Patrick Henry
Patrick Henry objected to the phrase 'We, the people' in the Constitution because he believed it constituted a consolidated government, changing the existing confederation of sovereign States into a great national supreme government. He argued that the framers were not authorized to speak in the name of 'we the people' instead of 'we the States.' Confidence is moderate due to the reliance on an editor's note and a paraphrased speech.
- undated “His first and great objection to the new plan was that it constituted a consolidated government, with powers drawn directly from the people and operating directly upon the people of the adopting States, and changed the existing confederation of sovereign States into a great national supreme government.” OCR text
- 1788-06-04 “The style of the government (We, the people) was introduced perhaps to recommend it to the people at large; to those citizens who are to be levelled and degraded to the lowest degree; who are likened to a herd; and who, by the operation of this blessed system, are to be transformed from respectable, independent citizens, to abject, dependent subjects or slaves.” Reporter's notes
OCR: 1 cited passage(s) are machine-read (OCR) text of old printings; quotations reproduce the stored OCR text, misreadings included.
Reporter's notes: some cited speeches survive only as a reporter's shorthand record, not the speaker's own text.
The full record: ledger, contrary evidence, reasoning, sources
OCR: 1 cited passage(s) are machine-read (OCR) text of old printings; quotations reproduce the stored OCR text, misreadings included.
Reporter's notes: some cited speeches survive only as a reporter's shorthand record, not the speaker's own text.
1. WHAT HE SAID (the record)
Record ledger
- BELIEF (1788-06-04; reporter's paraphrase): Patrick Henry objected to the phrase 'We, the people' because he believed it degraded citizens and likened them to a herd, transforming them from independent citizens to dependent subjects or slaves. (key quote above)
- ACTION (editor's note) (undated; editor's note, not his words): Patrick Henry objected to the phrase 'We, the people' in the Constitution because he believed it constituted a consolidated government, changing the existing confederation of sovereign States into a great national supreme government. He argued that the framers were not authorized to speak in the name of 'we the people' instead of 'we the States.' (key quote above)
What cuts against it
- ACTION (editor's note) (undated; editor's note, not his words): Patrick Henry's objection to the phrase 'We, the people' is presented as a belief in the editor's note, but there is no direct evidence from Patrick Henry himself stating this belief.
2. HOW IT APPLIES (reasoning; inference is marked)
1. Patrick Henry objected to the phrase 'We, the people' in the Constitution.
2. He believed it constituted a consolidated government, changing the existing confederation of sovereign States into a great national supreme government.
3. He argued that the framers were not authorized to speak in the name of 'we the people' instead of 'we the States.'
4. He believed the phrase degraded citizens and likened them to a herd, transforming them from independent citizens to dependent subjects or slaves.
5. This inference is based on the editor's note and a paraphrased speech, which may not fully capture his exact words or reasoning.
3. HIS TAKE
Record coverage: PARTIAL
The record is silent on the specific reasoning behind Patrick Henry's objection to the phrase 'We, the people' in the Constitution. However, it is inferred that he believed it constituted a consolidated government and degraded citizens.
Extrapolation: Patrick Henry likely objected to the phrase 'We, the people' because he believed it represented a shift from a confederation of sovereign states to a centralized government, which he viewed as a threat to individual liberties and state sovereignty.
Competing readings: The record itself does not state a competing reading, but the inference is based on the editor's note and a paraphrased speech, which may not fully capture his exact words or reasoning.
Confidence: Moderate, as the evidence is based on an editor's note and a paraphrased speech, which may not fully capture his exact words or reasoning.
- Reporter's notesSpeeches in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1787-1788 (extracted from Elliot's Debates vol. 3) (Jonathan Elliot (ed.), The debates in the several state conventions on the adoption of the), p. 151. Document: Speeches in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1787-1788 (extracted from Elliot's Debates vol. 3). Date: 1788-06-04. Source type: reporter's notes (paraphrase; not verbatim speech). Passage id: patrick-henry/elliot-vol3-virginia-ratifying-convention-speeches/0000.45. Variants: patrick-henry/ia-pathenrylife03henrrich/0153.42. Note: Elliot's Debates: the convention reporter's shorthand record of the speech, not the speaker's text.
- OCR textPatrick Henry: Life, Correspondence and Speeches, vol. 2 (William Wirt Henry, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1891). Document: Editor's or biographer's text (outside the document index): OBJECTIONS TO THE CONSTITUTION. 379. Date: undated. Source type: EDITOR'S NOTE (the editor's words, not the person's) (OCR text). Passage id: patrick-henry/ia-pathenrylife02henrrich/0423.00
Quote check: PASSED (2/2 quotations verified verbatim)