Summer of 1787: The Men

¶ … Summer of 1787: The Men Who Invented the Constitution by David O. Stewart. Specifically it will contain a book critique of the book. "The Summer of 1787" is an enlightening look at the men behind the American Constitution, and how the framers had to fight to get the country and the government organized enough to complete this historic and essential document. Along the way, the author shows a country in turmoil after defeating the British. It was clear something had to be done to unite the government and the people, and that something was a workable and practical Constitution.

Stewart's book is a look at the year leading up to the Constitution Convention of 1787, and the leaders who helped frame the Constitution. It makes these men seem real, with real problems, real solutions, and the interests of their fledgling country at heart. The author makes it clear this was not an easy task. He writes, "Ten years after the Declaration of Independence, and not even four years after a victorious peace with the British, Americans were slaughtering each other on the field of battle" (Stewart 15). Clearly, something had to be done, and soon, because the country was falling into chaos without a workable government or central leadership. This seems to be something that many Americans seem to forget.

July 4, 1776 celebrates the Declaration of Independence, but Americans did not gain true freedom from Britain until they won the Revolutionary War in 1783, and when that occurred, the government, leadership, and government rules and regulations did not just magically appear. They had to be hammered out by many of the same men who created the Declaration, and it took time and resources that simply were not available. This book helps the reader get a greater understanding of why it took so long to frame the new government, elect a president, and create a Constitution, and so, it makes that period in history more real, more exciting, and more understandable all at the same time.

The author's thesis is quite clear. This is a history book, but a text that engages the reader rather than simply lecturing or stating dry facts. It is a book that looks at some of the influences on history, and some of the tensions facing the country as it formed. He also gives personal glimpse into some of the men that are lesser-known framers, such as James Wilson, Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania, and John Rutledge of South Carolina. The author is a lawyer, and so he looks at much of the work from a legal standpoint. However, he also gives special attention to many of the actual debates that took place during the Convention that created the Constitution, indicating the differences and disputes among members, and how difficult it actually was to frame this historic and far-reaching document.

Another myth that many Americans seem to hang on to is the idea that the states were immediately united after the victory over the British. The author dispels this as he does many other myths, showing instead that the country was quite divided between regions throughout the period. He writes, "With their own histories and traditions, the states mistrusted each other. New Englanders and southerners found each other's speech foreign" (Stewart 18). The areas were divided in their economies, their politics, and even their unity, which obviously could lead to more dissention between states and regions as the Constitution was formed.

In addition, some Americans felt the Articles of Confederation were enough, and more government was simply not necessary. Much of the blame was placed on the state governments, which seemed to want too much power on their own, instead of banding together for the good of all. This period in our nation's history is far less well-known than other areas, at least to most Americans, and this book helps it become clearer and more distinct, adding a layer to the reader's knowledge of some of the most important American history. It does not replace other volumes on the same topic, but instead it adds to them, giving a more complete picture of the time, the place, and the people.

The book leads the reader through events leading up to the Convention, and then takes the reader day by day through the events that transpired as the Constitution was forged. It is detailed and engaging without being too scholarly or dry. For example, the author gives detailed backgrounds on most of the delegates, including physical descriptions, so the reader will have a mental picture of even the lesser-known delegates. He writes of Scottish-born James Wilson, part of the Pennsylvania delegation, "Tall, well dressed and solidly built, his auburn hair fashionably powdered, Wilson radiated a lowering intensity, while inspiring little affection" (Stewart 34). The reader immediately gets a mental picture of this man who rarely smiles, has few friends, and has adopted another country as his home. The book is full of vivid descriptions such as these, which make the action more understandable, the participants more familiar, and the outcome even more spectacular.

Stewart manages to make the Convention delegates seem larger than life, and yet real people at the same time. They had varying backgrounds, and yet they had many commonalities. He writes, "Thirty-five were lawyers, thirteen were involved in trade, and twelve owned or managed plantations worked by slaves. About two dozen owed considerable (and sometimes precarious) amounts of public debt" (Stewart 41). For the most part, they seem like average men, like any number of public leaders today, who came to extraordinary decisions through relatively ordinary means. This look into the roots of our federal government is extremely important because it acknowledges the great importance of what these men did, without making them larger than life or demigods of some sort. They were real men. Some suffered from physical illness, others suffered from their own egos, but they all had common bonds in their desire to do the best for their new country, and together, they helped create the foundations of the laws that still regulate our land. Watching this happen, as if the reader was right there, in the balcony, so to speak, is fascinating and humbling at the same time. These men did not always agree, and not everything they did was perfect, but it has lasted more than 200 years, and it still works, which is a testament to the work they accomplished that summer in Philadelphia.

The actual Convention lasted from May 27 to September 17. It took four months to hammer out the details of the Constitution, and Stewart follows the procedure in detail, showing just how difficult it was to come to agreement on many of the articles and founding principles. It is notable that New Hampshire's delegates did not reach Philadelphia until the Convention was nearly two months old, and Rhode Island never sent any delegates at all.

Yet, the Convention worked, in its own way. It molded the separate thirteen states into a "more complete union," and helped save the country from chaos and revolt. However, it also shows that even men from very diverse backgrounds, who disagree on many subjects, can come together for the good of the group. It is also notable that the delegates decided not to publish any of the proceedings as they were going on, so there was an air of secrecy about the proceedings. Stewart writes, "The secrecy certainly permitted the delegates to speak with greater candor than they would have otherwise" (Stewart 52). However, this, and many other proceedings, seems to go against the way we view government today. For example, the delegates had the ability to change any decision, even after it had been voted on, and this happened frequently, leading to the continuation of the Convention. There are numerous surprising and enlightening details such as this throughout the book, such as the idea that Scottish James Wilson was the delegate who first conceived of a government that represented each citizen of the United States. Popular American opinion would probably recognize other prominent Americans, such as Thomas Jefferson or John Adams, with that idea, but those men did not even attend the Convention, they were in Europe negotiating other details of the new nation's operations and economics. Thus, this book dispels a lot of what the typical American "knows" about American history. Much of what we actually "know" is really legend or myth. Reading this book will set the reader straight on a lot of issues, and open up a whole new wealth of history to explore and discover, if they take the time.

The author proves his thesis simply by presenting the information in an entertaining and educational way. He writes descriptively, making the reader almost feel as if they are there in the room with the delegates. His main idea is to present the people and the actual debates, and that is just what he does. The book is detailed, but not so much so that it is difficult for the reader to comprehend. By gradually introducing the participants, and then showing how they work and debate together during the Convention, they become easier to understand and follow, and their actions seem to fit their personalities and ideals.

Clearly, the author spent a great amount of time researching this book. His comprehensive list of notes and sources spans nearly 50 pages, and he includes additional reading sources, as well. The author uses a variety of primary and secondary sources, from a lengthy list of online primary documents, such as the Constitution itself and other historical documents, to journal articles, memoirs, letters, books, and just about any historical document available related to his subject and to the men who created the Constitution. For many of the most intimate details about these men, he refers to short passages in letters which describe everything from their eye color to their disposition and even the diseases from which they suffer. This is how he makes these historic figures seem real and engaging. Many historical texts can seem dry and scholarly, and give no real feeling of the people behind the history. However, this book blends history and autobiography to create a real feeling for the men who created the Constitution, which makes it much more engaging and interesting for the reader.