Rhode Island Threatened With Invasion?

It's true, but I don't remember where I read it. Whenever I go on forums elsewhere, and I say that the Constitution could never have been ratified legally and the statists always like to forget that Rhode Island never would've joined Federal Republic had they not been forced to.

I think it was a law that Congress passed in the early 1790s and Washington signed into law. It was some kind of forceful trade sanction.

I emailed Shaffer and he replied: "This is fairly well established, although I became acquainted with it so many years ago that I can't recall the source.  You might look at some of Murray Rothbard's writings.  I will also try to retrace my steps from 50 or so years ago."

http://books.google.com/books?id=1e23fkBkOgQC&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48&dq=rhode+island+ratification+%2Bembargo&source=bl&ots=wtNCYh166k&sig=hZE7_rhXm5cWPjFqx7Nt8q4vf9s&hl=en&ei=QNV7ToLNB4fpsQLAufGsAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=rhode%20island%20ratification%20%2Bembargo&f=false

Thanks Malachi. I found what I was looking for at the link:

From a Constitutional perspective this doesn't seem illegal at all. You can impose as many embargoes as you want under the Constitution. There is no limitation saying that you can't "convince" other nations to join you with embargoes.

Wheylous:

From a Constitutional perspective this doesn't seem illegal at all. You can impose as many embargoes as you want under the Constitution. There is no limitation saying that you can't "convince" other nations to join you with embargoes.

 

As James Ostrowski writes:

 

"The union established by the Articles of Confederation, in spite of its exhortation of perpetuity, was terminated by nothing other than a secession! The proposed Constitution provided that it would take effect upon ratification by nine states. On 21 June 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify. On that date, a new union was formed, exclusive of Virginia, New York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island, which had not yet ratified. That new union seceded from the union formed by the Articles of Confederation in violation of Article XIII, which barred any alteration in the Articles save by unanimous consent."

 

So, for those who believe in the social contract, the ratification of the Constitution was illegal because it (1) violated Article XIII and (2) the new illegal union of 9 states threatened Rhode Island to sign the new contract, and legally and morally speaking any contract that is signed because of a threat makes the contract null and void.