The Debates in
the Federal Convention of 1787
|
|
|
As Recorded by James
Madison |
Return to
Federal Debates Calendar
SATURDAY
JULY 7.
IN CONVENTION
1 "Shall the clause allowing
each State one vote in the 2d. branch, stand as part of the Report"?
being taken up —
Mr. GERRY. This is the critical
question. He had rather agree to it than have no accomodation. A
Governt. short of a proper national plan, if generally acceptable,
would be preferable to a proper one which if it could be carried at
all, would operate on discontented States. He thought it would be
best to suspend the 2 question
till the Comme. yesterday appointed, 3
should make report.
Mr. SHERMAN Supposed that it
was the wish of every one that some Genl. Govt. should be
established. An equal vote in the 2d. branch would, he thought, be
most likely to give it the necessary vigor. The small States have
more vigor in their Govts. than the large ones, the more influence
therefore the large ones have, the weaker will be the Govt. In the
large States it will be most difficult to collect the real & fair
sense of the people. Fallacy & undue influence will be practiced
with most success: and improper men will most easily get into
office. If they vote by States in the 2d. branch, and each State has
an equal vote, there must be always a majority of States as well as
a majority of the people on the side of public measures, & the Govt.
will have decision and efficacy. If this be not the case in the 2d.
branch there may be a majority of the 4
States agst. public measures, and the difficulty of compelling them
to abide by the public determination, will render the Government
feebler than it has ever yet been.
Mr. WILSON was not deficient in
a conciliating temper, but firmness was sometimes a duty of higher
obligation. Conciliation was also misapplied in this instance. It
was pursued here rather among the Representatives, than among the
Constituents; and it wd. be of little consequence, if not
established among the latter; and there could be little hope of its
being established among them if the foundation should not be laid in
justice and right.
On 5 Question shall the words
stand as part of the Report?
Massts. divd. Cont. ay. N. Y. ay. N. J. ay. Pa. no. Del. ay. Md.
ay. Va. no. N. C. ay. S. C. no. Geo. divd. 6
[Note. Several votes were given here in the affirmative or were
divd. because another final question was to be taken on the whole
report.]
Mr. GERRY thought it would be
proper to proceed to enumerate & define the powers to be vested in
the Genl. Govt. before a question on the report should be taken, as
to the rule of representation in the 2d. branch.
Mr. MADISON, observed that it
wd. be impossible to say what powers could be safely & properly
vested in the Govt. before it was known, in what manner the States
were to be represented in it. He was apprehensive that if a just
representation were not the basis of the Govt. it would happen, as
it did when the Articles of Confederation were depending, that every
effectual prerogative would be withdrawn or withheld, and the New
Govt. wd. be rendered as impotent and as shortlived as the old.
Mr. PATTERSON would not decide
whether the privilege concerning money bills were a valuable
consideration or not: But he considered the mode & rule of
representation in the 1st. branch as fully so. and that after the
establishment of that point, the small States would never be able to
defend themselves without an equality of votes in the 2d. branch.
There was no other ground of accomodation. His resolution was fixt.
He would meet the large States on that Ground and no other. For
himself he should vote agst. the Report, because it yielded too
much.
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS.
He had no resolution unalterably fixed except to do what should
finally appear to him right. He was agst. the Report because it
maintained the improper Constitution of the 2d. branch. It made it
another Congress, a mere whisp of straw. It had been sd. [by Mr.
Gerry] that the new Governt. would be partly national, partly
federal; that it ought in the first quality to protect individuals;
in the second, the States. But in what quality was it to protect the
aggregate interest of the whole. Among the many provisions which had
been urged, he had seen none for supporting the dignity and splendor
of the American Empire. It had been one of our greatest misfortunes
that the great objects of the nation had been sacrificed constantly
to local views; in like manner as the general interests of States
had been sacrificed to those of the Counties. What is to be the
check in the Senate? none; unless it be to keep the majority of the
people from injuring particular States. But particular States ought
to be injured for the sake of a majority of the people, in case
their conduct should deserve it. Suppose they should insist on
claims evidently unjust, and pursue them in a manner detrimental to
the whole body. Suppose they should give themselves up to foreign
influence. Ought they to be protected in such cases. They were
originally nothing more than colonial corporations. On the
declaration of Independence, a Governmt. was to be formed. The small
States aware of the necessity of preventing anarchy, and taking
advantage of the moment, extorted from the large ones an equality of
votes. Standing now on that ground, they demand under the new system
greater rights as men, than their fellow Citizens of the large
States. The proper answer to them is that the same necessity of
which they formerly took advantage, does not now exist, and that the
large States are at liberty now to consider what is right, rather
than what may be expedient. We must have an efficient Govt. and if
there be an efficiency in the local Govts. the former is impossible.
Germany alone proves it. Notwithstanding their common diet,
notwithstanding the great prerogatives of the Emperor as head of the
Empire, and his vast resources, as sovereign of his particular
dominions, no union is maintained: foreign influence disturbs every
internal operation, & there is no energy whatever in the general
Governmt. Whence does this proceed? From the energy of the local
authorities; from its being considered of more consequence to
support the Prince of Hesse, than the Happiness of the people of
Germany. Do Gentlemen wish this to be ye case here. Good God, Sir,
is it possible they can so delude themselves. What if all the
Charters & Constitutions of the States were thrown into the fire,
and all their demagogues into the ocean. What would it be to the
happiness of America. And will not this be the case here if we
pursue the train in wch. the business lies. We shall establish an
Aulic Council without an Emperor to execute its decrees. The same
circumstances which unite the people here, unite them in Germany.
They have there a common language, a common law, common usages and
manners, and a common interest in being united; yet their local
jurisdictions destroy every tie. The case was the same in the
Grecian States. The United Netherlands are at this time torn in
factions. With these examples before our eyes shall we form
establishments which must necessarily produce the same effects. It
is of no consequence from what districts the 2d. branch shall be
drawn, if it be so constituted as to yield an asylum agst. these
evils. As it is now constituted he must be agst. its being drawn
from the States in equal portions. But shall he was
7 ready to join in devising such an amendment of
the plan, as will be most likely to secure our liberty & happiness.
Mr. SHERMAN & Mr. ELSEWORTH
moved to postpone the Question on the Report from the Committee of a
member from each State, in order to wait for the Report from the
Come. of 5 last appointed.
Masts. ay. Cont. ay. N. Y. no. N. J. ay. Pa. ay. Del. Maryland
ay. Va. no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no. 8
Adjd.
1. The words "The question" are
here inserted in the transcript.
2. The word "this" is substituted
in the transcript for "the."
3. The words "yesterday
appointed" are transposed to read "appointed yesterday" in the
transcript.
4. The word "the" is omitted in
the transcript.
5. The word "the" is here
inserted in the transcript.
6. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, North
Carolina, aye — 6; Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, no — 3;
Massachusetts, Georgia, divided."
7. The words "shall be" are
substituted in the transcript for "shall he was."
8. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, Maryland, aye — 6; New York, Virginia, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Georgia, no — 5."