History has been denied an accurate and complete record of the Pennsylvania ratifying convention. The official record is spotty and selective, reporting only speeches favoring ratification, limited almost exclusively to the numerous and exhaustive presentations by James Wilson. Speeches by the opposition and even some procedural issues were reported in local newspapers and broadsides, as well as diaries maintained by delegates Jasper Yeates, Anthony Wayne, and James Wilson.
Wilson delivered a “long and elaborate speech” on November 26, delving into the theory and principles underlying the Constitution. He addressed the convention again on November 30. Two days earlier, John Smilie had responded to Wilson, but his speech is not to be found in the official record. However, his speech, or portions of it, were printed in the Pennsylvania Herald and in the notes kept by Yeates, Wayne and Wilson. Fortunately for students of the Constitution and American history, the Center for the Study of the American Constitution at the University of Wisconsin at Madison has uncovered and catalogued more than 70,000 documents pertaining to the entire ratification history. Under the leadership of its founder and Director, John Kaminski, these documents are freely available at csac.history.wisc.edu.
Omitting criticism of the Constitution from the convention’s journal was not accidental. Federalists were pushing hard for Pennsylvania to be the first State to ratify the Constitution and even hoped that Philadelphia would become the seat of the new federal government. Anti-federalists, on the other hand, needed more time. People in the west and on the frontier would require information and time to receive that information and make their views known.
On November 26, following Wilson’s speech, Robert Whitehill rose from his seat to propose that the convention dissolve into a Committee of the Whole. The process was not uncommon and was frequently used in the Pennsylvania Assembly. It had been utilized to great effect months earlier during the Constitutional Convention which drafted the Constitution.
A Committee of the Whole includes all members of the assembly but utilizes more relaxed rules, rather than the usual rules of debate, in order to facilitate a more open exchange of views. When the debate is concluded, the Committee submits its conclusions to the assembly (to itself) to resume normal business and formally vote on the issues discussed in the Committee. An added advantage is that the issue is likely to be discussed twice. Equally important, it would take more time; and the Anti-federalists needed time. Whitehill’s motion was soundly defeated.
Whitehill’s next attempt to help shape the debate [according to the Pennsylvania Herald] took place the next day when he offered a resolution that “upon all questions where the yeas and nays were called, any member might insert the reason of his vote upon the Journals of the Convention.” Like Whitehill’s earlier proposal, this was consistent with the practice of the Pennsylvania Assembly and was certainly not an unreasonable request.
Thomas Hartley, a pro-Constitution delegate representing York County, suggested that Whitehill’s motion be limited to the final vote for or against ratification. Assuming numerous motions would be decided during the convention’s deliberations, allowing each delegate to include in the Journal the reasons for his vote would render the Journal not only unwieldy and excessively long, but expensive to print. Whitehill shot back. “Unless we are allowed to insert our reasons,” he argued, “the yeas and nays will be a barren document, from which the public can derive no information, and the minority no justification for their conduct.” Furthermore, he added, “if we are allowed to state the foundation of our votes, the merits of the Constitution may be proved by the arguments of its advocates, and those who do not consider it to be an immaculate, or even salutary system, will have an opportunity to point out the defects from which their opposition originates.” In short, the people have a right to know.
Thomas McKean, Chief Justice of Pennsylvania, supported Hartley, stating he would be “satisfied” if the motion were confined to “the final question” of ratification. Otherwise, it would simply “indulge the vanity of some gentlemen who wish to turn authors at the public expense.” James Wilson claimed he would “wish our proceedings may be fully known and perfectly understood by our constituents,” but opposed that it be at public expense. The convention had already determined that five thousand copies of its minutes would be printed in both English and German. Anticipating a long debate, he said, “Shall we then employ the whole winter in carrying on a paper war at the expense of the state?” Let opponents of the Constitution “print when they will…but not at the expense of those who have sent us hither for a very different purpose.” Whitehill’s second motion failed. Anti-federalists were confined to finding their own means of communicating to their constituents and the general public. Federalists were in control.
Robert Whitehill was the son of an Ulster Irish immigrant blacksmith. Born in Lancaster County, he and his wife, Eleanor Reed, moved to Cumberland Country where they operated a 440-acre farm and Robert embarked on a political career which began with the struggle against Great Britain. After Pennsylvania declared independence, he served as a member of the committee which drafted Pennsylvania’s new constitution and later served in the Assembly and on the Supreme Executive Council.
Joining Whitehill as leaders of the convention minority were John Smilie and William Findley. Both had immigrated from Ireland within a year or two of their twentieth birthday, arriving in Pennsylvania within a year of one another, in 1762 and 1763 respectively. Both served during the Revolutionary War and were active in local and state politics. Smilie had established a 300-acre farm in Fayette County as he continued to be elected to public office. Later, in 1796, he will be chosen as a presidential elector and vote for Thomas Jefferson for President. He will also be elected to the United States House of Representatives (1793-95 and 1799-1812) and stand out as one of the most outspoken opponents of slavery and the slave trade. He will be re-elected to Congress in 1813 but die before Congress convenes.
William Findley will also be elected to Congress (1791-99 and 1803-17). At the end of his career he will have been the longest serving member of the House at that time. Like Smilie and Whitehill, Findley was a “Jeffersonian” and advocate for states’ rights. Derided as “a country hick” by some, he was a formidable force for democracy. As for Robert Whitehill, he will be called by some, “the father of the Bill of Rights” – a subject for another day in our series.