On May 25, 1787, when the Constitutional Convention convened in Philadelphia, Rhode Island was notably absent. While states like Virginia and Pennsylvania sent delegates to debate the framework of a new government, Rhode Island stayed away entirely. This absence was not an oversight but a calculated decision rooted in deep-seated political ideology, economic self-interest, and a profound skepticism of centralized power. Understanding why Rhode Island did not attend the Constitutional Convention requires looking at the specific anxieties of a small state navigating the treacherous waters of post-revolutionary America.
The Sovereignty Obsession: A Legacy of Independence
Rhode Island’s resistance to the new Constitution was consistent with its behavior throughout the Revolutionary era. Founded by dissenters and built on religious freedom, the colony had fiercely guarded its autonomy for over a century. By the time of the Convention, this had evolved into a staunch commitment to state sovereignty. Rhode Islanders viewed the proposed Constitution not as a necessary upgrade to the Articles of Confederation, but as a direct threat to their hard-won independence. The fear was that a stronger federal government would act as a colonial master, imposing taxes and regulations on a state that had just fought a war to escape exactly that kind of external control.
Economic Interests Against a National Currency
Economically, Rhode Island was heavily reliant on printing its own paper currency to pay off debts incurred during the Revolutionary War. This policy, while controversial and inflationary, provided the state with crucial financial flexibility. The Constitutional Convention’s proposal to grant the federal government exclusive power to coin money and regulate its value was seen as an existential threat. Delegates understood that a single national currency would likely displace the state’s paper notes, destabilizing the local economy and hurting creditors who had become accustomed to the depreciated value of Rhode Island currency. For a state legislature dominated by rural debtors, protecting this monetary autonomy was a non-negotiable priority.
Distrust of Delegates and Process
Beyond specific policy issues, Rhode Island operated under a general cloud of distrust regarding the Convention itself. The state had no representation at the Annapolis Convention of 1786, a precursor meeting that called for the Philadelphia gathering, fostering a sense of exclusion. When the Philadelphia delegates exceeded their mandate by drafting an entirely new constitution rather than merely revising the Articles, it confirmed the suspicions of Rhode Island leaders. The Convention was seen as an elitist affair, conducted in secret with delegates who were out of touch with the agrarian and working-class populations of the small state. The absence of a Bill of Rights in the initial draft further alienated Rhode Island, which viewed the document as a dangerous concentration of unchecked power.
