The financial and industrial condition of the States was also very bad. In 1786 the %ituation was one of general depression, bankruptcy was impending. Seven of the States had sought relief in large issues of paper money. In west ern Massachusetts the debtor class rose in an outbreak, known as Shay's Rebellion in November of that year, and before it was sup pressed had greatly alarmed the friends of law and order and • those who respected the rights of property. This outbreak is chiefly important owing to its influence in creating a sentiment favorable to a stronger national government. All signs seemed to point to an early dissolu tion of the Union. Our situation," wrote Madi son, "is becoming every day more and more critical. No money comes into the federal treasury, no respect is paid to the federal au thority, and people of reflection unanimously agree that the existing confederacy is tottering to its foundation." The Articles of Confederation provided for but one way of amendment, but the requirement of securing the unanimous consent of all the States as well as of Congress rendered the amending provision nugatory. Some other means had to he found to reach the people than that prescribed by the Articles, if reforms needed were to be secured, but any other method would be extra constitutional and per haps revolutionary. Such a means, however, had been already suggested. Passing by the early proposal for a convention by Thomas Paine in 1775, by Alexander Hamilton in 1780 and by Pelatiah Webster in 1781, it is worthy of note that the legislature of New York in July 1782, under the influence of Hamilton, was led unanimously to recommend the calling of a convention to revise the Articles of Con federation. After the news of peace in April 1783, Congress took up this resolution only to defer action, but Washington, in June, ad dressed communications to Congress and to the governors of the States urging the convoking of "a constitutional convention" eto form a new Constitution that will give consistency, stability and dignity to the Union." This en couraged Hamilton to present his resolutions to Congress, hut without result. At the sugges tion of Governor Bowdoin the legislature of Massachusetts, 1 July 1785, adopted resolutions also calling upon Congress to recommend a con vention to revise the form and powers of the government. But the States' delegates in Con gress disobeyed their instructions and failed to present the resolutions, justifying their ac tion on the ground that ato seek reform through a convention is a violation of the rights of Congress and . . . must meet their disappro bation." From these failures it was clear that the plan of inducing Congress to initiate the called of a convention was vain. Some more indirect way of reaching the people mttst he resorted to. Fortunately it was shortly found. Owing to the friction resulting from the con flicting commercial regulations the legislatures of Virginia and Maryland had appointed com missioners, who met in the spring of 1785 to prepare the terms of an agreement for the jurisdiction over the waters common to both States. The legislature of Maryland approved of their report but desired that Delaware and Pennsylvania be invited to join with them in a common system of commercial regulation. James Madison, a member of the Virginia legis lature and an advocate of a stronger union, took advantage of this suggestion and was instru mental in securing the adoption by the Virginia legislature, 21 Jan. 1786, of a resolution invit ing all the States to send delegates to a con vention to be held at Annapolis in September, to take into consideration the question of the commerce of the whole country. Only Vir ginia and the four middle States were present at Annapolis. Realizing that they were too few for important action, at the suggestion of Ham ilton, the convention issued an invitation to the States to attend a new general convention to meet at Philadelphia on the second Monday of the following May, to consider the whole situ ation of the United States. Virginia at once elected delegates, and six other States did like wise, before Congress took action. Finally, on 21 Feb. 1787, that body was led to give its sanction, although avoiding all reference to the other call, it fixed upon the same time and place for a convention as already proposed, for the sole and express purpose of revising the Arti cles of Confederation and reporting to Congress and the several State legislatures." The convention was formally organized on 25 May 1787 with the election of Washington as president. For nearly four months it con tinued in session in Independence Hall, sitting with closed doors, as nothing but its completed work was given to the public. Not till 1819 was its journal published, and Madison's notes, the best report of the debates preserved, were not printed till over half a century after the con vention adjourned. All of the States but Rhode Island were represented, although New Hamp shire was not present until 23 July. Seventy three delegates are known to have been ap pointed,-but of these only 55 were in attendance. They comprised nearly all of the men of the greatest experience, authority and ability in the country. All but 12 had served in Congress and knew at first hand of its impotence. -Among the delegates—classed by the parties into which they were shortly grouped — may be men tioned-as the leaders of the Nationalists, Madi son, Hamilton, Wilson, Gouverneur Morris, Charles Pinckney and King; as the champions of the confederation, Paterson, Lansing, Yates, and Luther Martin, while chief among the advo cates of compromise were Franklin, Sherman, Ellsworth, Dickinson, Gerry and C. C. Pinckney. Many difficulties confronted the convention at the outset, owing to the conflicting instructions of the State legislatures and the divergent views of the members. They were at first divided into groups of the large and the small States, those who wished to draw up an entirely new scheme of government national in scope, and those who simply desired to amend the Articles. As the work of the convention progressed other com binations were effected, in which the North was arrayed against the South, or the commercial against the agricultural States. The task before the delegates was to harmonize all these conflict ing ideas and interests so that they might be brought to substantial agreement upon a plan which was calculated to command the approval of the people and infuse new life into the Union.
On 29 May, as soon as the convention had been fairly opened, Edmund Randolph presented the Virginia plan, which was probably largely drawn by Madison. It proposed a fundamental change in the government from a confederation to a federal union of States. It made provision for three distinct departments of government, a national legislature, executive and judiciary. The legislature was to consist of two branches, the first branch (representative) to be elected directly by the people of the respective States, the second (senate) by the first branch out of candidates nominated by the State legislatures. Representation in both branches was to be ap portioned among the States according to the quotas of contribution or the free inhabitants. In addition to the powers under the confeder acy, the Congress should legislate in all cases in which State legislation would interrupt the harmony of the United States, should have a negative on State laws contravening the articles of union or its laws and treaties and might coerce a delinquent State. The executive should be chosen by Congress for a limited term, and with a part of the judiciary should form a council of revision with a limited veto on legis lation. An independent national judiciary was provided for. The remaining resolution related to the admission of new States, the guaaanteeing to each State a republican form of government, the requirement of an oath to support the na tional Constitution from State officers, provi sion for amendment and the ratification of the new Constitution by conventions of the people.
This plan was nationalistic in its tendency, al though favoring the large States. It became the basis of the Constitution. On the same day Charles Pinckney, of South Carolina, presented a plan of government. The so-called "Pinck ney Plan," first published in 1819 in the (Jour nal of Congress,' has long been known to be a document of little authority. Recently at tempts have been made to reconstruct this plan, and within the last few months a contemporary manuscript has been found giving what is be lieved to be the chief provisions of this plan. This would seem to indicate that the plan. Pinckney actuallypresented suggested a con siderable number of provisions that were incor porated into the completed Constitution, and entitle him to greater credit than he hitherto has been accorded by scholars. It is impossible here to present the details of this draft, but suffice it to say that it was national in character, made provision for the three departments of government, namely, a bicameral legislature the Senate and House by name—a single ex ecutive with the title of President and a Fed eral judiciary, and suggested several additional features in regard to the powers of the execu tive and legislative departments.
The debates in the convention naturally fall into three periods. During the first period, from 30 May to 19 June, the proceedings took place chiefly in the committee of the whole. The Virginia plan was under discussion for several days, when on 13 June this plan, some what amended, but practically intact, was re ported favorably to the convention in 19 reso lutions. The chief changes made provided that a national government ought to be established, that the term of members of the lower house should be three years and of the upper seven years, and for the executive one term of seven years, and dropped the clauses for the coercing a State and for the council of revision, leaving to the executive a limited veto. During this discussion the antagonism between the large and small States had become evident, as the provision for proportional in both houses had been retained. This would give to the large States of Virginia, Massa chusetts and Pennsylvania nearly a majority in both branches of the legislature. North Car olina, South Carolina and Georgia also voted for this provision, probably in anticipation of future growth. This called forth a plan from the small States, which was presented on 15 June by William Paterson of New Jersey, and is generally known as the New Jersey plan. This proposed no change in the basis of the government, which was still to be a confederacy. The existing Congress was to be preserved, but a plural executive chosen by Congress and a judiciary appointed by the ex ecutive department with well-defined jurisdic tion were provided for. Congress was to be given additional powers to enable it to levy customs duties and internal taxes, and to regu late commerce and for enforcing the payment of requisitions. The acts of Congress and trea ties were to be the supreme law of the respec tive States," and the executive was authorized to enforce obedience to the same. Once more the Convention went into the committee of the whole to consider these two plans. The issue of a national government or a confederation was clearly presented and on 19 June the com mittee reported back the Virginia plan. It may be of interest to note that on the day before this, Hamilton, expressing his objection to both plans, sketched the outline of a system which was the embodiment of his views. He advocated a stronger and more centralized gov ernment, in which the States would have been reduced almost to administrative divisions of the central government. The assembly was to be chosen by the people for three years, the senators to be chosen for good behavior by electors, and should represent property. The executive to be chosen for good behavior by a more complicated electoral system. He was to be vested with an absolute negative on Con gressional legislation. The governors of the States were to be appointed by the central gov ernment and were to be given an absolute negative on State legislation. As one of the delegates remarked, "Hamilton was praised by many but supported by none." During the second period of its deliberations, which extended from 19 June to 26 July, the convention was occupied in the discussion of the 19 resolutions agreed to in committee. It was in this period that the great contest between the large and small States, or, better, between the national and confederate parties took place. The nature and character of the new organization was at stake, and was involved particularly in the determination of the question of represen tation. The large States insisted upon propor tional representation in both houses of Congress, the small States refused to enter the Union on any such terms. On 2 July a proposition for equal representation in the Senate was lost. The excitement was intense, the Convention seemed on the point of dissolving. Sherman declared, "We are now at a full stop. Nobody, I suppose, means that we shall break up, with out doing something"; and he suggested a com mittee as "likely to hit on some expedient." The matter thereupon was referred to a com mittee of one from each State. They reported 5 July, favorably to equal representation in the Senate and proportional in the House, and as a concession to the large States that the House should originate money bills. To the resolu tion as reported there was subsequently added the proviso that in the apportionment of repre sentatives and direct taxes "three fifths of all other persons" (slaves) should be counted, which was the rule fixed upon for the appor tionment of quotas in the revenue amendment of 1783, and which had been agreed to by the legislatures of 11 States and already had been incorporated in the report of the committee of the whole of 13 June. This proviso should not, therefore, be considered as an essential part of this compromise. This report agreeing to equal representation in the Senate at first excited a storm of protest, but the entire resolution was finally adopted 16 July, by a vote of five States to four, one State being divided and three un represented. Thus this compromise, involving the structure of Congress and the organic nature of the government, was determined by a vote of less than a majority of the States present and by the representatives of less than one-third of the people of the States. The effect of this compromise was most marked. The small States now gave up their opposition to the reorganization of the government and joined heartily in the work of providing an efficient organization and adequate powers for the new government. The other important mod ifications of the plan made during this period were substituting for the phrase "National Gov ernment" the "Government of the United States," shortening the term of representatives to two years and of senators to six years, and providing that the latter should retire by thirds, omitting the provision for the negative on State laws and inserting "the supreme law" clause first suggested in the New Jersey plan. Some of these changes show a departure from na tionalism in the direction of federalism, and indicate that the spirit of compromise was at work. On 24 July a "Committee of Detail" was appointed to prepare the draft of a Con stitution conformable to the resolutions adopted by the convention. Two days later the 23 reso lutions already agreed to together with the Pinckney and New Jersey plans were referred to this committee. Then the Convention adjourned until 6 August to await the com mittee's report. On that date they reported the draft of a Constitution in which the main features of the completed Constitution already appear.