There wasn't 27 states in 1787 only 13 so there was no 27 signing it.
If you read the constitution, it appears to be that William Jackson was the last one. He signed the document "Attest: William Jackson, Secretary" to attest to the delegates' signing. He is the 40th signer of the Constitution.
There is no "British constitution" in the sense of the American one where a group of people sat down and wrote it. The British constitution is a collection of documents from the Magna Carta to the EU's Declaration of Human Rights. The constitution has evolved from 1215, the signing of the Magna Carta.
The constitution wasn't sent anywhere. In fact, on the 25th anniversary of the signing of the constitution no one knew where it was. It was found in a box. Today you can view it in Washington DC at the National Archives. It is in a special safe that has a viewing window for people to see but not touch or bother.
Georgia was one of the colonies most closely monitored by the British. Basically it had been placed under guardianship by the British when it transpired that it could not make ends meet without British subsidies. So joining the other 12 colonies in the revolution and as a consequence signing the Constitution was a way of getting back control over its internal affairs.
no because one of the amendments are "all rights not stated in the constitution are hereby given to the states or the people"
No. That is not given as one of his powers in the constitution.
There is a dilemma in signing the constitution because no one can decide whether paper cups are a necessity or not.
One can receive a PKI certificate, or a public-key infrastructure certificate, is by digitally signing and publishing the public key bound to a given user.
One possible reason is that its not happy at that given moment.
The Constitution lacked a bill of rights.
When the Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776 the US Senate didn't exist since it was created in the constitution. So, the answer to your question is no one.