The Debates in
the Federal Convention of 1787
|
|
|
As Recorded by James
Madison |
Return to
Federal Debates Calendar
SATURDAY
JUNE 30, 1787.
1 IN
CONVENTION
Mr. BREARLY moved that the
Presidt. write to the Executive of N. Hamshire, informing it that
the business depending before the Convention was of such a nature as
to require the immediate attendance of the deputies of that State.
In support of his motion he observed that the difficulties of the
subject and the diversity of opinions called for all the assistance
we could possibly obtain. [it was well understood that the object
was to add N. Hamshire to the no. of States opposed to the doctrine
of proportional representation, which it was presumed from her
relative size she must be adverse to].
Mr. PATTERSON seconded the
motion
Mr. RUTLIDGE could see neither
the necessity nor propriety of such a measure. They are not
unapprized of the meeting, and can attend if they choose. Rho.
Island might as well be urged to appoint & send deputies. Are we to
suspend the business until the deputies arrive? if we proceed he
hoped all the great points would be adjusted before the letter could
produce its effect.
Mr. KING. said he had written
more than once as a private correspondent, & the answers
2 gave him every reason to expect
that State would be represented very shortly, if it shd. be so at
all. Circumstances of a personal nature had hitherto prevented it. A
letter cd. have no effect.
Mr. WILSON wished to know
whether it would be consistent with the rule or reason of secresy,
to communicate to N. Hamshire that the business was of such a nature
as the motion described. It wd. spread a great alarm. Besides he
doubted the propriety of soliciting any State on the subject; the
meeting being merely voluntary — on the 3
motion of Mr. Brearly Masts. no. Cont. no. N. Y. ay. N. J. ay. Pa.
not on ye. floor. Del. not on floor. Md. divd. Va. no. N. C. no. S.
C. no. Geo. not on floor. 4
The motion of Mr. Elseworth 5
resumed for allowing each State an equal vote in ye 2d. branch.
Mr. WILSON did not expect such
a motion after the establishment of ye. contrary principle in the
1st. branch; and considering the reasons which would oppose it, even
if an equal vote had been allowed in the 1st. branch. The Gentleman
from Connecticut [Mr. Elseworth] had pronounced that if the motion
should not be acceded to, of all the States North of Pena. one only
would agree to any Genl. Government. He entertained more favorable
hopes of Connt. and of the other Northern States. He hoped the
alarms exceeded their cause, and that they would not abandon a
Country to which they were bound by so many strong and endearing
ties. But should the deplored event happen, it would neither stagger
his sentiments nor his duty. If the minority of the people of
America refuse to coalesce with the majority on just and proper
principles, if a separation must take place, it could never happen
on better grounds. The votes of yesterday agst. the just principle
of representation, were as 22 to 90 of the people of America. Taking
the opinions to be the same on this point, and he was sure if there
was any room for change, it could not be on the side of the
majority, the question will be shall less than 1/4 of the U. States
withdraw themselves from the Union; or shall more than 3/4 .
renounce the inherent, indisputable, and unalienable rights of men,
in favor of the artificial systems of States. If issue must be
joined, it was on this point he would chuse to join it. The
gentlemen from Connecticut in supposing that the prepondenancy
6 secured to the majority in the
1st. branch had removed the objections to an equality of votes in
the 2d. branch for the security of the minority, narrowed the case
extremely. Such an equality will enable the minority to controul in
all cases whatsoever, the sentiments and interests of the majority.
Seven States will controul six: Seven States, according to the
estimates that had been used, composed 24/90 . of the whole people.
It would be in the power then of less than 1/3 to overrule 2/3
whenever a question should happen to divide the States in that
manner. Can we forget for whom we are forming a Government? Is it
for men, or for the imaginary beings called States?
Will our honest Constituents be satisfied with metaphysical
distinctions? Will they, ought they to be satisfied with being told
that the one third compose the greater number of States? The rule of
suffrage ought on every principle to be the same in the 2d. as in
the 1st. branch. If the Government be not laid on this foundation,
it can be neither solid nor lasting. Any other principle will be
local, confined & temporary. This will expand with the expansion,
and grow with the growth of the U. States. — Much has been said of
an imaginary combination of three States. Sometimes a danger of
monarchy, sometimes of aristocracy, has been charged on it. No
explanation however of the danger has been vouchsafed. It would be
easy to prove both from reason & history that rivalships would be
more probable than coalitions; and that there are no coinciding
interests that could produce the latter. No answer has yet been
given to the observations of [Mr. Madison] on this subject. Should
the Executive Magistrate be taken from one of the large States would
not the other two be thereby thrown into the scale with the other
States? Whence then the danger of monarchy? Are the people of the
three large States more aristocratic than those of the small ones?
Whence then the danger of aristocracy from their influence? It is
all a mere illusion of names. We talk of States, till we forget what
they are composed of. Is a real & fair majority, the natural hot-bed
of aristocracy? It is a part of the definition of this species of
Govt. or rather of tyranny, that the smaller number governs the
greater. It is true that a majority of States in the 2d. branch can
not carry a law agst. a majority of the people in the 1st. But this
removes half only of the objection. Bad Governts. are of two sorts.
1. 7 that which does too little.
2. 7 that which does too much:
that which fails thro' weakness; and that which destroys thro'
oppression. Under which of these evils do the U. States at present
groan? under the weakness and inefficiency of its Governt. To remedy
this weakness we have been sent to this Convention. If the motion
should be agreed to, we shall leave the U. S. fettered precisely as
heretofore; with the additional mortification of seeing the good
purposes of ye. fair represention of the people in the 1st. branch,
defeated in 8 2d. Twenty four
will still controul sixty six. He lamented that such a disagreement
should prevail on the point of representation, as he did not foresee
that it would happen on the other point most contested, the boundary
between the Genl. & the local authorities. He thought the States
necessary & valuable parts of a good system.
Mr. ELSEWORTH. The capital
objection of Mr. Wilson "that the minority will rule the majority"
is not true. The power is given to the few to save them from being
destroyed by the many. If an equality of votes had been given to
them in both branches, the objection might have had weight. Is it a
novel thing that the few should have a check on the many? Is it not
the case in the British Constitution the wisdom of which so many
gentlemen have united in applauding? Have not the House of Lords,
who form so small a proportion of the nation a negative on the laws,
as a necessary defence of their peculiar rights agst. the
encroachmts. of the Commons. No instance of a Confederacy has
existed in which an equality of voices has not been exercised by the
members of it. We are running from one extreme to another. We are
razing the foundations of the building, when we need only repair the
roof. No salutary measure has been lost for want of a majority of
the States, to favor it. If security be all that the great
States wish for the 1st. branch secures them. The danger of
combinations among them is not imaginary. Altho' no particular
abuses could be foreseen by him, the possibility of them would be
sufficient to alarm him. But he could easily conceive cases in which
they might result from such combinations. Suppose that in pursuance
of some commercial treaty or arrangement, three or four free ports &
no more were to be established would not combinations be formed in
favor of Boston — Philada. & & some port in 9
Chesapeak? A like concert might be formed in the appointment of the
great officers. He appealed again to the obligations of the federal
pact which was still in force, and which had been entered into with
so much solemnity; persuading himself that some regard would still
be paid to the plighed faith under which each State small as well as
great, held an equal right of suffrage in the general Councils. His
remarks were not the result of partial or local views. The State he
represented [Connecticut] held a middle rank.
Mr. MADISON did justice to the
able & close reasoning of Mr. E. but must observe that it did not
always accord with itself. On another occasion, the large States
were described by him as the Aristocratic States, ready to oppress
the small. Now the small are the House of Lords requiring a negative
to defend them agst. the more numerous commons. Mr. E. had also
erred in saying that no instance had existed in which confederated
States had not retained to themselves a perfect equality of
suffrage. Passing over the German system in which the K. of Prussia
has nine voices, he reminded Mr. E. of the Lycian confederacy, in
which the component members had votes proportioned to their
importance, and which Montesquieu recommends as the fittest model
for that form of Government. Had the fact been as stated by Mr. E.
it would have been of little avail to him, or rather would have
strengthened the arguments agst. him; the History & fate of the
several confederacies modern as well as Antient, demonstrating some
radical vice in their structure. In reply to the appeal of Mr. E. to
the faith plighted in the existing federal compact, he remarked that
the party claiming from others an adherence to a common engagement
ought at least to be guiltless itself of a violation. Of all the
States however Connecticut was perhaps least able to urge this plea.
Besides the various omissions to perform the stipulated acts from
which no State was free, the Legislature of that State had by a
pretty recent vote, positively, refused to pass a law for
complying with the Requisitions of Congs. and had transmitted a copy
of the vote to Congs. It was urged, he said, continually that an
equality of votes in the 2d. branch was not only necessary to secure
the small, but would be perfectly safe to the large ones whose
majority in the 1st. branch was an effectual bulwark. But
notwithstanding this apparent defence, the majority of States might
still injure the majority of 10
people. 1. 11 they could
obstruct the wishes and interests of the majority. 2.
11 they could extort
measures repugnant to the wishes & interest of the Majority. 3.
11 they could impose
measures adverse thereto; as the 2d. branch will probably exercise
some great powers, in which the 1st. will not participate. He
admitted that every peculiar interest whether in any class of
citizens, or any description of States, ought to be secured as far
as possible. Wherever there is danger of attack there ought
12 be given a constitutional
power of defence. But he contended that the States were divided into
different interests not by their difference of size, but by other
circumstances; the most material of which resulted partly from
climate, but principally from the effects of their having or not
having slaves. These two causes concurred in forming the great
division of interests in the U. States. It did not lie between the
large & small States: It lay between the Northern & Southern, and if
any defensive power were necessary, it ought to be mutually given to
these two interests. He was so strongly impressed with this
important truth that he had been casting about in his mind for some
expedient that would answer the purpose. The one which had occurred
was that instead of proportioning the votes of the States in both
branches, to their respective numbers of inhabitants computing the
slaves in the ratio of 5 to 3, they should be represented in one
branch according to the number of free inhabitants only; and in the
other according to the whole no. counting the slaves as if
13 free. By this arrangement the
Southern Scale would have the advantage in one House, and the
Northern in the other. He had been restrained from proposing this
expedient by two considerations: one was his unwillingness to urge
any diversity of interests on an occasion where it is but too apt to
arise of itself — the other was, the inequality of powers that must
be vested in the two branches, and which wd. destroy the equilibrium
of interests.
Mr. ELSEWORTH assured the House
that whatever might be thought of the Representatives of Connecticut
the State was entirely federal in her disposition. He appealed to
her great exertions during the war, in supplying both men & money.
The muster rolls would show she had more troops in the field than
Virga. If she had been Delinquent, it had been from inability, and
not more so than other States.
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Madison has
14 animadverted on the
delinquency of the States, when his object required him to prove
that the Constitution of Congs. was faulty. Congs. is not to blame
for the faults of the States. Their measures have been right, and
the only thing wanting has been, a further power in Congs. to render
them effectual.
Mr. DAVY was much embarrassed
and wished for explanations. The Report of the Committee allowing
the Legislatures to choose the Senate, and establishing a
proportional representation in it, seemed to be impracticable. There
will according to this rule be ninety members in the outset, and the
number will increase as new States are added. It was impossible that
so numerous a body could possess the activity and other qualities
required in it. Were he to vote on the comparative merits of the
report as it stood, and the amendment, he should be constrained to
prefer the latter. The appointment of the Senate by electors chosen
by the people for that purpose was he conceived liable to an
insuperable difficulty. The larger Counties or districts thrown into
a general district, would certainly prevail over the smaller
Counties or districts, and merit in the latter would be excluded
altogether. The report therefore seemed to be right in referring the
appointment to the Legislatures, whose agency in the general System
did not appear to him objectionable as it did to some others. The
fact was that the local prejudices & interests which could not be
denied to exist, would find their way into the national councils
whether the Representatives should be chosen by the Legislatures or
by the people themselves. On the other hand, if a proportional
representation was attended with insuperable difficulties, the
making the Senate the Representative of the States, looked like
bringing us back to Congs. again, and shutting out all the
advantages expected from it. Under this view of the subject he could
not vote for any plan for the Senate yet proposed. He though that in
general there were extremes on both sides. We were partly federal,
partly national in our Union, and he did not see why the Govt. might
not in some respects operate on the States, in others on the people.
Mr. WILSON admitted the
question concerning the number of Senators, to be embarrassing. If
the smallest States be allowed one, and the others in proportion,
the Senate will certainly be too numerous. He looked forward to the
time when the smallest States will contain 100,000 souls at least.
Let there be then one Senator in each for every 100,000 souls and
let the States not having that no. of inhabitants be allowed one. He
was willing himself to submit to this temporary concession to the
small States; and threw out the idea as a ground of compromise.
DOCr. FRANKLIN.
The diversity of opinions turns on two points. If a proportional
representation takes place, the small States contend that their
liberties will be in danger. If an equality of votes is to be put in
its place, the large States say their money will be in danger. When
a broad table is to be made, and the edges of planks do not fit, the
artist takes a little from both, and makes a good joint. In like
manner here both sides must part with some of their demands, in
order that they may join in some accomodating proposition. He had
prepared one which he would read, that it might lie on the table for
consideration.
The proposition was in the words following"
"That the Legislatures of the several States shall choose & send
an equal number of Delegates, namely _____ who are to compose the
2d. branch of the General Legislature —
"That in all cases or questions wherein the Sovereignty of
individual States may be affected, or whereby their authority over
their own Citizens may be diminished, or the authority of the
General Government within the several States augmented, each State
shall have equal suffrage.
"That in the appointment of all Civil officers of ye. Genl. Govt.
in the election of whom the 2d. branch may by the Constitution have
part, each State shall have equal suffrage.
"That in fixing the Salaries of such officers, and in all
allowances for public services, and generally in all appropriations
& dispositions of money to be drawn out of the General Treasury; and
in all laws for supplying that Treasury, the Delegates of the
several States shall have suffrage in proportion to the Sums which
their respective States do actually contribute to the Treasury."
Where a Ship had many owners this was the rule of deciding on her
expedition. He had been one of the Ministers from this Country to
France during the joint war and wd. have been very glad if allowed a
vote in distributing the money to carry it on.
Mr. KING observed that the
simple question was whether each State should have an equal vote in
the 2d. branch; that it must be apparent to those gentlemen who
liked neither the motion for this equality, nor the report as it
stood, that the report was as susceptible of melioration as the
motion; that a reform would be nugatory & nominal only if we should
make another Congress of the proposed Senate: that if the adherence
to an equality of votes was fixed & unalterable, there could not be
less obstinacy on the other side, & that we were in fact cut
insunder 15 already, and it was
in vain to shut our eyes against it: that he was however filled with
astonishment that if we were convinced that every man in
America was secured in all his rights, we should be ready to
sacrifice this substantial good to the phantom of State
sovereignty: that his feelings were more harrowed & his fears more
agitated for his Country than he could express, that he conceived
this to be the last opportunity of providing for its liberty &
happiness: that he could not therefore but repeat his amazement that
when a just Governt. founded on a fair representation of the
people of America was within our reach, we should renounce the
blessing, from an attachment to the ideal freedom & importance of
States: that should this wonderful illusion continue to prevail,
his mind was prepared for every event, rather than to
16 sit down under a Govt. founded in
17 a vicious principle of
representation, and which must be as short lived as it would be
unjust. He might prevail on himself to accede to some such expedient
as had been hinted by Mr. Wilson: but he never could listen to an
equality of votes as proposed in the motion.
Mr. DAYTON. When assertion is
given for proof, and terror substituted for argument, he presumed
they would have no effect however eloquently spoken. It should have
been shewn that the evils we have experienced have proceeded from
the equality now objected to: and that the seeds of dissolution for
the State Governments are not sown in the Genl. Government. He
considered the system on the table as a novelty, an amphibious
monster; and was persuaded that it never would be recd. by the
people.
Mr. MARTIN, wd. never
confederate if it could not be done on just principles.
Mr. MADISON would acquiesce in
the concession hinted by Mr. Wilson, on condition that a due
independence should be given to the Senate. The plan in its present
shape makes the Senate absolutely dependent on the States. The
Senate therefore is only another edition of Congs. He knew the
faults of that Body & had used a bold language agst. it. Still he
wd. preserve the State rights, as carefully as the trials by jury.
Mr. BEDFORD, contended that
there was no middle way between a perfect consolidation and a mere
confederacy of the States. The first is out of the question, and in
the latter they must continue if not perfectly, yet equally
sovereign. If political Societies possess ambition avarice, and all
the other passions which render them formidable to each other, ought
we not to view them in this light here? Will not the same motives
operate in America as elsewhere? If any gentleman doubts it let him
look at the votes. Have they not been dictated by interest, by
ambition? Are not the large States evidently seeking to aggrandize
themselves at the expense of the small? They think no doubt that
they have right on their side, but interest had blinded their eyes.
Look at Georgia. Though a small State at present, she is actuated by
the prospect of soon being a great one. S. Carolina is actuated both
by present interest & future prospects. She hopes too to see the
other States cut down to her own dimensions. N. Carolina has the
same motives of present & future interest. Virga. follows. Maryd. is
not on that side of the Question. Pena. has a direct and future
interest. Massts. has a decided and palpable interest in the part
she takes. Can it be expected that the small States will act from
pure disinterestedness. Look at G. Britain. Is the Representation
there less unequal? But we shall be told again that that is the
rotten part of the Constitution. Have not the boroughs however held
fast their constitutional rights? and are we to act with greater
purity than the rest of mankind. An exact proportion in the
Representation is not preserved in any one of the States. Will it be
said that an inequality of power will not result from an inequality
of votes. Give the opportunity, and ambition will not fail to abuse
it. The whole History of mankind proves it. The three large States
have a common interest to bind them together in commerce. But
whether a combination as we suppose, or a competition as others
suppose, shall take place among them, in either case, the smaller
18 States must be ruined. We
must like Solon make such a Governt. as the people will approve.
Will the smaller States ever agree to the proposed degradation of
them. It is not true that the people will not agree to enlarge the
powers of the present Congs. The Language of the people has been
that Congs. ought to have the power of collecting an impost, and of
coercing the States when 19 it
may be necessary. On the first point they have been explicit &, in a
manner, unanimous in their declarations. And must they not agree to
this & similar measures if they ever mean to discharge their
engagements. The little States are willing to observe their
engagements, but will meet the large ones on no ground but that of
the Confederation. We have been told with a dictatorial air that
this is the last moment for a fair trial in favor of a good
Governmt. It will be the last indeed if the propositions reported
from the Committee go forth to the people. He was under no
apprehensions. The Large States dare not dissolve the Confederation.
If they do the small ones willfind some foreign ally of more honor
and good faith, who will take them by the hand and do them justice.
He did not mean by this to intimidate or alarm. It was a natural
consequence; which ought to be avoided by enlarging the federal
powers not annihilating the federal system. This is what the people
expect. All agree in the necessity of a more efficient Govt. and why
not make such an one; as they desire.
Mr. ELSEWORTH. Under a National
Govt. he should participate in the National Security, as remarked by
[Mr. King] but that was all. What he wanted was domestic happiness.
The Natl. Govt. could not descend to the local objects on which this
depended. It could only embrace objects of a general nature. He
turned his eyes therefore for the preservation of his rights to the
State Govts. From these alone he could derive the greatest happiness
he expects in this life. His happiness depends on their existence,
as much as a new born infant on its mother for nourishment. If this
reasoning was not satisfactory, he had nothing to add that could be
so.
Mr. KING was for preserving the
States in a subordinate degree, and as far as they could be
necessary for the purposes stated by Mr. Elsewth. He did not think a
full answer had been given to those who apprehended a dangerous
encroachment on their jurisdictions. Expedients might be devised as
he conceived that would give them all the security the nature of
things would admit of. In the establishmt. of Societies the
Constitution was to the Legislature what the laws were to
individuals. As the fundamental rights of individuals are secured by
express provisions in the State Constitutions; why may not a like
security be provided for the Rights of States in the National
Constitution. The articles of Union between Engld. & Scotland
furnish an example of such a provision in favor of sundry rights of
Scotland. When that Union was in agitation, the same language of
apprehension which has been heard from the smaller States, was in
the mouths of the Scotch patriots. The articles however have not
been violated and the Scotch have found an increase of prosperity &
happiness. He was aware that this will be called a mere paper
security. He thought it a sufficient answer to say that if
fundamental articles of compact, are no sufficient defence against
physical power, neither will there be any safety agst. it if there
be no compact. He could not sit down, without taking some notice of
the language of the honorable gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Bedford].
It was not he that had uttered a dictatorial language. This
intemperance had marked the honorabl gentleman himself. It was not
he who with a vehemence unprecedented in that House, had declared
himself ready to turn his hopes from our common Country, and court
the protection of some foreign hand. This too was the language of
the Honbl member himself. He was grieved that such a thought had
entered into 20 his heart. He
was more grieved that such an expression had dropped from his lips.
The gentleman cd. only excuse it to himself on the score of passion.
For himself whatever might be his distress, he wd. never court
relief from a foreign power.
Adjourned.
1. The year "1787" is here
inserted in the transcript.
2. The transcript uses the word
"answers" in the singular.
3. The word "the" is omitted in
the transcript.
4. In the transcript the vote
reads: "New York, New Jersey, aye — 2; Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, no — 5; Maryland, divided:
Pennsylvania, Delaware, Georgia, not on the floor."
5. The word "being" is here
inserted in the transcript.
6. The word "prepondenancy" is
changed to "preponderance" in the transcript.
7. The figures "1" and "2" are
changed to "first" and "secondly" in the transcript.
8. The word "the" is here
inserted in the transcript.
9. The words "of the" are
substituted in the transcript for "in."
10. The word "the" is here
inserted in the transcript.
11. The figures "1," "2" and "3"
are changed to "In the first place," "Secondly" and "Thirdly."
12. The word "to" is here
inserted in the transcript.
13. The word "if" is omitted in
the transcript.
14. The word "has" is omitted in
the transcript.
15. The word "asunder" is
substituted in the transcript for "insunder.."
16. The word "to" is omitted in
the transcript.
17. The word "on" is substituted
in the transcript for "in."
18. The word "small" is
substituted in the transcript for "smaller."
19. The word "where" is
substituted in the transcript for "when."
20. The word "into" is omitted
in the transcript.