At the Constitutional Convention, 74 delegates were invited to participant in the drafting and signing of the document. Fifty-five members attended, but out of those, only 39 signed the Constitution on Sept. 17, 1787. Those who didn’t sign included three delegates – George Mason, Elbridge Gerry and Edmund Randolph – who had been very instrumental in the process but feared the final document did not adequately protect individual rights.
George Mason, a delegate from Virginia, was a strong anti-federalist who had helped write the Articles of Confederation. He not believe the Constitution established a “wise and just government.” His primary objection was the absence of a bill of rights. He not only refused to sign but also fought against ratification despite the promise by James Madison and others to add the bill of rights in the first Congress. Among other concerns, he believed the convention was giving the executive branch too much power. During the convention, he argued for a three-person executive, fearing that a one-person presidency was far too close to a monarchy. He supported natural (inalienable) rights, both in Virginia and the nation. A vote of gratitude is owed him for the first 10 amendments to the Constitution.

Elbridge Gerry, the former Massachusetts governor, was mercurial and cantankerous by nature and was one of the most vocal delegates at the convention. Like Mason, he did not think the Constitution provided adequate protection for the rights of individuals, and he also wanted more protection for the rights of the states. Even though he chaired the committee that produced the Great Compromise – which established a two-chamber legislative branch and how representation in the House and Senate would be apportioned – he disliked the compromise itself. His inconsistency antagonized nearly everyone, and according to a colleague, he “objected to everything he did not propose.” At first he advocated for a strong central government but ultimately rejected and refused to sign the Constitution because it lacked a bill of rights and because he deemed it a threat to republicanism. He led a drive against the ratification in Massachusetts and said the document was “full of vices,” including inadequate representation of the people, dangerously ambiguous legislative powers, the blending of the executive and the legislative, and the danger of an oppressive judiciary. However, he did feel these flaws could be remedied through amendments.

Edmund Randolph, who was elected governor of Virginia in 1786, had introduced the Virginia Plan as the outline for a new national government during the convention. He was in favor of a strong central government, advocating a plan for three chief executives from various parts of the country. He was a member of the “Committee of Detail,” which worked to convert the Virginia Plan’s 15 resolutions into a first draft of the Constitution. However, Randolph refused to sign the final document believing it had insufficient checks and balances. He published his objections in October 1787. Yet in 1788 at the Virginia Ratifying Convention, he voted for ratification because he did not want to see Virginia left out of the new national government.
Mason, Gerry and Randolph added much to the thinking process of the delegates and the structuring of the government set up in the Constitution. They were concerned that the power given the executive branch of the government would be a problem. Whatever the reason, right or wrong, they stood strong in their concerns. By refusing to sign the document when they were not in agreement with the principles, they brought intense scrutiny to areas that they felt needed change. Perhaps they served as the squeaky wheel.