{"id":17816,"date":"2025-11-14T15:56:00","date_gmt":"2025-11-14T20:56:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/?p=17816"},"modified":"2026-02-04T17:01:58","modified_gmt":"2026-02-04T22:01:58","slug":"breaking-news-melancton-smiths-speech-discovered-in-albany","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/breaking-news-melancton-smiths-speech-discovered-in-albany\/","title":{"rendered":"Breaking news: Melancton Smith’s speech discovered in Albany"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Breaking News: Critical speech from New York ratification convention discovered in Albany<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

John P. Kaminski, PhD and Adam P. Levinson, Esq.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

For the past 237 years, historians have debated which were the most important events during the campaign to ratify the U.S. Constitution. Among the most consequential speeches from 1787 to 1788 were James Wilson\u2019s address at the Pennsylvania State House Yard,[1]<\/a> John Hancock\u2019s speech proposing recommendatory amendments at the Massachusetts ratification convention,[2]<\/a> and Edmund Randolph\u2019s speech at the Virginia ratification convention announcing his reasons for supporting ratification even though he had refused to sign the Constitution in Philadelphia.[3]<\/a> We are excited to report that undated notes to a speech by Melancton Smith were recently uncovered in Albany. \u00a0As described below, Smith\u2019s previously unreported speech is arguably comparable to these critical moments, if not more historic.<\/p>\n

Over seventy percent of the delegates elected to the New York ratification convention in Poughkeepsie were Antifederalists. In no other state had Federalists faced worse odds. Indeed, when Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison decided to write The Federalist<\/em>, they fully understood the uphill battle looming in New York.[4]<\/a> Not surprisingly, the New York ratification convention would become the longest state ratification convention lasting from mid-June to late July.<\/p>\n

Melancton Smith served as the Antifederalist floor manager and led the debate against Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and the outnumbered Federalists. Although the plainspoken Smith lacked the rhetorical skills of the leading Federalists, he was \u201ca man of remarkable simplicity, and of the most gentle, liberal, and amiable disposition.\u201d[5]<\/a> He was also well prepared for the Convention as Governor Clinton\u2019s loyal lieutenant and the author of sixteen influential essays signed by Brutus and a pamphlet signed by Plebeian<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Soon after New York\u2019s convention assembled, the New Hampshire convention ratified the Constitution, crossing the required nine state threshold. It had little effect on the New York Antifederalists who adamantly insisted that the new government under the Constitution could not function effectively without New York and Virginia. Two weeks later, when Smith learned on 2 July that Virigina had become the tenth state to ratify, he understood that the landscape had changed. Now, it seemed that New York might be isolated outside the new Union. On July 23, Smith announced that he would be pivoting to support an unconditional ratification. He did so \u201cin full confidence\u201d that a Bill of Rights and structural amendments to the Constitution would be considered by the first Federal Congress. By abandoning his prior outspoken opposition to an unamended Constitution, Smith provides an example of a profile in courage, acting in the national interest, at what would prove to be great personal cost.<\/p>\n

After Smith endorsed an unconditional ratification he became a pariah for many stalwart Antifederalists. Although he served in Congress from 1785 to 1787, he would never again be elected to national office. According to some Antifederalists, Smith \u201c[i]njured the cause of our country more than any Federalist.\u201d[6]<\/a> Antifederalist observers noted that \u201c[s]ome detest Smith as much as Hamilton.\u201d[7]<\/a> While Hamilton\u2019s brilliance and elegant speeches at the New York convention were widely hailed by his peers, Smith\u2019s newly \u201cdiscovered\u201d speech was certainly more impactful.[8]<\/a><\/p>\n

Smith\u2019s extensive handwritten speech is over twenty pages long and has been carefully transcribed. While speeches during the first two weeks of the convention were actively reported by the press, by mid-July detailed records become more sparse. Thankfully this discovery allows readers to better understand Smith\u2019s thinking as he attempted to convince enough of his Antifederalist fellow delegates to join him in gaining a slim majority in ratifying the Constitution by a vote of 30 \u2013 27.<\/p>\n

In beautifully written prose, Smith asked whether New York will join \u201cthe great American family\u201d[9]<\/a> or \u201cshall we withdraw ourselves from it and seek our fortunes separately.\u201d Smith argued that New York should take its place in the \u201cfamily mansion\u201d \u201cwith brotherly kindness and confidence,\u201d relying on \u201ccommon interests and common prudence\u201d to obtain an improved Constitution. Smith explained that he \u201cdid not approve the building as it stands,\u201d but admitted that the \u201cwhole is made of good materials.\u201d Remaining in his metaphors, and keeping his sense of humor, Smith observed that the Constitution covered too much ground yet \u201cleaves too little room for the outhouses [i.e., the states] which are equally necessary to the prosperity of the farm.\u201d<\/p>\n

While he was a dedicated Antifederalist, Smith recognized that \u201c[i]n the short period of nine months\u201d the constitution has been adopted by ten of the thirteen States. Smith was concerned by the danger that New York City and the southern counties might secede if the state rejected ratification. Smith took solace in the fact that the union was supported by \u201cmany wise good men, men who have given the fullest evidence of their love of their country.\u201d For Smith, the goal of amending the Constitution could best be obtained after aligning with other states who were also recommending amendments. The speech concludes with the observation that America was witnessing \u201cone of the most astonishing events in the history of humane affairs.\u201d<\/p>\n

The manuscript copy of Smith\u2019s speech was not found in Melancton Smith\u2019s Papers and is likely an early draft. The manuscript also invites inquiry about the behind-the-scenes discussions taking place during the final week of the New York convention. As yet unanswered questions include when Smith wrote the speech and whether he did so alone? It is clear, for example, that Smith engaged in robust correspondence with trusted Antifederalists in New York and other states.[10]<\/a> Might he have shared a draft of the speech with Antifederalist colleagues? One might also ask why Smith didn\u2019t provide a copy of the speech to the press for publication, among other tantalizing questions under investigation.<\/p>\n

Earlier this year, fourteen pages of Melancton Smith\u2019s personal notes of the debates in Poughkeepsie were transcribed and published for the first time. Smith\u2019s convention notes had been held in private hands after being sold at auction at Sotheby\u2019s in 2017. The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution<\/em> recently transcribed \u00a0Smith\u2019s crucial July speech discovered in Albany, along with his personal convention notes. Historians are invited to dive into these previously unknown primary sources evidencing a seminal moment in American history. In the weeks to follow, we look forward to releasing additional scholarship on this and related topics, including the authorship of the letters of the Antifederalist Federal Farmer <\/em>and Brutus<\/em>, which newly compiled evidence suggests were written by Elbridge Gerry and Melancton Smith.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\n
Melancton Smith’s July 23 speech was summarized in the New York Journal<\/em>, but until now a copy of the speech was unavailable<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n
\"\"<\/a>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

The convention’s journal merely records motions and votes \u00a0<\/figcaption>\n<\/figure>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

For a preview of the scholarship involving the authorship of the Federal Farmer<\/em>, see https:\/\/csac.history.wisc.edu\/2025\/04\/01\/identifying-the-federal-farmer-unravelling-the-mystery-of-an-antifederalist-treasure\/<\/a> and https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/mystery-solved-antifederalist-elbridge-gerry-was-the-federal-farmer\/<\/a><\/p>\n

Footnotes:<\/p>\n

[1]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 DHRC<\/em>, 2:167 (6 October 1787)<\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 DHRC<\/em>, 6:1383 (31 January 1788)<\/p>\n

[3]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 DHRC<\/em>, 10:1484-1488 (6 June 1788)<\/p>\n

[4]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Pauline Maier, Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution<\/em> (Simon & Schuster, 2010), 344.<\/p>\n

[5]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Linda Grant De Pauw, The Eleventh Pillar: New York and the Federal Convention<\/em> (Cornell University Press, 1966), 199.<\/p>\n

[6]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Abraham G. Lansing to Abraham Yates, Jr. (20 July 1788), DHRC<\/em>, 21:1330.<\/p>\n

[7]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 De Witt Clinton Journal (18 July 1788), DHRC<\/em>, 23:2232.<\/p>\n

[8]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Smith himself recognized Hamilton\u2019s rhetorical skills admitting during the debate that, \u201c[t]he honorable Gentleman from New York [City] in particular who has so elaborately on two successive days argued in favour of the Clause has talents capable of reasoning plausibly on either side of any political question\u2014his remarks are ingenuous, and his manner engaging\u2014But still no reasoning Can change the nature of things or make truth falsehood.\u201d<\/p>\n

[9]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 George Washington would use the same phrase when he congratulated Rhode Island after it ratified the Constitution in 1790. DHRC<\/em>, 26:1009.<\/p>\n

[10]<\/a> \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 DHRC<\/em>, 21:1308; 22:2015; 28:214.<\/p>\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Breaking News: Critical speech from New York ratification convention discovered in Albany John P. Kaminski, PhD and Adam P. Levinson,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17816"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17816"}],"version-history":[{"count":22,"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17816\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18215,"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17816\/revisions\/18215"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17816"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17816"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17816"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}