Consolidation: George Mason’s Core Anti-Federalist Warning
“A monarchy, or a corrupt tyrannical aristocracy.”
That, George Mason warned, is what the Constitution would produce. His objections to ratification became the foundation for some of the most influential Anti-Federalist arguments.
Born 300 years ago today, December 11, 1725, Mason was one of the most influential political thinkers and leaders of the American Revolution. It would be hard to exaggerate the impact of his Virginia Declaration of Rights, which served as the foundation for the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights – and other constitutional documents around the world.
But today, on the 300th anniversary of his birth, we are exploring his forgotten warnings about the Constitution during the ratification debates. They focus almost completely on his core fear that the new system would centralize power in a national government and destroy liberty.
Mason did not start as an opponent, but he grew sharply dissatisfied with the Convention’s direction, especially after the compromise to allow the international slave trade to continue. As the Convention neared its end, he famously declared that he would rather “chop off his right hand than put it to the Constitution as it now stands.”
His public objections quickly became a rallying cry and a platform for critics of the Constitution, echoed throughout the ratification debates.
THE CORE WARNING: CONSOLIDATION
Mason’s primary objection? Consolidation – the fundamental shift from a union of sovereign states (a confederation) to a centralized national government. This, he warned, was a rejection of the principles of the American Revolution.
“The very idea of converting what was formerly a confederation, to a consolidated Government, is totally subversive of every principle which has hitherto governed us.”
He argued that the new system was built to enable this centralization, identifying two key mechanisms:
1. The General Welfare Clause
Mason argued that giving the federal government direct taxing power would guarantee the dreaded consolidation, turning the confederation into a “national government.” He warned that the taxing power was “calculated to annihilate totally the State Governments.”
Here, he was pointing to the general Welfare clause – Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, which delegates to Congress the power to “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.”
Mason held that this one clause was all that was needed to turn a confederation into a consolidated, national government.
“The assumption of this power of laying direct taxes, does of itself, entirely change the confederation of the States into one consolidated Government. This power being at discretion, unconfined, and without any kind of controul, must carry every thing before it.”
2. The Necessary and Proper Clause
Mason also warned that the Necessary and Proper Clause, combined with the general Welfare Clause, would hand the federal government vast, unchecked power.
Mason questioned whether any real safeguards existed: “Is there any thing in this Constitution which secures to the States the powers which are said to be retained? Will powers remain to the States which are not expressly guarded and reserved?”
Mason illustrated the danger with a concrete example – suppressing criticism of government through restrictions on the freedom of the press.
“Now suppose oppressions should arise under this Government, and any writer should dare to stand forth and expose to the community large, the abuses of those powers. Could not Congress, under the idea of providing for the general welfare, and under their own construction, say, that this was destroying the general peace, encouraging sedition, and poisoning the minds of the people? And could they not, in order to provide against this, lay a dangerous restriction on the press?”
THE FIX
To prevent this, Mason proposed a simple fix: “a clause in the Constitution with respect to all powers which are not granted, that they are retained by the States,” modeled after Article II of the Articles of Confederation.
“Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”
He warned that without such a safeguard, “the power of providing for the general welfare may be perverted to its destruction.”
THE MACHINERY OF CONSOLIDATION
Mason believed that the Constitution’s structural design in every branch of government was flawed in a way that would accelerate centralization and tyranny.
The following points were echoed by Anti-Federalists throughout the ratification fight:
- The Militia and Standing Army: Mason feared federal power over the militia would be used to “harass and abuse” citizens until they demanded a permanent standing army in its place, a system he “abominate[d] and detest[ed].”
- Executive Power: Without a Constitutional Council, the President would rely on “minions and favorites.” Mason saw the pardon power as an invitation to presidential corruption, warning it could be used to “screen from punishment those whom he had secretly instigated to commit the crime.”
- Congress: Mason objected that the House of Representatives offered just “the shadow only of representation.” He criticized the Senate’s structure, including long terms, lack of recall, and lack of rotation, along with its “other great powers” would allow them to accomplish “what usurpations they please upon the rights and liberties of the people.”
- Judiciary: Mason warned the proposed system was so extended as to “absorb and destroy the judiciaries of the several States.” Furthermore, he charged that the system would empower “the rich to oppress and ruin the poor,” and its structure would ensure a bias in favor of federal officials. Together, it would render “justice as unattainable.”
- The Federal District: Mason believed it would protect and encourage bad rulers, creating a cesspool of the worst political criminals. He warned that “this ten miles square” that would later become Washington D.C., “may set at defiance the laws of the surrounding States and may… become the sanctuary of the blackest crimes.”
THE ESSENTIAL QUESTION
Mason doubted that such a vast, consolidated republic could ever preserve liberty, arguing that history proved freedom could only survive in small, self-governing communities.
That brings us full circle to his sharpest final prediction, his most potent warning:
“This government will set out a moderate aristocracy: it is at present impossible to foresee whether it will, in its operation, produce a monarchy, or a corrupt, tyrannical aristocracy; it will most probably vibrate some years between the two, and then terminate in the one or the other.”
On his 300th birthday, perhaps it’s worth asking: was George Mason right?
Latest posts by Michael Boldin (see all)