Antifederalist No. 85 

CONCLUDING REMARKS: EVILS UNDER CONFEDERATION EXAGGERATED; 
CONSTITUTION MUST BE DRASTICALLY REVISED BEFORE ADOPTION 



By Melancthon Smith (a "PLEBIAN") 


    . . . . It is agreed, the plan is defective-that some of the 
powers granted are dangerous-others not well defined-and 
amendments are necessary why then not amend it?  Why not remove 
the cause of danger, and, possible, even the apprehension of it?  
The instrument is yet in the hands of the people; it is not 
signed, sealed, and delivered, and they have power to give it any 
form they please. 
     But it is contended, adopt it first, and then amend it.  I 
ask, why not amend, and then adopt it?  Most certainly the latter 
mode of proceeding is more consistent with our ideas of prudence 
in the ordinary concerns of life If men were about entering into 
a contract respecting their private concerns it would be highly 
absurd in them to sign and seal an instrument containing 
stipulations which are contrary to their interests and wishes, 
under the expectation, that the parties, after its execution, 
would agree to make alteration agreeable to their desire.  They 
would insist upon the exceptionable clause being altered before 
they would ratify the contract.  And is a compact for the 
government of ourselves and our posterity of less moment than 
contract between individuals?  Certainly not.  But to this 
reasoning, which at first vie would appear to admit of no reply, 
a variety of objections are made, and number of reasons urged for 
adopting the system, and afterwards proposing amendments.  Such 
as have come under my observation, I shall state, an remark upon. 
     It is insisted, that the present situation of our country is 
such, as not t admit of a delay in forming a new government, or 
of time sufficient t deliberate and agree upon the amendments 
which are proper, without involving ourselves in a state of 
anarchy and confusion. 
     On this head, all the powers of rhetoric, and arts of 
description, ar employed to paint the condition of this country, 
in the most hideous an frightful colors.  We are told, that 
agriculture is without encouragement trade is languishing; 
private faith and credit are disregarded, and public credit is 
prostrate; that the laws and magistrates are condemned and set at 
naught; that a spirit of licentiousness is rampant, and ready to 
break over every bound set to it by the government; that private 
embarrassments and distresses invade the house of every man of 
middling property, and insecurity threatens every man in affluent 
circumstances: in short, that we are in a state of the most 
grievous calamity at home, and that we are contemptible abroad, 
the scorn of foreign nations, and the ridicule of the world. From 
this high wrought picture, one would suppose that we were in a 
condition the most deplorable of any people upon earth. But 
suffer me, my countrymen, to call your attention to a serious and 
sober estimate of the situation in which you are placed, while I 
trace the embarrassments under which you labor, to their true 
sources, What is your condition?  Does not every man sit under 
his own vine and under his own fig-tree, having none to make him 
afraid?  Does not every one follow his calling without 
impediments and receive the reward of his well-earned industry? 
The farmer cultivates his land, and reaps the fruit which the 
bounty of heaven bestows on his honest toil.  The mechanic is 
exercised in his art, and receives the reward of his labor.  The 
merchant drives his commerce, and none can deprive him of the 
gain he honestly acquires; all classes and callings of men 
amongst us are protected in their various pursuits, and secured 
by the laws in the possession and enjoyment of the property 
obtained in those pursuits.  The laws are as well executed as 
they ever were, in this or any other country.  Neither the hand 
of private violence, nor the more to be dreaded hand of legal 
oppression, are reached out to distress us. 
     It is true, many individuals labor under embarrassments, but 
these are to be imputed to the unavoidable circumstances of 
things, rather than to any defect in our governments.  We have 
just emerged from a long and expensive war.  During its existence 
few people were in a situation to increase their fortunes, but 
many to diminish them.  Debts contracted before the war were left 
unpaid while it existed, and these were left a burden too heavy 
to be home at the commencement of peace.  Add to these, that when 
the war was over, too many of us, instead of reassuming our old 
habits of frugality, and industry, by which alone every country 
must be placed in a prosperous condition, took up the profuse use 
of foreign commodities.  The country was deluged with articles 
imported from abroad, and the cash of the country has been sent 
to pay for them, and still left us laboring under the weight of a 
huge debt to persons abroad.  These are the true sources to which 
we are to trace all the private difficulties of individuals.  But 
will a new government relieve you from these? ... Your present 
condition is such as is common to take place after the conclusion 
of a war. Those who can remember our situation after the 
termination of the war preceding the last, will recollect that 
our condition was similar to the present, but time and industry 
soon recovered us from it.  Money was scarce, the produce of the 
country much lower than it has been since the peace, and many 
individuals were extremely embarrassed with debts; and this 
happened although we did not experience the ravages, desolations, 
and loss of property, that were suffered during the late war. 
     With regard to our public and national concerns, what is 
there in our condition that threatens us with any immediate 
danger?  We are at peace with all the world; no nation menaces us 
with war; nor are we called upon by any cause of sufficient 
importance to attack any nation.  The state governments answer 
the purposes of preserving the peace, and providing for present 
exigencies.  Our condition as a nation is in no respect worse 
than it has been for several years past.  Our public debt has 
been lessened in various ways, and the western territory, which 
has been relied upon as a productive fund to discharge the 
national debt has at length been brought to market, and a 
considerable part actually applied to its reduction.  I mention 
these things to show, that there is nothing special, in our 
present situation, as it respects our national affairs, that 
should induce us to accept the proffered system, without taking 
sufficient time to consider and amend it.  I do not mean by this, 
to insinuate, that our government does not stand in need of 
reform.  It is admitted by all parties, that alterations are 
necessary in our federal constitution, but the circumstances of 
our case do by no means oblige us to precipitate this business, 
or require that we should adopt a system materially defective.  
We may safely take time to deliberate and amend, without in the 
meantime hazarding a condition, in any considerable degree, worse 
than the present. 
     But it is said that if we postpone the ratification of this 
system until the necessary amendments are first incorporated, the 
consequence will be a civil war among the states. . . . The idea 
of [New York] being attacked by the other states, will appear 
visionary and chimerical, if we consider that tho' several of 
them have adopted the new constitution, yet the opposition to it 
has been numerous and formidable.  The eastern states from whom 
we are told we have most to fear, should a civil war be blown up, 
would have full employ to keep in awe those who are opposed to it 
in their own governments.  Massachusetts, after a long and 
dubious contest in their convention, has adopted it by an 
inconsiderable majority, and in the very act has marked it with a 
stigma in its present form.  No man of candor, judging from their 
public proceedings, will undertake to say on which side the 
majority of the people are. Connecticut, it is true, have acceded 
to it, by a large majority of their convention; but it is a fact 
well known, that a large proportion of the yeomanry of the 
country are against it.  And it is equally true, that a 
considerable part of those who voted for it in the convention, 
wish to see it altered.  In both these states the body of the 
common people, who always do the fighting of a country, would be 
more likely to fight against than for it.  Can it then be 
presumed, that a country divided among themselves, upon a 
question where even the advocates for it, admit the system they 
contend for needs amendments, would make war upon a sister state? 
. . . The idea is preposterous. . . 
     The reasonings made use of to persuade us, that no 
alterations can be agreed upon previous to the adoption of the 
system, are as curious as they are futile.  It is alleged, that 
there was great diversity of sentiments in forming the proposed 
constitution; that it was the effect of mutual concessions and a 
spirit of accommodation, and from hence it is inferred, that 
further changes cannot be hoped for.  I should suppose that the 
contrary inference was the fair one.  If the convention, who 
framed this plan, were possessed of such a spirit of moderation 
and condescension, as to be induced to yield to each other 
certain points, and to accommodate themselves to each other's 
opinions, and even prejudices, there is reason to expect, that 
this same spirit will continue and prevail in a future 
convention, and produce an union of sentiments on the points 
objected to. There is more reason to hope for this, because the 
subject has received a full discussion, and the minds of the 
people much better known than they were when the convention sat.  
Previous to the meeting of the convention, the subject of a new 
form of government had been little thought of, and scarcely 
written upon at all.  It is true, it was the general opinion, 
that some alterations were requisite in the federal system.  This 
subject had been contemplated by almost every thinking man in the 
union.  It had been the subject of many well- written essays, and 
it was the anxious wish of every true friend to America.  But it 
was Dever in the contemplation of one in a thousand of those who 
had reflected on the matter, to have an entire change in the 
nature of our federal government-to alter it from a confederation 
of states, to that of one entire government, which will swallow 
up that of the individual states.  I will venture to say, that 
the idea of a government similar to the one proposed, never 
entered the minds of the legislatures who appointed the 
convention, and of but very few of the members who composed it, 
until they had assembled and heard it proposed in that body: much 
less had the people any conception of such a plan until after it 
was promulgated, While it was agitated, the debates of the 
convention were kept an impenetrable secret, and no opportunity 
was given for well informed men to offer their sentiments upon 
the subject.  The system was therefore never publicly discussed, 
nor indeed could be, because it was not known to the people until 
after it was proposed.  Since then, it has been the object of 
universal attention-it has been thought of by every reflecting 
man-been discussed in a public and private manner, in 
conversation and in print; its defects have been pointed out, and 
every objection to it stated; able advocates have written in its 
favor, and able opponents have written against it. And what is 
the result?  It cannot be denied but that the general opinion is, 
that it contains material errors, and requires important 
amendments.  This then being the general sentiment, both of the 
friends and foes of the system, can it be doubted, that another 
convention would concur in such amendments as would quiet the 
fears of the opposers, and effect a great degree of union on the 
subject?  -- An event most devoutly to be wished.  But it is 
further said, that there can be no prospect of procuring 
alterations before it is acceded to, because those who oppose it 
do not agree among themselves with respect to the amendments that 
are necessary.  To this I reply, that this may be urged against 
attempting alterations after it is received, with as much force 
as before; and therefore, if it concludes anything, it is that we 
must receive any system of government proposed to us, because 
those who object to it do not entirely concur in their 
objections.  But the assertion is not true to any considerable 
extent. There is a remarkable uniformity in the objections made 
to the constitution, on the most important points.  It is also 
worthy of notice, that very few of the matters found fault with 
in it, are of a local nature, or such as affect any particular 
state; on the contrary, they are such as concern the principles 
of general liberty, in which the people of New Hampshire, New 
York and Georgia are equally interested. . . . 
     It has been objected too that the new system . . . is 
calculated to and will effect such a consolidation of the States, 
as to supplant and overturn the state governments.... 
     It has been said that the representation in the general 
legislature is too small to secure liberty, or to answer the 
intention of representation. In this there is an union of 
sentiments in the opposers. 
     The constitution has been opposed, because it gives to the 
legislature an unlimited power of taxation both with respect to 
direct and indirect taxes, a right to lay and collect taxes, 
duties, imposts and excises of every kind and description, and to 
any amount.  In this there has been as general a concurrence of 
opinion as in the former. 
     The opposers to the constitution have said that it is 
dangerous, because the judicial power may extend to many cases 
which ought to be reserved to the decision of the State courts, 
and because the right of trial by jury is not secured in the 
judicial courts of the general government, in civil cases.  All 
the opposers are agreed in this objection. 
     The power of the general legislature to alter and regulate 
the time, place and manner of holding elections, has been stated 
as an argument against the adoption of the system.  The opposers 
to the constitution universally agree in this objection. . . 
     The mixture of legislative, judicial, and executive powers 
in the Senate; the little degree of responsibility under which 
the great officers of government will be held; and the liberty 
granted by the system to establish and maintain a standing army 
without any limitation or restriction, are also objected to the 
constitution; and in these there is a great degree of unanimity 
of sentiment in the opposers. . . . 
     You have heard that both sides on this great question, 
agree, that there are in it great defects; yet the one side tell 
you, choose such men as will adopt it, and then amend it-while 
the other say, amend previous to its adoption.  I have stated to 
you my reasons for the latter, and I think they are unanswerable.  
Consider, you the common people, the yeomanry of the country, for 
to such I principally address myself, you are to be the principal 
losers, if the constitution should prove oppressive.  When a 
tyranny is established, there are always masters as well as 
slaves; the great and well-born are generally the former, and the 
middling class the latter.  Attempts have been made, and will be 
repeated, to alarm you with the fear of consequences; but reflect 
there are consequences on both sides, and none can be apprehended 
more dreadful, than entailing on ourselves and posterity a 
government which will raise a few to the height of human 
greatness and wealth, while it will depress the many to the 
extreme of poverty and wretchedness. Consequences are under the 
control of that all-wise and all-powerful being, whose providence 
conducts the affairs of all men.  Our part is to act right, and 
we may then have confidence that the consequences will be 
favorable.  The path in which you should walk is plain and open 
before you; be united as one man, and direct your choice to such 
men as have been uniform in their opposition to the proposed 
system in its present form, or without proper alterations.  In 
men of this description you have reason to place confidence, 
while on the other hand, you have just cause to distrust those 
who urge the adoption of a bad constitution, under the delusive 
expectation of making amendments after it is acceded to.  Your 
jealousy of such characters should be the more excited, when you 
consider that the advocates for the constitution have shifted 
their ground.  When men are uniform in their opinions, it affords 
evidence that they are sincere.  When they are shifting, it gives 
reason to believe, they do not change from conviction.  It must 
be recollected, that when this plan was first announced to the 
public, its supporters cried it up as the most perfect production 
of human wisdom, It was represented either as having no defects, 
or if it had, they were so trifling and inconsiderable, that they 
served only, as the shades in a fine picture, to set off the 
piece to the greater advantage.  One gentleman in Philadelphia 
went so far in the ardor of his enthusiasm in its favor, as to 
pronounce, that the men who formed it were as really under the 
guidance of Divine Revelation, as was Moses, the Jewish lawgiver.  
Their language is now changed; the question has been discussed; 
the objections to the plan ably stated, and they are admitted to 
be unanswerable.  The same men who held it almost perfect, now 
admit it is very imperfect; that it is necessary it should be 
amended.  The only question between us, is simply this@hall we 
accede to a bad constitution, under the uncertain prospect of 
getting it amended, after we have received it, or shall we amend 
it before we adopt it?  Common sense will point out which is the 
most rational, which is the most secure line of conduct. May 
heaven inspire you with wisdom, union, moderation and firmness, 
and give you hearts to make a proper estimate of your invaluable 
privileges, and preserve them to you, to be transmitted to your 
posterity unimpaired, and may they be maintained in this our 
country, while Sun and Moon endure. 
                                A PLEBEIAN