This is the Notes of the Convention of 1787 (The Federal Convention) for May 30, 1787. The notes included are those that specifically address this day, and do not include notes of others who may address the topics of the day. You can download and read those, and the entire collection of Notes recorded at the Constitution Convention in the Links and Downloads section. These contain the entire series of Notes on the Convention from James Madison, Rufus Kings, James McHenry, William Pierce, William Patterson, Alexander Hamilton and Robert Yates, in addition with the Journal from the Convention can be read by following this link, Federal Journal of the Convention of 1787.
Roger Sherman, from Connecticut, took his seat.
The house went into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. Mr. Gorham was elected to the chair by ballot.
The propositions of Mr. RANDOLPH which had been referred to the committee being taken up, he moved, on the suggestion of Mr. G. MORRIS, that the first of his propositions,—to wit: “Resolved, that the Articles of Confederation ought to be so corrected and enlarged, as to accomplish the objects proposed by their institution; namely, common defence, security of liberty, and general welfare,”—should mutually be postponed, in order to consider the three following:—
“1. That a union of the states merely federal will not accomplish the objects proposed by the Articles of Confederation—namely, common defence, security of liberty, and general welfare.
“2. That no treaty or treaties among the whole or part of the states, as individual sovereignties, would be sufficient.
“3. That a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme legislative, executive, and judiciary.”
The motion for postponing was seconded by Mr. G. MORRIS, and unanimously agreed to.
Some verbal criticisms were raised against the first proposition, and it was agreed, on motion of Mr. BUTLER, seconded by Mr. RANDOLPH, to pass on to the third, which underwent a discussion, less, however, on its general merits than on the force and extent of the particular terms national and supreme.
Mr. CHARLES PINCKNEY wished to know of Mr. Randolph, whether he meant to abolish the state governments altogether. Mr. RANDOLPH replied, that he meant by these general propositions merely to introduce the particular ones which explained the outlines of the system he had in view.
Mr. BUTLER said, he had not made up his mind on the subject, and was open to the light which discussion might throw on it. After some general observations, he concluded with saying, that he had opposed the grant of powers to Congress heretofore, because the whole power was vested in one body. The proposed distribution of the powers with different bodies changed the case, and would induce him to go great lengths.
Gen. PINCKNEY expressed a doubt whether the act of Congress recommending the Convention, or the commissions of the deputies to it, would authorize a discussion of a system founded on different principles from the Federal Constitution.
Mr. GERRY seemed to entertain the same doubt.
Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS explained the distinction between a federal and a national supreme government; the former being a mere compact resting on the good faith of the parties, the latter having a complete and compulsive operation. He contended, that in all communities there must be one supreme power, and one only.
Mr. MASON observed, not only that the present Confederation was deficient in not providing for coercion and punishment against delinquent states, but argued very cogently, that punishment could not, in the nature of things, be executed on the states collectively, and therefore that such a government was necessary as could directly operate on individuals, and would punish those only whose guilt required it.
Mr. SHERMAN admitted that the Confederation had not given sufficient power to Congress, and that additional powers were necessary; particularly that of raising money, which, he said, would involve many other powers. He admitted, also, that the general and particular jurisdictions ought in no case to be concurrent. He seemed, however, not to be disposed to make too great inroads on the existing system; intimating, as one reason, that it would be wrong to lose every amendment by inserting such as would not be agreed to by the states.
It was moved by Mr. READ, and seconded by Mr. CHARLES COTESWORTH PINCKNEY, to postpone the third proposition last offered by Mr. Randolph, viz., “that a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme legislative, executive, and judiciary,” in order to take up the following, viz.: “Resolved, that, in order to carry into execution the design of the states in forming this Convention, and to accomplish the objects proposed by the Confederation, a more effective government, consisting of a legislative, executive, and judiciary, ought to be established.” The motion to postpone for this purpose was lost.
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, South Carolina, ay, 4; New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, no, 4.
On the question, as moved by Mr. BUTLER, on the third proposition, it was resolved, in committee of the whole, “that a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme legislative, executive, and judiciary.”
Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, ay, 6; Connecticut, no, 1; New York, divided, (Colonel Hamilton, ay, Mr. Yates, no.)
The following resolution, being the second of those proposed by Mr. RANDOLPH, was taken up, viz.:
“That the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to be proportioned to the quotas of contribution, or to the number of free inhabitants, as the one or the other rule may seem best in different cases.”
Mr. MADISON, observing that the words “or to the number of free inhabitants” might occasion debates which would divert the committee from the general question whether the principle of representation should be changed, moved that they might be struck out.
Mr. KING observed, that the quotas of contribution, which would alone remain as the measure of representation, would not answer; because, waiving every other view of the matter, the revenue might hereafter be so collected by the general government that the sums respectively drawn from the states would not appear, and would besides be continually varying.
Mr. MADISON admitted the propriety of the observation, and that some better rule ought to be found.
Col. HAMILTON moved to alter the resolution so as to read, “that the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to be proportioned to the number of free inhabitants.” Mr. SPAIGHT seconded the motion.
It was then moved that the resolution be postponed; which was agreed to.
Mr. RANDOLPH and Mr. MADISON then moved the following resolution: “That the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to be proportioned.”
It was moved, and seconded, to amend it by adding, “and not according to the present system;” which was agreed to.
It was then moved and seconded to alter the resolution so as to read, “That the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought not to be according to the present system.”
It was then moved and seconded to postpone the resolution moved by Mr. Randolph and Mr. Madison; which being agreed to,—
Mr. Madison moved, in order to get over the difficulties, the following resolution: “That the equality of suffrage established by the Articles of Confederation ought not to prevail in the national legislature; and that an equitable ratio of representation ought to be substituted.” This was seconded by Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS, and, being generally relished, would have been agreed to; when
Mr. READ moved, that the whole clause relating to the point of representation be postponed; reminding the committee that the deputies from Delaware were restrained by their commission from assenting to any change of the rule of suffrage, and in case such a change should be fixed on, it might become their duty to retire from the Convention.
Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS observed, that the valuable assistance of those members could not be lost without real concern; and that so early a proof of discord in the Convention as the secession of a state would add much to the regret; that the change proposed was, however, so fundamental an article in a national government, that it could not be dispensed with.
Mr. MADISON observed, that, whatever reason might have existed for the equality of suffrage when the union was a federal one among sovereign states, it must cease when a national government should be put into the place. In the former case, the acts of Congress depended so much for their efficacy on the coöperation of the states, that these had a weight, both within and without Congress, nearly in proportion to their extent and importance. In the latter case, as the acts of the general government would take effect without the intervention of the state legislatures, a vote from a small state would have the same efficacy and importance as a vote from a large one, and there was the same reason for different numbers of representatives from different states, as from counties of different extents within particular states. He suggested, as an expedient for at once taking the sense of the members on this point, and saving the Delaware deputies from embarrassment, that the question should be taken in committee, and the clause, on report to the House, be postponed without a question there. This, however, did not appear to satisfy Mr. Read.
By several it was observed, that no just construction of the act of Delaware could require or justify a secession of her deputies, even if the resolution were to be carried through the House as well as the committee. It was finally agreed, however, that the clause should be postponed; it being understood that, in the event, the proposed change of representation would certainly be agreed to, no objection or difficulty being started from any other quarter than from Delaware.
The motion of Mr. Read to postpone being agreed to, the committee then rose; the chairman reported progress; and the House, having resolved to resume the subject in committee to-morrow, adjourned to ten o’clock.
Convention met pursuant to adjournment.
The convention, pursuant to order, resolved itself into a committee of the whole-Mr. Gorham (a member from Massachusetts) appointed chairman.
Mr. Randolph then moved his first resolve, to wit: "Resolved, that the articles of the confederation ought to be so corrected and enlarged as to accomplish the objects proposed by their institution, namely, common defence, security of liberty, and general welfare."
Mr. G. Morris observed, that it was an unnecessary resolution, as the subsequent resolutions would not agree with it. It was then withdrawn by the proposer, and in lieu thereof the following were proposed, to wit:
1. Resolved, That a union of the States merely federal, will not accomplish the objects proposed by the articles of the confederation, namely, common defence, security of liberty, and general welfare.
2. Resolved, That no treaty or treaties among any of the States as sovereign, will accomplish or secure their common defence, liberty, or welfare.
3. Resolved, That a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme judicial, legislative, and executive.
In considering the question on the first resolve, various modifications were proposed, when Mr. Pinkney observed, at last, that if the convention agreed to it, it appeared to him that their business was at an end; for as the powers of the house in general were to revise the present confederation, and to alter or amend it as the case might require; to determine its insufficiency or incapability of amendment or improvement, must end in the dissolution of the powers.
This remark had its weight, and in consequence of it, the 1st and 2d resolve was dropt, and the question agitated on the third.
This last resolve had also its difficulties; the term supreme required explanation. It was asked whether it was intended to annihilate State governments? It was answered, only so far as the powers intended to be granted to the new government should clash with the States, when the latter was to yield.
For the resolution-Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina.
Against it-Connecticut, New York divided, Jersey, and the other States unrepresented.
The next question was on the following resolve:
In substance that the mode of the present representation was unjust-the suffrage ought to be in proportion to number or property.
To this Delaware objected, in consequence of the restrictions in their credentials, and moved to have the consideration thereof postponed, to which the house agreed.
Adjourned to to-morrow.
James McHenry
Mr. Randolph wished the house to dissent from the first proposition on the paper delivered in to the convention in order to take up the following
1st. That a union of the States merely federal will not accomplish the object proposed by the articles of confederation, namely "common defence, security of liberty, and general welfare."
2. That no treaty or treaties between the whole or a less number of the States in their sovereign capacities will accomplish their common defence, liberty, or welfare.
3. That therefore a national government ought to be established consisting of a supreme legislature, judi[c]iary and executive.
On a question taken on the last proposition after various attempts to amend it, the same was agreed to. For it, Massachusetts, Pennsylv., Delaware, Virginia, N. Carolina and S. Carolina-against it Connecticut. New York divided.
[The proceedings of May 30, up to this point, are set forth in much more detail in a loose folio sheet, in Dr. McHenry's handwriting, which was found lying in the book containing the main body of his notes. It seems best to insert this paper at this point. It reads as follows:
May 30th.
1st resolution from Mr. Randol[ph]
Mr. R. wishes to have that resol. dissented to. The resol. postponed to take up the following:
1st. That a union of the States merely foederal will not accomplish the object proposed by the articles of confederation, namely, "common defence, security of liberty, and general welfare".
Mr. C. Pinkney wishes to know whether the establishment of this Resolution is intended as a ground for a consolidation of the several States into one.
Mr. Randol[ph] has nothing further in contemplation than what the propositions he has submitted yesterday has [sic] expressed.
2. Resolved that no treaty or treaties between the whole or a less number of the States in their sovereign capacities will accomplish their common defence, liberty or welfare.
3. Resolved therefore that a national governmen[t] ought to be established consisting of a supreme legislature, judiciary and executive.
Mr. Whythe [sic] presumes from the silence of the house that they gentn. are prepared to pass on the resolution and proposes its being put.
Mr. Butler-does not think the house prepared, that he is not. Wishes Mr. Randolph to shew that the existence of the States cannot be preserved by any other mode than a national government.
Gen. Pinkney-Thinks agreeing to the resolve is declaring that the convention does not act under the authority of the recommendation of Congress.
The first resolution postponed to take up the 3d. viz-Resolved that a national government ought to be established consisting of a supreme legislature, judiciary and executive.
1787, 21 Febry. Resolution of Congress.
Resolved that in the opinion of Congress it is expedient that on the 2d Monday of May next a convention of delegates who shall have been appointed by the several States to be held at Philada. for the sole and expres[s] purpose of revising the articles of confederation, and reporting to Congress and the several legislatures, such alterations and provisions therein as shall when agreeed [sic] to in Congress, and confirmed by the States, render the foederal constitution, adequate to the exigencies of government and the preservation of the union."
Mr. Randolph explains the intention of the 3d Resolution. Repeats the substance of his yesterdays observations. It is only meant to give the national government a power to defend and protect itself. To take therefore from the respective legislatures or States, no more sover[e]ignty than is competent to this end.
Mr. Dickinson. Under obligations to the gentlemen who brought forward the systems laid before the house yesterday. Yet differs from the mode of proceeding to which the resolutions or propositions before the Committee lead. Would propose a more simple mode. All agree that the confederation is defective all agree that it ought to be amended. We are a nation altho' consisting of parts or States-we are also confederated, and he hopes we shall always remain confederated. The enquiry should be-
1. What are the legislative powers which we should vest in Congress.
2. What judiciary powers.
3. What executive powers.
We may resolve therefore, in order to let us into the business. That the confederation is defective; and then proceed to the definition of such powers as may be thought adequate to the objects for which it was instituted.
Mr. E. Gerry. Does not rise to speak to the merits of the question before the Committee but to the mode.
A distinction has been made between a federal and national government. We ought not to determine that there is this distinction for if we do, it is questionable not only whether this convention can propose an government totally different or whether Congress itself would have a right to pass such a resolution as that before the house. The commission from Massachusets empowers the deputies to proceed agreeably to the recommendation of Congress. This the foundation of the convention. If we have a right to pass this resolution we have a right to annihilate the confederation.
Proposes-In the opinion of this convention, provision should be made for the establishment of a foederal legislative, judiciary, and executive.
Governeur Morris. Not yet ripe for a decision, because men seem to have affixed different explanations to the terms before the house. 1. We are not now under a foederal gover[n]ment. 2. There is no such thing. A foederal government is that which has a right to compel every part to do its duty. The foederal gov. has no such compelling capacities, whether considered in their legislative, judicial or Executive qualities.
The States in their appointments Congress in their recommendations point directly to the establishment of a supreme government capable of "the common defence, security of liberty and general welfare.
Cannot conceive of a government in which there can exist two supremes. A federal agreement which each party may violate at pleasure cannot answer the purpose. One government better calculated to prevent wars or render them less expensive or bloody than many.
We had better take a supreme government now, than a despot twenty years hence- for come he must.
Mr. Reed, Genl. [Pinckney] 2dng. proposes-In order to carry into execution the design of the States in ------ this meeting and to accomplish the objects proposed by the confederation resolved that A more effective government consisting of a legislative judiciary and executive ought to be established.
In order to carry into execution.
Mr. R. King -The object of the motion from Virginia, an establishment of a government that is to act upon the whole people of the U. S.
The object of the motion from Delaware seems to have application merely to the strengthening the confederation by some additional powers.
Mr. Maddison-The motion does go to bring out the sense of the house-whether the States shall be governed by one power. If agreed to it will decide nothing. The meaning of the States that the confed. is defect. and ought to be amended. In agreeing to the . . . ]
The Committee then proceeded to consider the 2 Resolution in Mr. Randolphs paper viz
That the rights of suffrage in the national legislature ought to be proportioned to the quotas of contribution or to the number of free inhabitants as the one or the other rule may seem best in different cases.
As this gave the large States the most absolute controul over the lesser ones it met with opposition which produced an adjourn ment without any determination.
The Commitee of the whole to sit to-morrow.
No comments :
Post a Comment