To have observed the strict letter of the law would have defeated the purposes of the delegates, because Congress and the state legislatures were openly hostile to such drastic changes as had been made.  Unanimous ratification, as events proved, would have been impossible.  Therefore the delegates decided that the Constitution should be sent to Congress with the recommendation that it, in turn, transmit the document, not to the state legislatures, but to conventions held in the states for the special object of deciding upon ratification.  This process was followed.  It was their belief that special conventions would be more friendly than the state legislatures.

The convention was equally positive in dealing with the problem of the number of states necessary to establish the new Constitution.  Attempts to change the Articles had failed because amendment required the approval of every state and there was always at least one recalcitrant member of the union.  The opposition to a new Constitution was undoubtedly formidable.  Rhode Island had even refused to take part in framing it, and her hostility was deep and open.  So the convention cast aside the provision of the Articles of Confederation which required unanimous approval for any change in the plan of government; it decreed that the new Constitution should go into effect when ratified by nine states.

In providing for future changes in the Constitution itself the convention also thrust aside the old rule of unanimous approval, and decided that an amendment could be made on a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states.  This change was of profound significance.  Every state agreed to be bound in the future by amendments duly adopted even in case it did not approve them itself.  America in this way set out upon the high road that led from a league of states to a nation.

THE STRUGGLE OVER RATIFICATION

On September 17, 1787, the Constitution, having been finally drafted in clear and simple language, a model to all makers of fundamental law, was adopted.  The convention, after nearly four months of debate in secret session, flung open the doors and presented to the Americans the finished plan for the new government.  Then the great debate passed to the people.

=The Opposition.=—­Storms of criticism at once descended upon the Constitution.  “Fraudulent usurpation!” exclaimed Gerry, who had refused to sign it.  “A monster” out of the “thick veil of secrecy,” declaimed a Pennsylvania newspaper.  “An iron-handed despotism will be the result,” protested a third.  “We, ‘the low-born,’” sarcastically wrote a fourth, “will now admit the ‘six hundred well-born’ immediately to establish this most noble, most excellent, and truly divine constitution.”  The President will become a king; Congress will be as tyrannical as Parliament in the old days; the states will be swallowed up; the rights of the people will be trampled upon; the poor man’s justice will be lost in the endless delays of the federal courts—­such was the strain of the protests against ratification.