Annapolis Schouler's States, I, 25-34. Calling of the Federal Convention. Delegates to the Convention. Fiske's Critical Period, 222-229; Schouler's United States, I, 39. in with the scheme, and invited Pennsylvania and Delaware to appoint commissioners. In Virginia, a fierce contest arose it appeared that the Virginia commissioners had exceeded their instructions, which, in all probability, they had never seen, owing to a curious combination of circumstances; the matter had gone so far, however, that Virginia could hardly draw back; in the end, she proposed that commissioners from all the states should meet at Annapolis and consider the trade and commerce of the United States as a whole. The representatives of only five states appeared at the opening of this convention (1786), although others were on their way. Instead of waiting for them, and proceeding with the business for which the meeting had been summoned, the delegates present passed a resolution providing for another convention to amend the Articles of Confederation, to be held at Philadelphia in 1787. Six states, including Virginia and Pennsylvania, appointed delegates to this new convention before Congress could bring itself to approve the plan and recommend its adoption to the states. On the same day that this vote was passed, although ignorant of its passage, Massachusetts appointed her delegates, and, Congress having spoken, the other states, except Rhode Island, fell into line. 180. The Federal Convention, 1787. — When the members of the convention met for the first time at Philadelphia (May 25, 1787), it was at once apparent that, with few exceptions, the strongest men in the United States were there. New Hampshire was not represented at the beginning of the discussion, Rhode Island was not represented at all, and of the Revolutionary leaders, John Adams, Samuel Adams, John Jay, Patrick Henry, and Thomas Jefferson were not present. With these exceptions, however, the men who had shown the greatest ability in the management of affairs or in knowledge of men were there. The oldest and ablest of them was Benjamin Franklin, whose connection with the Albany Plan of Union (p. 138) and with the formation of the Articles of Confederation has already been 17871 The Constitution 235 described; he was to recognize the critical moment and to suggest a compromise which made the adoption of the Constitution a possibility. The most prominent figure in the assemblage was George Washington, who was already "first in the hearts of his countrymen." He was chosen to preside over the convention; his name, therefore, seldom appears in Madison's Notes; but just before the end he made Jauns Madison an important suggestion, which was at once adopted by the convention. Washington and Franklin made few speeches, but, in all probability, they exerted great influence in smoothing away differences, and their presence was an inspiration to the other members. Moreover, their approval of the Constitution in its final form gave to the plan a place in the eyes of large masses of the people which it otherwise would not have had. In addition to Washington, the Virginian delegation contained George Mason, James Madison, and Edmund Randolph, and besides Franklin, Pennsylvania was represented by James Wilson, a great constitutional lawyer, Robert Morris, the financier of the Revolution, and Gouverneur Morris, to whom the Constitution mainly owes its clear and simple language. Delaware sent John Dickinson, who had reported the Articles of Confederation. Connecticut sent her veteran statesman Roger Sherman, who had served in nearly every Congress, Oliver Ellsworth, and William S. Johnson. Massachusetts was Gouverneur Morris Genesis of represented by four able and experienced men: Elbridge Gerry, Caleb Strong, John Gorham, and Rufus King. New York sent Alexander Hamilton, New Jersey, Governor Patterson, and South Carolina was represented by the two Pinckneys and John Rutledge. These were the foremost men in that remarkable assemblage, but all the members were men of mark, of experience, and of ability. The convention met daily, with brief adjournments to facilitate the work of committees, until September 17, when it finally adjourned. Its discussions were secret, and it was not until long afterwards, when Madison's Notes were printed, that the difficulties which surrounded its deliberations were known. 181. Nature of the Constitution. The best way to the Constitu- reach a thorough knowledge of the nature of the Constitution is to read Madison's Notes. The student will at once notice the straightforward character of tion. Winsor's America, VII, 237-246; the debates of the convention, and will be impressed with the patriotism and *Bryce's Common wealth (abd. ed.), chs. iii, xxv, xxviii, xxix. the good sense of its members. It is surprising to observe how little they relied upon theoretical considerations, and how much they confided in the test of experience. The Constitution is, in reality, a most skillful adaptation of the best features of the existing state constitutions to the needs of a federation. A few things in it were necessarily new, for the problem to be settled was new. An historical student familiar with colonial history and with the constitutions of the Revolutionary epoch can find precedents for nearly all its more important features. Instead of having been "struck off at a given time from the brain and purpose of man," as Mr. Gladstone declared, it was the result of the experience of the English race in Britain and in America. The idea of a written constitution was not new; every Government, colonial government had been regulated in conformity with a written document,— a charter or a commission and its accompanying instructions. The origin of the Supreme Court can be found in the authority exercised by the Privy Fiske's Civil ch. vii. 1787] The Great Compromises 237 Council in annulling colonial acts which were contrary to the fundamental laws and usages of England, to a charter, or to a commission. The veto power exercised by the President was drawn from the constitution of Massachusetts. The idea of the Electoral College was derived from the Maryland constitution. There is no more truth in the remark of Sir Henry Maine, that the Constitution is "a modified version of the British Constitution," than there is in the saying of Mr. Gladstone mentioned above. The principal new points were the attempt to form a detailed written constitution for a federation, and its submission to the people for ratification. tution. Schouler's United States, I, 41-45. 182. The Great Compromises. It is hardly correct to Plans for a describe the convention as divided into parties; it is new Constitrue, however, that parties were formed on nearly every Fiske's Criti important question, and that oftentimes the same states cal Period, would group themselves together on several propositions. 232-249; The first division came about at the very beginning, when Edmund Randolph, in the name of the Virginia delegation, introduced a plan which was mainly the work of Madison and had received the sanction of Washington. This scheme, known as the Virginia plan, provided for the formation of a national government with a legislative body, or Congress, of two houses, in both of which representation should be based on population; the scheme also contemplated that the executive and judicial officers should be appointed by the Congress. This plan would have placed the government in the hands of the larger states, and it was fiercely attacked by the delegates from the smaller states. latter, however, were in the minority; for, as we have seen, Rhode Island was never represented at all, and New Hampshire's representatives did not arrive until July 23. By this time the convention had settled many of the main features of the plan, and the majority of New York's delegation had retired in disgust at the evident intention of the convention to override the wishes of the smaller states, it must be remembered that New York was then The regarded as one of the smaller states. The representatives of these states then supported a scheme brought forward by Patterson of New Jersey, and known as the New Jersey plan. This provided for the continuance of the existing government, but gave Congress power to regulate commerce, to raise revenue, and to coerce the states. These were the most important schemes presented to the convention; but Hamilton read a plan for a strong centralized government in which the states would have little power; he knew that such a plan "was very remote from the ideas of the people," and offered it only as a statement of his own views on the matter. Charles Pinckney of South Carolina also presented a plan, which resembled the Virginia scheme in general outline but was much more detailed. The contest turned on the Virginia and the New Jersey plan, and the former was adopted as the basis of a new constitution. Compromise For a time it seemed as if the smaller states would withon represen- draw, but finally, through the efforts of Roger Sherman and Fiske's Criti- Benjamin Franklin, a compromise was effected which gave the states equal representation in the Senate and proportional representation in the House of Representatives. tation. cal Period, 250-253. The "federal Fiske's Criti- Ser. No. 70. The next question was the apportionment of representatives in the lower house. Slavery still existed in the South; should slaves, who had no vote, be counted in estimating the representation of that section in Congress? And what should be done as to direct taxes,- should these be apportioned among the states according to their total populations, or should the slaves be omitted from this estimate? This matter was finally compromised by providing that both representation and direct taxes should be apportioned among the states according to a ratio which should be ascertained "by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons," namely, slaves. This provision was called "the federal ratio," and, so far as it related to representation, greatly increased the political power of the slave owners. |