From Washington to his nephew, before ratification of the Constitution

[StPatrick]

Letters of Note: Is it best for the States to unite, or not to unite?

In 1787, George Washington (after the war, but before the presidency), wrote a letter to his nephew, a Virginia delegate, on the importance of uniting the states as a formal country and ratifying the Constitution that had been completed two months prior.

The language is difficult at times, but it's worth reading. Much of the spelling is phonetic, and the sentence structure is definitely not modern, but it's not much worse than most gun boards. At least there's some formality. ur gon 2 lik it iz all bout liberteez.

It appears passage and unification was not so easy as the history books I learned from made it seem.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

One of the comments made that I totally agree with was that the literal word

should be read directly and not interpreted by a history professor. After reading

that letter, I am going to read more of those. Thanks for posting this.

[LagerHead]

Letters of Note: Is it best for the States to unite, or not to unite?

In 1787, George Washington (after the war, but before the presidency), wrote a letter to his nephew, a Virginia delegate, on the importance of uniting the states as a formal country and ratifying the Constitution that had been completed two months prior.

The language is difficult at times, but it's worth reading. Much of the spelling is phonetic, and the sentence structure is definitely not modern, but it's not much worse than most gun boards. At least there's some formality. ur gon 2 lik it iz all bout liberteez.

It appears passage and unification was not so easy as the history books I learned from made it seem.

Absolutely true. One of the big issues, for example, that prevented immediate ratification was states' rights. New York was a very important state even in those times and many states looked to them for guidance. New York wanted the ability to secede from the union if the federal government got too big and powerful. Well, I guess we see how that all worked out.

I firmly believe that if the states could see into the future and see how much power the federal government has today over just about every aspect of our lives, not a single state would have ratified it. It wouldn't have even come close. It makes no sense that a country that had just fought a war to maintain their states' rights would then turn around and sign it over to another government.

Oh well. Hindsight is 20/20 I guess.

[Defender]

I don't know how in the world it got through. I'm reading The Federalist Papers now again, and have recently finished Newt's book on Washington's crossing of the Delaware and the battle right after. Absolutely facinating, but again, how they did it ALL is amazing. I agree with Lagerhead in that some of them KNEW or feared that the Federal Govt would become what it is now. This was the biggest argument against it.

One thing about ole George though, not only did he have an incredible ability to lead men, he also had a way with words. I'm reminded of a quote I have from him on my wall at work,"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence. To secure peace, security, and happiness, they rifle and pistol are eually indispensable, The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that is good."