Profiles in Character #23 : Melancton Smith Changes His Mind
On June 17, 1788, when the New York State Convention to consider ratifying the U.S. Constitution began, 46 of the 65 delegates were known to be “Antifederalist/Republicans” (“Antis”), vigorously opposed to the new form of government. Eight states had already ratified, (nine were needed to put the Constitution into effect), but Virginia, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Rhode Island had not. The “Antis” believed New York should reject the new charter of government – and had the votes as they outnumbered Federalist supporters by two to one. Their leader in the Poughkeepsie ratification convention was forty-four-year-old Melancton Smith.
A prosperous merchant, Smith had been a member of the 1775 Provincial Congress that led New York into the American Revolution, organized the Dutchess County Rangers to ferret out Loyalists, had served as Sheriff and Justice of the Peace and as a member of the Continental Congress under the Articles of Confederation. Like many at the convention and in other states, he described the proposed Constitution as “radically defective,” granting too much power to the national government, undermining state sovereignty and failing to protect American liberties. Scholars believe he contributed to or actually wrote many of the most noted essays arguing against ratification.
Since an early Convention vote would have been “no,” Federalists sought to delay it pending news from the ongoing New Hampshire and Virginia conventions. When word of a “yes” vote arrived from these states on June 21 and July 2, respectively, the “Antis” faced a new challenge. Failure to ratify now would leave them out of the new union.
Smith agreed that government under the Articles needed improvement but felt the Constitution went too far. Described by contemporaries as a “reasonable” man, he sought advice from Massachusetts friend Nathan Dane, with whom he had served in the Continental Congress. In a July 3rd letter, Dane argued that there were only two course of action: (1) ratify and recommend amendments or (2) make amendments a condition of ratifying. Dane recommended the former, believing it would be easier to make changes to the Constitution if New York was inside the union with representatives in Congress than outside of it.
Smith, having written Dane earlier that he was ready “to consider the circumstances we are in”, agreed but knew very powerful members of his party, including Governor George Clinton, who was president of the Convention, were not. Federalists, feeling the tide in their favor, pressed for a vote. On July 17th, Alexander Hamilton (a Federalist delegate) argued that being out of the union would make New York dependent again on England. Other Federalists reminded the “Antis” that failure to ratify would mean that the capitol of the new nation would of necessity be moved from New York City.
What followed were various proposals, including one from Smith to make ratification contingent on certain Constitutional amendments made within a certain period of years which if not passed would allow New York to secede from the union. Large numbers of amendments had already been proposed during debate, and more followed. Smith had tried to find language to “support the party with whom I have connected as far as is consistent with propriety” but later on July 17th withdrew his own proposal. He had become convinced the national Congress would never accept a conditional New York ratification as other state conventions had already concluded. If New York was to join the union and pursue changes from the inside, it had to ratify.
After the “Antis” met that evening and the morning of the 18th, DeWitt Clinton (the governor’s nephew) reported that “Some are much enraged at” Smith, saying “he goes so much among the feds that he has raised jealousies against him.” During debate on July 18th, Smith formally announced his view. In a dramatic public turnaround, the leader of the opposition changed his mind, saying he now supported ratification without conditions:
“It is true I have shifted the ground, it is only to take a better position. The objects we have in view will be better attained by this system than the former – we shall better assure our independence with the union and procure a consideration of amendments by the people of America.
I entreat both sides not to decide hastily, to consider well before they give an opinion – to lay aside prejudices and passion . . .”
On July 26th, when the final vote was taken, New York agreed to ratify not with conditions but “in full confidence” that the new government would call a convention to consider amendments. Smith had agreed to this wording, further angering many in his party. The vote was 30-27, with Smith in the majority, the narrowest margin of any state thus far.
Governor Clinton, who said Smith had “disgusted many of the Antifeds by accepting Ratification,” extracted a price. He made sure Smith was denied his bid for a Senate seat in the new Congress. Ever faithful to his political belief, Smith nevertheless supported Clinton’s re-election.
Melancton Smith, unknown to most Americans, exemplifies the party politician who, considering the long-term interests of his country, has the courage to change his mind.
Photo Credit: Clermont State Historic Site
