December 15, 1791: Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution Are Ratified

Bill of Rights

Despite a modern perception that the first ten amendments bestow rights, it’s clear that the Bill of Rights is really a list of government prohibitions. The Founders did not believe in government benevolence and would never have accepted government as the arbiter of rights. 

Read all about it at Constituting America

Guest essayist at Constituting America: U.S. Constitution Sent to the States for Ratification

Constituting America

Read all about it at Constituting America

The Founding of this great nation was unique. Until 1776, with a few brief exceptions, world history was about rulers and empires. The American experiment shook the world. Not only did we break away from the biggest and most powerful empire in history, we took the musings of the brightest thinkers of the Enlightenment and implemented them. Our Founding was simultaneously an armed rebellion against tyranny, and a revolution of ideas—ideas that changed the world.

That is why we still care about America’s founding and the Framers of our Constitution.

In celebration of Constitution Day, here's a description of the signing ceremony from Tempest at Dawn

On September 17, 1787, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention signed the engrossed document that began with the three famous words that define the true source of all government power.

From Tempest at Dawn, here's an abridged description of the ceremony.


Madison sat in his customary place with folded hands resting on the table. He didn’t intend to take notes today. In fact, he didn’t intend to take any more notes on any day. This signing ceremony would be the final act of the convention.

Madison noticed that his ink-stained hands looked prayerful. He thought this fitting because a reverential spirit suffused the assembly. The chamber remained hushed as the secretary read the engrossed Constitution in its entirety. At the conclusion, Franklin rose with a speech in his hand.

“Mr. President, most men believe they possess all truth and that whoever differs from them is in error. The older I grow, the more I doubt my own judgment and the more I pay attention to the judgment of others.

“When you assemble a group of men to take advantage of their collective wisdom, you inevitably bring together all their prejudices, passions, and selfish views. From such an assembly, can one expect perfection? It astonishes me that this system approaches so near perfection.

Franklin dropped his papers to his side and spoke in a commanding voice. “I move the Constitution be signed.”

King interrupted the initiation of the signing ceremony. “I suggest that the journals of the convention be destroyed or deposited in the custody of the president. If it becomes public, those who wish to prevent the adoption of the Constitution will put it to bad use.”

 “I prefer the second expedient.” Wilson looked directly at Gerry. “Some may make false representations of our proceedings, and we’ll need evidence to contradict them.”

The last comments confirmed Madison’s suspicion that the fight for ratification would be divisive and mean-spirited.

The motion passed to deposit the journals into the hands of Washington.

Finally, all other business completed, Washington formally called on the delegates to sign the Constitution. The secretary had arranged the Syng inkstand that had been used to sign the Declaration of Independence on a green baize-covered table. Washington walked around the table and signed first. He then called the states from north to south. The delegates remained silent and reverential as they approached the low dais to apply their signatures.

When Virginia was called, Madison felt a tightening in his stomach. This Constitution would permanently bind his beloved country. When he picked up the pen, he looked at Washington, who stood respectfully to the side, instead of behind the table. The precedents set by this man would seal these words. Madison grabbed the pen, dipped it in the inkwell, and signed with confidence. When he looked up, Washington gave him a nod that made Madison think he had read his mind.

Despite his illness, Franklin had remained standing after he signed, shaking hands with delegates and whispering an occasional aside. While the last members were signing, tears glistened in Franklin’s eyes. With an obvious struggle to control his emotions, he began to speak in a stronger than normal voice.

“Gentlemen, have you observed the half sun painted on the back the president’s chair? Artists find it difficult to distinguish a rising from a setting sun. In these many months, I have been unable to tell which it was. Now, I’m happy to exclaim that it is a rising, not a setting sun.”

Once the last signature was in place, no one wanted to spend another moment in this room that had dominated their lives for so many months. Besides, John Dickinson had left a banknote for a celebratory dinner at the City Tavern.

Because of the momentous day, Franklin intended to walk out of the State House. Madison grabbed one elbow, and Wilson took the opposite side to help the old man out of the chamber. Madison hoped he could protect Franklin from being jostled by the bubbling delegates, but Washington took a point position in front of their little group, and the crowd parted like the Red Sea.

“I want to thank you gentlemen for helping an enfeebled and diminished old man,” Franklin said.

“I witnessed your diminished capacity these many months,” Madison said. He became puzzled when this somehow evoked a hearty chuckle from Franklin.

The doctor glanced between Madison and Wilson. “I’m usually assisted by the inmates of Walnut Street Prison. It occurs to me that you men have been prisoners in this chamber.” Franklin chuckled again. “With the power vested in me by the State of Pennsylvania, I pardon and set you free.”

At that precise moment, with theatrics that seemed natural to Washington, the sentries threw open the door to the State House, and Madison was assaulted by bright sunlight and a deafening roar. Hundreds of people cheered, clapped, and whistled at the sight of Gen. George Washington framed by the great white door.

The threesome stopped a respectful distance behind Washington. This crowd was not going to part so easily. In fact, the sentries had skipped down the three steps and joined arms to hold back the surge of people.

“Our rambunctious session on Saturday told our fair citizens that we had concluded our business,” Franklin observed.

“Are you riding with the general?” Madison asked.

“Relax, boys. The general will know the exact moment to step off the stoop.”

True to Franklin’s prediction, Washington gauged the crowd’s mood perfectly, and when he stepped down, they gave the men a narrow path to Washington’s beautiful new carriage.

As they followed in the general’s footsteps, the people continued to cheer and applaud. A woman leaned her head past Madison to yell, “Dr. Franklin, what is it to be? A republic or a monarchy?”

The doctor hesitated in his step and looked over the throng of anxious people. His answer came in a firm, loud voice.

“A republic—if you can keep it.”

The real story of our nation's founding.

How to study the Constitution

The study of the Constitution can seem daunting to those who want to gain a greater understanding of this unique document. To begin with, there are eight historic periods that shaped our Constitution. 

1. Constitutional Convention
2. Public debate on Constitution as reflected in the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers
3. State Ratification Conventions
4. First Congress and Bill of Rights
5. George Washington precedents
6. Supreme Court Rulings
7. Amendments beyond the Bill of Rights
8. Executive encroachment with emphasis on Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and Obama

As a constitutional conservative, I recommend starting with the convention and the Framers. Besides, it’s always a good idea to start at the beginning.

There are countless history books on the Constitutional convention. In these books, the convention is usually presented in one of two ways: chronologically or by subject.

Most Americans confuse the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution

The Constitution means different things to different people. While there has been resurgence in the interest and study of the Constitution, most Americans remain ill-informed. Last Constitution Day, the James Madison’s Montpelier’s Center for the Constitution held a celebration that attracted nearly 300 people. Those who attended were asked questions that had already been answered in a national poll. Here are some of the results from the multiple choice quiz:

Only 35% of the general population identified “We the People” as the first words of the Constitution. 85% of attendees selected this answer. 

78% of attendees knew that James Madison was the “father of the Constitution.” In the national poll, only 20% answered correctly and 50% thought Thomas Jefferson fathered our Constitution. 

62% of attendees correctly identified 1787 as the year the Constitution was written. 55% of the national poll respondents thought the Constitution was written in 1776, and only 13% knew the correct answer.

Learning about the Constitution

We often hear laments that our politicians no longer honor their pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.  This is backward.  The Constitution was never written for politicians.  Our political leaders have no motivation to abide by a two hundred year old restraining order.  Americans must enforce the supreme law of the land. The first outsized words of the Constitution read We the People.  It’s our document. It was always meant to be ours, not the government’s.  It is each and every American’s obligation to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

In order to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, Americans need to understand it. Luckily, there are some great learning tools available. These include an online course at James Madison’s Montpelier Center for the Constitution, Hillsdale College Online Courses, Constitutional essays at Constituting America, and several good books, including The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, Tempest at Dawn, and Decision in Philadelphia.

James Madison’s Montpelier, Center for the Constitution

The Center for the Constitution at Montpelier conducts a series of seminars on the Constitution. For those who cannot attend in person, the Center has created a free course on their website. The interactive online course includes text instructions, video discussions with constitutional scholars, and quizzes to test the student’s knowledge. I have taken the first of seven sessions and found it to be accurate, not politicized, and paced to keep the student’s interest. The seminars and online course were originally designed for teachers, but work well for any inquisitive student of the Constitution. Continuing Education Units (CEUs) are available after successful completion of the entire course. The course is free, but it cost $25 to claim CEUs.

Constitutional Protection of Property

“Government is instituted to protect property of every sort … This being the end of government, that alone is a just government which impartially secures to every man whatever is his own.” James Madison

Does the Constitution protect private property? All rights, not just property rights, appear to have received scant attention during the Constitutional Convention. Most of the delegates believed it would be far more effective to limit government with enumerated powers than to compose a list of rights because they feared an overly powerful government would trample those rights, despite written restrictions to the contrary. If the national government’s powers were held in check, then it was believed that common law and state declarations of rights provided sufficient safeguards to protect all rights. That is, until ratification. Several states unofficially conditioned their ratification on a Bill of Rights being added to the Constitution. The First Congress thus proposed the first ten amendments to the Constitution.

There were only a couple provisos in the base document that protected property rights. States were prohibited from impairing the obligation of contracts, and intellectual property was protected, giving “authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”

Surely the Bill of Rights rectified this absence of protection for private property. Not entirely. The takings clause in the Fifth Amendment is one of the few outright protections of property. It reads, “nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.’’ It would appear that this clause protects property owners from government confiscation, but cities and states became increasingly brazen in taking property for public domain purposes.  In 2005, Kelo v. City of New London defined public domain so broadly that it effectively included any action forecasted to increase the tax base. The takings issue is an illuminating object lesson that proves the Framers were right on the issue of protecting rights—unchecked power trumps protections written on a piece of parchment.  The clause is clear, yet it has proven a weak shield against the abusive exercise of determined power.

American Exceptionalism Explained

Throughout history, new nations have come into being because of conquering armies, internal rebellion, or the edict of a great power. Although the United States of America was conceived in revolt, our governing institutions were born in calm reason. Our Constitution comes from a convention and ratification process where reasoned debate eventually led to a decision by a large segment of the population to put a new government in place.

Our founding was unique, and the type of republic we formed was profoundly foreign to most of the world. With a few brief exceptions, world history until 1776 was written about kings and emperors. The American experiment in self-government rudely shook up a world used to rule by nobility. Not only did we break away from the biggest and most powerful empire in history, we took the musings of the brightest thinkers of the Enlightenment and implemented them in the New World. Our founding was simultaneously an armed rebellion against tyranny and a revolution of ideas—ideas that changed the course of world history.

It doesn’t take much study to conclude that early Americans held dear a few key principles, and risked their lives, families, fortunes, and honor to build a republic based on those very same principles. Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Madison, and most of their contemporaries believed they had witnessed and participated in events that were more than merely unusual. Our forefathers repeatedly said that the founding of the United States of America was truly historic—a unique event in human history.

The Patriot Who Refused to Sign the Constitution

The eyes of the United States are turned upon this assembly and their expectations raised to a very anxious degree. May God grant that we may be able to gratify them, by establishing a wise and just government. —George Mason, in a letter to his son.

George Mason

In the end, George Mason did not believe the Constitution established a wise and just government. He was one of only three delegates present in the final days of the convention who didn’t sign the document. The other two refused due to their personalities. Elbridge Gerry was mercurial and cantankerous by nature, and Edmond Randolph was afraid to be associated with something that might fail. George Mason, on the other hand, refused to sign based on his principles.

In early 1776, before the Declaration of Independence, Mason drafted the Virginia Declaration of Rights and framed Virginia’s constitution. George Mason was rightfully proud of the Virginia Declaration of Rights, and pleased that it became a model for other states.

SECTION I. That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.

SEC. 2. That all power is vested in, and consequently derived from, the people; that magistrates are their trustees and servants and at all times amenable to them.

Are the Founders Worthy of Our Admiration?

“Threading an idea into the slipstream of politics, then into government, then into history ... is a craft which I have since come to consider the most important in the world.”  Theodore White, In Search of History

The Founders of the United States lived over two hundred years ago in a completely different world. Some dismiss the Founders by saying that most were wealthy and many owned slaves. Let’s leave aside for a moment whether those are valid reasons to dismiss the Founders. These criticisms may be true for some of the more prominent Founders, but they are woefully misleading when applied to the great body of people who committed everything to the idea of self-government.

The Founding of this great nation was unique. Up until 1776, with a few brief exceptions, world history was about rulers and empires. The American experiment shook the world. Not only did we break away from the biggest and most powerful empire in history, we took the musings of the brightest thinkers of the Enlightenment and actually implemented them. Our Founding was simultaneously an armed rebellion against tyranny, and a revolution of ideas—ideas that changed the world.

For our purposes, let’s define the founding as extending from the Stamp Act through the first administration of George Washington. This would include the development of a revolutionary spirit, the revolution itself, a few non-war years under the Articles of Confederation, the adoption of the Constitution, and Washington’s first term, which set so many precedents. Who were the people involved in these events?

First off, it was a lot of people.

·         57   men committed treason by signing the Declaration of Independence

·         48   signed the Articles of Confederation

·         437 were members of Congress prior to the ratification of the Constitution

·         55   attended the Constitutional Convention

·         30   were members of the first Senate

·         67   were members of the first Congress

·         7     were Cabinet level or above in the First Executive

·         6     were members of the Supreme Court

A Most Audacious Letter

Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. —Declaration of Independence

In February of 1787, Congress sanctioned a convention in Philadelphia “for the sole and express purpose of revising the articles of confederation, and reporting to Congress and the several legislatures, such alterations and provisions therein as shall when agreed to in Congress, and confirmed by the States, render the federal constitution, adequate to the exigencies of government and the preservation of the union.”

The instructions were clear. The convention was to recommend changes to the Articles of Confederation, and submit them to Congress and the state legislatures for approval. Instead, the Federal Convention wrote an entirely new constitution—one that would dissolve the existing Congress and take away some state power. How in the world would they get this thing approved? It threatened every political figure in the country. The answer was simple. As stated in the Declaration of Independence, the Founders believed that all political power emanated from the people. They would bypass Congress and the state legislatures, and go directly to the people for ratification of their work.

There was a problem, of course. Congress and the state legislatures to might not agree to being marginalized. The convention’s solution was to send Congress a letter. The first draft was a convoluted rationalization for their actions and a long winded declaration that their motives were pure. No one thought it was convincing, so in the end, they just told Congress what to do and how to do it.

Letter to Congress from Federal Convention

James Madison—Father of the Constitution?

In his later years, James Madison protested being referred to as the Father of the Constitution. He said the document was not “the off-spring of a single brain.” Our Constitution was actually the off-spring of fifty-five brains, although none were as potent as Madison’s. A few historians have denigrated Madison’s informal title, saying he had merely outlived the other Framers and his convention notes gave him more credit than he would have received from an impartial observer. These critics also point out the final Constitution diverted appreciably from the Virginia Plan that Madison initially supported as the correct governmental system.

Despite revisionists seeking a unique angle, James Madison was still the most important Framer—before, during, and after the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

James Madison

Real Jeopardy

“It is to be remembered that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects”  James Madison, Federalist 14

The Founders did not trust unrestrained government. Their own experience and study of history taught them that overly powerful governments invariably turned oppressive. But they also knew government was necessary. In fact, they knew they needed a government stronger than the one they had at the beginning of our nation. By the time the Constitutional Convention convened in May of 1787, a consensus had developed that the Articles of Confederation were severely flawed, but there was uncertainty about what kind of government could sustain a republic through the ages. They knew it couldn't be too weak, but it also couldn't be too strong.

The Founders did not seek a Goldilocks government. Instead they designed an elaborate set of checks and balances so they could give the government enough power to govern, while harnessing it with Lilliputian ropes to hold it in place so it wouldn't trample the little people. From our high school civics class we learned about the checks and balances between the three branches, but teachers seldom mention the intended check of the national government by the states. Nor were we taught that the Founders wanted our national leaders selected and elected by different means as yet another check on a runaway government. Lastly, the Constitution itself was supposed to be the premier check to prevent our government from becoming oppressive.

Limited Government is a Founding Principle

“The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.” James Madison

“In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” Thomas Jefferson

The design of the government under the Constitution was not haphazard. Our Founding Fathers understood that governments can oppress people. They knew it from their own experience—and they knew it from their extensive scrutiny of governmental forms throughout history.

Concentrated power was more than dangerous … it was life threatening.

Despite the risk, they had no choice but to frame a workable government. What to do? A number of things, actually. To prevent the government from becoming overly powerful, the Framers agreed on eight measures:

All Political Power Emanates from the People

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” —Declaration of Independence

In 1776, upstart colonists penned the most revolutionary document in history. The Declaration of Independence flipped the world upside down, and the Divine Right of Kings suddenly became the consent of the governed. The individual was now the one endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. This was a world-shattering concept.

Like most revolutionary visions, this one didn't suddenly spring onto the world stage. John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, and Thomas Paine were among many who advocated that consent of the governed was dictated by the laws of nature and of nature’s God. Not everyone accepted this concept, of course—certainly not King George III or the English nobility.

The Founders, however, were steeped in this incendiary idea. Self-governance had been part of their experience in the New World. The colonists were subjects of England, but a round-trip sail across the great Atlantic put three to four months between them and their king. Self-rule started the Pilgrims. The Mayflower Compact began by pledging loyalty to King James, but then went on to decree that the colonists would “combine together into a civil body politick, for our better ordering and preservation, and furtherance of the ends aforesaid: and by virtue hereof do enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and officers, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony.” Basically, the Mayflower Compact was a written statement declaring self-government in colonial America.

Rights come from God, not government

“Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God?” —Thomas Jefferson

The Framers didn't believe rights were handed down by governments, kings, or rulers. Instead, they believed every individual was endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. In their experience, governments didn't protect rights; governments threatened rights. World history had been an unbroken string of rulers suppressing rights and liberty.

Rights endowed by God was not a new concept. It went back at least to Marcus Tullius Cicero and the Roman Republic. Cicero searched for what he called natural law. 

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106 BC–46 BC) on Natural Rights (abridged): “True law is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting. There will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens, or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all time. If so great a power belongs to the decrees of fools that the laws of Nature can be changed by their votes, then why do they not ordain that what is bad be considered good?”

John Locke and the Enlightenment magnified awareness that rights came from God. Locke wrote that humans were “by nature free, equal and independent.” 

Locke’s teachings didn't mean that natural rights couldn't be suppressed. It was the exception when they were not. Thomas Jefferson said, “The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.” This means that force can be used to suppress rights, but they remain intrinsically joined to our human spirit. That is why the history of the world is not only the history of despots; it’s also the history of man’s constant struggle to reassert his natural rights. John Adams agreed, “You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.”

Washington Did More Than Bang His Gavel at the Constitutional Convention

“The people may not yet be sufficiently mislead to retract from error.  Evils must be sorely felt before they can be removed.” George Washington

It’s hard to believe that George Washington could be underrated. After all, he’s eulogized in marble, stone, and oil; Amazon lists nearly two thousand biographies; and he’s called the Father of Our Country. And yet …

The popular perception of Washington is of a man of honor that won a war through strength of character and perseverance, and a first president who gracefully stepped down from power after two terms. Most view him as cold and aloof. Many dismiss him as an aristocrat who owned slaves and relied on others for creative thinking and grand ideas. Historians generally concede his military contributions, and restrained leadership as president, but dismiss him as a mere figurehead at the Constitutional Convention. They invariably mention that during four arduous months of debate, he spoke only once.

Washington was very different from our image of the man. It’s true that he was tall and stately, personally reserved, preoccupied with his reputation, and ambitious, but he also loved to dance, play cards, and attend the theater. He was a superb horseman who enjoyed wagering on races, ran his plantation with a sharp sense for profit, attended church religiously, was a master politician, and bragged that he hadn’t eaten dinner alone since before the war. Whatever he became involved in, he actively managed, and he was an expert in public relations and image making. Washington was a vibrant, athletic man who wanted more than anything else to be loved by his countrymen. He was open and vociferous about his political beliefs, but closed and silent about his political manipulations.

Do we know what the Founders thought?

Two hundred years ago, there were no televised speeches or proceedings, no one captured video of crucial events, and reporters needed to live close to a news event. The Constitutional Convention was so secret they nailed the windows shut and posted guards. Even fifty years after this historic event, the only records of what happened inside Independence Hall were terse official minutes and a few partisan reconstructions. Pundits talk about original intent of the Framers, but do they have a clue? How could anyone claim to know what the Founders thought?

Actually, it’s not difficult at all. They left a massive record. The secret proceedings of the Constitutional Convention were eventually made public after James Madison died. Dolley Madison published her husband’s exceptionally comprehensive convention notes which were in excess of 230,000 handwritten words. Modern students have access not only to the Federalist Papers, but a collection of opinion pieces we now call the Anti-Federalist Papers. The Constitution was ratified by conventions of the people in the thirteen states, and we have good-to-excellent documentation of all of these ratification debates.

The Bill of Rights—Mallet or Shield

“The Sacred Rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the Hand of the Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.” Alexander Hamilton

Alexander Hamilton

Individual rights were not a significant issue during the Constitutional Convention, but a Bill of Rights certainly became a major issue during ratification. Despite the clamor for a Bill of Rights, the Federalists continued to insist that one was not needed because the national government’s powers were restricted, and most state constitutions already possessed declarations of rights. As Hamilton explained in Federalist 84, “I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do?”

Madison’s support for a bill of rights became crucial. At first he objected, then became unsure, and finally became a forceful advocate. He came to believe that a Bill of Rights had become a political necessity. In his speech on June 8, 1789, when he first proposed a Bill of Rights, he said, “It may be thought all paper barriers against the power of the community are too weak to be worthy of attention … yet, as they have a tendency to impress some … it may be one mean to control the majority from those acts to which they might be otherwise inclined.” Politically, Madison became a strong advocate for these amendments, but as these words reflect, he remained ambivalent philosophically.