Skip to main content

Unit 3 · Topic 3.8

3.8 The Constitutional Convention and Debates over Ratification

In 1787 delegates met in Philadelphia and wrote a new Constitution through a series of compromises over representation and slavery. The fight to ratify it split Americans into Federalists, who wanted a stronger national government, and Anti-Federalists, who feared it, and the promise of a Bill of Rights helped win approval.

Key terms

  • Great Compromise
  • Three-Fifths Compromise
  • Federalists
  • Anti-Federalists
  • Federalist Papers
  • Bill of Rights

The Convention

Fifty-five delegates from twelve states met in Philadelphia from May to September 1787; Rhode Island refused to send anyone. George Washington presided, and James Madison of Virginia took detailed notes and shaped much of the debate. The delegates were mostly wealthy, well-educated men, and they met in secret. They were supposed to revise the Articles but quickly decided to write a new constitution.

The big compromises

Notice that the Constitution never uses the word 'slave' or 'slavery', but several clauses protected it. Historians still debate how much the Constitution strengthened slavery and how much it left room to limit it.

  • Representation: Madison's Virginia Plan gave large states more power by basing representation in a two-house Congress on population. The New Jersey Plan gave each state one equal vote in a one-house Congress. The Great Compromise (also called the Connecticut Compromise, proposed by Roger Sherman) created a House of Representatives based on population and a Senate with two members per state.
  • Three-Fifths Compromise: Southern delegates wanted enslaved people counted for representation but not for taxes; Northern delegates wanted the reverse. They agreed to count three-fifths of the enslaved population for both representation in the House and direct taxes. This gave slaveholding states extra seats and extra electoral votes.
  • Slave trade: Congress could not ban the importation of enslaved people before 1808.
  • Fugitive slave clause: people 'held to service' who escaped to another state had to be returned.
  • The presidency: delegates created the Electoral College, in which electors chosen by each state elect the president, as a compromise between election by Congress and direct popular election.

Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists

FederalistsAnti-Federalists
Supported ratificationOpposed ratification as written
Wanted a stronger national government to fix the Articles' weaknessesFeared a distant, powerful government would crush the states and individual liberty
Argued a large republic would protect liberty because many competing factions would check one another (Federalist No. 10)Argued republics only work in small areas where leaders stay close to the people
Said separation of powers and checks and balances would protect liberty (Federalist No. 51), so a bill of rights was unnecessary (Federalist No. 84)Demanded a bill of rights to protect individual freedoms
Leaders: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John JayLeaders: Patrick Henry, George Mason, Mercy Otis Warren
Strongest among merchants, cities and the coastStrongest among small farmers and the backcountry

Ratification and the Bill of Rights

The Constitution would take effect when special conventions in nine of the thirteen states approved it. Hamilton, Madison and Jay wrote 85 newspaper essays, later collected as The Federalist (or the Federalist Papers), to win over New York. New Hampshire became the ninth state in June 1788, but the large states of Virginia and New York were still needed for the government to work, and both ratified narrowly that summer.

Several states ratified only after Federalists promised amendments to protect rights. In the first Congress in 1789, Madison drafted amendments, and the first ten, the Bill of Rights, were ratified in 1791. They protect freedoms such as speech, religion, the press and the right to a fair trial, and the Tenth Amendment reserves to the states or the people powers not given to the national government.

Worked examples

Try each one yourself first, then open the solution.

  1. Example 1

    Explaining a debate

    Short-answer practice: Briefly explain ONE argument Anti-Federalists made against ratifying the Constitution, and ONE way Federalists responded.

    Show the solution
    1. Step 1: State an Anti-Federalist argument specifically.
    2. Step 2: State the Federalist response.
    3. Step 3: If possible, give the result.

    Answer: Model answer: Anti-Federalists such as George Mason argued that the Constitution lacked a bill of rights and that a powerful national government could take away individual freedoms. Federalists first argued that the separation of powers and checks and balances would protect liberty, but to win ratification in key states they promised to add amendments, which led to the Bill of Rights in 1791.

Common mistakes

  • Saying the Three-Fifths Compromise meant Black people were considered three-fifths of a person in law. It was a formula for counting enslaved people for representation and taxes, and it increased the political power of slaveholders.
  • Confusing the Federalists of 1787–1788 (supporters of the Constitution) with the Federalist Party of the 1790s (Hamilton's party), though many of the same people were involved.
  • Thinking the Bill of Rights was part of the original Constitution. It was added in 1791.

On the exam

  • Excerpts from Federalist No. 10 or No. 51, or from Anti-Federalist writers, are common sources. Know each side's main argument.
  • Questions about how the Constitution dealt with slavery are common. Be ready to name specific clauses.

Connected topics

Videos

  • The CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION and Debates Over RATIFICATION [APUSH Review Unit 3 Topic 8] Period 3

    Heimler's HistoryWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • The Anti-Federalists

    Tom RicheyWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • The US Constitution, 3/5, and the Slave Trade Clause: Crash Course Black American History #9

    CrashCourseWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • #23 - APUSH 3.8 The Constitutional Convention and Debates Over Ratification [UPDATED]

    APUSH SlidesWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • The Constitutional Convention in Under 3 mins (APUSH Topic 3.8)

    Maximum InsightWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  • The Constitutional Convention and Debates Over Ratification (APUSH Period 3, 3.8)

    Jocz ProductionsWatch on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

Check yourself

3 questions on 3.8 The Constitutional Convention and Debates over Ratification. Pick an answer to see if you got it, and why.

Question 1 of 3

The Three-Fifths Compromise at the Constitutional Convention affected the new government by

StateDate of ratificationConvention vote (for–against)
DelawareDecember 7, 178730–0
PennsylvaniaDecember 12, 178746–23
New JerseyDecember 18, 178738–0
GeorgiaJanuary 2, 178826–0
MassachusettsFebruary 6, 1788187–168
VirginiaJune 25, 178889–79
New YorkJuly 26, 178830–27
Rhode IslandMay 29, 179034–32

Source: Records of the state ratifying conventions, 1787–1790. Only some states are shown.

Question 2 of 3

The data in the table best support which conclusion?

Question 3 of 3

Delaware, New Jersey and Georgia most likely ratified quickly and without a single no vote because

0 of 3 answered