Rhode Island might also be considered. After all, IIRC, they did not
bother to show up at the Con. Convention! And the ratification of nine
states was specifically designed to handle Rhode Island (or any others)
which might balk! 

It is and was a matter of time, as well as the issue, that determined
how folks felt about the relationship of state and national government. 

As Emerson put it so well, “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of
little minds, adored by statesmen and philosophers and divines. With
consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do.”

Take care,

Bob

Judy and Bob Huddleston
10643 Sperry Street
Northglenn, CO  80234-3612
303.451.6276   [log in to unmask] 

-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Maass
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 11:07 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: NC as an example....


Hi Bob:

I argue that the 13 colonies WERE in fact separate states albeit for a
short period of time.  For ex., there was a brief period after the
Revolutionary war when NC refused to adopt the Constitution; for 7-8
months NC was not a member of the new union, but then in a second
convention at Fayetteville NC decided to join. The state even had
representatives assigned as liaison between it and the rest of the
states who joined together under the Constit.  This is detailed in
McDonald's book, E PLURIBUS UNUM.

Regards, John Maass

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
instructions at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html