to all forms of self-rule in the
states.
Many Anti-Federalists believed in a
type of government that has been
described as agrarian republicanism.
Such a government is centered on a society
of landowning farmers who participate
in local politics. THOMAS
JEFFERSON agreed with this view.He felt
that the virtues of democratic freedom
were best nurtured in an agrarian, or
agricultural, society, and that with
increasing urbanization, commercialization,
and centralization of power would
come a decline in political society and
eventual tyranny. Unlike the Anti-Federalists,
however, Jefferson supported the
Constitution, although rather reluctantly.
He was not strongly identified with the
Federalist position and would eventually
oppose the Federalists as a member of the
DEMOCRATIC-REPUBLICAN PARTY.
The Anti-Federalists also shared the
feeling that so large a country as the
United States could not possibly be controlled
by one national government. One
Pennsylvania Anti-Federalist, who signed
his articles “Centinel,” declared,
It is the opinion of the greatest
writers, that a very extensive
country cannot be governed on
democratical principles, on any
other plan than a confederation
of a number of small republics,
possessing all the powers of
internal government, but united
in the management of their foreign
and general concerns.
. . . [A]nything short of despotism
could not bind so great a country under
one government.
Although the Anti-Federalists were
united in their opposition to the Constitution,
they did not agree on what form
of government made the best alternative
to it. Some still believed that the Articles
of Confederation could be amended in
such a way that they would provide a
workable confederation. Some wanted
the Union to break up and re-form into
three or four different confederacies.
Others were even ready to accept the
Constitution if it were amended in such a
way that the rights of citizens and states
would be more fully protected.
The Federalists The Federalists
focused their arguments on the inadequacies
of national government under the
Articles of Confederation and on the benefits
of national government as formed by
the Constitution. They were also much
more favorably disposed toward commerce
than were the Anti-Federalists, and
they argued that a strong central government
would foster the commercial
growth of the new country.Moreover, the
Federalist vision of society was more pluralistic
than the Anti-Federalist vision.
That is, the Federalists did not see society
as made up principally of farmers, as did
the Anti-Federalists, but instead viewed it
as comprising many different and competing
interests and groups, none of
which would be completely dominant in
a federalist system of government. For
this reason, many later scholars have
argued that the Federalists were more
aware of the economic and social changes
then transforming American society.
The most famous example of Federalist
doctrine is The Federalist Papers, a
collection of 85 essays by Alexander
Hamilton, James Madison, and JOHN
JAY. Published in New York newspapers
and in two bound volumes distributed
during the ratification debate, these
essays were signed with the pseudonym
Publius, taken from Publius Valerius
Poplicola, a man who reputedly saved the
ancient Roman republic. The Federalist
Papers is an important American contribution
to political philosophy and
remains a classic today. It is also a great
and authoritative commentary on the
Constitution.
The Federalist Papers communicates
the central ideas of the Federalists: the
benefits of a Union between the states;
the problems with the confederation as it
stood at the time; the importance of an
energetic, effective federal government;
and a defense of the republicanism of the
proposed Constitution. The Federalist
Papers makes a persuasive case for the
necessity of federal government in preserving
order and securing the liberty of
a large republic. In doing so, it asserts that
a weak union of the states will make the country more vulnerable to internal and
external dissension, including civil war
and invasion from foreign powers.
One of the most famous of its essays
is The Federalist, number 10, by James
Madison. In it, Madison addressed the
issue of whether or not the republican
government created by the Constitution
can protect the liberties of its citizens.
The problem that Madison saw as most
destructive of popular government is
what he called faction. A faction, according
to Madison, is “a number of citizens,
whether amounting to a majority or
minority of the whole, who are united
and actuated by some common impulse
of passion, or of interest, adverse to the
rights of other citizens, or to the permanent
and aggregate interests of the community.”
Factions, Madison added,
become especially dangerous when they
form a majority of the population.
Madison divided popular government
into two types, democratic and
republican, and preferred the latter. In a
democracy, all citizens participate
directly in the decisions of government.
In a republic, representatives elected by
the people make the decisions of government.
In his intricate argument in The Federalist,
number 10, Madison contended
that a republican government of the kind
envisioned by the U.S. Constitution can
best solve the problem of faction not by
“removing its causes”—which only
tyranny can do—but by “controlling its
effects.” Madison proposed that elected
representatives, as opposed to the people
as a whole, will be more disposed to consider
the national interest ahead of a particular
factional interest. He also argued
that the nature of an “extensive,” or large,
republic such as the United States will
naturally frustrate the ability of a single
faction to advance its own interests ahead
of the interests of other citizens.With the
huge variety of parties and interests in an
extended republic, it becomes “less probable
that a majority of the whole will have
a common motive to invade the rights of
other citizens.” Thus, Madison, in contrast
to the Anti-Federalists, saw the large
size of the United States as a help rather
than a hindrance to the cause of liberty.
This is only one of the many points
that The Federalist Papers makes in favor
of the Constitution. However, as brilliant
and carefully reasoned as The Federalist
Papers may be, it probably did not greatly
sway opinion toward ratification of the
Constitution. The politics of ratification
were instead influenced most by direct,
face-to-face contact and negotiation.
Nevertheless, The Federalist Papers aided
the Constitution’s cause by giving the
Constitution’s adherents ideas with
which to counter their opposition.
The outcome Ultimately, the ratification
provisions of Article VII of the
Constitution, created by the Federalists
themselves, were one of the best allies the
Federalists had in their attempt to ratify
the Constitution. After the Constitution
had been created at the Constitutional
Convention, Federalist leaders quickly
returned to their states to elect Federalist
delegates to the state conventions. The
Anti-Federalists were not able to muster
enough votes in response, though in several
states, they nearly defeated the Federalists.
By 1790, all thirteen states had
ratified the document, giving the Federalists
and their Constitution a great victory.
The Anti-Federalist outcry was not
without its effects, however. By 1791, in
response to Anti-Federalist sentiments,
state legislatures voted to add the first ten
amendments to the Constitution. Those
ten amendments are also called the Bill of
Rights, and they have become an important
part of the Constitution and its heritage
of liberty.

FURTHER READINGS
Frohnen, Bruce, ed. 1999. The Anti-Federalists:
Selected Writings and Speeches. Washington,
D.C.: Regnery Pub.
Wills, Garry. 2001. Explaining America: The
Federalist. New York: Penguin Books.

CROSS-REFERENCES
Federalist Papers.

Constitutional Convention of 1787

The Constitutional Convention of 1787 is a high
point in the history of the United States. This
remarkable assemblage of men, meeting in Philadelphia
between May 23 and September 17, 1787, created
the document that has given the United States
one of the most stable and admired constitutional
democracies in the history of the world.
55 delegates from 12 states attended various
parts of the convention. Drawn from the educated
and wealthy elite of the country, they included such
luminaries as GEORGE WASHINGTON, the commander
of American forces in the WAR OF INDEPENDENCE,
who presided over the convention, and BENJAMIN
FRANKLIN, at 81, the oldest delegate and the country’s
most famous statesman. A majority of the delegates
were lawyers, and many, such as JAMES MADISON,
were wealthy landowners. Many notable leaders of
the time, however, including THOMAS JEFFERSON,
who was in France, and PATRICK HENRY, did not
attend.
The meetings of the convention were closed to
the public and to the press. Thus, behind closed
doors, the delegates hammered out the eventual form
of U.S. government. The agreements reached during
the convention exemplified the values of constitutional
government. In an atmosphere that combined
competitive, lively debate with tolerance and respect
for differences of opinion, the delegates reached vital
compromises on matters that threatened to divide the
still loosely connected union of states. Many different
factions opposed one another—small states versus
large states, farmers versus businesspeople, North
versus South, and slave states versus nonslave
states.
The Constitutional Convention occurred in three
separate phases. The first, from May 23 to July 26,
created the basic features of the national government,
including its division into legislative, executive,
and judicial branches. During this phase, delegates
also arrived at one important compromise between
the interests of large and small states. That compromise
created a bicameral, or two-chamber, legislature,
composed of the House of Representatives and
the Senate. During the second phase of the convention,
from July 27 to August 6, the five-man Committee
of Detail created a rough draft of the Constitution.
In the third phase, which lasted from August 6 to September
6, the delegates debated remaining sticking
points, particularly relating to the EXECUTIVE BRANCH
and the means of electing a president. Eventually,
they settled on the ELECTORAL COLLEGE suggested by
Benjamin Franklin.

On September 17, 39 of the 42 delegates present
signed the Constitution. Gouverneur Morris, coauthor
of the New York State Constitution and a key delegate,
summed up the significance of the Constitution that
the convention had created when, after affixing his
signature to it, he uttered these words: “The moment
this plan goes forth, all other considerations will be
laid aside and the great question will be: Shall there
be a national government or not? And this must take
place or a general anarchy will be the alternative.”

FURTHER READINGS
Rossiter, Clinton. 1966. 1787: The Grand Convention. Reprint,
New York: Norton, 1987.
Scott, James Brown. 2001. James Madison’s Notes of Debates in
the Federal Convention of 1787 and their Relation to a More
Perfect Society of Nations. Union, N.J.: Lawbook Exchange.