Twelve state legislatures,
Rhode Island being the only exception, sent delegates to convene at Philadelphia in May 1787. While the resolution calling the Convention specified that its purpose was to propose amendments to the Articles, through discussion and debate it became clear by mid-June that the convention would propose a Constitution with a fundamentally new design.
Sessions The
Congress of the Confederation endorsed a plan to revise the Articles of Confederation on February 21, 1787. It was weighted toward the interests of the larger, more populous states. The intent was to meet the purposes set out in the Articles of Confederation, "common defense, security of liberty and general welfare". The Virginia Plan was national, authority flowed from the people. If the people will ratify them, changes for better republican government and national union should be proposed. Much of the Virginia Plan was adopted. All the powers in the Articles transfer to the new government. Congress has two houses, the 'house' apportioned by population. It can enact laws affecting more than one state and Congress can override a veto. The President can enforce the law. The Supreme Court and inferior courts rule on international, U.S. and state law. The Constitution is the supreme law and all state officers swear to uphold the Constitution. Every state is a republic, and new states can be admitted. The Congress of the Confederation continued until the new system started. Amendments are possible without Congress. The Convention recommendations went to Congress, from them to the states. State legislatures set the election rules for ratification conventions, and the people "expressly" chose representatives to consider and decide about the Constitution. June 15, William Paterson (NJ) proposed the Convention minority's
New Jersey Plan. It was weighted toward the interests of the smaller, less populous states. The intent was to preserve the states from a plan to "destroy or annihilate" them. The New Jersey Plan was purely federal, authority flowed from the states. Gradual change should come from the states. If the Articles could not be amended, then advocates argued that should be the report from the convention to the states. Although the New Jersey Plan only survived three days as a proposal, it served as an important alternative to the Virginia Plan. Scholars observe that it is unusual in world history for the minority in a revolution to have the influence that the "old patriot" Anti-Federalists had over the "nationalist" Federalists who had the support of the revolutionary army in the Society of the Cincinnati. Both factions were intent on forging a nation in which both could be full participants in the changes which were sure to come, since that was most likely to allow for their national union, guarantee liberty for their posterity, and promote their mutual long-term material prosperity.
Debate Over Slavery The contentious issue of
slavery was too controversial to be resolved during the convention. But it was at center stage in the Convention three times: June 7 regarding who would vote for Congress, June 11 in debate over how to proportion relative seating in the 'house', and August 22 relating to commerce and the future wealth of the nation. Once the Convention looked at how to proportion the House representation, tempers among several delegates exploded over slavery. When the Convention progressed beyond the personal attacks, it adopted the existing "federal ratio" for taxing states by three-fifths of slaves held. On August 6, the Committee of Detail reported its proposed revisions to the Randolph Plan. Again the question of slavery came up, and again the question was met with attacks of outrage. Over the next two weeks, delegates wove a web of mutual compromises relating to commerce and trade, east and west, slave-holding and free. The transfer of power to regulate slave trade from states to central government could happen in 20 years, but only then. Later generations could try out their own answers. The delegates were trying to make a government that might last that long. Migration of the free or "importation" of indentures and slaves could continue by states, defining slaves as persons, not property. Long-term power would change by population as counted every ten years. Apportionment in the House would not be by wealth, it would be by people, the free citizens and three-fifths the number of other persons meaning propertyless slaves and taxed Indian farming families. In 1806, President Thomas Jefferson sent a message to the
9th Congress on their constitutional opportunity to remove U.S. citizens from the
transatlantic slave trade "[violating] human rights". The 1807 "
Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves" took effect the first instant the Constitution allowed, January 1, 1808. The United States joined the British that year in the first "international humanitarian campaign". In the 1840–1860 era
abolitionists denounced the
Fugitive Slave Clause and other protections of slavery.
William Lloyd Garrison famously declared the Constitution "a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell." In ratification conventions, the anti-slavery delegates sometimes began as anti-ratification votes. Still, the Constitution "as written" was an improvement over the Articles from an abolitionist point of view. The Constitution provided for abolition of the slave trade but the Articles did not. The outcome could be determined gradually over time. Sometimes contradictions among opponents were used to try to gain abolitionist converts. In Virginia, Federalist
George Nicholas dismissed fears on both sides. Objections to the Constitution were inconsistent, "At the same moment it is opposed for being promotive and destructive of slavery!" But the contradiction was never resolved peaceably, and the failure to do so contributed to the Civil War.
"Great" Connecticut Compromise File:Nathaniel Jocelyn - Elbridge Gerry (1744-1814) - 1943.1816 - Harvard Art Museums.jpg|
Elbridge Gerry, MAChair of the First Committee on Representation File:Roger Sherman 1721-1793 by Ralph Earl.jpeg|
Roger Sherman, CTArchitect of the Connecticut Compromise
Roger Sherman (CT), although something of a political broker in Connecticut, proved to a pivotal though unlikely leader at the convention. After these defeats, the delegates who called themselves the "old patriots" of 1776 and the "men of original principles" organized a caucus in the convention. William Paterson (NJ) spoke for them introducing his "New Jersey Plan". Roger Sherman (CT), a signer of the Declaration of Independence, was with them. Supporters explained that it "sustained the sovereignty of the states", while the Edmund Randolph (VA) "Virginia Plan" erased it. The convention had no authority to propose anything not sent up from state legislatures, and the states were not likely to adopt anything new. The "nationalists" answered, The convention could not conclude anything, but it could recommend anything. "Patriots" said if their legislature knew anything about proposals for consolidated government, it would not have sent anyone. "Nationalists" countered, that it would be treason to withhold any proposal for good government when the salvation of the American republic was at stake. Three sessions after its introduction, the New Jersey Plan failed : 7 against, 3 for, 1 divided. For nearly a month there was no progress; small states were seriously thinking of walking out of the convention. Then June 25, the "original principles" men finally won a vote. The 'senate' would be chosen by the state legislatures, not the people, passed: 9 for, 2 against. The basis of representation for both the 'house' and the 'senate' re-surfaced. Sherman tried a second time to get his idea for a 'house' on the basis of population and a 'senate' on an equal states basis. The "big states" got their population 'house' win, then his equal state 'senate' motion was dropped without a vote. The majority adjourned "before a determination was taken in the House."
Luther Martin (MD) insisted that he would rather divide the Union into regional governments than submit to a consolidated government under the Randolph Plan. Sherman's proposal came up again for the third time from
Oliver Ellsworth (CT). In the "senate", the states should have equal representation. Advocates said that it could not be agreed to, the union would fall apart somehow. Big states would not be trusted, the small states could confederate with a foreign power showing "more good faith". If delegates could not unite behind this here, one day the states could be united by "some foreign sword". On the question of equal state representation, the Convention adjourned in the same way again, "before a determination was taken in the House.". On July 2, the convention for the fourth time considered a "senate" with equal state votes. This time a vote was taken, but it stalled again, tied at 5 yes, 5 no, 1 divided. The Convention elected one delegate out of the delegation of each state onto a Committee to make a proposal; it reported July 5. Nothing changed over five days. July 10, Lansing and Yates (NY) quit the Convention in protest over the big state majorities repeatedly overrunning the small state delegations in vote after vote. No direct vote on the basis of 'senate' representation was pushed on the floor for another week. With delegates unable to reconcile their differences, the Convention elected one delegate from each state to the
First Committee on Representation to make a proposal. Unlike debate in the Committee of the Whole, the membership of the committee, led by
Elbridge Gerry and including Sherman, was carefully selected and was more sympathetic to the views of the small states.
Taxation substantially increased the power of Congress relative to the states. It was limited by restrictions, forbidding taxes on exports, per capita taxes, requiring import duties to be uniform and that taxes be applied to paying U.S. debt. But the states were stripped of their ability to levy taxes on imports, which was at the time, "by far the most bountiful source of tax revenues". Congress had no further restrictions relating to
political economy. It could institute protective
tariffs, for instance. Congress overshadowed state power regulating
interstate commerce; the United States would be the "largest area of free trade in the world." The most undefined grant of power was the power to "make laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution" the Constitution's enumerated powers.
Limit governments As of ratification, sovereignty was no longer to be theoretically indivisible. With a wide variety of specific powers among different branches of national governments and thirteen republican state governments, now "each of the
portions of powers delegated to the one or to the other ... is ... sovereign
with regard to its proper objects". There were some powers that remained beyond the reach of both national powers and state powers, so the logical seat of American "sovereignty" belonged directly with the people-voters of each state. Besides expanding Congressional power, the Constitution limited states and central government. Six limits on the national government addressed property rights such as slavery and taxes. Six protected liberty such as prohibiting
ex post facto laws and no
religious tests for national offices in any state, even if they had them for state offices. Five were principles of a republic, as in legislative
appropriation. These restrictions lacked systematic organization, but all constitutional prohibitions were practices that the
British Parliament had "legitimately taken in the absence of a specific denial of the authority." The regulation of state power presented a "qualitatively different" undertaking. In the state constitutions, the people did not enumerate powers. They gave their representatives every right and authority not explicitly reserved to themselves. The Constitution extended the limits that the states had previously imposed upon themselves under the Articles of Confederation, forbidding taxes on imports and disallowing treaties among themselves, for example. In light of the repeated abuses by
ex post facto laws passed by the state legislatures, 1783–1787, the Constitution prohibited
ex post facto laws and bills of attainder to protect United States citizen property rights and
right to a fair trial. Congressional power of the purse was protected by forbidding taxes or restraint on interstate commerce and foreign trade. States could make no law "impairing the obligation of contracts." To check future state abuses the framers searched for a way to review and veto state laws harming the national welfare or citizen rights. They rejected proposals for Congressional veto of state laws and gave the Supreme Court appellate case jurisdiction over state law because the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The United States had such a geographical extent that it could only be safely governed using a combination of republics. Federal judicial districts would follow those state lines.
Population power The British had relied upon a concept of "
virtual representation" to give legitimacy to their
House of Commons. According to many in Parliament, it was not necessary to elect anyone from a large port city, or the American colonies, because the representatives of "
rotten boroughs", mostly abandoned medieval fair towns with twenty voters, "virtually represented" them.
Philadelphia in the colonies was second in population only to
London. "They were all Englishmen, supposed to be a single people, with one definable interest. Legitimacy came from membership in Parliament of the sovereign realm, not elections from people. As Blackstone explained, the Member is "not bound ... to consult with, or take the advice, of his constituents." As Constitutional historian Gordon Wood elaborated, "The Commons of England contained all of the people's power and were considered to be the very persons of the people they represented." File:Gouverneur Morris 1753.png|
G. Morris, PAprovinces forever While the English "virtual representation" was hardening into a theory of
parliamentary sovereignty, the American theory of representation was moving towards a theory of sovereignty of the people. In their new constitutions written since 1776, Americans required community residency of voters and representatives, expanded suffrage, and equalized populations in
voting districts. There was a sense that representation "had to be proportioned to the population." The convention would apply the new principle of "sovereignty of the people" both to the
House of Representatives, and to the
United States Senate.
House changes Once the Great Compromise was reached, delegates in Convention then agreed to a decennial census to count the population. The Americans themselves did not allow for universal suffrage for all adults. Their sort of "virtual representation" said that those voting in a community could understand and themselves represent non-voters when they had like interests that were unlike other political communities. There were enough differences among people in different American communities for those differences to have a meaningful social and economic reality. Thus New England colonial legislatures would not tax communities which had not yet elected representatives. When the royal governor of Georgia refused to allow representation to be seated from four new counties, the legislature refused to tax them. The 1776 Americans had begun to demand expansion of the franchise, and in each step, they found themselves pressing towards a philosophical "actuality of consent." The Convention determined that the power of the people, should be felt in the House of Representatives. For the U.S. Congress, persons alone were counted. Property was not counted.
Senate changes The Convention found it more difficult to give expression to the will of the people in new states. What state might be "lawfully arising" outside the boundaries of the existing thirteen states? The new government was like the old, to be made up of pre-existing states. Now there was to be admission of new states. Regular order would provide new states by state legislatures for
Kentucky,
Tennessee and
Maine. But the Congress of the Confederation had by its
Northwest Ordinance presented the convention with a new issue. Settlers in the Northwest Territory might one day constitute themselves into "no more than five" states. More difficult still, most delegates anticipated adding alien peoples of
Canada,
Louisiana and
Florida to United States territory. Generally in American history, European citizens of empire were given U.S. citizenship on territorial acquisition. Should they become states? Some delegates were reluctant to expand into any so "remote wilderness". It would retard the commercial development of the east. They would be easily influenced, "foreign gold" would corrupt them. Western peoples were the least desirable Americans, only good for perpetual provinces. There were so many foreigners moving out west, there was no telling how things would turn out. These were poor people, they could not pay their fair share of taxes. It would be "suicide" for the original states. New states could become a majority in the Senate, they would abuse their power, "enslaving" the original thirteen. If they also loved liberty, and could not tolerate eastern state dominance, they would be justified in civil war. Western trade interests could drag the country into an inevitable war with Spain for the
Mississippi River. As time wore on, any war for the Mississippi River was obviated by the 1803
Louisiana Purchase and the 1812 American
victory at New Orleans. Even if there were to be western states, a House representation of 40,000 might be too small, too easy for the westerners. "States" had been declared out west already. They called themselves republics, and set up their own courts directly from the people without colonial charters. In
Transylvania,
Westsylvania,
Franklin, and
Vandalia, "legislatures" met with emissaries from
British and
Spanish empires in violation of the Articles of Confederation, just as the sovereign states had done. In the Constitution as written, no majorities in Congress could break up the larger states without their consent. "New state" advocates had no fear of western states achieving a majority one day. For example, the British sought to curb American expansion, which caused the angered colonists to agitate for independence. Follow the same rule, get the same results. Congress has never been able to discover a better rule than majority rule. If they grow, let them rule. As they grow, they must get all their supplies from eastern businesses. Character is not determined by points of a compass. States admitted are equals, they will be made up of our brethren. Commit to right principles, even if the right way, one day, benefits other states. They will be free like ourselves, their pride will not allow anything but equality. It was at this time in the Convention that Reverend
Manasseh Cutler arrived to lobby for western land sales. He brought acres of land grants to parcel out. Their sales would fund most of the U.S. government expenditures for its first few decades. There were allocations for the Ohio Company stockholders at the convention, and for others delegates too. Good to his word, in December 1787, Cutler led a small band of pioneers into the Ohio Valley. The provision for admitting new states became relevant at the purchase of the
Louisiana Territory from
France. It was constitutionally justifiable under the "treaty making" power of the federal government. The agrarian advocates sought to make the purchase of land that had never been administered, conquered, or formally ceded to any of the original thirteen states. Jefferson's
Democratic-Republicans would divide the
Louisiana Purchase into states, speeding land sales to finance the federal government with no new taxes. The new populations of new states would swamp the commercial states in the Senate. They would populate the House with egalitarian Democrat-Republicans to overthrow the
Federalist Party. Jefferson dropped the proposal of Constitutional amendment to permit the purchase, and with it, his notion of a confederation of sovereign states.
Final document After nearly four months of debate, on September 8, 1787, the final text of the Constitution was set down and revised. Then, an official copy of the document was
engrossed by
Jacob Shallus. The effort consisted of copying the text (prelude, articles and endorsement) on four sheets of
vellum parchment, made from treated animal skin and measuring approximately by , probably with a
goose quill. Shallus engrossed the entire document except for the list of
states at the end of the document, which are in
Alexander Hamilton's handwriting. On September 17, 1787, following a speech given by
Benjamin Franklin, 39 delegates endorsed and submitted the Constitution to the
Congress of the Confederation. ==Ratification of the Constitution==