Thursday June 21. in Convention.

M^r Jonathan Dayton from N. Jersey took his seat.[94]

[ [94] From June 21 to July 18 inclusive not copied by M^r Eppes.—Madison's Note. This applies evidently to notes he permitted Hon. George W. Eppes, Jefferson's son-in-law, to take.

Doc^r Johnson.[95] On a comparison of the two plans which had been proposed from Virginia & N. Jersey, it appeared that the peculiarity which characterized the latter was its being calculated to preserve the individuality of the States. The plan from V^a did not profess to destroy this individuality altogether, but was charged with such a tendency. One Gentleman alone (Col. Hamilton) in his animadversions on the plan of N. Jersey, boldly and decisively contended for an abolition of the State Gov^ts. M^r Wilson & the gentleman from Virg^a who also were adversaries of the plan of N. Jersey held a different language. They wished to leave the States in possession of a considerable, tho' a subordinate jurisdiction. They had not yet however shewn how this c^d consist with, or be secured ag^st the general sovereignty & jurisdiction, which they proposed to give to the National Government. If this could be shewn in such a manner as to satisfy the patrons of the N. Jersey propositions, that the individuality of the States would not be endangered, many of their objections would no doubt be removed. If this could not be shewn their objections would have their full force. He wished it therefore to be well considered whether in case the States, as was proposed, sh^d retain some portion of sovereignty at least, this portion could be preserved, without allowing them to participate effectually in the Gen^l Gov^t, without giving them each a distinct and equal vote for the purpose of defending themselves in the general Councils.

[ [95] "D^r Johnson is a character much celebrated for his legal knowledge; he is said to be one of the first classics in America, and certainly possesses a very strong and enlightened understanding.

"As an Orator in my opinion, there is nothing in him that warrants the high reputation which he has for public speaking. There is something in the tone of his voice not pleasing to the Ear,—but he is eloquent and clear,—always abounding with information and instruction. He was once employed as an Agent for the State of Connecticut to state her claims to certain landed territory before the British House of Commons; this Office he discharged with so much dignity, and made such an ingenious display of his powers, that he laid the foundation of a reputation which will probably last much longer than his own life. D^r Johnson is about sixty years of age, possesses the manners of a Gentleman, and engages the Hearts of Men by the sweetness of his temper, and that affectionate style of address with which he accosts his acquaintance."—Pierce's Notes, Am. Hist. Rev., iii., 326.

M^r Wilson's respect for Doc^r Johnson, added to the importance of the subject led him to attempt, unprepared as he was, to solve the difficulty which had been started. It was asked how the Gen^l Gov^t and individuality of the particular States could be reconciled to each other; and how the latter could be secured ag^st the former? Might it not, on the other side be asked how the former was to be secured ag^st the latter? It was generally admitted that a jealousy & rivalship would be felt between the Gen^l & particular Gov^ts. As the plan now stood, tho' indeed contrary to his opinion, one branch of the Gen^l Gov^t (the Senate or second branch) was to be appointed by the State Legislatures. The State Legislatures, therefore, by this participation in the Gen^l Gov^t would have an opportunity of defending their rights. Ought not a reciprocal opportunity to be given to the Gen^l Gov^t of defending itself by having an appointment of some one constituent branch of the State Gov^ts. If a security be necessary on one side, it w^d seem reasonable to demand it on the other. But taking the matter in a more general view, he saw no danger to the States from the Gen^l Gov^t. In case a combination should be made by the large ones it w^d produce a general alarm among the rest; and the project w^d be frustrated. But there was no temptation to such a project. The States having in general a similar interest, in case of any propositions in the National Legislature to encroach on the State Legislatures, he conceived a general alarm w^d take place in the National Legislature itself, that it would communicate itself to the State Legislatures, and w^d finally spread among the people at large. The Gen^l Gov^t will be as ready to preserve the rights of the States as the latter are to preserve the rights of individuals; all the members of the former, having a common interest, as representatives of all the people of the latter, to leave the State Gov^ts in possession of what the people wish them to retain. He could not discover, therefore any danger whatever on the side from which it was apprehended. On the contrary, he conceived that in spite of every precaution the General Gov^t would be in perpetual danger of encroachments from the State Gov^ts.

M^r Madison was of opinion that there was 1. less danger of encroachment from the Gen^l Gov^t than from the State Gov^ts 2. that the mischief from encroachments would be less fatal if made by the former, than if made by the latter. 1. All the examples of other confederacies prove the greater tendency in such systems to anarchy than to tyranny; to a disobedience of the members than usurpations of the federal head. Our own experience had fully illustrated this tendency.—But it will be said that the proposed change in the principles & form of the Union will vary the tendency; that the Gen^l Gov^t will have real & greater powers, and will be derived in one branch at least from the people, not from the Gov^ts of the States. To give full force to this objection, let it be supposed for a moment that indefinite power should be given to the Gen^l Legislature, and the States reduced to Corporations dependent on the Gen^l Legislature; Why sh^d it follow that the Gen^l Gov^t w^d take from the States any branch of their power as far as its operation was beneficial, and its continuance desireable to the people? In some of the States, particularly in Connecticut, all the Townships are incorporated, and have a certain limited jurisdiction. Have the Representatives of the people of the Townships in the Legislature of the State ever endeavoured to despoil the Townships of any part of their local authority? As far as this local authority is convenient to the people they are attached to it; and their representatives chosen by & amenable to them, naturally respect their attachment to this, as much as their attachment to any other right or interest. The relation of a General Gov^t to State Gov^ts is parallel. 2. Guards were more necessary ag^st encroachments of the State Gov^ts on the Gen^l Gov^t than of the latter on the former. The great objection made ag^st an abolition of the State Gov^ts was that the Gen^l Gov^t could not extend its care to all the minute objects which fall under the cognizance of the local jurisdictions. The objection as stated lay not ag^st the probable abuse of the general power, but ag^st the imperfect use that could be made of it throughout so great an extent of country, and over so great a variety of objects. As far as its operation would be practicable it could not in this view be improper; as far as it would be impracticable, the conveniency of the Gen^l Gov^t itself would concur with that of the people in the maintenance of subordinate Governments. Were it practicable for the Gen^l Gov^t to extend its care to every requisite object without the cooperation of the State Gov^ts the people would not be less free as members of one great Republic than as members of thirteen small ones. A Citizen of Delaware was not more free than a Citizen of Virginia: nor would either be more free than a Citizen of America. Supposing therefore a tendency in the Gen^l Government to absorb the State Gov^ts no fatal consequence could result. Taking the reverse as the supposition, that a tendency should be left in the State Gov^ts towards an independence on the General Gov^t and the gloomy consequences need not be pointed out. The imagination of them, must have suggested to the States the experiment we are now making to prevent the calamity, and must have formed the chief motive with those present to undertake the arduous task.

On the question for resolving "that the Legislature ought to consist of two Branches"

Mass. ay. Con^t ay. N. Y. no. N. Jersey, no. P^a ay. Del. no. M^d div^d. V^a ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

The third resolution of the Report taken into consideration.

Gen^l Pinkney moved "that the 1^st branch, instead of being elected by the people, sh^d be elected in such manner as the Legislature of each State should direct." He urged 1. that this liberty would give more satisfaction, as the Legislatures could then accommodate the mode to the conveniency & opinions of the people. 2. that it would avoid the undue influence of large Counties which would prevail if the elections were to be made in districts as must be the mode intended by the Report of the Committee. 3. that otherwise disputed elections must be referred to the General Legislature which would be attended with intolerable expence and trouble to the distant parts of the Republic.

M^r L. Martin seconded the Motion.[96]

[ [96] After Martin's second, according to Yates:

"M^r Madison. I oppose the motion—there are no difficulties, but they may be obviated in the details connected with the subject."—Yates, Secret Proceedings, etc., 149.

Col. Hamilton considered the Motion as intended manifestly to transfer the election from the people to the State Legislatures, which would essentially vitiate the plan. It would increase that State influence which could not be too watchfully guarded ag^st. All too must admit the possibility, in case the Gen^l Gov^t sh^d maintain itself, that the State Gov^ts might gradually dwindle into nothing. The system therefore sh^d not be engrafted on what might possibly fail.

M^r Mason urged the necessity of retaining the election by the people. Whatever inconveniency may attend the democratic principle, it must actuate one part of the Gov^t. It is the only security for the rights of the people.

M^r Sherman, would like an election by the Legislatures best, but is content with the plan as it stands.

M^r Rutlidge could not admit the solidity of the distinction between a mediate & immediate election by the people. It was the same thing to act by oneself, and to act by another. An election by the Legislature would be more refined than an election immediately by the people: and would be more likely to correspond with the sense of the whole community. If this Convention had been chosen by the people in districts it is not to be supposed that such proper characters would have been preferred. The Delegates to Cong^s he thought had also been fitter men than would have been appointed by the people at large.

M^r Wilson considered the election of the 1^st branch by the people not only as the Corner Stone, but as the foundation of the fabric: and that the difference between a mediate & immediate election was immense. The difference was particularly worthy of notice in this respect: that the Legislatures are actuated not merely by the sentiment of the people; but have an official sentiment opposed to that of the Gen^l Gov^t and perhaps to that of the people themselves.

M^r King enlarged on the same distinction. He supposed the Legislatures w^d constantly choose men subservient to their own views as contrasted to the general interest; and that they might even devise modes of election that w^d be subversive of the end in view. He remarked several instances in which the views of a State might be at variance with those of the Gen^l Gov^t: and mentioned particularly a competition between the National & State debts, for the most certain & productive funds.

Gen^l Pinkney was for making the State Gov^ts a part of the General System. If they were to be abolished, or lose their agency, S. Carolina & other States would have but a small share of the benefits of Gov^t.

On the question for Gen^l Pinkney motion to substitute election of the 1^st branch in such mode as the Legislatures should appoint, in stead of its being elected by the people"

Mass^ts no. Con^t ay. N. Y. no. N. J. ay. P^a no. Del. ay. M^d div^d. V^a no. N. C. no. S. C. ay. Geo. no.

General Pinkney then moved that the 1^st branch be elected by the people in such mode as the Legislatures should direct; but waived it on its being hinted that such a provision might be more properly tried in the detail of the plan.

On the question for y^e election of the 1^st branch by the people"

Mass^ts ay. Con^t ay. N. Y. ay. N. J. no. P^a ay. Del. ay. M^d div^d. V^a ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

Election of the 1^st branch "for the term of three years," considered.

M^r Randolph moved to strike out, "three years" and insert "two years"—he was sensible that annual elections were a source of great mischiefs in the States, yet it was the want of such checks ag^st the popular intemperence as were now proposed, that rendered them so mischievous. He would have preferred annual to biennial, but for the extent of the U. S. and the inconveniency which would result from them to the representatives of the extreme parts of the Empire. The people were attached to frequency of elections. All the Constitutions of the States except that of S. Carolina, had established annual elections.

M^r Dickinson. The idea of annual elections was borrowed from the antient Usage of England, a country much less extensive than ours. He supposed biennial would be inconvenient. He preferred triennial, and in order to prevent the inconveniency of an entire change of the whole number at the same moment, suggested a rotation, by an annual election of one third.

M^r Elseworth was opposed to three years, supposing that even one year was preferable to two years. The people were fond of frequent elections and might be safely indulged in one branch of the Legislature. He moved for 1 year.

M^r Strong [97] seconded & supported the motion.

[ [97] "M^r Strong is a Lawyer of some eminence,—he has received a liberal education, and has good connections to recommend him. As a speaker he is feeble, and without confidence. This Gentⁿ is about thirty five years of age, and greatly in the esteem of his Colleagues."—Pierce's Notes, Amer. Hist. Rev. iii., 326.

M^r Wilson being for making the 1^st branch an effectual representation of the people at large, preferred an annual election of it. This frequency was most familiar & pleasing to the people. It would not be more inconvenient to them, than triennial elections, as the people in all the States have annual meetings with which the election of the National representatives might be made to co-incide. He did not conceive that it would be necessary for the Nat^l Leigsl: to sit constantly; perhaps not half—perhaps not one fourth of the year.

M^r Madison was persuaded that annual elections would be extremely inconvenient and apprehensive that biennial would be too much so; he did not mean inconvenient to the electors; but to the representatives. They would have to travel seven or eight hundred miles from the distant parts of the Union; and would probably not be allowed even a reimbursement of their expences. Besides, none of those who wished to be re-elected would remain at the seat of Governm^t; confiding that their absence would not affect them. The members of Cong^s had done this with few instances of disappointment. But as the choice was here to be made by the people themselves who would be much less complaisant to individuals, and much more susceptible of impressions from the presence of a Rival candidate, it must be supposed that the members from the most distant States would travel backwards & forwards at least as often as the elections should be repeated. Much was to be said also on the time requisite for new Members who would always form a large proportion, to acquire that knowledge of the affairs of the States in general without which their trust could not be usefully discharged.

M^r Sherman preferred annual elections, but would be content with biennial. He thought the Representatives ought to return home and mix with the people. By remaining at the seat of Gov^t they would acquire the habits of the place which might differ from those of their Constituents.

Col. Mason observed that the States being differently situated such a rule ought to be formed as would put them as nearly as possible on a level. If elections were annual the middle States would have a great advantage over the extreme ones. He wished them to be biennial; and the rather as in that case they would coincide with the periodical elections of S. Carolina as well of the other States.

Col. Hamilton urged the necessity of 3 years, there ought to be neither too much nor too little dependence, on the popular sentiments. The checks in the other branches of the Govern^t would be but feeble, and would need every auxiliary principle that could be interwoven. The British House of Commons were elected septennially, yet the democratic spirit of y^e Constitution had not ceased. Frequency of elections tended to make the people listless to them; and to facilitate the success of little cabals. This evil was complained of in all the States. In Virg^a it had been lately found necessary to force the attendance & voting of the people by severe regulations.

On the question for striking out "three years"

Mass^ts ay. Con^t ay. N. Y. no. N. J. div^d. P^a ay. Del. no. M^d no. V^a ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

The motion for "two years" was then inserted nem. con.

Adj^d.