Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

and said, in effect, that, "though he was sensible of the impropriety of the chairman's intermingling in the debates, yet he could not help observing that the small number which constituted the representative body appeared to him a defect in the plan-that it would better suit his ideas, and he believed it would be more agreeable to the people, if the number should be increased, and that the ratio should be one for every thirty thousand." The motion for reducing the ratio to this number was immediately put and almost unanimously carried. This is one instance of the influence of that great man in this assembly; and there can be no doubt his influence was also felt in other instances, though perhaps not in so direct a manner during the long deliberations of that body.

On July 23 the nineteen resolutions of the Virginia plan, with the amendments, were referred to a "committee of detail" to draft a Constitution in accordance with them. The plans of Pinckney and Paterson were also referred to the committee. The members composing the committees were elected by ballot: Rutledge, Randolph, Gorham, Ellsworth, and Wilson.

On the 6th of August the committee reported the draft it had agreed upon. (For the text of this, see Elliott's "Debates on the Federal Constitution," Vol. I, page 224.) This was debated upon until September 8, when a committee of five was chosen by ballot "to revise the style of and arrange the articles agreed to by the House." The members chosen were Johnson, Hamilton, Gouverneur Morris, Madison, and King.

On the 12th of September the committee submitted its draft, together with the draft of a letter to Congress. Both were approved, and the Constitution was ordered to be printed and copies furnished the members. This was done on the following day.

On September 17 the convention formally agreed to the Constitution, all the States voting "Ay," and ordered it to be transmitted to Congress to be laid before State conventions elected for the purpose of considering the ratification of the instrument, and that so soon as it was ratified by a constitutional majority Congress should

take measures for the election of a President, and fix the time for beginning proceedings under it. The Journal of the Convention and other papers were deposited with its president (Washington) to be retained by him subject to the order of Congress if this body should be formed under the Constitution.

The members proceeded to sign the Constitution, and the convention then dissolved itself by an adjournment sine die.

The following is the text of the letter to Congress accompanying the Constitution:

THE LETTER TO CONGRESS

We have now the honor to submit to the consideration of the United States in Congress assembled that Constitution which has appeared to us the most advisable.

The friends of our country have long seen and desired that the power of making war, peace, and treaties; that of levying money and regulating commerce; and the correspondent executive and judicial authorities shall be fully and effectually vested in the general government of the Union. But the impropriety of delegating such extensive trust to one body of men is evident. Thence results the necessity of a different organization. It is obviously impracticable in the Federal Government of these States to secure all rights of independent sovereignty to each and yet provide for the interest and safety of all. Individuals entering into society must give up a share of liberty to preserve the rest. The magnitude of the sacrifice must depend as well on situation and circumstances as on the object to be obtained. It is at all times difficult to draw with precision the line between those rights which must be surrendered and those which may be reserved. And on the present occasion this difficulty was increased by a difference among the several States as to their situation, extent, habits and particular interests.

In all our deliberations on this subject we kept steadily in our view that which appeared to us the greatest interest of every true American-the consolidation of the Union-in which are involved our prosperity, felicity, safety, perhaps our national existence. This important consideration, seriously and deeply impressed on our minds, led each State in the convention to be less rigid in points of inferior magnitude than might have been otherwise expected. And thus the Constitution which

we now present is the result of a spirit of amity and of that mutual deference and concession which the peculiarity of our political situation rendered indispensable.

That it will meet the full and entire approbation of every State is not perhaps to be expected. But each will doubtless consider that, had her interest alone been consulted, the consequences might have been particularly disagreeable and injurious to others. That it is liable to as few exceptions as could reasonably have been expected we hope and believe; that it may promote the lasting welfare of that country so dear to us all, and secure her freedom and happiness, is our most ardent wish.

CHAPTER XIV

NATION OR CONFEDERATION?

[DEBATES IN STATE LEGISLATURES ON RATIFICATION OF THE CONSTITUTION]

Congress Submits the Constitution to the States for Ratification-Debate in the Massachusetts Convention: Speech of Fisher Ames: "Union, the Dyke of the Nation"-The Virginia Convention: Great Debate on "Consolidation or Confederation?" between Edmund Pendleton, Edmund Randolph, James Madison, George Wythe, John Marshall, et al., Advocating Ratification, and Patrick Henry, George Mason, William Grayson, et al., Opposing It-Debates in the New York Convention.

ON

N September 20, 1787, the Constitution was taken up by Congress, then sitting in City Hall, New York, and debated for eight days. The chief opposition to the Constitution was that it consolidated too much power in the general Government, thus endangering the independence of the States. Congress finally ordered, on September 28, that the "report (i. e., the Constitution) of the convention lately assembled in Philadelphia" be "transmitted to the several legislatures in order to be submitted to a convention of delegates chosen in each State by the people thereof." In pursuance of this act the State legislatures called such conventions, which met in the course of the next three years.

Ratification was adopted unanimously by Georgia, New Jersey, and Delaware, and by large majorities in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Maryland, and South Carolina. The State of Rhode Island for some time declined calling a convention, and it was for a while doubtful whether the other States would assent to it without previous amendments. Such, however, was the situation of the United States, without government, without

funds, burdened with debt, and without the power or means of discharging it, despised abroad, and threatened with anarchy at home, that small majorities were at last induced to yield their assent, trusting to future amendments.

THE MASSACHUSETTS CONVENTION

In the convention of Massachusetts, which met in January, 1788, were men of the first talents who exerted their utmost energies in favor of the adoption of the Constitution. They encountered strong opposition from a class who had small personal interests at stake, and among these persons were eighteen or twenty who had actually been in Shay's army.

Fisher Ames delivered the most powerful of the speeches in favor of ratification. In the conclusion he said:

UNION, THE Dyke of the NATION

FISHER AMES

Shall we put every thing to hazard by rejecting this Constitution? Who is there that really loves liberty that will not tremble for its safety if the Federal Government should be dissolved? Can liberty be safe without government?

The Union is essential to our being as a nation. The pillars that prop it are crumbling to powder. The Union is the vital sap that nourishes the tree. If we reject the Constitution, to use the language of the country, we girdle the tree, its leaves will wither, its branches drop off, and the moldering trunk will be torn down by the tempest. What security has this single State against foreign enemies? Could we defend the mast country which the British so much desire? Can we protect our fisheries or secure by treaties a sale for the produce of our lands in foreign markets? Is there no loss, no danger, by delay? In spite of our negligence and perverseness, are we to enjoy at all times the privilege of forming a Constitution which no other nation has enjoyed at all? We approve our own form of government, and seem to think ourselves in safety under its protection. We talk as if there was no danger of deciding wrong. But when the inundation comes, shall we stand on dry land? The State government is a beautiful structure. It is situated, however, on the naked beach. The Union

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »