{"id":17933,"date":"2025-11-05T13:53:28","date_gmt":"2025-11-05T18:53:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/?p=17933"},"modified":"2026-01-21T13:59:10","modified_gmt":"2026-01-21T18:59:10","slug":"brutus-part-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/brutus-part-3\/","title":{"rendered":"Melancton Smith’s Fingerprints (Brutus Part 3)"},"content":{"rendered":"

Melancton Smith\u2019s Fingerprints<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The \u201cBrutus<\/em> \u2013 Melancton Smith Authorship Thesis\u201d (Part 3)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

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

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

During his first speech at the New York ratification convention Melancton Smith delivered a damning criticism of slavery and the proposed Constitution. Refusing to pull any punches, Smith described slavery as \u201cutterly repugnant.\u201d He observed that the rule of apportionment governing the House of Representatives was \u201cabsurd,\u201d founded on \u201cunjust principles,\u201d and the result of an accommodation \u201cwith the southern states.\u201d Calling out those who benefitted from the Three-Fifths compromise, Smith declared that \u201cthe very operation of it was to give certain privileges to those people who were so wicked as to keep slaves.\u201d[1]<\/a><\/p>\n

The same bold, outspoken criticism of slavery appeared seven months earlier in Brutus III<\/em>. Addressing the same rule of apportionment, Brutus<\/em> sarcastically observed: \u201cWhat a strange and unnecessary accumulation of words are here used to conceal from the public eye\u201d what might have been more concisely stated. Brutus<\/em> quoted Montesquieu for the proposition that \u201cin a free state\u201d the legislature should reside in the whole body of the people. Why Brutus<\/em> asked should slaves, \u201cwho are not free agents\u201d and have \u201cno share in government\u201d be included in the representation formula? Brutus<\/em> derisively answered:<\/p>\n

Is it because in some of the states, a considerable part of the property of the inhabitants consists in a number of their fellow men, who are held in bondage, in defiance of every idea of benevolence, justice, and religion, and contrary to all the principles of liberty, which have been publickly avowed in the late glorious revolution?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Next, Brutus<\/em> proceeded to lay bare the illogic of the clause:<\/p>\n

If this be a just ground for representation, the horses in some of the states, and the oxen in others, ought to be represented\u2014for a great share of property in some of them, consists in these animals; and they have as much controul over their own actions, as these poor unhappy creatures<\/strong>, who are intended to be described in the above recited clause, by the words, \u201call other persons<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n

Finally, Brutus<\/em> condemned the inhumanity and hypocrisy of slavery and the slave trade:<\/p>\n

What adds to the evil is, that these states are to be permitted to continue the inhuman traffic of importing slaves, until the year 1808<\/strong>\u2014and for every cargo of these unhappy people, which unfeeling, unprincipled, barbarous, and avaricious wretches, may tear from their country, friends and tender connections, and bring into those states, they are to be rewarded by having an increase of members in the general assembly.[2]<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

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

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

These were not hollow words for Melancton Smith. When he delivered his convention speech of 20 June 1788 decrying slavery, Smith was \u201cvery likely the most actively anti-slavery man in the entire Congress.\u201d[3]<\/a> Smith was a founding member of the New York Manumission Society and would continue to be an active opponent of slavery for years to come.[4]<\/a> Unlike many of the speakers at the New York ratification convention, there is no evidence that Smith ever owned slaves.[5]<\/a> In fact, all of the other leading Antifederalists who have been suggested as authors of Brutus<\/em> were slaveowners.[6]<\/a> Accordingly, Smith\u2019s consistent and profound opposition to slavery is compelling attribution evidence that helps confirm the \u201cBrutus<\/em> \u2013 Melancton Smith Authorship Thesis.\u201d[7]<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Overview of Brutus<\/em> Attribution<\/p>\n

This blog post is the third of a multi-part series exploring the authorship of the sixteen letters of Brutus<\/em>. The \u201cBrutus<\/em> \u2013 Melancton Smith Authorship Thesis\u201d<\/strong> argues that Brutus<\/em> was Melancton Smith, Alexander Hamilton\u2019s chief opponent at the New York ratification convention in Poughkeepsie. Part 1<\/strong><\/a><\/span> provides an overview of existing scholarship and a summary of the new evidence compiled by Statutesandstories.com in collaboration with John P. Kaminski. Part 2<\/strong><\/a><\/span> and 3 set forth the detailed attribution evidence summarized in Part 1<\/strong><\/a><\/span>.<\/p>\n

Part 2<\/strong><\/a><\/span> focused on pre-authorship <\/em>attribution evidence arising prior to the printing of the Brutus<\/em> essays from 18 October 1787 to 10 April 1788. Part 3 continues with a discussion of post-authorship<\/em> attribution evidence primarily arising from Smith\u2019s speeches at the New York ratification convention.[8]<\/a> Part 4 <\/strong><\/a><\/span>\u00a0will present the remaining categories of attribution evidence, with a focus on Smith\u2019s syllogistical reasoning style. Part 5 (pending)<\/strong> will discuss newly uncovered speeches by Melancton Smith which further confirm Melancton Smith\u2019s identity as Brutus<\/em>.<\/p>\n

The \u201cBrutus <\/em>\u2013 Melancton Smith Authorship Thesis\u201d<\/strong> is based on a detailed review of decades of correspondence, pamphlets, legislative history, records of the New York ratification convention, and recently uncovered speeches by Smith. Much of this work is only made possible after the completion of the monumental forty-seven volumes of the Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution<\/em> (DHRC<\/em>). Readers are advised that Parts 2 and 3 are not intended to be a quick read. Unlike more traditional and reader friendly blog posts, Parts 2 and 3 might best be consumed in digestible installments.<\/p>\n

Earlier this year, Statutesandstories released a related seven-part series about the Antifederalist Federal Farmer<\/em>. Historians have long recognized Brutus<\/em> and the Federal Farmer<\/em> as the two most important Antifederalist authors. For decades, the Federal Farmer<\/em> was believed to have been Richard Henry Lee. In 1974, historian Gordon Wood challenged this longstanding attribution, but did not offer a replacement author. In 1988, John P. Kaminski released a paper arguing that Elbridge Gerry was the Federal Farmer<\/em>. Click here<\/a><\/span><\/strong> for a link to the F<\/em><\/strong>ederal Farmer <\/em>\u2013 E<\/strong>lbridge Gerry A<\/strong>uthorship T<\/strong>hesis (\u201cFEAT\u201d)<\/strong><\/a><\/span> which surveys newly uncovered evidence that Elbridge Gerry was in fact the Federal Farmer<\/em>. With Elbridge Gerry confirmed as the Federal Farmer<\/em>, the field is cleared for Melancton Smith to be recognized as Brutus<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Part 2<\/a><\/span><\/strong> was organized into the following categories of attribution evidence:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Smith\u2019s 1784 pamphlet opposing the holding in the case of Rutgers v. Waddington<\/em> which made Smith a leading early critic of judicial review;<\/li>\n
  2. the choice of the pseudonym Brutus<\/em> and Smith\u2019s political rivalry with Alexander Hamilton;<\/li>\n
  3. Smith\u2019s speech to Congress defending New York\u2019s conditional adoption of the impost requested by Congress;<\/li>\n
  4. Smith\u2019s two pamphlets as A Republican<\/em> defending New York\u2019s actions on the impost;<\/li>\n
  5. the nexus and political relationship between Smith and New York Governor George Clinton, as evidenced in Charles Tillinghast\u2019s letter to Hugh Hughes dated 27 January 1788; and<\/li>\n
  6. logistical considerations which place Smith in Brutus\u2019s <\/em>shoes.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Part 3 continues with a discussion of the following Melancton Smith \u201cfingerprints,\u201d additional attribution evidence which flows in large part from Smith\u2019s speeches at the New York ratification convention in June and July of 1788:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Brutus\u2019s<\/em> frequent use of biblical references which aligns with Smith\u2019s biography as an \u201cardent Presbyterian\u201d and \u201cpillar of his church\u201d;<\/li>\n
    2. Smith\u2019s ardent and abiding opposition to slavery which aligns with Brutus<\/em>;<\/li>\n
    3. Smith\u2019s linguistic fingerprints (words and phrases reoccurring in Smith\u2019s correspondence and speeches) which align with Brutus<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      Part 4<\/strong><\/a><\/span>\u00a0will present the remaining categories of attribution evidence and fingerprints which connect Smith to <\/span>Brutus<\/em>:<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Smith\u2019s logical and syllogistic reasoning style which aligns with Brutus<\/em>;<\/li>\n
      2. Brutus\u2019s <\/em>lack of insider knowledge relating to the Constitutional Convention, in contrast to the Federal Farmer<\/em>;<\/li>\n
      3. Brutus\u2019s <\/em>intimate knowledge<\/em> of the workings of the Confederation Congress which aligns with Smith\u2019s service in Congress beginning in 1785.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        Brutus\u2019s<\/u><\/em> frequent use of biblical references aligns with Smith<\/u><\/p>\n

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

        Brutus\u2019s<\/em> letters are replete with biblical and religious references, as are the pages of Plebeian<\/em> which is also believed to have been written by Smith. Taken together, Brutus<\/em> and Plebeian<\/em> contain over three dozen biblical references, including prayers. As discussed below, this same pattern of frequent biblical allusions occurs in Smith\u2019s correspondence throughout his life. It should thus not be surprising that several of Smith\u2019s convention speeches likewise contain similar biblical references. This is particularly true for Smith\u2019s early convention speeches which are more likely to have been prepared in advance of the convention, compared with later speeches which were more narrowly focused.<\/p>\n

        The following chart evidences over thirty biblical and\/or religious references in Brutus<\/em> 1-7, 9, 10, 15 & 16, including four biblical references in Brutus 1<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
        \u00a0<\/td>\nBiblical References by Brutus<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 1<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cgenerations to come will rise up and call you blessed<\/strong>.\u201d<\/td>\nLuke 1:48<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 1<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cThe most important question that was ever proposed to your decision, or to the decision of any people under heaven<\/strong>, is before you\u2026\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 1<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cThe territory of the United States is of vast extent<\/em>; it now contains near three millions of souls\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 1<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cperfection<\/strong> is not to be expected in any thing that is the production of man\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 2<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cLaw of nature or of God\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 2<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cIf they had been disposed to conform themselves to the rule of immutable righteousness<\/strong>, government would not have been requisite.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 3<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cIs it because in some of the states, a considerable part of the property of the inhabitants consists in a number of their fellow men, who are held in bondage, in defiance of every idea of benevolence, justice, and religion<\/strong>, and contrary to all the principles of liberty, which have been publickly avowed in the late glorious revolution?\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 4<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cAs it is true what the\u00a0Apostle Paul<\/strong>\u00a0saith, that \u201cno man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it.\u201d<\/td>\nEphesians 5:29<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 4<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cThus when the prophet<\/strong> Elisha told Hazael, “I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the children of Israel<\/strong>; their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men, wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women with child.” Hazael had no idea that he ever should be guilty of such horrid cruelty, and said to the prophet. \u2018\u2018Is thy servant a dog that he should do this great thing.” Elisha answered. “The Lord<\/strong> hath shewed me that thou shalt be king of Syria.” The event proved, that Hazael only wanted an opportunity to perpetrate these enormities without restraint, and he had a disposition to do them, though he himself knew it not.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a02 Kings 8:12\u201313<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 4<\/em><\/td>\npainted sepulcher<\/td>\nMatthew 23:27<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 4<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cthey will then have to wrest from their oppressors, by a strong hand<\/strong>, that which they now possess, and which they may retain if they will exercise but a moderate share of prudence and firmness.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 5<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cso oppressive, as to grind the face of the poor\u201d<\/td>\nIsaiah 3:15<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 5<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cand which will introduce such an infinite number of laws and ordinances, fines and penalties. courts, and judges. collectors, and excisemen, that when a man can number them, he may enumerate the stars of Heaven<\/strong>.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 6<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cContradicts the scripture<\/strong> maxim: which saith: no man can serve two masters’ \u201d<\/td>\nMatthew 6:24<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 6<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cit will be a constant companion\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 6<\/em><\/td>\n\u201c\u2026..even at church\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 6<\/em><\/td>\n\u201clight upon the head of every person\u201d<\/td>\nJob 29:3<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 6<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cimmutable laws of G-d <\/strong>and reason\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 6<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cunless the people rise up, and, with a strong hand<\/strong>, resist and prevent the execution of constitutional laws\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 7<\/em><\/td>\n“matter of mere grace<\/strong> and favor\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 7<\/em><\/td>\n\u2018Let the monarchs in Europe, share among them the glory of depopulating countries, and butchering thousands of their innocent citizens, to revenge private quarrels, or to punish an insult offered to a wife, a mistress, or a favorite: I envy them not the honor, and I pray\u00a0heaven<\/strong>\u00a0this country may never be ambitious of it.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 9<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cmaking the Alcoran a rule of faith\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 9<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cthe establishment of the Mahometan religion\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 10<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cWhat the consequences of such a determination would have been, heaven only knows<\/u><\/strong>\u2026.as it ever did in any country under heaven<\/strong><\/u>.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 15<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cand which indeed transcends any power before given to a judicial by any free government under\u00a0heaven.\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 15<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cThere is no authority that can remove them, and they cannot be controuled by the laws of the legislature. In short, they are independent of the people, of the legislature, and of every power under heaven<\/strong>. Men placed in this situation will generally soon feel themselves independent of heaven<\/strong> itself.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 15<\/em><\/td>\n\u201crequired the spirit of a martyr\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 15<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cwithout the spirit of prophecy\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 15<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cany free government under heaven;<\/strong> every power under heaven; <\/strong>independent of heaven <\/strong>itself\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 15<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cHigh hand and an outstretched arm\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\nDeuteronomy 26:8<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Brutus 16<\/em><\/td>\n\u201c\u2026forget the hand that formed them\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\nParadise Lost<\/em> by John Milton – quoting devil<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

        It is noteworthy that Brutus\u2019s<\/em> biblical lens is in stark contrast with the letters of the Federal Farmer<\/em> (Elbridge Gerry), which contain only a single passing reference to \u201cthe days of Adam.\u201d This dichotomy between Brutus<\/em> and the Federal Farmer <\/em>has been noted by historians for decades. According to David E. Narrett, \u201c[t]he more plainspoken Smith quoted from the Bible, a practice fairly common in Brutus<\/em> but not in the Federal Farmer<\/em>.\u201d By contrast, the \u201cFederal Farmer\u2019s<\/em>prose style is more ornate and more replete with classical allusions than is Smith\u2019s.\u201d[9]<\/a><\/p>\n

        This comparison is consistent with efforts by scholars to categorize Antifederalist schools of thought. For example, Saul Cornell describes Brutus<\/em> as a \u201cmiddling\u201d Antifederalist.[10]<\/a> In comparison, the Federal Farmer <\/em>arguably falls into the \u201celite\u201d strand of Antifederalist thinking.[11]<\/a> As noted by David J. Siemers, elite Antifederalists quoted from a \u201cbroad array\u201d of sources, compared to the middling Antifederalists who quoted \u201cmore familiar sources, like John Locke or the Bible.\u201d[12]<\/a> This matches Michael J. Faber\u2019s similar classifications of Brutus<\/em> as a \u201cPower Anti-Federalist\u201d and the Federal Farmer<\/em> as a \u201cRights Anti-Federalist.\u201d[13]<\/a><\/p>\n

        A Plebeian\u2019s <\/u><\/em>frequent use of biblical references aligns with Smith\/Brutus<\/em><\/u><\/p>\n

        The final Brutus<\/em> essay, Brutus 16<\/em>, was published on April 10 in Thomas Greenleaf\u2019s New York Journal<\/em>.[14]<\/a> A week later Greenleaf\u2019s newspaper advertised on April 17 that a twenty-six page pamphlet by A Plebeian<\/em> was now available for sale.[15]<\/a> The election of delegates to the New York ratification convention was scheduled to begin on April 29th<\/sup>.[16]<\/a>Although Brutus 16<\/em> contemplated that it would be followed by a future 17th<\/sup> essay, it appears that Brutus\u2019s<\/em> efforts were redirected into what became A Plebeian<\/em>.[17]<\/a> If so, A Plebeian <\/em>can properly be considered as Smith\u2019s final Brutus<\/em> essay (and a magnum opus of sorts), timed to correspond with the pending election of delegates to Poughkeepsie.<\/p>\n

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

        It is noteworthy that Brutus 1<\/em> begins by describing the decision facing America as the most important question ever proposed \u201cof any people under heaven<\/strong>.\u201d Brutus<\/em> warns that if the decision \u201cbe a wise<\/strong> one\u201d calculated to preserve the invaluable blessings of liberty, \u201cgenerations to come will rise up and call you blessed.\u201d With this phrase, Brutus<\/em> invokes Mary\u2019s prediction of praise by future generations, as recounted in the Gospel of Luke<\/em>. Similarly, A Plebeian <\/em>opens with an extended discussion of Paul\u2019s conversation with King Agrippa. It should thus not be surprising that the final paragraph of A Plebeian<\/em> ends with a prayer from the book of Psalms, which completes the circle.<\/p>\n

        Connecting the dots, Brutus 1 <\/em>begins with the prospect of future generations rising up \u201cto call you blessed,\u201d based on the wisdom<\/em> of your decision. Plebeian<\/em> completes what can be viewed as an extended sermon with a prayer for wisdom,<\/em> as the voters of New York headed to the polls. Brutus 1<\/em> describes the ratification vote as \u201cthe most important question\u201d ever proposed \u201cof any people under heaven<\/em>.\u201d Plebeian<\/em> concludes with a prayer that \u201cheaven<\/em> inspire you with wisdom<\/em>\u201d and preserve our country while the \u201csun and moon endure.\u201d Thus, the beginning of Brutus 1<\/em> perfectly aligns with the final paragraph of Plebeian<\/em>:<\/p>\n

        May heaven<\/strong> inspire you with wisdom<\/strong>, union, moderation and firmness, and give you hearts to make a proper estimate of your invaluable privileges, and preserve them to you, to be transmitted to your posterity unimpaired, and may they be maintained in this our country, while Sun and Moon endure.<\/p>\n

        While it is true that Plebeian<\/em> contains a postscript after this concluding paragraph, it is clear that the postscript was specifically added after \u201cthe foregoing pages have been put to the press.\u201d\u00a0 In other words, the purpose of Plebeian<\/em>\u2019s postscript was to directly respond to John Jay\u2019s recently published pamphlet. Accordingly, the beginning of Brutus 1<\/em> and the conclusion of Plebeian<\/em> flow together as one cohesive whole, tied together with related biblical references.<\/p>\n

        A further example connecting Brutus<\/em> and Plebeian<\/em> is the recognition in Brutus 1 <\/em>that \u201cperfection<\/em> is not to be expected in any thing that is the production of man.\u201d Brutus 1<\/em> explains that he would have held his peace if he didn\u2019t believe that the Constitution was fundamentally defective.[18]<\/a> The final paragraph of Plebeian<\/em> connects with this same theme. Plebeian<\/em>reminds his readers that \u201c[i]t must be recollected, that when this plan was first announced to the public, its supporters cried it up as the most perfect<\/em> production of human wisdom.\u201d Plebeian <\/em>reinforces the point by referring to a speech by Democritus<\/em> (Benjamin Rush) which \u201cwent so far, in the ardour of his enthusiasm in its favour, as to pronounce, that the men who formed it were as really under the guidance of Divine Revelation, as was Moses, the Jewish lawgiver.\u201d[19]<\/a> Yet now, on the verge of the New York ratification vote,[20]<\/a> Plebeian<\/em> observes \u201c[t]he same men who held it almost perfect<\/em>, now admit it is very imperfect<\/em>; that it is necessary it should be amended.\u201d<\/p>\n

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

        The following chart illustrates biblical references found in A Plebeian<\/em>, which is also believed to have been written by Melancton Smith:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
        \u00a0<\/td>\nBiblical References by Plebeian<\/em><\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        A<\/em> Plebeian<\/em> 1st paragraph<\/td>\n\u201cAs the favourers of the constitution, seem, if their professions are sincere, to be in a situation similar to that of Agrippa<\/strong>, when he cried out upon Paul\u2019s<\/strong> preaching\u2014\u201calmost thou persuadest me to be a christian<\/strong>,\u201d I cannot help indulging myself in expressing the same wish which St. Paul <\/strong>uttered on that occasion, \u201cWould to G-d you were not only almost, but altogether such an one as I am.\u201d\u00a0But alas, as we hear no more of Agrippa\u2019s<\/strong>christianity<\/strong> after this interview with Paul<\/strong>, so it is much to be feared, that we shall hear nothing of amendments from most of the warm advocates for adopting the new government, after it gets into operation.\u201d<\/td>\nActs 26:28\u201329<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        A Plebeian<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cDoes not every man sit under his own vine and under his own fig-tree<\/strong>, having none to make him afraid?\u201d<\/td>\nMicah 4:4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        A Plebeian<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cOne gentleman in Philadelphia went so far, in the ardour of his enthusiasm in its favour, as to pronounce, that the men who formed it were as really under the guidance of Divine Revelation, as was Moses, the Jewish lawgiver.\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        A Plebeian<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cThe present is the most important crisis at which you ever have arrived. You have before you a question big with consequences, unutterably important to yourselves, to your children, to generations yet unborn, to the cause of liberty and of mankind; every motive of religion<\/strong> and virtue\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        A Plebeian<\/em><\/td>\n\u201cThe farmer cultivates his land, and reaps the fruit which the bounty of heaven bestows<\/strong> on his honest toil.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        A<\/em> Plebeian<\/em> ending<\/td>\n\u201cMay heaven<\/strong> inspire you with wisdom, union, moderation and firmness, and give you hearts to make a proper estimate of your invaluable privileges, and preserve them to you, to be transmitted to your posterity unimpaired, and may they be maintained in this our country, while Sun and Moon endure<\/strong>.\u201d<\/td>\nPsalm 72:5<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

        The biblical references in Smith\u2019s convention speeches align with Brutus\/Plebeian<\/em><\/u><\/p>\n

        The New York ratification convention was dominated by two speakers, Melancton Smith and Alexander Hamilton.[21]<\/a>During the period when shorthand notes were being taken, Smith delivered nineteen speeches, more than any other Antifederalist speaker.[22]<\/a> Unfortunately, Francis Childs stopped transcribing the New York Convention speeches after July 2.[23]<\/a> Yet, it does not appear that Smith lost any steam as the Convention continued for another three weeks through July 26. For example, DeWitt Clinton described Smith\u2019s speech of July 11 as \u201cvery long and masterly.\u201d[24]<\/a><\/p>\n

        The following chart displays biblical and religious references in Smith\u2019s convention speeches, including more than half a dozen examples with Smith\u2019s very first convention speech on June 20:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
        \u00a0<\/td>\nBiblical References in Smith’s convention speeches<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 20 speech<\/td>\n\u201cthe great number of souls<\/strong> were spread over this extensive<\/em>county\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 20 speech<\/td>\n\u201cThe nation of Israel<\/strong> having received a form of civil government from Heaven<\/strong>, enjoyed it for a considerable period; but at length labouring under pressures, which were brought upon them by their own misconduct and imprudence, instead of imputing their misfortunes to their true causes, and making a proper improvement of their calamities, by a correction of their errors, they imputed them to a defect in their constitution\u201d<\/td>\n1 Samuel 8:11-18<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 20 speech<\/td>\n\u201cthey rejected their Divine Ruler, and asked Samuel to make them a King to judge them<\/strong>, like other nations. Samuel was grieved at their folly; but still, by the command of God<\/strong>, he hearkened to their voice; tho\u2019 not until he had solemnly declared unto them the manner in which the King should reign over them. \u201cThis, (says Samuel) shall be the manner of the King that shall reign over you.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 20 speech<\/td>\n\u201cHe had one more observation to make, to show that the representation was insufficient – Government, he said must rest for its execution, on the good opinion of the people, for if it were made in heaven,<\/strong> and had not the confidence of the people, it could not be executed: that this was proved, by the example give by the gentleman of, the Jewish theocracy.\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 20 speech<\/td>\n\u201cGolden images<\/strong>, with feet part of iron and part of clay\u201d<\/td>\nDaniel 2:31-33<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 20 speech<\/td>\n\u201cBeast dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly, having great iron teeth, which devours, breaks in pieces, and seeps the residue with his feet\u201d<\/td>\nDaniel 7:7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 20 speech<\/td>\n\u201chow long it might continue, God only knew<\/strong>!\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 25 speech<\/td>\n\u201cHeaven<\/u><\/strong> only knows<\/u> when they will be.\u201d<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        June 27 speech<\/td>\n\u201cwith as much Zeal as now used to shew that the Con. is perfect and like a System framed in Heaven<\/strong> & given to us by express Revelation\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

        \u00a0Biblical references in Smith\u2019s correspondence are consistent with Brutus\/Plebeian<\/em><\/u><\/p>\n

        While Melancton Smith has not been studied as closely as other more prominent members of the founding generation, historians have uniformly recognized Smith\u2019s religious background and faith. It is believed that the first biographical sketch about Smith was written in the late 19th<\/sup> century. Without elaboration, Smith was described as \u201ca strict churchman.\u201d[25]<\/a> In the 1940s, Julian Boyd wrote an entry in the Dictionary of American Biography<\/em> indicating that Smith manifested a \u201clife-long interest\u201d in religion and metaphysics.[26]<\/a> Boyd observed that Smith helped organize the Washington Hollow Presbyterian Church in 1769, where he owned a pew. Two hundred years later, historian Broadus Mitchell described Smith as an \u201can ardent Presbyterian.\u201d[27]<\/a> By far the most detailed account of Smith\u2019s life can be found in Robin Brooks\u2019 Ph.D. dissertation which describes Smith as a \u201cpillar\u201d of his church.[28]<\/a><\/p>\n

        Brooks confirms that \u201c[t]here is little question that Melancton Smith remained a devout Christian\u201d during his lifetime.[29]<\/a>In particular, Brooks points to a letter written by Smith to Gilbert Livingston where \u201cSmith burst out in praise of the Kingdom of Heaven and its Ruler who shapes all mortal acts to His good purposes.\u201d[30]<\/a> A close examination of Smith\u2019s surviving correspondence reveals biblical references and allusions which align with his convention speeches, the letters of Brutus<\/em> and the Plebeian<\/em> pamphlet. For example, Smith\u2019s 1 January 1789 letter to Gilbert Livingston cites to Psalms as does Plebeian<\/em>.[31]<\/a><\/p>\n

        As a delegate to the New York Provincial Congress from Dutchess County, Smith voted with his delegation in favor of the controversial resolution to open each daily session with a prayer.[32]<\/a>\u00a0 Smith\u2019s religious convictions were also evident in June of 1775 when he sought to add a \u201cright of conscience,\u201d otherwise known as freedom of religion, to the proposed Plan of Accommodation with the British. This early work would subsequently serve as a model for New York\u2019s first constitution.[33]<\/a><\/p>\n

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

        The first example of Smith\u2019s religiosity expressed in his correspondence dates back to 1771. In a letter from Smith to his friend Henry Livingston, Smith invokes the blessings of Heaven three times. These examples of Smith seeking the blessings from Heaven (\u201cMay the smiles of a kind and indulgent Heaven cheer you\u201d; \u201cmay Heaven grant\u201d; \u201cHeaven bless you\u201d) align with references to heaven in Smith\u2019s convention speeches (on June 20, 25, 27), five of Brutus\u2019s<\/em> letters (Brutus<\/em>1, 5, 7, 10, 15) and two examples in Plebeian<\/em>. The 1771 letter also refers to \u201ceternity,\u201d \u201ca God of infinite Wisdom & immaculate goodness,\u201d \u201cdivine Providence,\u201d and \u201cegyptian Bondage.\u201d<\/p>\n

        Smith\u2019s letter to Gilbert Livingston two decades later is consistent with this same religious perspective. Writing in January of 1789, Smith updated Livingston as to post ratification developments in New York City. Smith reassured Livingston that he retained the same sentiments as he ever did, that the new Constitution was not \u201cof divine Original.\u201d Smith uses a metaphor from Psalms 125 that they \u201cought therefore to strive to maintain our union firm and immoveable as the mountains\u201d[34]<\/a> in pursuing their object of amendments. Smith also quotes Psalms 76 as follows:<\/p>\n

        \u201cBlessed<\/strong> be the king of it, all things are under his controul<\/strong>, and however great the ambition of frail mortals<\/strong> may be, he will conduct every event to produce the best end. For even the wrath of Man shall praise him and the remainder will he restrain<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n

        It is clear that Smith took comfort in scripture as he declared, \u201cMay we stand in our Lot in that Kingdom,\u201d referring to the \u201cKingdom which can never be moved.\u201d[35]<\/a> He concluded his letter with the request that Livingston \u201c[t]ell all our friends to stand fast.\u201d<\/p>\n

        The following chart displays biblical and religious references in Smith\u2019s correspondence which is consistent with Brutus, Plebeian<\/em> and Smith\u2019s convention speeches:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
        \u00a0<\/td>\nBiblical References in Melancton Smith Correspondence<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to Henry Livingston 2 Feb 1771<\/td>\n\u201cMay the smiles of a kind an dindulgent Heaven<\/strong> cheer you while travelling through the gloomy vale of life, till you arrive to the bright regions of a happy Eternity<\/strong>….Were it not that I firmly believed a God of infinite Wisdom <\/strong>& immaculate<\/strong> goodness<\/strong> presided over Human Affairs, who is able & determined to so dispose of Things as finally, to, bring about the Greatest Good, I should be quite distracted with the shameless Conduct of Men in Power.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to Henry Livingston 2 Feb 1771<\/td>\n\u201cI think, we are bound to be very grateful to divine Providence<\/strong>, that the majority of the House of Asses, have not understanding equal to the Wickedness of their Hearts, for if this was the case, we should have awful Reason to fear, the province would soon be ensalved in egyptian Bondage<\/strong>.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to Henry Livingston 2 Feb 1771<\/td>\n\u201cmay Heaven grant <\/strong>a dissolution and open peoples eyes to a sese of their true interest…..I am to set out by leave of providence, on a journey to N. England….expect much pleasure in explaining philosophical & theological subjects. Heaven bless you.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to A Yates, 23 Jan 1788<\/td>\n\u201cI could easily lengthen my epistle<\/strong> but I am in haste”<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to Gilbert Livingston, 1 Jan 1789<\/td>\n\u201c\u2026that Kingdom which can never be moved. May we stand in our lot in that kingdom.\u201d<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to Gilbert Livingston, 1 Jan 1789<\/td>\n“Blessed<\/strong> be<\/strong> the king of it, all things are under his controul<\/strong>, and however great the ambition of frail mortals<\/strong>may be, he will conduct every event to produce the best end. For even the wrath of Man shall praise him and the remainder will he restrain<\/strong>.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to Gilbert Livingston, 1 Jan 1789<\/td>\n\u201c…who did not believe the new constitution was of divine Original<\/strong>.\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to Gilbert Livingston, 1 January 1789<\/td>\n\u201cWe ought therefore to strive to maintain our union firm and immoveable as the mountains\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to John Smith 10 January 1789<\/td>\n\u201cengaging heaven<\/strong> on their side\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
        Smith to James Cooper, 28 March 1795<\/td>\n\u201cfor Gods<\/strong> sake change your course\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

        Smith\u2019s ardent and abiding opposition to slavery which aligns with Brutus<\/em><\/u><\/p>\n

        As discussed above, Melancton Smith was a \u201cstrict churchman\u201d who manifested a \u201clife-long interest\u201d in religion. Both Smith and Brutus<\/em> frequently used biblical imagery and references. Not surprisingly, Smith was both an \u201cardent Presbyterian\u201d and an ardent opponent of slavery. Brutus 3<\/em> declared that slavery was \u201cin defiance of every idea of benevolence, justice, and religion<\/em><\/strong>, and contrary to all the principles of liberty, which have been publickly avowed in the late glorious revolution.\u201d Brutus<\/em>\u2019s<\/em> outspoken criticism of slavery aligns with Smith\u2019s June 20 convention speech and abiding opposition to slavery.<\/p>\n

        While serving in Congress in 1787 Smith was a member of the Congressional committee that drafted the Northwest Ordinance which banned slavery in the territories acquired from Britain during the war.[36]<\/a> Unlike other Antifederalist delegates to the New York ratification convention who owned slaves, Smith was one of nineteen founders of the New-York Manumission Society (NYMS). Consistent with his religious background, Smith assumed an active and longstanding leadership role with the NYMS.<\/p>\n

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

        Smith was elected chairman of the NYMS at its first meeting held on January 25, 1785 in Simmons\u2019 Tavern in New York City.[37]<\/a> Click here<\/strong><\/a> for a discussion of Simmons\u2019 Tavern. Smith was one of five members on the committee that prepared the NYMS\u2019 statement of rules and principles which fully aligns with Brutus 3<\/em> and Smith\u2019s New York ratification convention speech on June 20th.<\/p>\n

        Borrowing from the Declaration of Independence, the NYMS statement of rules and principles declared that \u201call men had an equal right to life, liberty and property.\u201d The NYMS statement further declared that \u201cfree citizens and Christians\u201d had a duty to recognize injustice and act with compassion to spread liberty \u201cby lawful Ways and Means.\u201d Thus, the NYMS was established with the goal of enabling slaves to \u201cshare, equally with us, in that civil and religious Liberty\u201d with which providence had blessed the American states. The same concept would be used by Lucretia Mott and Elizabeth Cady Stanton with the Declaration of Sentiments which kicked off the Women\u2019s Rights movement in Seneca Falls in July of 1848.<\/p>\n

        The first two paragraphs of the NYMS declaration setting forth its \u201cprinciples\u201d and \u201cobjects\u201d are copied below:<\/p>\n

        The benevolent Creator and Father of Men having given to them all, an equal Right to Life, Liberty and Property; no Sovereign Power, on Earth, can justly deprive them of either, but in Conformity to impartial Government and Laws to which they have expressly or tacitly consented \u2014<\/p>\n

        It is our Duty therefore, both as free Citizens and Christians, not only to regard, with Compassion, the Injustice done to those, among us who are held as Slaves, but to endeavour, by lawful Ways and Means, to enable them to Share, equally with us, in that civil and religious Liberty with which an indulgent Providence has blessed these States; and to which these, our Brethren, are by Nature, as much entitled as ourselves.<\/p>\n

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

        After chairing the inaugural meeting of the NYMS, Smith continued in an active leadership role.[38]<\/a> Smith was the first member elected to the six-member standing committee charged with implementing the society\u2019s agenda. Among other things, the committee prepared and presented a petition to the New York legislature for an act gradually abolishing slavery in New York, publicized the NYMS\u2019 activities, and collected dues.[39]<\/a><\/p>\n

        At its May 1785 meeting, Smith\u2019s committee reported on the efforts to publicize the society\u2019s work and objective \u201cto remove that Prejudice which has unhappily prevailed over Justice and the Dictates of Religion.\u201d Working with dispatch, the standing committee also reported on the society\u2019s petition to the New York legislature for the abolition of slavery which was signed by \u201ca great number of respectable Persons.\u201d[40]<\/a> Having served in the New York legislature and as a member of Congress, Smith was frequently selected as a NYMS lobbyist for the New York legislature and Congress.[41]<\/a>In January of 1788 Smith was appointed to a committee that petitioned the legislature to prevent the exportation of slaves from New York.[42]<\/a><\/p>\n

        Smith\u2019s committee also worked on securing freedom for individual slaves and \u201cto prevent kidnappers from leaving the city on ships with free Black people onboard, to intervene in situations where slaves were being improperly treated by their owners, and forced jailers in the city to release those who had been illegally detained.\u201d[43]<\/a> For example, Smith was involved with the filing of a habeas corpus petition to prevent a free Black citizen kidnapped in Connecticut from being transported to South Carolina.[44]<\/a><\/p>\n

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

        Another objective of the NYMS was to provide education. One way the NYMS did so was with the founding of the African Free School. Smith was the first trustee appointed when the school was established in November of 1787.[45]<\/a> A related problem confronted by the committee involved situations where manumissions by wills were being ignored by surviving family members. Although some slave owners wanted to free their slaves upon their death, widows and family sought \u201cto keep the slave in their household to avoid having to support the slave if he ever became unable to care for himself.\u201d[46]<\/a><\/p>\n

        When John Jay was appointed chief justice of the United States and Congress relocated from New York to Philadelphia, Jay and Alexander Hamilton were forced to step down as the first and second presidents of the NYMS. Smith was elected vice-president after their departure. He would be reelected as the vice president of the NYMS in 1792 and 1793.[47]<\/a><\/p>\n

        A fundraising subscription for the African Free School spearheaded by Smith[48]<\/a> is pictured below. The concluding paragraph of the detailed description contains sentiments that align with Brutus 3<\/em> and Smith\u2019s June 20th<\/sup> convention speech. For example, Brutus 3<\/em> condemned slavery and referred to slaves as \u201cunhappy<\/em> people\u201d torn from their tender connections and as \u201cpoor unhappy creatures<\/em>.\u201d This aligns with Smith\u2019s subscription for the NYMS which referred to the \u201cunhappy<\/em> circumstances in which this class of our fellow creatures<\/em> have been held.\u201d Moreover, Smith\u2019s subscription sought donations from \u201chumane<\/em> and benevolent<\/em>\u201d New Yorkers to implement their plan \u201cconsistent with the feelings of humanity<\/em>\u201d while Brutus 3<\/em> referred to slaves being held in bondage in defiance of every idea of \u201cbenevolence<\/em>, justice and religion\u201d and condemned the \u201cinhuman<\/em> traffic of importing slaves.\u201d<\/p>\n

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

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

        Unlike other prominent New Yorkers who merely professed opposition to slavery, Smith was a committed member of the NYMS who \u201crendered yeoman service to the society.\u201d[49]<\/a>\u00a0 According to Zuckert and Webb, \u201cSmith\u2019s outspoken opposition to slavery, as demonstrated by his opposition to the three-fifths clause at the ratifying convention, his membership on the committee that drafted the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 barring slavery from the territories, and his eleven-year membership and active participation in the New York Manumission Society, indicate that he was quite capable of denouncing slavery in the terms in which Brutus<\/em> did.\u201d[50]<\/a><\/p>\n

        Almost two decades ago, Zuckert and Webb contemplated a Melancton Smith \u201ccircle.\u201d Based on the totality of newly compiled attribution evidence it is now time to affirmatively recognize that Elbridge Gerry was the Federal Farmer<\/em> and Melancton Smith was Brutus<\/em>. Click here<\/strong><\/a> for a link to Part 1 of the F<\/strong>ederal Farmer \u2013\u00a0E<\/strong>lbridge Gerry\u00a0A<\/strong>uthorship\u00a0T<\/strong>hesis (\u201cFEAT\u201d). Set forth below are detailed linguistic fingerprints supporting the \u201cBrutus<\/em> \u2013 Melancton Smith Authorship Thesis.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

        Smith\u2019s linguistic fingerprints which align with Brutus<\/em> and Plebeian<\/em><\/u><\/p>\n

        Gradual expansion of federal power in a \u201csilent and imperceptible manner<\/em>\u201d by \u201cinsensible degrees<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n

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

        Set forth below is a detailed discussion of Melancton Smith\u2019s linguistic fingerprints which taken together prove that he was the Antifederalist Brutus<\/em>. As indicated in Part 2<\/strong>, the timing and content of Smith\u2019s 23 January 1788 letter to Abraham Yates provides powerful attribution evidence. Smith worried that the proposed judicial powers under Article III would clinch all other powers and extend them in a \u201csilent and imperceptible manner<\/em> to <\/strong>any thing and every thing.\u201d In evaluating Article III, Brutus 11<\/em> used the identical phrase that judicial power would operate in a \u201csilent and imperceptible manner<\/em><\/strong>\u201d resulting in \u201can entire subversion of the legislative, executive and judicial powers of the individual states.\u201d[51]<\/a>As this unique phrase was used by Smith prior to Brutus 11<\/em>, it is properly viewed as a useful attribution fingerprint.<\/p>\n

        The same concern was expressed by Smith in Brutus 4<\/em>, indicating that federal expansion would occur silently as the chains were gradually rivetted together until it was too late:<\/p>\n

        This may be effected constitutionally, and by one of those silent<\/em> operations which frequently takes place without being noticed, but which often produces such changes as entirely to alter a government, subvert a free constitution, and rivet the chains on a free people before they perceive they are forged.[52]<\/a><\/p>\n

        Brutus 15<\/em> raises the similar concern that the judicial power granted to the Supreme Court was immense and would gradually expand federal control \u201cby insensible degrees<\/em>\u201d over time. As described by Brutus 15<\/em>:<\/p>\n

        Perhaps nothing could have been better conceived to facilitate the abolition of the state governments than the constitution of the judicial. They will be able to extend the limits of the general government gradually, and by<\/em><\/strong>insensible degrees<\/strong><\/em>, and to accommodate themselves to the temper of the people.<\/p>\n

        Writing as Plebeian<\/em> Melancton Smith expressed the identical concern that the federal government would gradually expand over time \u201cby insensible degrees<\/em>.\u201d According to Plebeian<\/em>:<\/p>\n

        When the compact is once formed and put into operation, it is too late for individuals to object. The deed is executed\u2014the conveyance is made\u2014and the power of reassuming the right is gone\u2026. It steals, by insensible degrees<\/em><\/strong>, one right from the people after another, until it rivets its powers so as to put it beyond the ability of the community to restrict or limit it.<\/p>\n

        After the Constitution was ratified Melancton Smith continued to actively support constitutional amendments. Writing as a Federal Republican[53]<\/strong><\/a><\/em> in December of 1788, Smith used the same phrase to express the concern that the federal government would gradually annihilate the state governments as it expanded \u201cby insensible degrees<\/em><\/strong>.\u201d According to the Federal Republican<\/em>, amendments were necessary to prevent the establishment of a dangerous system of government which its supporters sought \u201cto fix over the people of this country by insensible degrees<\/em><\/strong>, and without their perceiving it until it is accomplished.\u201d<\/p>\n

        Accordingly, the phrases \u201csilent and imperceptible manner\u201d and \u201cby insensible degrees\u201d are properly recognized as Smith\u2019s unique signature fingerprints. The two phrases are not used by other Antifederalists, despite the fact that the Federal Farmer<\/em>, Cato<\/em>, Centinel <\/em>and other Antifederalists frequently made overlapping arguments.[54]<\/a><\/p>\n

        \u201ctotally independent<\/em>\u201d and \u201cuncontroulable power<\/em>\u201d which would \u201cswallow up<\/em>\u201d the states<\/p>\n

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

        Smith\u2019s 23 January 1788 letter to Abraham Yates, Jr. also objected that the federal courts would have powers that were \u201ctotally independent<\/em>, uncontroulable<\/em> and not amenable to any other power.\u201d[55]<\/a> This directly aligns with the concern in Brutus 11<\/em> that the courts would be rendered \u201ctotally independent<\/em>\u201d and Brutus 12<\/em> that the courts would be vested with \u201csupreme and uncontroulable<\/em> power.\u201d This phraseology and concern that a creeping federal government would eventually annihilate the states – and individual rights – appears in Brutus 1<\/em>, 6<\/em> and 12<\/em>. Smith makes the same argument in his convention speeches on June 21 and July 1.<\/p>\n

        Set forth below are examples of alignment between Brutus<\/em> and Melancton Smith\u2019s convention speeches illustrating his concern for the danger of a \u201ctotally independent\u201d judiciary with the \u201cuncontrollable power\u201d of judicial review. In the following examples, Smith (Brutus<\/em>) variously refers to \u201cabsolute and uncontroulable power,\u201d \u201cgreat and uncontroulable powers,\u201d and \u201csupreme and uncontroulable power\u201d of the federal government:<\/p>\n