Heroes of the Convention

Nation at the Crossroads: Video Transcript The Great New York Debate over the Constitution, 1787-88

Pauline Maier: I think the New York Convention had a couple of heroes. One was John Jay, who was not one of these flashy orators like Robert R. Livingston or Alexander Hamilton, but who was courteous, who treated the opposition with politeness, which . . . who made an effort not to distort what they were saying but who was very firm that the Convention could not ratify with conditions, and who was working very hard to find some middle way that everybody could agree upon. I donʼt think he could have done it, however, without the man who was the greater hero of the two, and that is Melancton Smith. Smith was a merchant, he came from Dutchess County, had moved actually to Manhattan in the 1780s. He was one of the leading advisors of Governor George Clinton, but he had understood from early on that circumstances were shifting and that if perhaps in the beginning of the ratification controversy it made some sense to say we wonʼt ratify unless the Constitution is changed. After this Constitution had been ratified, you couldnʼt do that anymore. Now many of his colleagues remained adamant and even more so thought that their constituents were unwilling to live under a constitution that had not yet been ratified. Melancton Smith was willing to say circumstances have changed, what made sense then does not make sense now, and we have to modify what we do. And it was he and a handful of like-thinking members of the Antifederalist/Republican delegates who managed to see to it that New York ratified the Constitution.

John Kaminski: I think the two personalities of Melancton Smith on the Antifederalist side and John Jay on the Federalist side really come to the fore here and assist a great deal. These are two individuals that are bent on compromise, Melancton Smith as the political compromiser and John Jay certainly as a compromiser as well, but he has an image, John Jay has an image that is totally different than Alexander Hamilton. Although heʼs viewed as an aristocrat, heʼs viewed as a moralistic person, heʼs viewed as a religious person, and would not do wrong here. He has tremendous experience already in the federal government, that is, he has been secretary for foreign affairs for four years. And in that capacity he has been de facto prime minister of the United States. And everybody understands this and they trust him. And so without John Jay it wouldʼve been difficult for the Antifederalists to accept the promises that they were getting from the Hamiltonians. And so it is, I think, those two leaders of the parties that helped to smooth the rough waters that wouldʼve been there without them.

Richard Leffler: Itʼs a lesson today when we have this bitter partisan politics. Let me tell you, compared to the eighteenth century, our partisan politics is nothing. The partisan politics of the 1780s and 1790s was vicious. And yet they had to come together, “What do you need to ratify this Constitution unconditionally?” And they did it.