Compromise ... and Success
As the delegates at the "Great Convention" adjourned to mark the 11th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, many thoughts must have been running through their minds. Would the unity which had brought the 13 colonies together in the common struggle against Great Britain just a few years earlier now abandon the nation in its moment of need?
Perhaps the celebration of July 4, and the reminder of the mutual sacrifices made in pursuit of liberty, marked a turning point of sorts in the progress of theconvention. Still, many points of contention remained ahead of the delegates.
The deadlock over representation in Congress, which had pitted the large states against the smaller ones, lurched toward resolution when, on July 3, the convention appointed a special committee to devise a workable compromise solution. Still, there was little basis for belief that the committee could formulate a proposal acceptable to the divergent interests represented by these strong-willed men.
On July 5, the committee offered a compromise plan which, on its surface, featured aspects pleasing to both factions within the convention. In a nutshell, the plan appealed to the large states by advocating representation by population in the House of Representatives, while soothing the smaller states by recommending equal representation in the Senate. In addition, the plan mandated that all bills for appropriations, raising money and fixing salaries originate in the House.
While a preliminary vote indicated favorable consideration of the measure, continuing dissatisfaction and discord marked the next few days. Just four days after introduction of this compromise plan, two of New York's three delegates left Philadelphia, frustrated by the growing nationalist sentiment. They were never to return. Meanwhile, many other interests within the convention maneuvered -- some successfully, others unsuccessfully - - to push through measures which reflected their beliefs.
For example, on July 14, "wealth" was stricken as a requirement for voting when nine states voted to delete that word from a proposal to regulate the number of representatives of the states "upon the principle of their wealth and number of inhabitants."
South Carolina's Charles Pinckney also attempted to subvert the compromise committee's work when he made a motion to provide each state with a specific and unequal number of votes in the Senate. This motion failed by a 6-4 vote.
Despite these attempts, there was, by all accounts, an almost noticeable change in the atmosphere at the convention. Delegates, while not conceding points to the opposition, began to privately express the belief that the work of the convention must be completed, regardless of their differences. While not a true indication of conciliation, these thoughts perhaps expressed a growing fear that an unsuccessful conclusion to the convention would have a lasting and perhaps fatal effect upon the young nation.
In the meantime, delegates were prepared to concede no ground in debates. While the vote tallies for the convention showed where each state delegation stood, they did not indicate the strong dissension within the delegations. Unanimity within these groups was, by now, almost nonexistent.
Finally, on July 16, the committee's plan -- to later be known as the Great Compromise -- was approved by the narrowest of margins, 5-4 (with Massachusetts divided). Immediately upon this vote, New Jersey's William Patterson, who bitterly opposed the compromise, moved for the adjournment of the convention. But the majority of delegates, feeling that a significant development had occurred, voted only to adjourn until the next day in order to collect their thoughts and review the accomplishments to date.
With the compromise firmly in place, delegates returned to the convention the next day ready for the task ahead of them. There was some feeling that the convention had passed the point of no return with approval of the compromise measure.
Just two days later, the Committee of the Whole's much-discussed proposal to leave the creation of the "inferior federal courts" to the national legislature was approved. Under the terms of this plan, the Senate was given the authority to appoint the judges of these courts. Sensing the convention's general interest in the structure and operation of the court system, Madison successfully lobbied for increasing the jurisdiction of the national judiciary "to cases under general laws passed by the general legislature, and to such other questions as involve the national peace and harmony."
On July 22, the convention completed four days of debate, then rejected for the final time any plan for a combined judiciary-executive veto power. While this was a significant development, four days had been expended on this question. Still unresolved were several thorny issues, such as the method of selection for the executive, the length of his term of office and his eligibility for reelection.
Moving from the judiciary to the legislative branch, the convention next adopted, after a stirring speech by Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, a proposal to allow each Senator to vote as an individual, rather than as a state delegation.
Despite pleas by Connecticut's Oliver Ellsworth, delegates next endorsed another aspect of the original Virginia Resolves requiring any finished document from the convention to be placed before specially-elected conventions or ratification.
The delegates also reviewed extensively and finally approved, 6-4, the provision of the Virginia Plan related to the selection and term of the national executive. The vote mandated the national legislature as the selection body, with the executive to serve a single seven-year term. As with so many decisions by the convention, this would also be quickly reversed.
With a confusing series of decisions and counter-decisions already on record, the convention on July 26 formed a Committee of Detail to sift through the adopted measures and form them into a written document. To allow time for the completion of this work, the convention adjourned for 10 days.
Those not occupied with the work of the Committee of Detail took advantage of this welcome break to escape the stifling heat of the city. Many enjoyed such pursuits as fishing in the scenic countryside surrounding Philadelphia.
No doubt refreshed by this pause, delegates on August 6 reconvened and plunged right into the Committee of Detail's report. In preparing its written summary of measures adopted by the convention, the committee had followed the lead of the convention as a whole and had gone well beyond its original scope. For example, the committee's 23 articles, divided into 41 sections, offered specific limits on the jurisdiction of both the national legislature and the judiciary -- in direct contradiction to the more broad powers authorized by the convention.
The report also goes about formalizing, for the first time, the titles which were to accompany the various bodies and posts within the new government, such as President, House of Representatives, Senate and Supreme Court.
Point by point, the convention began going through the Committee of Detail's report, carefully evaluating each article. Progress was rapid at times, such as when the convention decisively voted to eliminate any property ownership requirement for members of Congress. This action was led by Benjamin Franklin, who strongly opposed the Committee of Detail's granting of authority to Congress for establishment of property qualifications for its members. Following his remarks, three separate motions, each holding open the possibility of a property requirement, were defeated.
One of the first problems with the Committee of Detail's report dealt with Congress, when the convention overruled the recommendation that members of Congress be compensated by their individual states. This action came only after an extended debate which at times reawakened the heated emotions previously displayed between the nationalist and pro-states camps. Mindful of the crippled Articles of Confederation and fearful that reliance on the states for salaries would result in fractionalization among members of Congress, the convention voted 9-2 to authorize payment of all members of Congress from the national treasury.
With old sentiments stirred by the debate over congressional compensation, the convention next dealt with another controversial issue: the military powers of the national government. A lengthy debate immediately resulted, as pro-states forces attempted to kill off a proposal giving Congress the power to declare war, and raise and maintain both military and naval forces. However, a series of attempts by opponents to seek limitations on the numbers of federal troops in favor of reliance on the various state militias failed.
With nationalist sentiment now on the upswing, the convention was prepared by August 21 to pass the Committee of Detail's recommendation that Congress be given the authority to pass all laws deemed "necessary and proper" to carry out its designated powers.
That same day, the convention took another major step toward breaking the hold of the Articles of Confederation. After voting down a motion which would have sustained the existing method of taxation through the levying of quotas on the states, the delegates approved the imposition of a direct levy on individuals, with collection by the national government. This action was to raise considerable concern and suspicion within many states during their later ratification meetings.
On August 25, the convention postponed -- for the 11th time -- a decision on the method of selection for the President. With sentiment virtually guaranteeing no popular election, Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania proposed the next best thing: election of the executive by electors chosen by the people of the states. Alas, this plan was also defeated, 6-5. A resolution to this dilemma was to avoid delegates well into September.
Skipping through the committee's report, the convention next returned to the provisions related to the national judiciary. In an action which set up the Supreme Court as the arbiter between the branches of the federal government, as well as between the national and state governments, the delegates extended the Court's power "to all cases arising under the Constitution." This resulted in an expansion of the Court's influence to any case whose decision involves an application of the Constitution.
At the same time, the convention approved life tenure for federal judges, and gave Congress the much-debated authority to create such inferior courts as it deems necessary. These courts, as part of the federal judicial system, were also given the power to rule on the constitutionality of laws.
While unable to come down firmly on a selection method for the President, delegates were able to agree on his power as "commander-in-chief of the army and navy," as well as his authority "to grant reprieves and pardons" and "to receive ambassadors and other public ministers."
In an amusing action the convention decreed that the national executive was to be addressed as the rather regal "His Excellency, the President of the United States of America."
By August 28, the convention had imposed a ban on state coinage of money in order to stabilize the financial and commercial plight of the nation. The separate monetary systems in effect in each state had rendered many bills of credit issued by them worthless, not to mention proving a hindrance to foreign nations attempting to do business with the United States.
On the last day of August, the convention took a perilous step into the area of religious liberty. While the Committee of Detail's report had made no mention of any religious requirement for the holding of office, some delegates, such as South Carolina's Charles Pinckney, feared that such a qualification could be easily imposed by Congress. A more likely scenario involved the states, only two of which had no religious requirement in their own constitutions, passing measures restricting public service to those who cleared some sort of religious test or qualification.
Pinckney, realizing that the separation of church and state was a vital ingredient in assuring a truly democratic nation, proposed an amendment to the committee report in order to assure that ". . . no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the authority of the United States." The motion was unanimously approved.
Virtually all of the delegates knew that by passing this measure they were severely threatening the ratification of the final document by the states. It is a testimony to their courage and tolerance that they did not opt for a more politically expedient alternative, but instead plunged ahead and established a doctrine of religious freedom which continues to be a part of our heritage.
As August became September, delegates began to sense that their work was near completion. Still, many issues remained unresolved. The first of these issues, the troublesome selection method for the President, was addressed first. What had to be one of the convention's most active committees, the Committee on Postponed Matters, presented a compromise proposal featuring election of the President by presidential electors chosen by each state and equal in number to the representation of the state in Congress.
The proposal would, in the case of a tie in the electoral vote, pass to the Senate the job of selecting the President from a list of those obtaining the five highest electoral vote totals. The person receiving the second largest number of votes cast for President by the electors would then occupy a new office, that of Vice-President.
In offering a viable solution to the logjam over selection of the President, this compromise was easily the most important set of concessions since that regarding representation in Congress. In fact, even more so than the "Great Compromise," this plan had something for everyone. The small states were appeased by the greater power given to the Senate in its possible final choice of the President. At the same time, the large state forces were aware of the fact that, with the number of electors largely proportional to members in the House, their states would probably choose the five names from which the President would be elected.
Two days later, despite the fears of some delegates that this measure would give the Senate too much responsibility, the convention approved the compromise plan. In the process of debate on this issue, many delegates continued to hold out for a single seven-year term for the President. The final plan approved, however, created a four-year term with no restrictions on reelection.
Acting at the same time, delegates also approved the office of Vice-President and beat back an attempt to transfer from the Senate to the House the power to make treaties.
With this last major agenda item now resolved, the convention turned the document over to its Committee of Style for final preparation. Their draft, submitted to the convention on September 11, offered little new other than a more detailed preamble than that proposed by the Committee of Detail.
Madison took this opportunity to come forward with a new proposal. Recognizing that the future needs of the country would require some flexibility within the Constitution, he offered a plan for amendment of the original document. Under this plan, which was approved by the convention, an amendment could be submitted for ratification whenever two-thirds of both houses of Congress deem it necessary, or upon application of two-thirds of the various state legislatures. The ratification process would be completed when the submitted amendment was approved by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states or by conventions in the same proportion of states.
By now, most delegates anticipated a quick end to the convention. But there was one more brief delay, brought about when Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts rose to decry the convention's failure to include in the Constitution a roster of the rights guaranteed to each citizen of the United States. Gerry's motion was largely prompted by Col. George Mason of Virginia, who called the convention's attention to its failure to include a guarantee of jury trials in civil as well as in criminal cases.
Although the full convention rejected Gerry's motion, that subject was to appear again, particularly during the ratification hearings in each of the states. The pressure for a written list of such guarantees would eventually lead to the drafting of the first ten amendments to the Constitution some four years later -- amendments which are collectively known as the Bill of Rights.
On September 15, the convention approved the final draft of the Constitution and ordered the printing of 500 copies. Even at this point in the proceedings, however, unanimity eluded the convention. Gov. Edmund Randolph of Virginia, upon passage of the document, made a futile motion to call for a second convention. Thwarted in this attempt, he then reiterated his decision not to sign the Constitution, citing 10 specific objections to the finished product ranging from the "indefinite and dangerous" powers given to Congress to the "want of more definite boundary between the powers of the national and state courts." It is indeed ironic that the man who introduced to the convention the Virginia Plan, upon which most of the summer's debate had hinged, was now objecting to the end product.
Two other delegates -- Col. George Mason of Virginia and Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts -- also announced their intention to forego the formal signing of the Constitution.
Thus, it was on September 17, 1787, some 39 delegates gathered in Independence Hall to affix their names to the Constitution, this framework for a new form of government. Washington, as president of the convention, called the assembly to the dais state by state. With the completion of the signing ceremony, the weary delegates adjourned and made plans to return to their homes scattered across the country.
The prevailing sentiment at that time, the records show, believed the Constitution to be, at best, a temporary tool for the organization of the states into a nation. While each state had its own interests and concerns, all would now join together for the common good.
It had been much the same way during the convention itself, as men spoke their minds, guided by their own beliefs and perceptions as well as the stated interests of their home states. And while virtually every delegate found at least one objectionable item in the finished product, the individual sacrifices were more than made up for by the end product.
After five long months of thought, debate and consideration, the nation finally had a Constitution. But the battle was only half over. Now the document faced ratification conventions in each of the states, where the true test of its merits was yet to come.