Sunday, March 20, 2011

Convention of 1787: June 4, 1787 Day 8; One Executive, Council of Revision and the Veto

 

After a Sunday of, following debate on the Executive on June 2, 1787, the Convention resumes its debates with the Executive on June 4, 1787. June 2, resolved very little on the Executive, and little of what was agreed to will actually remain through the final draft, mainly the ability to impeach the President, while a seven year term would eventually be changed.

Singular or Plural Executive Decided

Charles Pinckney (South Carolina) resumes discussion on whether the Executive should be singular or plural, by moving,

Shall the Blank for the Number of the Executive be filled with a single person”.

This motion is seconded by James Wilson (Pennsylvania) and noted it was opposed by Edmund Randolph (Virginia), since no arguments to this point in the convention had convinced him a singular was best. James Wilson observed the objections were not leveled so much at the measure itself, as much as at its unpopularity. On examination he could see no evidence of the apathy of the people, on the contrary was persuaded it did not exist. All know a single magistrate is not a king. One fact had great weight; ALL Thirteen States had a single magistrate. The idea of three heads has taken place in none, and Wilson saw tranquility in one head which would not be obnoxious to the people, they were used to the single executive. Three may divide, two may not agree resulting in Anarchy and confusion1, and he foresaw uncontrolled and continued and violent animosities, which would interrupt the Administration, but diffuse their poison through the other branches of Government, through the States and the People. Roger Sherman (Connecticut) felt the matter is of great importance and ought be well considered be determined. He noted a single magistrate in each state. He also noted each State Magistrate had a council and favored one.

Constitution Convention Notes: June 4, 1787

This is the Notes of the Convention of 1787 (The Federal Convention) for June 4, 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.

Monday, March 7, 2011

James Madison, do you know him? QUIZ

James Madison, do you know him?

How much do you know about the Founding Fathers? See what you know about one of the most well known, James Madison.
  1. Who solicited James Madison to resolve an issue between MD & VA about the Potomac River in 1784?
    Patrick Henry
    George Mason
    James McHenry
    Edmund Randolph
    George Washington

  2. James Madison signed which
    Continental Association
    Declaration of Independence
    Articles of Confederation
    Paris Peace Treaty
    Constitution

  3. James Madison penned The Federalist [Papers] with whom?
    George Clinton
    Oliver Ellsworth
    John Jay
    Rufus King
    Robert Yates

  4. James Madison served as Secretary of State to whom?
    George Washington
    John Adams
    Thomas Jefferson
    James Monroe
    Alexander Hamilton

  5. James Madison served on the Committee that finalized the Constitution, what was it called?
    Committee of Detail
    Committee of Elements
    Committee of Manner
    Committee of Style
    Committee of the Whole

  6. Who of the following, like James Madison, kept notes about the Convention?
    Alexander Hamilton
    Rufus King
    James McHenry
    None of the above
    All of the Above
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
  7. Who may have attempted to Gerrymander Madison out of a US House seat?
    Alexander Hamilton
    Patrick Henry
    George Mason
    Edmund Randolph
    George Washington

  8. James Madison was survived by what Founding Fathers
    John Adams
    Samuel Adams
    Alexander Hamilton
    Edmund Randolph
    None

  9. Madison initially supported which in the Convention of 1787
    1st Branch elected by the State Legislatures
    President has power to make War and Peace
    The Legislature appointing Judges
    Representatives should have a two year term
    The Constitution should be ratified by the People

  10. Madison did the following during the Revolution
    Assisted in writing MD Constitution
    A Colonel in the Army under Washington
    Governor of Virginia
    Member of the House of Burgess
    Member of the Continental Congress

Learn more about James Madison here
http://www.discoveringthefoundingprinciples.com/2010/12/who-are-founding-fathers-james-madison.html

James Madison, do you know him? Quiz: ANSWER KEY

James Madison, do you know him?

ANSWER KEY AND LINKS

Sunday, March 6, 2011

How well do you know our founding?

Take this short quiz and find out how well you know our founding?

  1. Who presented the Virginia Plan to the Constitution Convention on May 29, 1787?
    Patrick Henry
    James Madison
    George Mason
    Charles Pinckney
    Edmund Randolph

  2. Rhode Island did not have delegates at the Constitution Convention because
    The Upper Chamber in the Legislature failed to approve it
    Rhode Island did not want to alter the Articles of Confederation
    The Delegates did not arrive at the Convention in time
    Rhode Island did not elect Delegates in time
    Rhode Island was not aware the convention was taking place

  3. How many Amendments were in the Bill of rights Congress presented to the States in 1789
    10
    11
    12
    13
    14

  4. What State did not ratify the Constitution in its first Convention?
    Massachusetts
    New Hampshire
    New York
    North Carolina
    Virginia

  5. How Many States proposed amendments to the Constitution when they Ratified it?
    3
    5
    7
    9
    11

  6. Who was selected as a Delegate to the Convention but refused to attend?
    John Adams
    Samuel Adams
    Patrick Henry
    John Jay
    Thomas Jefferson

  7. What was the first to propose a bicameral legislature
    Virginia Plan
    Pinckney Plan
    Benjamin Franklin in an Address
    New Jersey Plan
    Great (Connecticut) Compromise

  8. How may persons were debated to be the Executive (President)
    1 was only ever considered
    2
    3
    4
    5

  9. What was the first to recommend a Convention in May 1787
    Mount Vernon Conference
    Annapolis Convention
    Petition of the States following Shays' Rebellion
    Act of Congress under the Articles of Confederation
    Invitation of the State of Pennsylvania to hold a Convention

  10. The Articles of Confederation were fully enacted on
    June 12, 1776
    November 11, 1777
    March 1, 1781
    March 4, 1783
    September 17, 1787

Learn more about our founding history here: http://www.discoveringthefoundingprinciples.com/

Answer Key Here: http://www.discoveringthefoundingprinciples.com/2011/03/how-well-do-you-know-our-founding_06.html 

How well do you know our founding? Answers and Links

Take this short quiz and find out how well you know our founding?

ANSWER KEY 

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Quick Thoughts: Free Speech must be protected, even when offensive.

Today the Supreme court handed down an 8-1 ruling that protests in conjunction with funerals is protected under the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Though what the protestors may say, and the message they convey may be of the most offensive and insensitive and done at the most inappropriate times, speech no matter how offensive, insensitive and ill-timed must always be protected. Standards of the protection speech in public must never have limits, except for the those that directly endanger the public, like screaming “fire” in a movie theater, or directly advocating the physical harm and immediate of someone. But no limits should ever be placed on the “decency” of speech because if limits are placed on it, it leaves the standards to the whim of man. If the standards of decency where left to what a person feels is “decent”, this leaves open the ability to limit speech of political nature. What one considers as essential political speech and something that needs to be brought to peoples attention, another may find indecent. Only one entity would have the ability to decide what is “decent”. By allowing government to decide what is decent, it opens the door to give government the ability to suppress or outright prohibit speech which is critical to government or policy.

The free expression of opinion should always remain absolute, subject to no test of decency. In this time of a very polarized electorate, neither side should be able to deem what of the opposing side is or is not “decent”. Only in an environment of the free exchange of all ideas can the people be the most informed, limiting any point of view is to deprive the people as whole of an avenue to, One: express their views, and Two: hear other or opposing views.

Speech can generate the full spectrum of emotions, and can be extremely powerful. We may enjoy hearing the good and what we like in speech, but remember this speech will be offensive or disagreeable to others. Wrongs cannot be righted if speech is limited, since many times when the wrongs of society are first addressed it was considered “offensive” to discuss it. A society can only be as just and free as its speech is, no matter how many it offends. When a society limits speech, it is limiting its own freedom, and also one of the most critical methods of correcting itself, by addressing the offensive things that occur in a society.