CHAP. nounced any general government that could reach inIII. dividuals, and intimated plainly that Clinton of New 1787. York would surely prevent its adoption in that state. 28. Lansing renewed the proposal to vote by states in June the first branch of the legislature. Madison summed up a most elaborate statement by saying: "The two extremes before us are, a perfect separation, and a perfect incorporation of the thirteen states. In the first case, they will be independent nations, subject only to the law of nations; in the last, they will be mere counties of one entire republic, subject to one common law. In the first, the smaller states will have everything to fear from the larger; in the last, nothing. Their true policy, therefore, lies in promoting that form of government which will most approximate the states to the condition of counties." Johnson and Sherman and Ellsworth, Paterson and Dickinson, even at the risk of union, opposed King, the most eloquent orator, Wilson, the most learned civilian, and Madison, the most careful statesman, of the convention. It was in vain for the smaller states to say they intended no injustice, and equally in vain for Madison to plead that the large states, from differing customs, religion, and interests, could never unite in perilous combinations. In the great diversity of sentiment, Johnson was saddened by anxiety for the result; and at a later day Martin reported that the convention was "on the verge of dissolution, scarce held together by the strength of a hair."' 1 To restore calm, Franklin, just as the house was son, Philadelphia, 27 June, 1787. 1 Gilpin, 982; Elliot, 252. 2 William Samuel Johnson to his MS. 3 Elliot, i. 358. III. June 28. about to adjourn, proposed that the convention should CHAP. be opened every morning by prayer. Having present in his mind his own marvellous career from the 1787. mocking skepticism of his boyhood, he said: "The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see that God governs in the affairs of men. I firmly believe that 'except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.' Without his concurring aid, we shall be divided by our little local interests, succeed no better than the builders of Babel, and become a reproach and by-word to future ages. What is worse, mankind may hereafter, from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing government by human wisdom, and leave it to chance and war." The motion was avoided by adjournment. 1 The concurring aid which Franklin invoked implied a purification from the dominion of selfish interests. In the next meeting the members were less absorbed by inferior motives. The debate was opened by Johnson. "A state," he said, "exists as a political society, and it exists as a district of individ ual citizens. The aristocratic and other interests, and the interests of the states, must be armed with some power of self-defence. In one branch of the general government, the people ought to be represented; in the other, the states." Gorham brought together arguments for union alike from the point of view of small and of large states; and his last word was: “A union of the states is necessary to their happiness, and a firm general government is necessary to their 1 1 Gilpin, 985; Elliot, 253, 254. 2 Walter Scott's Heart of Mid lothian, vol. i., chap. xiv. 8 Gilpin, 987; Elliot, 255. 29. CHAP. union. I will stay here as long as any state will reIII. main, in order to agree on some plan that can be 1787. recommended to the people."1 June 29. "I do not despair," said Ellsworth; "I still trust that some good plan of government will be devised and adopted." "If this point of representation is once well fixed," said Madison, "we shall come nearer to one another in sentiment." The necessity will then be discovered of circumscribing more effectually the state governments, and enlarging the bounds of the general government. There is a gradation from the smallest corporation with the most limited powers to the largest empire with the most perfect sovereignty. The states never possessed the essential rights of sovereignty; these were always vested in congress. Voting as states in congress is no evidence of sovereignty. The state of Maryland voted by counties. Did this make the counties sovereign? The states, at present, are only great corporations, having the power of mak ing by-laws not contradictory to the general confederation. The proposed government will have powers far beyond those exercised by the British parliament when the states were part of the British empire. "The mixed nature of the government ought to be kept in view; but the exercise of an equal voice by unequal portions of the people is confessedly unjust, and would infuse mortality into the constitution which we wish to last forever. A total separation of the states from each other or partial confederacies 1 Gilpin, 989; Elliot, 255. 3 Gilpin, 990; Elliot, 256. III. would alike be truly deplorable; and those who may CHAP. be accessory to either can never be forgiven by their country, nor by themselves."" "In all the states," said Hamilton, "the rights of individuals with regard to suffrage are modified by qualifications of property. In like manner states may modify their right of suffrage, the larger exercising a larger, the smaller a smaller share of it. Will the people of Delaware be less free if each citizen has an equal vote with each citizen of Pennsylvania? The contest is for power, not for liberty. "No government can give us happiness at home which has not the strength to make us respectable abroad. This is the critical moment for forming such a government. As yet we retain the habits of union. We are weak, and sensible of our weakness. Our people are disposed to have a good government;' but henceforward the motives will become feebler and the difficulties greater. It is a miracle that we are now here, exercising free deliberation; it would be madness to trust to future miracles. We must therefore improve the opportunity, and render the present system as perfect as possible. The good sense of the people, and, above all, the necessity of their affairs, will induce them to adopt it." 4 It was then decided, by the six national states to four, Maryland being divided, that the rule of suffrage in the first branch ought to bear proportion to the population of the several states. A reversal of this decision was never attempted. 1787. June 29. CHAP. III. June 29. "We are partly national, partly federal," said Ellsworth, and he moved that in the second branch the 1787. vote should be taken by states. "I am not sorry that the vote just passed has determined against this rule in the first branch; I hope it will become a ground of compromise with regard to the second. On this middle ground, and on no other, can a compromise take place. If the great states refuse this plan, we shall be forever separated. 30. "In the hour of common danger we united as equals; is it just to depart from this principle now, when the danger is over? The existing confederation is founded on the equality of the states in the article of suffrage, and is declared to be perpetual.' Is it meant to pay no regard to this plighted faith?' We then associated as free and independent states. To perpetuate that independence, I wish to establish a national legislature, executive, and judiciary; for under these we shall preserve peace and harmony." 4 Abraham Baldwin, a native of Connecticut, a graduate of Yale college, for four years one of its tutors, a recent emigrant to Georgia, from which state he was now a deputy, stepped forth to the relief of Ellsworth, saying: "The second branch ought to be the representation of property, and ought not to be elected as the first." "If a minority will have their own will, or separate the union," said Wilson, "let it be done. I cannot consent that one fourth shall control the power of three fourths. The Connecticut proposal |