Constitution Day 2025

The 238th Anniversary of the Signing of the Constitution

On 17 September 1787, 238 years ago today, my third cousin (7 times removed) was one of 39 people who signed the new Constitution of the United States. His name? Nathaniel Gorham.¹ He was one of the representatives from Massachusetts, Rufus King being the other representative from that commonwealth.

Nathaniel Gorham was the great grandson of John Gorham and Mary Otis. John Gorham was the grandson of John Howland - the only man to fall off the Mayflower and get back on. Mary Otis’ brother, John, was the grandfather of Mercy Otis Warren and James Otis, Jr, two figures who were just as politically active, though, I would argue, even more well known than their second cousin, once removed.

Was that document perfect? No. But it was the start of what we have called since, the great American experiment. And the original document that Nathaniel signed? His cousin, Mercy, had quite a few critiques.

There is no security in the profered system, either for the rights of conscience, or the liberty of the press : Despotism usually, while it is gaining ground, will suffer men to think, say, or write what they please ; but when once established, if it is thought necessary to subserve the purposes of arbitrary power, the most unjust restriction may take place in the first instance, and an imprimator on the press in the next, may silence the complaints, and forbid the most decent remonstrances of an injured and oppressed people.²

Mercy starts right in on equal representation, then moves on to free thought and freedom of the press. This is not surprising: Mercy was one of the foremost satirists of the Revolutionary War. From there she points out the lack of boundaries on judicial power, the lack of clarity on legislative power, and the fact that civil cases appear to have no jury of peers. And then, she goes on to express concern about standing armies:

Though it has been said by Mr. Wilson, and many others, that a standing army is necessary for the dignity and safety of America, yet freedom revolts at the idea, when the Divan, or the despot, may draw out his dragoons to suppress the murmurs of a few, who may yet cherish those sublime principles which call forth the exertions, and lead to the best improvement of the human mind. […] Standing armies have been the nursery of vice, and the bane of liberty…³

And this only gets us as far as Mercy’s first six critiques of the document. She enumerates (quite literally, she numbered them) 18 total issues she has with the draft of the Constitution. Some of Mercy’s critiques of the document would be set to rights with the introduction of the Bill of Rights. In August of 1789, twelve amendments were sent to the states for ratification. Ten of those twelve would be ratified, with the final ratification happening in Virginia in 1791.⁴

And you can understand Mercy’s concerns. Many of them are the same concerns that we still have today. They had just thrown off the power of a King. Mercy wanted to make sure that they would not become shackled again.

But I cannot pass over in silence the insecurity in which we are left with regard to warrants unsupported by evidence—the daring experiment of granting writs of assistance in a former arbitrary administration is not yet forgotten in the Massachusetts ; nor can we be so ungrateful to the memory of the patriots who counteracted their operation, as so soon after their manly exertions to save us from such a detestable instrument of arbitrary power, to subject ourselves to the insolence of any petty revenue officer to enter our houses, search, insult, and seize at pleasure.⁵

This is from Mercy’s 14th critique - one of which is solved by the Bill of Rights. But it was so personal to her because her brother, James Otis, Jr, had argued against writs of assistance (open ended search warrants) being used by British officers. (The speech he gave is one that John Adams credits with being the birth of independence in the colonies.) It is to James Otis, Jr that she is referring when she mentions the “patriots who counteracted their operation”.

We have to remember the Constitution in the time that it was written, and all of the people who argued over what was needed and what wasn’t. The Federalists wanted a strong central government. The Anti-Federalists wanted more power in the states. Finding a balance between the two brought us the Constitution in its current form. Having the ability to make amendments over time, has also done this. Is it a perfect document? No. And how could it be? The founding fathers were as human as you or I. But one thing was absolutely clear: No more kings.

1. Nathaniel Gorham | U.S. Founding Father | ConstitutionDay.com

2. Observations on the New Constitution and on the Fœderal and State Conventions. By a Columbian Patriot. (New York, 1788).

3. Observations on the New Constitution and on the Fœderal and State Conventions. By a Columbian Patriot. (New York, 1788).

4. Bill of Rights | The US Constitution | Amendments | Bill of Rights Institute

5. Observations on the New Constitution and on the Fœderal and State Conventions. By a Columbian Patriot. (New York, 1788).