CHAPTER VI.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.
Events Leading to the Constitutional Convention.—Among the many difficulties that arose during the period of the confederation were constant disputes between Virginia and Maryland over the navigation of the Potomac River and Chesapeake Bay. Finally, in March, 1785, commissioners from these States met at Alexandria to consider these difficulties. The outcome of the meeting was that Virginia proposed a convention and called for delegates from all of the States to meet to consider how commerce should be controlled. Delegates from five States only were present at Annapolis on the day appointed, September 11, 1786. Nothing permanent could be accomplished with so few States represented. Before adjourning, however, they agreed to a resolution, framed by Alexander Hamilton, which proposed the calling of a convention at Philadelphia to amend the Articles of Confederation.
The Federal Convention, 1787; Delegates.—All of the States, Rhode Island excepted, were finally represented in this, one of the most notable conventions in the history of the world. Among the fifty-five delegates assembled were many who had already been conspicuous in public affairs. They were the choice men of the States from which they came. Twenty-nine of the number were university men. Washington and Franklin were present, and Washington was unanimously chosen president of the convention. Neither of these men took an active part in the debates; but their presence gave inspiration to the other members, and they had untold influence at critical times. Among the ablest members were Alexander Hamilton of New York; James Madison of Virginia; Oliver Ellsworth and William S. Johnson of Connecticut; James Wilson and Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania; Rufus King of Massachusetts; and Charles C. Pinckney of South Carolina.
Our Knowledge of the Convention.—The Convention lasted from May 25 to September 17, 1787. The sessions were secret. Fortunately we are not dependent on the secretary's report alone for our knowledge of the meetings.[[8]] Mr. Madison seemed to understand the full meaning of the convention from the first, and decided to give an accurate account of the proceedings. He wrote: "Nor was I unaware of the value of such a contribution to the fund of materials for the history of a Constitution on which should be staked the happiness of a people great even in its infancy, and possibly the cause of liberty throughout the world." His notes were purchased by the government from Mrs. Madison, in 1837, for the sum of thirty thousand dollars. They were published as "Madison's Journal of the Constitutional Convention."
Plans for a Government; Virginia Plan.—The magnitude of the labors of this convention can be understood only when we read the report of the discussions as given by Madison. It was at once determined that no time should be lost in patching up the articles, but that a new Constitution should be formed. Two sets of resolutions were early submitted, each setting forth a plan of government. The Virginia plan was largely the work of Mr. Madison. It provided for the establishment of a national government with supreme legislative, executive, and judicial powers. The legislative power was to be vested in a Congress of two separate houses. The executive was to be chosen by both houses of Congress and the judiciary by the Senate. Representation in both houses of Congress was to be based on population or the contributions to the support of the government. This scheme was fiercely attacked by the delegates from the small States, for it would clearly give control into the hands of the more powerful States.
The New Jersey Plan.—The New Jersey plan, presented by Mr. Patterson of that State, was agreed upon by the members from Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland. This Small-State plan, so called, provided for a continuance of the government under the Articles of Confederation. They were to be revised in such a manner as to give Congress the power to regulate commerce, to raise revenue, and to coerce the States. The Small-State party insisted that the Virginia plan, if adopted, would destroy the sovereignty of the States. They would rather, they said, submit to a foreign power than be deprived of equality of suffrage in both branches of the legislature. Madison, Wilson, King, and other leaders of the Large-State party declared that the basis for the new government was to be the people and not the States; that it would be unfair to give Delaware as many representatives as Virginia or Pennsylvania. After many days of fruitless debate, a compromise, sometimes called the "First Great Compromise," was presented and finally adopted. This provided that the House of Representatives should be composed of members elected on the basis of population. In the Senate, large and small States were to be equally represented.
The Slavery Problem; Second Compromise.—How was the number of the representatives to be found? Were slaves to be counted a part of the population? A heated debate arose over these questions. The delegates from South Carolina maintained that slaves were a part of the population and as such should be counted. The answer was made that slaves were not represented in the legislatures of that and other States; that slaves were regarded in those States merely as so much property, and as such ought never to be represented. Finally, when it seemed that the work of the convention must fail, a compromise, known as "the three-fifths compromise," was accepted. This provided that all free people should be counted and three-fifths of the slaves.
The Third Compromise.—Slave-trade and commerce were the causes for a third compromise. South Carolina and Georgia desired to have the importation of slaves continued. Some of the other Southern States and the Northern States generally were opposed. The New England members were anxious that the National government should have complete control of foreign commerce. This was resisted by some of the Southern delegates, who feared that the importation of slaves might thereby be prohibited. Finally, a compromise was agreed upon which gave Congress power over foreign and interstate commerce, but forbade any act which might prohibit the importation of slaves before 1808. It was also agreed that a tax of ten dollars each might be laid on all slaves imported. While the entire Constitution may be said to be made up of compromises, the agreement upon these three rendered the further work of the convention possible.
Signing the Constitution.—Gouverneur Morris was selected to give the document its final form. The clear, simple English used is due largely to him. After thirty-nine members, representing twelve different States, had signed the Constitution, the convention adjourned. While the last signatures were being written, Franklin said to those standing near him, as he called attention to a sun blazoned on the back of the President's chair: "I have, often and often, in the course of the session, and the vicissitudes of my hopes and fears as to its issue, looked at that behind the President, without being able to tell whether it was rising or setting; but now, at length, I have the happiness to know that it is a rising and not a setting sun."
Difficulties of Ratification.—The convention submitted the Constitution to Congress. Here, for eight days, it was attacked by its opponents. Finally, Congress passed it on to the State legislatures. It was sent by them to State conventions elected by the people. This ratification was provided for by Article VII of the Constitution, as follows: The ratification of the conventions of nine States shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the same.
The period included between September 28, 1787, when Congress transmitted the Constitution to the State legislatures, and June 21, 1788, when New Hampshire, the last of the necessary nine States, ratified, was one of the most critical in our history. Political parties, in a truly National sense, were formed for the first time. Among the leaders who defended ably the views of those who opposed the ratification of the Constitution were Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, Elbridge Gerry, and George Clinton. It was urged that there was no bill of rights,[[9]] that the President would become a despot, and that equality of representation in the Senate was an injustice to the larger States. "Letters from the Federal Farmer," prepared for the press of the country by Richard Henry Lee, set forth clearly the views of the Anti-Constitutional party.
"The Federalist."—No influence was more noteworthy in bringing about ratification than a series of political essays afterward collected under the name of "The Federalist." It is considered to-day the best commentary on the Constitution ever written. Alexander Hamilton originated the plan, and wrote 51 of the 85 numbers. James Madison wrote 29, and John Jay 5.
The Influence of Washington.—Washington was again a giant in his support of the Constitution. In a letter to Patrick Henry he early sounded an effective note of warning against anarchy, expressing the very fear that finally led many in the conventions to vote for the Constitution. He wrote: "I wish the Constitution which is offered had been more perfect; but it is the best that could be obtained at this time, and a door is open for amendments hereafter. The political concerns of this country are suspended by a thread. The convention has been looked up to by the reflecting part of the community with a solicitude which is hardly to be conceived, and if nothing had been agreed upon by that body, anarchy would soon have ensued, the seeds being deeply sown in every soil."
Ratification Secured.—Delaware, the first State, ratified December 6, 1787, without a dissenting vote. Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut followed quickly. Much depended on the action of the Massachusetts convention. After prolonged debate, the delegates were finally influenced by the statement that amendments might be made, and they ratified the Constitution by a vote of 187 to 168. The ninth State was secured in the ratification by New Hampshire, June 21, 1788. It was not until November 21, 1789, however, that North Carolina voted to accept the Constitution. Rhode Island held out until May 29, 1790.
The New Government Put into Operation.—When the ratification of the ninth State had been secured, Congress appointed a special committee to frame an act for putting the Constitution into operation. It was enacted that the first Wednesday in January should be the day for appointing electors; that the electors should cast their votes for President on the first Wednesday in February, and that on the first Wednesday of March the new government should go into operation. It was not until April 1 that a quorum was secured in the House of Representatives, and in the Senate not until April 6. The electoral votes were counted in the presence of the two houses on April 6.[[10]] The inauguration of President Washington did not take place, however, until April 30.
Origin of the Constitution.—Before making a study of this epoch-making document, let us inquire briefly as to its origin. An analysis of the Constitution shows that there are some provisions which are new and that English precedent had an influence. The main features, however, were derived from the constitutions of the States with whose practical workings the delegates were familiar. The following well-known statement is an excellent summary: "Nearly every provision of the Federal Constitution that has worked well is one borrowed from or suggested by some State constitution; nearly every provision that has worked badly is one which the convention, for want of a precedent, was obliged to devise for itself."
Authority and Objects of the Constitution.—It was evidently the intention of the framers of the Constitution to found a government deriving its authority from the people rather than from the States. The purposes for which this was done are set forth in the following enacting clause, commonly called the preamble:—
"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
This clause was attacked vigorously by the opponents of the Constitution, and especially in the Virginia and the North Carolina conventions. Said Patrick Henry: "And here I would make this inquiry of those worthy characters who composed a part of the late Federal Convention.... I have the highest veneration for those gentlemen; but, sir, give me leave to demand what right had they to say, 'We, the people'?... Who authorized them to speak the language of, We, the people, instead of, We, the States? If the States be not the agents of this compact, it must be one great, consolidated, national government of the people of all the States." It was argued, on the other hand, by Randolph, Madison, and others, that the government, under the Articles of Confederation, was a failure, and that the only safe course to pursue was to have a government emanating from the people instead of from the States, if the union of the States and the preservation of the liberties of the people were to be preserved.
SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTIONS AND READINGS.
1. For an account of the members of the convention, see Hart, Contemporaries, III, 205-211.
2. For the contributions of the individuals and the classes of delegates, see Walker, The Making of the Nation, 23-27; Fiske, Critical Period, 224-229.
3. Discuss the peculiar conditions in Massachusetts. Give the arguments presented. Walker, 56-57; Fiske, Critical Period, 316-331.
4. How was the Constitution regarded in Virginia? Walker, 58, 60; Fiske, Critical Period, 334-338.
5. What was the attitude of the New York Convention toward the Constitution? Fiske, Critical Period, 340-345.
6. What objections were made against the Constitution in North Carolina? Hart, Contemporaries, III, 251-254.
7. What would have been the status of North Carolina and Rhode Island if they had not ratified? Walker, 73, 74; Hart, Formation of the Union, 132, 133.
8. Show the influence of the State constitutions on the Federal Constitution. James and Sanford, Government in State and Nation, 117.
9. For other questions on the material in this chapter, see Fiske, Civil Government, 211, 212; James and Sanford, Government in State and Nation, 135, 136, 137.