Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up freeThe New Hampshire Gazette And General Advertiser
Portsmouth, Rockingham County, New Hampshire
What is this article about?
A Portsmouth correspondent supports the proposed U.S. Constitution but questions the process if fewer than all states ratify it, fearing civil war or separate republics. He suggests referring the plan to another convention for unanimous state approval to ensure peace and unity.
OCR Quality
Full Text
A correspondent remarks, that already one third of the number of States necessary to the establishment of the proposed constitution, has passed the Rubicon. His sentiments are favorable to that system, but he wishes, anxiously, to be relieved from one doubt: What is to be done, if four States refuse, or even one refuses, to acquiesce in the measure? Under the present articles of confederation an unanimous concurrence is necessary to an alteration; no State can be obliged to concur in an alteration, but all the States are bound to abide by the original compact, if a single State should refuse its concurrence.
Again, twelve States were represented in the federal convention; by what rule, therefore, has that body released and destroyed a compact at the will of nine, to which there were twelve parties equally interested? The federal convention were called together to amend the old constitution, but they chose to make a new one (this the writer does not complain of) but they were called upon to act for twelve States, and, in effect, they have only acted for nine.
It appears to our correspondent on this view, that the consequence must be either a civil war between the assenting and dissenting States, or the establishment of separate republics on the American continent. The former event must be painful to every friend of humanity. and the latter, it is agreed by all men, and expressly stated by Mr. Wilson, would be incompatible with the peace and welfare of the States.
In this dilemma, however the proposed constitution meets the approbation of our correspondent, he cannot give a negative to this important question; is it not better to refer the proposed plan, with the explicit sentiments of the people on its principles, to another convention, than to incur either of the consequences above stated? The unanimous opinion of the States, respecting the alterations that ought to be made, will render the task of the proposed constitution easy, and clear from future objection; while much less time will be requisite to accomplish this measure, than either to force our sister States to sacrifice their judgment to our will, or arrange the business of a separation into several and unconnected republics.
What sub-type of article is it?
What themes does it cover?
What keywords are associated?
What entities or persons were involved?
Letter to Editor Details
Author
A Correspondent
Main Argument
while supporting the proposed constitution, the correspondent doubts the ratification process requiring only nine states' approval out of twelve, suggesting instead a new convention to secure unanimous state consent and prevent civil war or the formation of separate republics.
Notable Details