by Jim Surkamp on June 9, 2019 in American Revolution, Constitutional Convention, George Washington, Jefferson County

Made possible with the generous, community-minded support of American Public University System (apus.edu). Views and sentiments, even if commendable, in this or any presentations of civilwarscholars.com are intended to encourage fact-based discussion and understanding and do not in any way reflect the modern-day 21st century policies of the University.

1.
– (Jim Surkamp – by Jim Surkamp).
So,

2.
On May 24th 1787, the eve of the Constitutional Convention at Independence Hall in Philadelphia – call it – make or break time – there starkly stood Need for a central gov’t that could forcibly tax the people to retire a huge war debt, a need to regulate ALL interstate commerce, a need to be ONE voice before all the world for all times in regulating foreign trade, and a need to kill OFF the one rule that all thirteen states needed by law to explicitly OK any new power to the already hobbled central government – even any amendment to the Articles. The articles were not a road to the future. They were a tomb.
– (Map of Northeast U.S. – google.com/maps 13 October 2001 Web. 10 February 2019).

16:37

3.
– (Second Street North from Market St. with Christ Church – Philadelphia by William Birch shows the first city court house and, to the north on Second Street, Christ Church. Summary: Pedestrians; people seated in chairs in front of bldg. Created / Published: 1800. loc.gov 16 June 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).- (philadelphiaencyclopedia.org 24 September 2019 Web. 19 January 2019).

16:56
4.
– (All rights reserved. XML+XSLT under JS in the browser using SaxonJS, from Saxonica, with help from XML Jelly Sandwich. – pellucidliterature.org 23 June 2017 Web. 19 January 2019).

Fifty-five delegates from all but one state poured into town.
17:01

5.
– (Detail of north elevation of Pennsylvania State House (Independence Hall), from 1752 map of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Date: 1752 wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).

6.
– (The Assembly Hall – nps.gov 3 April 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).

7.
– (Howard Chandler Christy: Signing of the Constitution; Collection: United States Capitol – Current location: East Stairway, House of Representatives wing – wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).- (With Identification keywikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).

17:30
It began with some quick sleight of hand by Pennsylvania’s early arriving delegates that transformed the whole affair to be not just a tinkering of the Articles, as planned but an expedition to blow them up and start over with something new.
17:47

8.
– James Wilson – Artist: James Barton Longacre, 11 Aug 1794 – 1 Jan 1869. Copy after: Jean Pierre Henri Elouis, 1755 – c. 1843. Sitter: James Wilson, 14 Sep 1742 – 21 Aug 1798. Date: c. 1825 National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution – npg.si.edu 24 December 1996 Web. 19 January 2019).

9.
– (James Madison – Artist: Charles Willson Peale, 15 Apr 1741 – 22 Feb 1827. Sitter: James Madison, 16 Mar 1751 – 28 Jun 1836. Date: c. 1792. Owner: Gilcrease Museum – gilcrease.org/ 12 December 19987 Web. 10 February 2019; npg.si.edu 24 December 1996 Web. 19 January 2019).

10.– (William Paterson – This image is from a copy (by Stapoko) of the original by Sharples in 1794. The original portrait has been etched by Max Rosenthal and printed on p. 181 of The History of the Supreme Court of the United States in 1902;[1] the etchings collected and published by Thomas Addis Emmet (1828–1919) in his Emmet Collection of Manuscripts Etc. Relating to American History,[2][3] donated to the library in 1896 – wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).

11.
–(John Dickinson Artist: Charles Willson Peale Title: English: Portrait of John Dickinson Description: Portrait of John Dickinson, American politician (November 8, 1732 – February 14, 1808) Date: 1780. commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019.

12.
– (Alexander Hamilton – Artist: John Trumbull Title: Alexander Hamilton. Date: 1806 Collection: Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, MA, United States – commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

13.
– (William Davie Name: Davie, William Richardson, 1756-1820 Collection: Emmet Collection of Manuscripts Etc. Relating to American History.- nypl.org 3 January 1997 Web. 19 January 2019 & commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

40.
– Luther Martin Etching by Albert Rosenthal – 1905 – id.lib.harvard.edu 12 June 2015 Web. 19 January 2019 & wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).

41.
– (Gunning Bedford, Jr. Albert Rosenthal (1863 – 1939) Title: Gunning Bedford commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019 & loc.gov 16 June 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).

42.
– (Ben Franklin, painted by Charles Wilson Peale in 1785, here in Philadelphia, shortly after Franklin’s return from completing peace negotiations in England. Original at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts – library.upenn.edu 11 December 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).

43.
– (Abraham Baldwin Artist: Charles Frederick Naegele (American, 1857 – 1944) Collection: Georgia Museum of Art, University of Georgia Gift of F. Phinizy Calhoun – wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).

44.
– (Elbridge Gerry Engraving copy by J.B. Longacre, after Vonderlyn image 14 cm x 9.5 cm; full page 23.4 cm x 13.3 cm Frontispiece from “The Life of Elbridge Gerry” by James T. Austin. [Boston, Wells and Lilly- Court St. 1828] – archive.org 26 January 1997 Web. 19 January 2019 & masshist.org 5 April 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).

45.

(George Washington Description: Portrait of George Washington Date: 1794 Author: Adolf Ulrik Wertmüller – mountvernon.org 11 November 1996 Web. 19 January 2019 & commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

46.
– (Rufus King A portrait of Rufus King (1820, Gilbert Stuart) located in the National Portrait Gallery in Washington, D.C. – npg.si.edu 24 December 1996 Web. 19 January 2019 & wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).

47.

– (John Langdon – historicnewengland.org 26 December 2003 Web. 19 January 2019).

48.
– (Gouverneur Morris Title: “Gouverneur Morris, Esq.” Artist: Pierre Eugène Du Simitière Date: 1783 May 15th Publisher: London : Pub’d. by R. Wilkinson, No. 58 Cornhill courtesy of Library of Congress Online – loc.gov 16 June 1997 Web. 19 January 2019 & mountvernon.org 11 November 1996 Web. 19 January 2019).

49.
– (John Rutledge Attribution: John Trumbull Sitter: John Rutledge Date: c. 1791 – npg.si.edu 24 December 1996 Web. 19 January 2019).

50.
– (Roger Sherman Artist: Ralph Earl (1751–1801) “Roger Sherman (1721-1793), M.A. (Hon.) 1768” Collection: Yale University Art Gallery Gift of Roger Sherman White, B.A. 1899, LL.B. 1902. Courtesy of Yale University, New Haven, Conn. – commons.wikimedia.org5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

51.
– (George Mason Artist: John Hesselius (1728–1778) Description: Portrait of George Mason (1725-1792) Date: 1750 – rationalwiki.org 31 May 2019 Web. 19 January 2019).

52.
– (Oliver Ellsworth by James Sharples Senior, 1796-1797 Independence National Historical Park – nps.gov 13 April 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).

53.
– (Charles Pinckney in Gilbert Stuart Portrait circa 1786 – nps.gov 13 April 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).

54.
– (David Brearly Courtesy the Trenton Public Library – archives.gov 31 March 2002 Web. 10 January 2019).

55.
– (William Samuel Johnson Artist: Gilbert Stuart (1755–1828) U.S. government property, National Portrait Gallery – commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

56.
– (Hugh Williamson 1790 Etching by Albert Rosenthal after painting by John Trumbull North Carolina Division of Archives and History – archives.upenn.edu 27 November 1999 Web. 19 January 2019 & cr.nps.gov 13 April 1997 Web. 19 January 2019 & commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

57.
– (Edmund Randolph [Edmund Randolph, head-and-shoulders portrait] Contributor Names: Brumidi, Constantino, 1805-1880, artist Detroit Publishing Co., copyright claimant Created/Published: c1904 – loc.gov 16 June 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).

58.
– (Major General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney Artist: James Earl (1761–1796) Date: circa 1795-1796 Collection: Worcester Art Museum Charles Cotesworth Pinckney; to his brother General Thomas Pinckney. By descent to Mrs. St. Julien Ravenel; to her son Frank Ravenel; to his wife, Mrs. Frank C. Ravenel, Charleston, S.C. Purchased by the Worcester Art Museum from Frank W. Bayley, Copley Gallery, Boston, April 21, 1921 – commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

59.
– (Nathaniel Gorham by Charles Willson Peale, circa 1793, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, No: 48.1356. Date: circa 1793 – nps.gov 13 April 1997 Web. 19 January 2019 & wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).

60.
– (Pierce Butler Description: Miniature of Pierce Butler. Date: Unknown date Source: National Archives and Records Administration – commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

61.
– (Effects of the Fugitive-Slave-Law – americanantiquarian.org 13 October 1999 Web. 19 January 2019).

62.
– (painting man signing Howard Chandler Christy: Signing of the Constitution Title: Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States Collection: United States Capitol
Current location: East Stairway, House of Representatives wing – wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019 & Identification key).

63.
– (Signatures on the Constitution – commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).

64.
– (Assembly Room – Independence Hall – nps.gov 13 April 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).

23:44
That glorious day – when the Constitution’s skirt was decorated with the blood-oath signatures of the “YES” men – all the delegates there that day – but for three.

65 & 66.
– (Shannondale Springs from old Route 9 & Jim Surkamp, August 5, 2018 – both by Jim Surkamp).

Our county’s history has made some big contributions to the country’s history. This is special to our nation’s fortunes. This is one. Listen in —

67.
– (Map of states 1787 – carolana.com 2 February 2006 Web. 19 January 2019).The proposed United States Constitution is passed by a vote in Philadelphia in September, 1787 – PENDING the approval of at least nine states in their own ratifying conventions. If Virginia, which included us here, and being a state with one fifth of all the potential nation’s population – were to vote “NO” What might have happened?68.
– (Traveling in Frontier Days The City of Cleveland by Edmund Kirke Harpers Magazine, March, 1886 Howard Pyle’s book of the American spirit; the romance of American history, pictured by Howard Pyle, comp. by Merle Johnson, with narrative descriptive text from original sources, edited by Francis J. Dowd. Published: New York, Harper & brothers, 1923 – hathitrust.org 19 September 2008 Web. 19 January 2019). p. 151.69a & 69b.
– (The United States of North America with the British and Spanish Territories 1783 – carolana.com/ 2 February 2006 Web. 19 January 2019).- (Flag of Spain – wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).- (Flag of France – wikipedia.org 27 July 2001 Web. 19 January 2019).We would have been descended into an enfeebled anarchy and be exploited by powerful countries with vast holdings immediately to our west.70.
– (Boston Centinel June 11, 1788 – teachingamericanhistory.org 6 January 2002 Web. 19 January 2019).71.
71a.
– (George Mason (matte) – memory.loc.gov 16 June 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).72.

– (The Assembly room – nps.gov 3 April 1997 Web. 19 January 2019). – (George Washington at Princeton. (matte) Date: circa 1790 Source: Christie’s, Author: Charles Peale Polk (1767–1822)- commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019).It didn’t look good because George Mason of Virginia – a delegate-to-be at the Virginia Convention – humiliated Washington at the Convention the year before and left refusing to sign the final product. Mason had stormed out of the Philadelphia meeting the previous summer, refusing to sign the result because of a 9-0 and one abstention vote blocked his last-minute motion to start a new committee to explore a Bill of Rights.All the delegates were exhausted and had been trickling homeward already.73.
– (Second Street North from Market St. with Christ Church – Philadelphia by William Birch shows the first city court house and, to the north on Second Street, Christ Church.
Summary: Pedestrians; people seated in chairs in front of bldg. Contributor Names: Birch, William Russell, 1755-1834, engraver Created / Published: 1800. loc.gov 16 June 1997 Web. 19 January 2019 & philadelphiaencyclopedia.org 24 September 2019 Web. 19 January 2019).Gouverneur Morris along with James Wilson of Pennsylvania wrote the final version of the Constitution – and he was also a close friend of General Washington.74.
– (Gouverneur Morris Artist: Pierre Eugène Du Simitière
Date: 1783 May 15th Publisher: London : Pub’d. by R. Wilkinson, No. 58 Cornhill courtesy of Library of Congress Online – loc.gov 16 June 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).He turned to Mason and said sarcastically: “What a marvelous idea, we have been talking about that for weeks!” But when Mason, while debating a measure to check the power of an American president devilishly crowed before Washington: This Convention is “about to try an experiment on which the most despotic Governments had never ventured – the Grand Signor himself has his Divan.” Washington, from that day forth until Mason died – called this old wrecking ball of a man: my “quondam (“erstwhile” or “former”) friend.”75,76,77.
– (Nero at Baiae – fresco author unknown monstersandcritics.com 31 December 2003 Web. 19 January 2019). – (George Washington at Princeton. (matte) Date: circa 1790 Source: Christie’s, Author: Charles Peale Polk (1767–1822)
commons.wikimedia.org 5 June 2004 Web. 19 January 2019). – (George Mason (matte) – memory.loc.gov 16 June 1997 Web. 19 January 2019).78.
– (pinterest.com 2 February 2010 Web. 19 January 2019).79.
– (Tobias Lear by Henry Bryan Hall, 1869. – mountvernon.org 11 November 1996 Web. 19 January 2019).But what did not fade away was a stream of vilely-worded hand bills about the delegates of the Constitutional Convention going back to George Mason. With the Virginia Convention approaching, Washington’s private secretary, Tobias Lear, wrote to John Langdon: Mr. Mason and Mr. Henry still continue opposition with unabated violence. The opponents . . .here have changed their mode of attack —- The are now endeavoring to deprecate the characters which composed the general convention. . .Even col. Mason has descended to this ow method and has declared that the Convention, generally speaking, was made of blockheads, from the northern, coxcombs from the southern & office seekers from the middle states.References:1. The records of the federal convention of 1787 – 3 vols./ edited by Max Farrand.
Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019.2. Hutson, James H. (1987). “Supplement to Max Farrand’s the Records of the Federal Convention of 1787.” (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
books.google.com 24 November 2005 Web. 10 February 2019.3. Maryland Journal February 29, 1788. infoplease.com 1 December 1998 Web. 10 February 2019.4. The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 3/ edited by Max Farrand.
Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. Title Page.5. Mr. Wilson – June 6
He wished for vigor in the Govt, but he wished that vigorous authority to flow immediately from the legitimate source of all authority. The Govt. ought to possess not only 1st. the force but 2ndly. the mind or sense of the people at large. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 1/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 132.6. James Madison – June 6
It was to be inferred then that wherever these prevailed the State was too small. Had they not prevailed in the largest as well as the smallest tho’ less than in the smallest; and were we not thence admonished to enlarge the sphere as far as the nature of the Govt. would admit. This was the only defence agst. the inconveniences of democracy consistent with the democratic form of Govt. All civilized Societies would be divided into different Sects, Factions, & interests, as they happened to consist of rich & poor, debtors & creditors, the landed the manufacturing, the commercial interests, the inhabitants of this district, or that district, the followers of this political leader or that political leader, the disciples of this religious sect or that religious sect. In all cases where a majority are united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 1/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. pp. 134-135.7. Richard Patterson – June 9
Let them unite if they please, but let them remember that they have no authority to compel the others to unite. N. Jersey will never confederate on the plan before the Committee. She would be swallowed up. He had rather submit to a monarch, to a despot, than to such a fate. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 1/ edited by Max Farrand.
Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 172.8. John Dickinson – June 9
The eagourness displayed by the Members opposed to a Natl. Govt. from these different (motives) began now to produce serious anxiety for the result of the Convention. — Mr. Dickenson said to Mr. Madison you see the consequence of pushing things too far. Some of the members from the small States wish for two branches in the General Legislature, and are friends to a good National Government; but we would sooner submit to a foreign power, than submit to be deprived of an equality of suffrage, in both branches of the legislature, and thereby be thrown under the domination of the large States. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 1/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 242. (footnote)9. William Samuel Johnson (implying “Alexander Hamilton”)
While the centralized Virginia Plan and the New Jersey favoring smaller states had both been proposed, Johnson then stated: A gentleman from New-York, with boldness and decision, proposed a system totally different from both; and though he has been praised by everybody, he has been supported by none. He continues: I could have wished, that the supporters of the Jersey system could have satisfied themselves with the principles of the Virginia plan and that the individuality of the states could be supported. It is agreed on all hands that a portion of government is to be left to the states. How can this be done? It can be done by joining the states in their legislative capacity with the right of appointing the second branch of the national legislature, to represent the states individually. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 1/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 363.10. William Davie in a letter to Richard Carswell – June 19
We move slowly in our business; it is indeed a work of great delicacy and difficulty, impeded at every step by jealousies and jarring interests. Supplement to Max Farrand’s the Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 By United States. Constitutional Convention, James H. Hutson. books.google.com 24 November 2005 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 97.11. Oliver Ellsworth (using the pseudonym “Landholder”) on Luther Martin – June 28
You, too, contended that the powers and authorities of the new Constitution must destroy the liberties of the people; but that the same powers and authorities might be safely trusted with the Old Congress. You cannot have forgotten, that by such ignorance in politics and contradictory opinions, you exhausted the politeness of the Convention, which at length prepared to slumber when you rose to speak; nor can you have forgotten, you were only twice appointed a member of a Committee, or that these appointments were made merely to avoid your endless garrulity, and if possible, lead you to reason, by the easy road of familiar conversation. But lest you should say that I am a record only of the bad, I shall faithfully recognize whatever occurred to your advantage. You originated that clause in the Constitution which enacts, that “This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or the law of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.” You voted that an appeal should lay to the Supreme Judiciary of the United States, for the correction of all errors both in law and fact.See foot note on p. 449 In June 28th report, mainly of Luther Martin’s comments on the issues. “See controversy between Ellsworth and Martin, Appendix A, CLXXXIX-CXCII
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 3 Supplements / edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. pp. 271-295 (Landholder to Luther Martin’ Martin’s written response) p. 445 (Footnote reference to the above source material in Vol. 3) and a summary of Martin’s address on June 18, 1787.12. Oliver Ellsworth: Landholder 10. Maryland Journal February 29, 1788. infoplease.com 1 December 1998 Web. 10 February 2019.13. The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. June 6th, p. 132.14. Gunning Bedford, Jr. June 30
The lesser states do not, gentlemen, trust you. If you possess the power, the abuse of it could not be checked; and what then would prevent you from exercising it to our destruction? You gravely allege that there is no danger of combination, and triumphantly ask, how could combinations be effected? “The larger states,” you say, “all differ in productions and commerce; and experience shows “that instead of combinations, they would be rivals, and counteract the views of one another.” This, I repeat, is language calculated only to amuse us.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 500.15. Ben Franklin – June 30
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 accommodating proposition. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 488.16. Abraham Baldwin – July 2nd
“So many things had been so well settled” – might refer to the profoundly important vote Baldwin cast that day – an abstention – resulting in a deadlocked 5-5 vote and thus stopping a measure that favored the larger states goals for their representation to such a great extent that the departure from the convention of the smaller states suddenly became a real possibility. Baldwin’s vote cooled the debate and a committee was formed to continue studying the impasse and find compromises, which they eventually did. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 510. (The vote tally by state).17. Elbridge Gerry – July 5
We ought not therefore to pursue the one or the other of these ideas too closely. If no compromise should take place what will be the consequence. A secession he foresaw would take place; for some gentlemen seem decided on it; two different plans will be proposed, and the result no man could foresee. If we do not come to some agreement among ourselves some foreign sword will probably do the work for us. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911.
babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 532.18. George Washington – July 10
From George Washington to Alexander Hamilton, 10 July 1787
To Alexander Hamilton
Philadelphia 10th July [17]87.
Dear Sir,
I thank you for your Communication of the 3d. When I refer you to the State of the Councils which prevailed at the period you left this City—and add, that they are now, if possible, in a worse train than ever; you will find but little ground on which the hope of a good establishment, can be formed. In a word, I almost despair of seeing a favorable issue to the proceedings of the Convention, and do therefore repent having had any agency in the business. The Men who oppose a strong & energetic government are, in my opinion, narrow minded politicians, or are under the influence of local views. The apprehension expressed by them that the people will not accede to the form proposed is the ostensible, not the real cause of the opposition—but admitting that the present sentiment is as they prognosticate, the question ought nevertheless to be, is it or is it not the best form? If the former, recommend it, and it will assuredly obtain meager opposition. I am sorry you went away—I wish you were back. The crisis is equally important and alarming, and no opposition under such circumstances should discourage exertions till the signature is fixed. I will not, at this time trouble you with more than my best wishes and sincere regards. I am Dear Sir Yr. obedt. Servt.
Go: Washington – founders.archives.gov 17 June 2013 Web. 10 February 2019. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Confederation Series, vol. 5, 1 February 1787 – 31 December 1787, ed. W. W. Abbot. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1997, p. 257.]19. Rufus King – July 11th
When the general convention that formed the constitution took this subject into their consideration, the whole question was once more examined, and while it was agreed that all contributions to the common treasury should be made according to the ability of the several states, to furnish the same, the old difficulty recurred in agreeing upon a rule whereby such ability should be ascertained, there being no simple standard by which the ability of individuals to pay taxes, can be ascertained. A diversity in the selection of taxes has been deemed requisite to their equalization: between communities, this difficulty is less considerable, and although the rule of relative numbers would not accurately measure the relative wealth of nations, in states, in the circumstances of the United States, whose institutions, laws and employments are so much alike, the rule of number is probably as nearly equal as any other simple and practical rule can be expected to be, (though between the old and new states its equity is defective,) these considerations, added to the approbation which had already been given to the rule, by a majority of the states, induced the convention to agree, that direct taxes should be apportioned among the states, according to the whole number of free persons, and three-fifths of the slaves which they might respectively contain. . . .The present House of Representatives consists of 181 members, which are apportioned among the states in a ratio of one representative for every thirty-five thousand federal numbers, which are ascertained by adding to the whole number of free persons, three-fifths of the slaves. . . . Thus while 35,000 free persons are requisite to elect one representative in a state where slavery is prohibited, 25,559 free persons in Virginia may and do elect a representative — so that five free persons in Virginia have as much power in the choice of representatives to Congress, and in the appointment of presidential electors, as seven free persons in any of the states in which slavery does not exist.This inequality in the appointment of representatives was not misunderstood at the adoption of the constitution; but as no one anticipated the fact that the whole of the revenue of the United States would be derived from indirect taxes (which cannot be supposed to spread themselves over the several states according to the rule for the apportionment of direct taxes), but it was believed that a part of the contribution to the common treasury would be apportioned among the states by the rule for the apportionment of representatives — the states in which slavery is prohibited, ultimately, though with reluctance, acquiesced in the disproportionate number of representatives and electors that was secured to the slave-holding states.THE CONCESSION WAS, AT THE TIME, BELIEVED TO BE A GREAT ONE, AND HAS PROVED TO HAVE BEEN THE GREATEST WHICH WAS MADE TO SECURE THE ADOPTION OF THE CONSTITUTION.Great, however, as this concession was, it was definite, and its full extent was comprehended. It was a settlement between the original thirteen states. The considerations arising out of their actual condition, their past connection, and the obligation which all felt to promote a reformation in the federal government, were peculiar to the time and to the parties; and are not applicable to the new states which congress may now be willing to admit into the Union.
The equality of rights, which includes an equality of burdens, is a vital principle in our theory of government, and its jealous preservation is the best security of public and individual freedom; the departure from this principle in the disproportionate power and influence allowed to the slave-holding states, was a necessary sacrifice to the establishment of the constitution.THE EFFECT OF THIS CONCESSION HAS BEEN OBVIOUS IN THE PREPONDERANCE WHICH IT HAS GIVEN TO THE SLAVE-HOLDING STATES, OVER THE OTHER STATES.Nevertheless, it is an ancient settlement, and faith and honor stand pledged not to disturb it. But the extension of this disproportionate power to the new states would be unjust and odious. The states whose power would be abridged, and whose burdens would be increased by the measure, cannot be expected to consent to it; and we may hope that the other states are too magnanimous to insist on it.
consource.org 27 October 2005 Web. 10 February 2019.The next clause as to the negroes considered Mr. King. being much opposed to fixing numbers as the rule of representation, was particularly so on account of the blacks. He thought the admission of them along with Whites at all, would excite great discontents among the States having no slaves. He had never said as to any particular point that he would in no event acquiesce in & support it; but he wd. say that if in any case such a declaration was to be made by him, it would be in this. He remarked that in the (temporary) allotment of Representatives made by the Committee, the Southern States had received more than the number of their white & three fifths of their black inhabitants entitled them to.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911.
babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 58620. John Langdon – July 23rd
The New Hampshire delegate arrives.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911.
babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 85.
p. 86. Votes with the bigger states.
babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019.21. Gouverneur Morris – August 8th
Upon what principle is it that the slaves shall be computed in the representation? Are they men? Then make them Citizens & let them vote? Are they property? Why then is no other property included? The Houses in this City (Philadelphia) are worth more than all the wretched slaves which cover the rice swamps of South Carolina. The admission of slaves into the Representation when fairly explained comes to this: that the inhabitant of Georgia and S. C. who goes to the Coast of Africa, and in defiance of the most sacred laws of humanity tears away his fellow creatures from their dearest connections & dam(n)s them to the most cruel bondages, shall have more votes in a Govt. instituted for protection of the rights of mankind, than the Citizen of Pa or N. Jersey who views with a laudable horror, so nefarious a practice.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 222.22. John Rutledge – August 21st.
Mr. Luther Martin, proposed to vary the sect: 4. art VII so as to allow a prohibition or tax on the importation of slaves. 1. As five slaves are to be counted as 3 free men in the apportionment of Representatives; such a clause would leave an encouragement to this traffic. 2. slaves weakened one part of the Union which the other parts were bound to protect: the privilege of importing them was therefore unreasonable — 3. it was inconsistent with the principles of the revolution and dishonorable to the American character to have such a feature in the Constitution. Mr. Rutledge did not see how the importation of slaves could be encouraged by this section. He was not apprehensive of insurrections and would readily exempt the other States from (the obligation to protect the Southern against them.). — Religion & humanity had nothing to do with this question — Interest alone is the governing principle with Nations — The true question at present is whether the Southern States shall or shall not be parties to the Union. If the Northern States consult their interest, they will not oppose the increase of Slaves which will increase the commodities of which they will become the carriers.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911.
babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 364.23. Roger Sherman – August 22nd
Mr. Sherman was for leaving the clause as it stands. He disapproved of the slave trade: yet as the States were now possessed of the right to import slaves, as the public good did not require it to be taken from them, & as it was expedient to have as few objections as possible to the proposed scheme of Government, he thought it best to leave the matter as we find it. He observed that the abolition of slavery seemed to be going on in the U.S. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 369.24. George Mason – August 22nd
Col. Mason. This infernal traffic originated in the avarice of British Merchants. The British Govt. constantly checked the attempts of Virginia to put a stop to it. The present question concerns not the importing States alone but the whole Union. The evil of having slaves was experienced during the late war. Had slaves been treated as they might have been by the Enemy, they would have proved dangerous instruments in their hands. But their folly dealt by the slaves, as it did by the Tories. He mentioned the dangerous insurrections of the slaves in Greece and Sicily; and the instructions given by Cromwell to the Commissioners sent to Virginia, to arm the servants & slaves, in case other means of obtaining its submission should fail. Maryland & Virginia he said had already prohibited the importation of slaves expressly. N. Carolina had done the same in substance. All this would be in vain if S. Carolina & Georgia be at liberty to import. The Western people are already calling out for slaves for their new lands; and will fill that Country with slaves if they can be got through S. Carolina & Georgia. Slavery discourages arts & manufactures. The poor despise labor when performed by slaves. They prevent the immigration of Whites, who really enrich & strengthen a Country. They produce the most pernicious effect on manners. Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring the judgment of heaven on a Country. As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes & effects providence punishes national sins, by national calamities. He lamented that some of our Eastern brethren had from a lust of gain embarked in this nefarious traffic. As to the States being in possession of the Right to import, this was the case with many other rights, now to be properly given up. He held it essential in every point of view, that the Genl. Govt. should have power to prevent the increase of slavery.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 370.25. Oliver Ellsworth – August 22nd
Let us not intermeddle. As population increases; poor laborers will be so plenty as to render slaves useless. Slavery in time will not be a speck in our Country. Provision is already made in Connecticut for abolishing it. And the abolition has already taken place in Massachusetts. As to the danger of insurrections from foreign influence, that will become a motive to kind treatment of the slaves. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911.
babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 371.26. Charles Pinckney – August 22nd
If slavery be wrong, it is justified by the example of all the world. He cited the case of Greece Rome & other antient States; the sanction given by France England, Holland & other modern States. In all ages one half of mankind have been slaves. If the S. States were let alone they will probably of themselves stop importations. He wd. himself as a Citizen of S. Carolina vote for it. An attempt to take away the right as proposed will produce serious objections to the Constitution which he wished to see adopted.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 371.27. David Brearly – August 21st
I was in hopes after the Committee had reported, that we should have been able to have published by the first of September, at present I have no prospect of our getting through before the latter end of that month. Every article is again argued over, with as much earnestness and obstinacy as before it was committed. We have lately made a rule to meet at ten and sit ’til four, which is punctually complied with. Cannot you come down and assist us, — we have many reasons for desiring this; our duty, in the manner we now sit, is quite too hard for three, but a much stronger reason is, that we actually stand in need of your abilities. – David Brearley to William Paterson (August 21, 1787) Philadelphia 21 Aug. 1787.
consource.org 27 October 2005 Web. 10 February 2019.28. William Samuel Johnson – August 27th
Under our old Confederation, each state was bound by the most solemn obligations to pay its proportion of the national expense. If any state did not perform what it had so solemnly promised, it be-came a transgressor. It did an injury to the other states to which it had plighted its faith for the performance of what it had stipulated in the Articles of Confederation. The other states have a right to redress; they have a right by the law of nature and nations to insist upon and compel a performance. How shall this be done? There is no other way but by force of arms. What is the consequence? This way of enforcing federal decrees leads directly to civil war and national ruin. This was the case with the ancient leagues. The states in confederacy were bound by compact to bear certain proportions of the public burdens. Some of the states were delinquent; they failed in performing their stipulations. This injurious conduct provoked the others; they had recourse to arms for redress. While they were thus involved in civil war, neighboring powers took advantage of it and availed themselves of the forces of a part to subdue the rest. Such is the nature of this kind confederacies, that the general decrees must either remain without efficacy or be put in execution by a military force.The Convention saw this imperfection in attempting to legislate for states in their political capacity; that the coercion of law can be exercised by nothing but a military force. They have therefore gone upon entirely new ground. They have formed one new nation out of the individual states. The Constitution vests in the general legislature a power to make laws in matters of national concern, to appoint judges to decide upon these laws, and to appoint officers to carry them into execution. This excludes the idea of an armed force.THE POWER WHICH IS TO ENFORCE THESE LAWS IS TO BE A LEGAL POWER VESTED IN PROPER MAGISTRATES, THE FORCE WHICH IS TO BE EMPLOYED IS THE ENERGY OF LAW AND THIS FORCE IS TO OPERATE ONLY UPON INDIVIDUALS WHO FAIL IN THEIR DUTY TO THEIR COUNTRY.This is the peculiar glory of the Constitution, that it depends upon the mild and equal energy of the magistracy for the execution of the laws.William Samuel Johnson’s Speech at the Connecticut Ratification Convention (January 4, 1788) consource.org 27 October 2005 Web. 10 February 2019.29. Hugh Williamson – August 28th
North Carolina Delegates to Governor Caswell (September 18, 1787)
Philadelphia, September 18th, 1787.
In the course of four Months severe and painful application and anxiety, the Convention have prepared a plan of Government for the United States of America which we hope will obviate the defects of the present Federal Union and procure the enlarged purposes which it was intended to effect. Enclosed we have the honor to send you a Copy, and when you are pleased to lay this plan before the General Assembly, we entreat that you will do us the justice to assure that honorable Body that no exertions have been wanting on our part to guard and promote the particular interest of North Carolina. You will observe that the representation in the second Branch of the National Legislature is to be according to numbers, that is to say, According to the whole number of white Inhabitants added to three-fifths of the blacks; you will also observe that during the first three years North Carolina is to have five Members in the House of Representatives, which is just one-thirteenth part of the whole number in that house and our Annual Quota of the National debt has not hitherto been fixed quite so high. Doubtless we have reasons to believe that the Citizens of North Carolina are more than a thirteenth part of the whole number in the Union, but the State has never enabled its Delegates in Congress to prove this Opinion and hitherto they had not been Zealous to magnify the number of their Constituents because their Quota of the National Debt must have been Augmented accordingly. We had many things to hope from a National Government and the chief thing we had to fear from such a Government was the Risk of unequal or heavy Taxation, but we hope you will believe as we do that THE SOUTHERN STATES IN GENERAL AND NORTH CAROLINA IN PARTICULAR ARE WELL SECURED on that head by the proposed system. It is provided in the 9th Section of Article the first that no Capitation or other direct Tax shall be laid except in proportion to the number of Inhabitants, in which number five blacks are only Counted as three. If a land tax is laid we are to pay the same rate, for Example: fifty Citizens of North Carolina can be taxed no more for all their Lands than fifty Citizens in one of the Eastern States. This must be greatly in our favour for as most of their Farms are small & many of them live in Towns we certainly have, one with another, land of twice the value that they Possess. When it is also considered that five Negroes are only to be charged the Same Poll Tax as three whites the advantage must be considerably increased under the proposed Form of Government. The Southern States have also a much better Security for the Return of Slaves who might endeavour to Escape than they had under the original Confederation. It is expected a considerable Share of the National Taxes will be collected by Impost, Duties and Excises, but you will find it provided in the 8th Section of Article the first that all duties, Impost and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. While we were taking so much care to guard ourselves against being over reached and to form rules of Taxation that might operate in our favour, it is not to be supposed that our Northern Brethren were Inattentive to their particular Interest. A navigation Act or the power to regulate Commerce in the Hands of the National Government by which American Ships and Seamen may be fully employed is the desirable weight that is thrown into the Northern Scale. This is what the Southern States have given in Exchange for the advantages we Mentioned above; but we beg leave to observe in the course of this Interchange North Carolina does not appear to us to have given up anything for we are doubtless the most independent of the Southern States; we are able to carry our own produce and if the Spirit of Navigation and Ship building is cherished in our State we shall soon be able to carry for our Neighbors. We have taken the liberty to mention the General pecuniary Considerations which are involved in this plan of Government, there are other Considerations of great Magnitude involved in the system, but we cannot exercise your patience with a further detail, but submit it with the utmost deference, and have the Honor to be, Your Excellency’s Most Obedient Humble Servts, Wm. Blount, Rich’d D. Spaight, Hugh Williamson. consource.org 27 October 2005 Web. 10 February 2019.30. Edmund Randolph – August 28th
And Randolph’s views, though not expressed until later, in the Virginia State Convention, were that this provision was an essential one, “because it must be promotive of virtue and justice and preventive of injustice and fraud. If we take a review of the calamities which have befallen our reputation as a people, we shall find they have been produced by frequent interferences of the State Legislatures with private contracts. If you inspect the great cornerstone of republicanism, you will find it to be justice and honor.”-
Warren, Charles. (1837). “The Making of the Constitution.” Boston, Ma: Little Brown & Company. Internet Archives archive.org 26 January 1997 Web.10 February 2019. p. 555NOTE: Appendix A on why the Constitution would have not been realized if the meetings were made public.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 3/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. pp. 478-479.31. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney – August 29th
General Pinckney said it was the true interest of the Southern States to have no regulation of commerce; but considering the loss brought on the commerce of the Eastern States by the Revolution, their liberal conduct towards the views* of South Carolina, and the interest the weak Southern States had in being united with the strong Eastern States, he thought it proper that no fetters should be imposed on the power of making commercial regulations, and that his constituents, though prejudiced against the Eastern States, would be reconciled to this liberality. He had, himself, he said, prejudices against the Eastern States before he came here, but would acknowledge that he had found them as liberal and candid as any men whatever.
Madison, James Jr. (1840). “The Papers of James Madison Being his correspondence and reports of debates during the congress of the confederation and his reports of debates of the federal convention. Volume 3, Washington, D.C.: Langtree & O’Sullivan. books.google.com 24 November 2005 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 145132. Nathaniel Gorham – August 29th
If the Government is to be so fettered as to be unable to relieve the Eastern States what motive can they have to join in it, and thereby tie their own hands from measures which they could otherwise take for themselves. The Eastern States were not led to strengthen the Union by fear for their own safety. He deprecated the consequences of disunion, but if it should take place it was the Southern part of the Continent that had the most reason to dread them. He urged the improbability of a combination against the interest of the Southern States, the different situations of the Northern & Middle States being a security against it. It was moreover certain that foreign ships would never be altogether excluded especially those of Nations in treaty with us.
The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 453.33. Pierce Butler – August 29th
Mr. Butler moved to insert after art: XV. “If any person bound to service or labor in any of the U— States shall escape into another State, he or she shall not be discharged from such service or labor, in consequence of any regulations subsisting in the State to which they escape, but shall be delivered up to the person justly claiming their service or labor,” which was agreed to.Art: XVII being taken up, Mr. Govr. Morris moved to strike out the two last sentences, to wit “If the admission be consented to, the new States shall be admitted on the same
terms with the original States— But the Legislature may make conditions with the new States, concerning the public debt, which shall be then subsisting”. — He did not wish to bind down the Legislature to admit Western States on the terms here stated.Mr. Madison opposed the motion, insisting that the Western States neither would nor ought to submit to a Union which degraded them from an equal rank with the other States.
Col. Mason— If it were possible by just means to prevent emigrations to the Western Country, it might be good policy. But go the people will as they find it for their interest,
and the best policy is to treat them with that equality which will make them friends not enemies. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand.
Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911. babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. pp. 453-454.34. Vile, John R. (2005). “The Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of America’s Founding, Volume 1.” Santa Barbara, Ca.; Oxford, England: ABC-CLIO.35. On September 7, George Mason proposed a Privy Council of six members, two from each of the nation’s geographical sections, which the Senate would choose (Farrand, Vol. 2, p. 537). As the convention was considering (the) current provision for allowing the president to request the opinion of heads of departments in writing, Mason said that “in rejecting a Council to the president, the Convention was “about to try an experiment on which the most despotic Governments had never ventured – the Grand Signor himself has his Divan.” (Farrand – Vol. 2, p. 541) The idea was rejected by a vote of 8 (states) to 3. (Farrand, Vol. 2, p. 542). p. 196. books.google.com 24 November 2005 Web. 10 February 2019. p.196.36. Col. Mason said that in rejecting a Council to the President we were about to try an experiment on which the most despotic Governments had never ventured — The Grand Signor himself had his Divan. – The records of the federal convention of 1787 – Vol. 2/ edited by Max Farrand. Published: New Haven: Yale University Press, 1911.
babel.hathitrust.org 6 December 2009 Web. 10 February 2019. p. 541.37. To Alexander Hamilton
(Private & confidential)
My dear Sir,
Mount Vernon July 29th 1792.
I have not yet received the new regulation of allowances to the Surveyors, or Collectors of the duties on Spirituous liquors;1 but this by the bye. My present purpose is to write you a letter on a more interesting and important subject. I shall do it in strict confidence, & with frankness & freedom. On my way home, and since my arrival here, I have endeavoured to learn from sensible & moderate men—known friends to the Government—the sentiments which are entertained of public measures. These all agree that the Country is prosperous & happy; but they seem to be alarmed at that system of policy, and those interpretations of the Constitution which have taken place in2 Congress.Others, less friendly perhaps to the Government, and more disposed to arraign the conduct of its Officers AMONG WHOM MAY BE CLASSED MY NEIGHBOR AND QUANDOM (SHOULD BE SPELLED “QUONDAM”-ed.) COL. M, go further, & enumerate a variety of matters—wch as well as I can recollect, may be adduced under the following heads.5 Viz. First—That the public debt is greater than we can possibly pay before other causes of adding new debt to it will occur; and that this has been artificially created by adding together the whole amount of the debtor & creditor sides of the accounts, instead of taking only their balances; which could have been paid off in a short time.“From George Washington to Alexander Hamilton, 29 July 1792,” Founders Online, National Archives, version of January 18, 2019, founders.archives.gov 17 June 2013 Web. 10 February 2019. [Original source: The Papers of George Washington, Presidential Series, vol. 10, 1 March 1792 – 15 August 1792, ed. Robert F. Haggard and Mark A. Mastromarino. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2002, pp. 588–592.] founders.archives.gov 17 June 2013 Web. 10 February 2019.Continue to: A People’s History of Jefferson County, WV Part 2 – The Rocky Road to Nationhood – The Virginia Ratifying Convention