Exhibit - Duty & Disaster
Delegates Elected to Attend
a State Convention to Vote on a
Revised United States Constitution, 1788
Transcription:
We the Subscribers Supervisors of the
County of Ulster do certify that on the 29th & 30th
Days of May 1788, Canvassed and estimated the Votes
taken at the Election held on the last Tuesday of April
last past in and for the said County- In Pursuance of
a joint Resolve of the Senate and Assembly of the State
of New York passed the 31st Day of January and the 1st
Day of February 1788 recommanding to the People of the
said State to chuse by Ballot Delegated to meet in Convention
for the purpose of taking into consideration the Report
of the Convention of the States lately Assembled at
Philadelphia with the Resolutions and Letters accompanying
the same That, George Clinton, John Cantine, Cornelius
C. Schoonmaker, Ebenezar Clarke, James Clinton and Dirck
Wynkoop Esquires..............were elected Delegates
for the said County to meet in convention for the purpose
aforesaid.
| Peter Van Gaasbeek |
Wynkoop |
| John Robinson |
Anning Smith |
| Corn E. Wynkoop |
Johannis G. Hardenbergh |
| David Galatian |
Nathaniel Dubois |
| Elias Hasbrouck |
Mathew DuBois |
| Samuel Watkins |
Peter G. Cuddeback |
introduction
| about
the exhibit
Note: "At the meeting of
the National Convention \ in Philadelphia] after considerable
discussion the majority decided to propose an entire
new Constitution, which did not amend, but abolished
the Articles of Confederation. .....The Constitution,
as reported to the several States and submitted for
adoption, contained a provision that it was to go into
operation whenever adopted by nine of the confederated
States. So that, after such adoption, the remaining
States must necessarily come in, or withdraw from the
Union and maintain a separate, independent government.
....The New
York Convention met, and the supposed or alleged merits
and demerits of the proposed Constitution were discussed
at great length and with much ability by the leading
men in the convention. The opposition to its adoption
claimed that the rights of the States and the individual
rights of the people were not sufficiently protected.
That discussion was in progress when news arrived of
its adoption by the tenth State, which gave it life
and rendered it operative. The alternative was then
presented to the convention to either adopt it and remain
in the Union, or reject it and stand forth as an independent
State. Many still adhered to their opposition, not because
they desired to withdraw from the Union, but they believed
that if New York took that independent stand the other
States would amend the Constitution so as to remove
the ground of their opposition. The discussion of the
various provisions of the Constitution, and its alleged
shortcomings, was continued in the convention, and various
proposed amendments and a Bill of Rights adopted. Then
by a majority of three votes a resolution was passed
declaring the Constitution ratified by the convention...."
From Marius
Schoonmaker, History of Kingston New York (New York:
Burr Printing House, 1888)
