barred by the provision that trial by jury should be preserved in all criminal cases. The objection to a standing army could be brought against the Articles of Confederation; national defense required the provision. The Senate was not a baneful aristocracy, as it could legislate only with the co-operation of the House and with the concurrence of the President. Its organization was the result of compromise between contending interests. That so per

fect a system could have been formed from such heterogeneous materials was a matter of astonishment.

The Constitution had not been framed, as Lee asserted, for the purpose of reducing the State governments to mere corporations, and, eventually, of annihilating them; on the contrary, its existence depended upon theirs. The members of the House of Representatives were to be chosen by the people of the several States, and federal electors were to have the qualifications requisite to electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. The President was to be chosen by electors named in such manner as the State legislatures might direct, and the senators were to be chosen by the State legislatures. It was manifest, then, that the existence of the proposed government would depend upon the people of the States. Indeed, they would have a more perfect representation than under the Confederation, in which the members of Congress were chosen by the legislatures. The power to levy imposts and direct taxes was exercisable only for the general welfare, and was necessary to support the credit of the Union. By such a grant of power, particular States, and Pennsylvania was an instance, would be discharged from extraordinary financial burdens, and the credit of the nation would be restored and maintained.

From a consideration of the difficulties in the way of forming a government for a more perfect Union, Wilson

28

WILSON'S STATE HOUSE SPEECH.

had this convention treated the minority with less scanty respect. By ignoring its demands, the Federalists antagonized the majority of the population. Richard Henry Lee had been indefatigable in circulating his anti-federal "Farmer Letters" in Pennsylvania, and they bore immediate fruit. It was to answer these letters, and all that they implied, that James Wilson was invited to make his celebrated speech in the State House yard. The "Farmer" admitted that reform was needed in the Confederation, but asserted that the aristocracy and centralization, which characterized the new plan, were not reform.1 Lee's whole argument was based on State sovereignty. In reply to his objections, Wilson showed that the powers of Congress were a positive grant under the new Constitution, and, therefore, a Bill of Rights would be superfluous, because no civil right was endangered; an opinion held also by Hamilton and Pinckney, but scouted by Jefferson.2

The exclusive authority of the United States over a particular district would be vested in the President and Congress, but as the district would be obtained by a contract with some State and its citizens, who would be parties to it, their liberties would be in their own control. A trial by jury in civil cases had not been provided for because of the lack of uniformity in the different States, and thus for lack of a precedent. No system of federal jurisprudence existed, therefore, the Constitution was silent on this subject. As the proceedings of the Supreme Court were to be regulated by Congress, and as Congress represented the people, oppression by the government was effectually

1 Lee's Letters are reprinted in Ford's Pamphlet on the Constitution, 277-325.

2 Hamilton uses the argument in No. LXXXIV of the Federalist; for Jefferson's comment on this part of Wilson's speech, see note, p. 212.

barred by the provision that trial by jury should be preserved in all criminal cases. The objection to a standing army could be brought against the Articles of Confederation; national defense required the provision. The Senate was not a baneful aristocracy, as it could legislate only with the co-operation of the House and with the concurrence of the President. Its organization was the result of compromise between contending interests. That so perfect a system could have been formed from such heterogeneous materials was a matter of astonishment.

The Constitution had not been framed, as Lee asserted, for the purpose of reducing the State governments to mere corporations, and, eventually, of annihilating them; on the contrary, its existence depended upon theirs. The members of the House of Representatives were to be chosen by the people of the several States, and federal electors were to have the qualifications requisite to electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. The President was to be chosen by electors named in such manner as the State legislatures might direct, and the senators were to be chosen by the State legislatures. It was manifest, then, that the existence of the proposed government would depend upon the people of the States. Indeed, they would have a more perfect representation than under the Confederation, in which the members of Congress were chosen by the legislatures. The power to levy imposts and direct taxes was exercisable only for the general welfare, and was necessary to support the credit of the Union. By such a grant of power, particular States, and Pennsylvania was an instance, would be discharged from extraordinary financial burdens, and the credit of the nation would be restored and maintained.

From a consideration of the difficulties in the way of forming a government for a more perfect Union, Wilson

28

WILSON'S STATE HOUSE SPEECH.

had this convention treated the minority with less scanty respect. By ignoring its demands, the Federalists antagonized the majority of the population. Richard Henry Lee had been indefatigable in circulating his anti-federal "Farmer Letters" in Pennsylvania, and they bore immediate fruit. It was to answer these letters, and all that they implied, that James Wilson was invited to make his celebrated speech in the State House yard. The "Farmer” admitted that reform was needed in the Confederation, but asserted that the aristocracy and centralization, which characterized the new plan, were not reform.1 Lee's whole argument was based on State sovereignty. In reply to his objections, Wilson showed that the powers of Congress were a positive grant under the new Constitution, and, therefore, a Bill of Rights would be superfluous, because no civil right was endangered; an opinion held also by Hamilton and Pinckney, but scouted by Jefferson.2

The exclusive authority of the United States over a particular district would be vested in the President and Congress, but as the district would be obtained by a contract with some State and its citizens, who would be parties to it, their liberties would be in their own control. A trial by jury in civil cases had not been provided for because of the lack of uniformity in the different States, and thus for lack of a precedent. No system of federal jurisprudence existed, therefore, the Constitution was silent on this subject. As the proceedings of the Supreme Court were to be regulated by Congress, and as Congress represented the people, oppression by the government was effectually

1 Lee's Letters are reprinted in Ford's Pamphlet on the Constitution, 277-325.

2 Hamilton uses the argument in No. LXXXIV of the Federalist; for Jefferson's comment on this part of Wilson's speech, see note, p. 212.

WILSON'S SPEECH.

29

barred by the provision that trial by jury should be preserved in all criminal cases. The objection to a standing army could be brought against the Articles of Confederation; national defense required the provision. The Senate was not a baneful aristocracy, as it could legislate only with the co-operation of the House and with the concurrence of the President. Its organization was the result of compromise between contending interests. That so perfect a system could have been formed from such heterogeneous materials was a matter of astonishment.

The Constitution had not been framed, as Lee asserted, for the purpose of reducing the State governments to mere corporations, and, eventually, of annihilating them; on the contrary, its existence depended upon theirs. The members of the House of Representatives were to be chosen by the people of the several States, and federal electors were to have the qualifications requisite to electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. The President was to be chosen by electors named in such manner as the State legislatures might direct, and the senators were to be chosen by the State legislatures. It was manifest, then, that the existence of the proposed government would depend upon the people of the States. Indeed, they would have a more perfect representation than under the Confederation, in which the members of Congress were chosen by the legislatures. The power to levy imposts and direct taxes was exercisable only for the general welfare, and was necessary to support the credit of the Union. By such a grant of power, particular States, and Pennsylvania was an instance, would be discharged from extraordinary financial burdens, and the credit of the nation would be restored and maintained.

From a consideration of the difficulties in the way of forming a government for a more perfect Union, Wilson