The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which framed the Constitution of USA Volume I Part 32

The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which framed the Constitution of USA Volume I Part 32

M^r Gerry[127] thought it would be proper to proceed to enumerate & define the powers to be vested in the Gen^l Gov^t before a question on the report should be taken as to the rule of representation in the 2^d branch.

[127] King gives the three speeches of Gerry, Madison and Patterson as follows:

"_Gerry._ I agree to the measure, provided that the first Br. (H. of Reps.) shall originate money bills and money appropriations. The prejudices as well as the interest of our Const.i.tuents must be regarded--two or three thousand men are in office in the States--their influence will be in favor of an Equality of votes among the States.

"_Madison._ Equality in the Senate will enable a minority to hold a majority, and to oblige them to submit to their interests, or they will withdraw their a.s.sent to measures essential and necessary to the general Good. I have known one man, when the State was represented by only two, and they were divided, oppose six States in Congress on an important occasion for three days, and finally compel them to gratify his caprice in order to obtain his suffrage. The Senate will possess certain exclusive Powers, such as the appointments to office, if the States have equal votes; a minority of People will appoint the Great Offices. Besides the small States may be near the Seat of Govt.--a bare Quorum of the H. of R. may be easily a.s.sembled, and carry a bill against the sense of a majority if all were present, and the Senate, tho' all were present, might confirm such Bill. Virginia has objected to every addition of the powers of Congress, because she has only 1/13 of the Power when she ought to have one sixth.

"_Paterson._ I hope the question will be taken: if we do not give equal votes in the Senate to the States, the small States agreeing that money Bills and appropriations shall originate in the H. of Reps., elected according to numbers, it must not be expected that the small States will agree to the amendments of the Confederation. Let us decide this question and lose no more time. I think that I shall vote against the provision, because I think that the exclusive originating of money Bills & appropriations by the H. of Reps. is giving up too much on the part of the small States."--King's _Life and Correspondence of Rufus King_, I., 613.

M^r Madison, observed that it w^d be impossible to say what powers could be safely & properly vested in the Gov^t before it was known, in what manner the States were to be represented in it. He was apprehensive that if a just representation were not the basis of the Gov^t it would happen, as it did when the Articles of Confederation were depending, that every effectual prerogative would be withdrawn or withheld, and the New Gov^t w^d be rendered as impotent and as shortlived as the old.

M^r Patterson would not decide whether the privilege concerning money bills were a valuable consideration or not: But he considered the mode & rule of representation in the 1^{st} branch as fully so; and that after the establishment of that point, the small States would never be able to defend themselves without an equality of votes in the 2^d branch. There was no other ground of accommodation. His resolution was fixt. He would meet the large States on that ground and no other. For himself he should vote ag^{st} the Report, because it yielded too much.

M^r Gov^r Morris. He had no resolution unalterably fixed except to do what should finally appear to him right. He was ag^{st} the Report because it maintained the improper const.i.tution of the 2^d branch. It made it another Congress, a mere whisp of straw. It had been s^d (by M^r Gerry) that the new Govern^t would be partly national, partly federal; that it ought in the first quality to protect individuals; in the second, the States. But in what quality was it to protect the aggregate interest of the whole. Among the many provisions which had been urged, he had seen none for supporting the dignity and splendor of the American Empire. It had been one of our greatest misfortunes that the great objects of the nation had been sacrificed constantly to local views; in like manner as the general interests of States had been sacrificed to those of the Counties. What is to be the check in the Senate? none; unless it be to keep the majority of the people from injuring particular States. But particular States ought to be injured for the sake of a majority of the people, in case their conduct should deserve it. Suppose they should insist on claims evidently unjust, and pursue them in a manner detrimental to the whole body. Suppose they should give themselves up to foreign influence. Ought they to be protected in such cases. They were originally nothing more than colonial corporations. On the declaration of Independence, a Governm^t was to be formed. The small States aware of the necessity of preventing anarchy, and taking advantage of the moment, extorted from the large ones an equality of votes. Standing now on that ground, they demand under the new system greater rights as men, than their fellow Citizens of the large States.

The proper answer to them is that the same necessity of which they formerly took advantage, does not now exist, and that the large States are at liberty now to consider what is right, rather than what may be expedient. We must have an efficient Gov^t and if there be an efficiency in the local Gov^{ts} the former is impossible. Germany alone proves it.

Notwithstanding their common diet, notwithstanding the great prerogatives of the Emperor as head of the Empire, and his vast resources, as sovereign of his particular dominions, no union is maintained; foreign influence disturbs every internal operation, & there is no energy whatever in the General Governm^t. Whence does this proceed? From the energy of the local authorities; from its being considered of more consequence to support the Prince of Hesse, than the Happiness of the people of Germany. Do Gentlemen wish this to be y^e case here. Good G.o.d, Sir, is it possible they can so delude themselves.

What if all the Charters & Const.i.tutions of the States were thrown into the fire, and all their demagogues into the Ocean. What would it be to the happiness of America. And will not this be the case here if we pursue the train in w^{ch} the business lies. We shall establish an Aulic Council without an Emperor to execute its decrees. The same circ.u.mstances which unite the people here, unite them in Germany. They have there a common language, a common law, common usages and manners, and a common interest in being united; Yet their local jurisdictions destroy every tie. The case was the same in the Grecian States. The United Netherlands are at this time torn in factions. With these examples before our eyes shall we form establishments which must necessarily produce the same effects. It is of no consequence from what districts the 2^d branch shall be drawn, if it be so const.i.tuted as to yield an asylum ag^{st} these evils. As it is now const.i.tuted he must be ag^{st} its being drawn from the States in equal portions. But still he was ready to join in devising such an amendment of the plan, as will be most likely to secure our liberty & happiness.

M^r Sherman & M^r Elseworth moved to postpone the Question on the Report from the Committee of a member from each State, in order to wait for the Report from the Com^e of 5 last appointed.

Ma.s.s^{ts} ay. Con^t ay. N. Y. no. N. J. ay. P^a ay. Del. ay.

Maryland ay. V^a no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no.

Adj^d.

MONDAY JULY 9^{TH} IN CONVENTION.

M^r Daniel Carroll, from Maryland took his seat.

M^r Gov^r Morris delivered a report from the Com^e of 5 members to whom was committed the clause in the Report of the Com^e consisting of a member from each State, stating the proper ratio of Representatives in the 1^{st} branch, to be as 1 to every 40,000 inhabitants, as follows viz

"The Committee to whom was referred the 1^{st} clause of the 1^{st} proposition reported from the grand Committee, beg leave to report:

I. that in the 1^{st} meeting of the Legislature the 1^{st} branch thereof consist of 56. members of which Number N. Hampshire shall have 2, Ma.s.s^{ts} 7, R. I^d 1, Con^t 4, N. Y. 5, N. J. 3, P^a 8, Del. 1, M^d 4, V^a 9, N. C. 5, S. C. 5, Geo. 2.

II. But as the present situation of the States may probably alter as well in point of wealth as in the number of their inhabitants, that the Legislature be authorized from time to time to augment y^e number of Representatives. And in case any of the States shall hereafter be divided, or any two or more States united, or any new States created within the limits of the United States, the Legislature shall possess authority to regulate the number of Representatives in any of the foregoing cases, upon the principles of their wealth and number of inhabitants."

M^r Sherman wished to know on what principles or calculations the Report was founded. It did not appear to correspond with any rule of numbers, or of any requisition hitherto adopted by Cong^s

M^r Gorham. Some provision of this sort was necessary in the outset. The number of blacks & whites with some regard to supposed wealth was the general guide. Fractions could not be observed. The Legisl^{re} is to make alterations from time to time as justice & propriety may require.

Two objections prevailed ag^{st} the rate of 1 member for every 40,000 inh^{ts}. The 1^{st} was that the Representation would soon be too numerous: the 2^d that the West^n States who may have a different interest, might if admitted on that principle by degrees, outvote the Atlantic. Both these objections are removed. The number will be small in the first instance and may be continued so. And the Atlantic States having y^e Gov^t in their own hands, may take care of their own interest, by dealing out the right of Representation in safe proportions to the Western States. These were the views of the Committee.

M^r L. Martin wished to know whether the Com^e were guided in the ratio, by the wealth or number of inhabitants, of the States, or by both; noting its variations from former apportionments by Cong^s

M^r Gov^r Morris & M^r Rutlidge moved to postpone the 1^{st} paragraph relating to the number of members to be allowed each State in the first instance, and to take up the 2^d paragraph authorizing the Legisl^{re} to alter the number from time to time according to wealth & inhabitants.

The motion was agreed to nem. con.

On Question on the 2^d parag^h taken without any debate

Ma.s.s^{ts} ay. Con^t ay. N. Y. no. N. J. no. P^a ay. Del. ay.

M^d ay. V^a ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

M^r Sherman moved to refer the 1^{st} part apportioning the Representatives, to a Comm^e of a member from each State.

M^r Gov^r Morris seconded the motion; observing that this was the only case in which such committees were useful.

M^r Williamson thought it would be necessary to return to the rule of numbers, but that the Western States stood on different footing. If their property shall be rated as high as that of the Atlantic States, then their representation ought to hold a like proportion. Otherwise if their property was not to be equally rated.

M^r Gov^r Morris. The Report is little more than a guess. Wealth was not altogether disregarded by the Com^e. Where it was apparently in favor of one State, whose n^{os} were superior to the numbers of another, by a fraction only, a member extraordinary was allowed to the former: and so vice versa. The Committee meant little more than to bring the matter to a point for the consideration of the House.

M^r Reed asked why Georgia was allowed 2 members, when her number of inhabitants had stood below that of Delaware.

M^r Gov^r Morris. Such is the rapidity of the population of that State, that before the plan takes effect, it will probably be ent.i.tled to 2 Representatives.

M^r Randolph, disliked the Report of the Com^e but had been unwilling to object to it. He was apprehensive that as the number was not be changed, till the Nat^l Legislature should please, a pretext would never be wanting to postpone alterations, and keep the power in the hands of those possessed of it. He was in favor of the Commitm^t to a member from each State.

M^r Patterson considered the proposed estimate for the future according to the combined rules of numbers and wealth, as too vague. For this reason N. Jersey was ag^{st} it. He could regard negroes slaves in no light but as property. They are no free agents, have no personal liberty, no faculty of acquiring property, but on the contrary are themselves property, & like other property entirely at the will of the Master. Has a man in Virg^a a number of votes in proportion to the number of his slaves? And if negroes are not represented in the States to which they belong, why should they be represented in the Gen^l Gov^t.

What is the true principle of Representation? It is an expedient by which an a.s.sembly of certain individ^{ls} chosen by the people is subst.i.tuted in place of the inconvenient meeting of the people themselves. If such a meeting of the people was actually to take place, would the slaves vote? They would not. Why then sh^d they be represented. He was also ag^{st} such an indirect encouragem^t of the slave trade; observing that Cong^s in their act relating to the change of the 8 art: of Confed^n had been ashamed to use the term "slaves" & had subst.i.tuted a description.

M^r Madison reminded M^r Patterson that his doctrine of Representation which was in its principle the genuine one, must forever silence the pretensions of the small States to an equality of votes with the large ones. They ought to vote in the same proportion in which their Citizens would do, if the people of all the States were collectively met. He suggested as a proper ground of compromise, that in the first branch the States should be represented according to their number of free inhabitants; And in the 2^d which had for one of its primary objects the guardianship of property, according to the whole number, including slaves.

M^r Butler urged warmly the justice & necessity of regarding wealth in the apportionment of Representation.

M^r King had always expected that as the Southern States are the richest, they would not league themselves with the North^n unless some respect were paid to their superior wealth. If the latter expect those preferential distinctions in Commerce, & other advantages which they will derive from the connexion they must not expect to receive them without allowing some advantages in return. Eleven out of 13 of the States had agreed to consider Slaves in the apportionment of taxation; and taxation and Representation ought to go together.

On the question for committing the first paragraph of the Report to a member from each State

Ma.s.s^{ts} ay. Con^t ay. N. Y. no. N. J. ay. P^a ay. Del. ay.

M^d ay. V^a ay. N. C. ay. S. C. no. Geo. ay.

The Com^e appointed were M^r King, M^r Sherman, M^r Yates, M^r Brearly, M^r Gov^r Morris, M^r Reed, M^r Carrol, M^r Madison, M^r Williamson, M^r Rutlidge, M^r Houston.

Adj^d.

TUESDAY JULY 10. IN CONVENTION.

M^r King reported from the Com^e yesterday appointed that the States at the 1^{st} meeting of the General Legislature, should be represented by 65 members, in the following proportions, to wit N. Hampshire by 3, Ma.s.s^{ts} 8, R. Is^d 1, Con^t 5, N. Y. 6, N. J. 4, P^a 8, Del. 1, M^d 6, V^a 10, N. C. 5, S. C. 5, Georgia 3.

M^r Rutlidge moved that N. Hampshire be reduced from 3 to 2. members.

Her numbers did not ent.i.tle her to 3 and it was a poor State.

Gen^l Pinkney seconds the motion.