Newspaper articles from the time of Shays Rebellion can help us gain a better understanding of the conflict and how people felt toward the farmers following Daniel Shays or why people at the time feared the constitution.

 

The following comes from a satirical piece from The Hampshire Gazette, Sep. 13th, 1786:

Your petitioner therefore, prays your Honours to take his present unhappy circumstances into your wise consideration and grant him to live without fear of his conduct being condemned and he punished,—may all people believe he has acted honestly and for the public good, and be thereby induced to improve him in all matters of any consequence to the destruction of society and mutual compact,—and may his private fortune be enlarged, his house become large and elegant, and his furniture grow proportionate to such a dwelling,—may his farm be increased to a large and grand size,—may his wells and springs become rum (Jamaica spirits I mean) and his large brooks the most cool and pleasant water,—may his oaks produce sugar by the loaf, and the shrubs on his plains lemons,- may his fields produce the finest of wheat, and his valleys the fittest of pasture, which may give him beef equal to the best from the stall,—may his garden bring forth every thing necessary for kitchen use, and to please the eye, may his apple trees replenish his cellar with the best Madeira wine and never be exhausted,—may all other trees on his farm produce playing cards instead of leaves, and he always have success in using them—and as the necessaries of life are all he wants, may he never more than he has been used to be troubled with cash, the root of all evil, but everything come forth upon his own farm as he wants, and his neighbours be induced to collect for nothing,—may the merchant and mechanic provide him, free of all cost, every article for necessary convenience and elegance, whether in cloathing for himself and family, or in carriages for show and parade,— and may your Honours enact that he shall not pay the taxes already assessed upon him and his estate, and that hereafter none shall be assessed upon him and his estate; or as your Honours shall think convenient, grant him such relief in the premises whether by constant rain, hail or snow, or in any other full, ample or certain way as shall be sufficient to all his wishes, as in duty bound shall ever pray. [1]

The piece is ended by the author signing it as “Robin Hood”. Clearly, he had a different opinion than the farmers did on the nature of the Rebellion. The Rebellion to him was a way for the farmers to clamor for more and more, until they reached a state of impossible to grant desires.

 

While many rebels got off without much punishment, there were deaths and harsh sentences as the The Hampshire Gazette  on April 25th, 1787 reports:

On Saturday last the Supreme Judicial Court, begun and holden at Northampton, within and for the county of Hampshire, on the 9th inst. adjourned without day—during their session, Jason Parminter of Barnardston, Daniel Luddington of Southampton, Alpheus Colton of Long-Meadow, James White of Colrain, John Wheeler of Hardwick, and Henry M’Cullock of Pelham, were convicted of high treason against the commonwealth, and sentence of death was accordingly passed upon them.—Joseph Jones, for an assault made by firing a pistol at a Deputy-Sheriff in the execution of his office, with an intent to kill and murder him, to set one hour on the gallows with a rope about his neck, and to recognize in the sum of 80 l. with sufficient surety to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for the term of two years.—Silas Hamilton, Esq. of Whitingham, in the state of Vermont, to stand one hour in the pillory, and be publicly whipped on the naked back twenty stripes, for exciting and stiring up sedition and insurrection in this commonwealth.—Abel Patridge, to pay a fine of 100 l. to the use of the commonwealth, and to recognize in the sum of 300 l. with sufficient surety to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for the term of five years, for a like crime.—Moses Harvey, to pay a fine of 50 l.- to set on the gallows with a rope round his neck one hour, and recognize with sufficient surety in the sum of 200 l. to keep the peace and be of good behaviour for the term of five years, for a like crime.—John Severance, to pay a fine of 30 l. and recognize in the sum of 100 l. with sufficient surety to keep the peace &c. for the term of three years, for a like crime.—Abner Fowler, to pay a fine of 50 l.—to suffer twelve months imprisonment, and recognize with sufficient surety to keep the peace &c. for the term of five years, for a like crime.—Thomas Killam, to pay a fine of 20 l. and recognize in the sum of 50 l. with surety to keep the peace &c. for three years, for a like crime.—Samuel Rose, to stand one hour in the pillory, and be publicly whipped on the naked back twenty stripes, for a like crime. [2]

Even after the Rebellion had ended many people still questioned the Constitution, and many were afraid of the new power it would give the Federal Government. There were many papers questioning and/or supporting the Constitution for other reasons.

The Massachusetts Centinel was a paper that hosted debate from both sides of Anti-Federalists and Federalists, while it often still supported the Federalists. In its November 21, 1787 edition the paper allowed people from both sides to pose the cons/pros of the new construction. The Anti-Federalists managed to list 23 while the Pro-Federalist listed 9. To see the full article in its original language, follow this link to Massachusetts Historical Society.

Select Anti-Federalists points:

23: In England the king only, has a nominal negative over the proceedings of the legislature, which he has NEVER DARED TO EXERCISE since the days of King William, Whereas by the new Constitution, the president general and the senate TWO EXECUTIVE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT, have that negative, and are intended to support each other in the exercise of it.

5: The consequence must therefore be, either that the union of the states will be destroyed by a violent struggle, or that the sovereignty will be swallowed up by silent encroachments into a universal aristocracy; because it is clear, that if two different sovereign powers have a co-jural command of the purses of the citizens, they will struggle for the spoils, and the weakest will be in the end obliged to yield to the efforts of the strongest [3]

While not directly in anyway a Shays’ supporter we still see the echo and the fear of many of Shays’ supporters in these two points. They are deathly afraid of the suppression from the government and of course the fear of being prey to whom ever find their way into their pockets.

Select Federalists points:

6: This Convention debated four months, before it produced the form of government now offered; and a man must be weak indeed to suppose, that every objection that is now made, was not there considered, supported, opposed, and either given up for wise reasons, or refuted.

7: Government being a human institution can never be perfect.

9:The shew the integrity of the Convention, the result of the deliberations is referred for confirmation to the public at large.

It is therefore incumbent on the people of this continent to ask themselves the question–Shall we rile into one respectable nation, or sink into thirteen factions? [4]

Here we see some of the main feelings behind the Federalists. They admit that while the government cannot be prefect it is better to try and be unified as a nation, and gain from that strength. As Shays Rebellion showed, both economically and militarily, we are weaker apart than together. Next ->

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[1] “The PETITION of Robin Hood: humbly sheweth,” Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, MA), Sep. 13th, 1786, nps.gov/spar/.

[2] “Supreme Judicial Court Sentences on Rebels,”  Hampshire Gazette(Northampton, MA), Apr. 25th, 1787, nps.gov/spar/.

[3] “Federal Constitution.” The Massachusetts Centinel. (Boston, MA) Nov. 21, 1787, masshist.org.

[4] Ibid.