The unanticipated adjournment on February 22 of New Hampshire’s ratifying convention reverberated throughout the States. Even though it was generally believed that New Hampshire would ratify at its second convention scheduled for mid-June, its delaying action had created a precedent, slowed the momentum toward ratification, and gave critics of the Constitution time to convince the people that its ratification would do more harm than good.

George Nicholas, a Virginia Federalist, shared his concerns with George Washington in a letter written on April 5, noting that “the adjournment of the New Hampshire convention puts an end to the hope that nine will adopt before the meeting of our [Virginia’s] convention” scheduled to convene on June 2. Only Maryland and South Carolina will meet before then, he added, then warned that “great efforts will be made to induce them to adjourn until after our meeting” and “will have great influence in this country.” He urged Washington to “impress on your friends in those states, the importance of their sanction prior to the meeting in this state.”

Five days later, James Madison also wrote to Washington, expressing the same concern. “The difference between even a postponement and adoption in Maryland may,” he warned, “in the nice balance of parties here, possibly give a fatal advantage to that which opposes the Constitution.”

Adding to the mounting concern, James McHenry weighed in. McHenry had represented Maryland at the Constitutional Convention and would represent Baltimore at Maryland’s ratifying convention. His letter to Washington began with the observation that elections to the Virginia ratifying convention had already taken place, but in Maryland “the opposition intend to push for an adjournment under the pretext that a conference with yours respecting amendments” might take place. McHenry saw this as “a step to amount to a rejection in both States” and promised to “do everything in my power to prevent it.”

The threat of a Maryland adjournment turned out to a hollow one and the drive for proposing amendments was easily defeated. Elections for delegates to the Maryland ratifying convention had taken place in early April; the returns favored Federalists over Antis by 64 – 12. Moreover, less than a quarter of eligible voters had even bothered to vote, evidence of either lack of interest or an assumption by the public that ratification was inevitable. By a curious turn of events, three leaders of the opposition, Luther Martin, Samuel Chase, and William Paca, did not even arrive until the second day of the convention, missing the first day’s selection of the convention’s officers and the committee to verify election returns.

In a procedural blow to the Antis, the convention voted 58 - 5 to debate the Constitution as a whole rather than paragraph by paragraph. The rules also provided that no member should speak more than twice to any point, and at each time not more than half an hour. The Pennsylvania Packet reported that the rules defeat “Chase, Martin, Paca, and Mercer in their plan of anti-federal measures.”

Luther Martin and John Francis Mercer had both represented Maryland at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, along with James McHenry, Daniel Carroll, and Daniel of St. Thomas Jennifer. Luther and Mercer left before the Convention ended and ultimately opposed the Constitution. Samuel Chase had represented Maryland in the First and Second Continental Congresses and signed the Declaration of Independence. Earlier, he and his close friend, William Paca, had formed the Sons of Liberty of Arundel County and both men actively opposed the Stamp Act and agitated for independence.

Now, at the Maryland ratification convention on April 24, Chase rose to explain his objections to the Constitution, beginning with the charge that there was “no authority from the legislature [Congress] to annihilate the Confederation and form a Constitution for the United States.” In fact, the “legislature could not grant such power…deputies acted as mere individuals and not in official or delegated capacity…and the express object of delegates was to revise the Confederacy.” In a lengthy discourse, Chase expounded on the litany of objections to the Constitution already familiar throughout the States, including the absence of a bill of rights.

At length, Chase said he had more to say but was exhausted. When no one else rose to speak, the convention adjourned until the next day when Paca took his turn “to propose a variety of amendments, not to prevent, but to accompany the ratifications. When he began to read his amendments, he was interrupted as one member from each of Maryland’s eleven counties and one from both Annapolis and Baltimore “rose in their places and declared for themselves and their colleagues that they were elected and instructed by the people they represented to ratify the proposed Constitution, and that as speedily as possible, and to do no other act...or consider any amendments.’”

On Saturday, April 26, advocates for the Constitution refused to respond to objections raised by the Antis and “called for the question - that the Convention assent to ratify the proposed plan of federal government for the United States.” The Constitution was ratified by a vote of 63 – 11. Paca voted “aye,” declaring that he had voted to ratify with the confidence that amendments could be “peaceably attained.” The convention moved to form a committee to consider amendments, but after a series of negotiations, none were agreed to, and the convention adjourned on April 29 by a vote of 47 – 27. It appeared that some pro-Constitution delegates were interested in considering amendments, but a majority felt their work was complete.

Conspicuous by his silence was Luther Martin. At the Constitutional Convention he had been an indefatigable defender of States rights, especially for the small States, and an irascible and often abrasive debater. In November 1787, reporting on the Convention to Maryland’s legislature, he assailed the Convention as well as the Constitution, but refrained from debate during the ratification convention due to a bout of laryngitis. However, if he could not use his voice, he used his pen, writing articles to rebut the formidable likes of Oliver Ellsworth in the Maryland Gazette and other publications. His extensive The Genuine Information is considered the Anti-federalist equivalent to the pro-Constitution series known as The Federalist Papers.

After the Bill of Rights will be added to the Constitution in 1791, history will record that Martin would generally reconcile to the new government. He would serve nearly thirty years as the attorney general of Maryland, but not seek federal office, keeping a vow he had made years earlier to accept no position within the government he had worked so hard to defeat.