A More Perfect Union: What We the People Can Do to Reclaim Our Constitutional Liberties (3 page)

Many of the delegates had served in the Revolutionary War, including Thomas Mifflin. Mifflin was born into a Quaker family in Philadelphia and graduated from the city’s college (now the University of Pennsylvania) in 1760 at age sixteen. He succeeded in several business ventures, but his heart was with the colonial cause. In spite of his religious upbringing, Mifflin not only mustered troops but also led them beginning in 1775—and was promptly expelled from his church. His service as a personal assistant, or aide-de-camp, to George Washington springboarded him to appointment as the first quartermaster general of the Continental Army, an executive position behind the lines overseeing the commanders in the field and the supply of the war effort, among other duties. Being a man of action, he wasn’t particularly fulfilled in this role. He did engage in battles in New York and New Jersey, however, and before he resigned he earned the rank of major general. He also served for a time as president of the Second Continental Congress.

Not only were there businessmen and soldiers among the delegates, but there were also several doctors. Five doctors had signed the Declaration of Independence, and as highly educated individuals they were deeply involved in local and national affairs during the early days of our nation.

There are many today who think that doctors should stick to medicine and cannot possibly know anything about any other area of life. The opposite is true: Most doctors are deeply invested in areas of knowledge besides medicine. In fact, today’s medical schools actively seek out students who are not confined to traditional premed majors like the biological sciences. History and philosophy majors as well as a variety of others are welcomed with open arms and are taught, like everyone else, to make decisions based on evidence rather than on ideology.

When we undertake policy making in this nation, we can benefit only when we are willing to hear the voices of a variety of citizens from different professions, including medicine. When doctors began to retreat from the public square to their operating rooms, laboratories, and clinics, leaving the social welfare of their patients in the hands of bureaucrats, health care began to transform from a social obligation to a business. Clearly patients will be the beneficiaries when those making the important policy decisions are also those who are concerned and knowledgeable about their health and well-being.

James McHenry of Maryland was one of the physicians at the convention. The Irish-born McHenry was educated in Dublin but set off for America on his own at age eighteen and was joined by his family the following year. While the family started a Baltimore-based business, McHenry studied under physician Benjamin Rush and then signed on as a military surgeon until he was captured as a prisoner of war at Fort Washington. As soon as he could return to service (1778), he joined George Washington at Valley Forge and subsequently served the Marquis de Lafayette until elected to the Maryland Senate, where he represented his constituents from 1781 to 1786 and again from 1791 to 1796.

Hugh Williamson of North Carolina studied for the ministry and worked as a college professor before choosing his long-term line of work. A member of the first graduating class of the College of Philadelphia (now the University of Pennsylvania) in 1757, he would cross the ocean a few years later, having decided to pursue a medical degree. After returning to Philadelphia to set up practice, Williamson soon wearied of medicine but became known for his studies in astronomy, which included penning “An Essay on Comets” in 1771 and tracking the movements of Mercury and Venus.

An eyewitness to the Boston Tea Party, he testified before a British council that revolt was brewing in America. When his warnings proved true, and the first shots of the revolution were fired, Williamson came home and reestablished his medical practice. North Carolina’s governor ultimately enlisted him as surgeon general to the militia. He is especially remembered for his pioneering efforts to mitigate illness within the fighting ranks by applying a number of hygienic methods. After the war, Williamson also served in his state legislature, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Continental Congress.

Native-born Virginian James McClurg was an internationally renowned physician whose medical writings brought him much attention within the scientific community. He earned his medical degree from the University of Edinburgh (Scotland) and did postgraduate work in Paris and London. In addition to his wartime surgical work, he served as president of the Virginia Medical Society in his later years and as a medical professor for a time at his alma mater, the College of William and Mary. Like that of the other physicians among the signers, his expertise helped ground the Constitutional Convention.

As the convention progressed, some delegates began to stand out as leaders. Twenty-nine-year-old lawyer and planter Charles Pinckney from South Carolina considered himself the greatest among his peers, speaking frequently during the Constitutional Convention and often problem solving as he spoke. His claim that he drafted the source document for the U.S. Constitution has been refuted. Nevertheless, his work on the final draft was substantial, and he used his influence to ratify the Constitution in his home state in 1788. He would later become a three-time governor of South Carolina and be elected to the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

James Madison was another prominent delegate. The Virginian had studied government, law, and theology at the College of New Jersey (now Princeton). Afterward he returned home and involved himself in local politics, being named a delegate to the Virginia Convention (1776). There he helped to create the state constitution. He also served twice in the Virginia House.

Even though he was one of the youngest members of the First Continental Congress, he was recognized as a change agent. His impact extended to the Constitutional Convention, where his copious writings on the limiting qualities of the Articles of Confederation, along with his more than 150 addresses to the 1787 assembly, hastened the work.

Madison was the brains behind the Virginia Plan, a key basis for our current Constitution, and his convention journal affords us an unsurpassed record of these historic sessions. He also was a point man in seeing the Constitution through the Continental Congress.

By the time he arrived to preside over the convention, George Washington was already well known for his victorious command of the Continental Army. Recognizing the ineffectiveness of the Articles of Confederation, Washington, along with Madison and others, favored a unifying central government, and he promoted this ideal in his dignified way during the proceedings.

Perhaps the most famous delegate was Benjamin Franklin, whose limited formal education did not stop him from becoming one of history’s most highly regarded thinkers and inventors and a heralded diplomat on two continents. After apprenticing with his father, who made soap and candles, as a boy he began working with his older half-brother James in the printing business. James had founded one of the first newspapers in the colonies, the
New-England Courant
, and without any fanfare the periodical included young Benjamin’s first published essays.

Due to disagreements with his brother, Benjamin relocated to Philadelphia in 1723, continuing as a printer with another company for a year before moving to London. Not long after his return to Philadelphia, he took over the
Pennsylvania Gazette
(1730–48). However, his annual publication
Poor Richard’s Almanack
(1732–58) was what put him on the literary map. It was such an overwhelming success that only the Bible was read by more colonists. With this early-American best seller came financial independence. While Franklin nurtured his interests in science and politics, his philanthropic efforts established hospitals, libraries, and schools.

Franklin’s first foray into politics was in 1736, when he was appointed a clerk of the colonial legislature. He was subsequently elected as a member, serving from 1751 to 1764.
Among his various positions in local government was deputy postmaster of Philadelphia (1737–53). He fulfilled a similar role for all the colonies from 1753 to 1774.

It was during an eleven-year stint in England as a representative of various colonies that Franklin’s eyes were opened to the revolutionary cause, especially when he recognized the tyranny of the Stamp Act. He worked tirelessly for its repeal, and through these efforts became one of America’s leading defenders of freedom. (He also did considerable work in his twilight years to abolish slavery.)

Franklin returned home once more and set to work at the Continental Congress, and in June of 1776 he helped to draft the Declaration of Independence. However, diplomatic duties drew him back to Europe later that year, and he directed various political negotiations with France as a commissioner between 1776 and 1785. His landmark achievement in that role was his collaboration with John Adams and John Jay to facilitate the war-ending Treaty of Paris in 1783.

Back on American soil, though hindered by ill health and age, he attended most sessions of the Constitutional Convention and frequently intervened to quell disputes—a leader among leaders to the final day.

Although the delegates were largely cooperative and cordial, there was plenty of conflict. Luther Martin of Maryland, a vocal opponent of a centralized government, stood before the assembly arguing against the Virginia Plan for more than three hours. The debate was so heated that Martin and fellow
Maryland delegate John Mercer left the convention. Martin actually fought ratification of the Constitution afterward.

The Virginia Plan favored states with large populations and advocated for a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature. The plan called for each state to have proportional representation in each of the legislative bodies. Of course this did not appeal to the states with small populations, since they would be dramatically overpowered by larger states like Virginia. The New Jersey Plan, in contrast, advocated for a unicameral (one-chamber) legislature in which each state would have a single vote regardless of its size and population. The dispute over the two plans was so significant that it threatened to derail the whole process of creating a union. Fortunately, the so-called Great Compromise resolved this conflict by suggesting a bicameral legislature with a House of Representatives that was populated on a proportional basis and a Senate that gave equal votes to each state.

Alexander Hamilton of New York was a major figure in the conflict, pushing a self-named plan that he deemed able to accomplish what neither the Virginia Plan nor the New Jersey Plan could. Delegate William Pierce said of Hamilton, “There is no skimming over the surface of a subject with him, he must sink to the bottom to see what foundation it rests on.”
⁶
Despite his thoroughness, though, Hamilton’s plan was rejected.

The fight over the New Jersey Plan and the Virginia Plan wasn’t the only disagreement. There were intense arguments between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists before the Constitution was finally ratified by the requisite number of states in 1788. The Federalists wanted a powerful central government. Their primary advocates were Alexander Hamilton,
James Madison, and John Jay, who became the first chief justice of the Supreme Court. They went so far as to write a series of pro-Constitution essays known as
The
Federalist Papers
, in which they eloquently laid out the argument for a strong federal government and indicated how it would work. Many of the papers were published in newspapers throughout the country and played an important role in the ratification of our Constitution.

The Anti-Federalists were just as vocal in their opposition to a strong central government and also wrote a series of papers that were widely disseminated. Their principal concern was that a strong central government would become more like a monarchy and would usurp the power of the people over time. They particularly wanted to prevent the executive branch from becoming too powerful. They eventually assented to the creation of a strong central government, but they insisted on countering it with the first ten amendments to the Constitution, otherwise known as the Bill of Rights. These amendments gave the people strong and specific protections that were not clearly spelled out in the original articles.

In retrospect, both groups were right. The Federalists were correct in predicting that a strong central government would promote the development of a strong nation. Federalism’s economic synergies throughout the nation would create a strong middle class and a powerful economic engine.

On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists correctly predicted that the strong federal government would usurp the power of the states and make them subservient. Fortunately, the Bill of Rights, for which they were responsible, has shielded us from further encroachments on freedom.

Once the Constitution was ratified by the states (a two-thirds majority was the requirement), George Washington was the unanimous electoral-college choice for president in 1789. Intent on providing the inexperienced nation with some much-needed grounding, he traveled throughout the Northeast that year and the South in 1791, in an effort to inform and unify his countrymen regarding the development of and need for the Constitution. The people who lived closer to the capital had been privy to the evolution of this essential document all along. Not so those who lived in more distant regions. And Washington wanted to even the playing field. Today our leaders would do well to learn from Washington’s example of protecting both unity and diversity.

Our Constitution was founded by brave and wise men, leaders who had America’s best interests at heart. They knew firsthand the pains of living under tyranny, and they sacrificed much in order to ensure that we, their descendants, would not suffer the same way. Their hard work has paid off, as the Constitution has so far stood the test of time. We should seek to honor their legacy by upholding its principles and emulating their unselfish examples.

The Constitution’s history also teaches us much about the types of leaders we should seek out. The founders had diverse backgrounds, but they tended to be people of accomplishment with real-world experience. Many of them demonstrated that a life filled with political experience was not a prerequisite for brilliant thinking and effective leadership. Instead of continuing to view political experience as the
main criterion for a leader, we should instead examine political candidates to see if they understand America’s history. We should draw leaders from all walks of life—business, the military, the church, and medicine. We should look for leaders who have open minds and are able to deal well with conflict. We should follow statesmen who value education. Most of all, we should make sure that we elect only leaders who understand the principles of the Constitution, which we will examine in the next section of this book.