The origins of the miracle:

"[These] 'details,' as finally agreed on, were to change the United States from a confederation to a workable, lasting Federal Republic."

  The word "miracle" was used by both George Washington and James Madison in their correspondence describing the results of the Constitutional Convention. Indeed, many delegates were so enmeshed in the heated debates over the details of the Constitution, that when they saw the finished document ready for signing, they expressed amazement at the excellence of the outcome of their work.

  "[These] 'details,' as finally agreed on, were to change the United States from a confederation to a workable, lasting Federal Republic. Two balanced powers: Congress and the Executive, state and central government, with the judiciary as umpire. It was to be a triumphant conclusion."

  However, this miracle had substantial origins, Catherine Drinker Bowen tells us in "Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention - May to September 1787." Prior efforts at self government had been ongoing since the earliest settlements in the early decades of the 17th century. They included The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut in 1639 - West New Jersey's Fundamental Laws of 1677 - The Albany Plan of Union in 1754 which was rejected at that time - and numerous Resolutions, Instructions, Declarations, Articles and Ordinances of the revolutionary period. These, in turn, drew from classical and contemporary history and philosophy with which the more intellectual leaders in the colonies were intimately familiar.
 &
  Moreover, there had been extensive experience with the establishment of new political entities and the writing of constitutions. It was just four years since the Paris Peace Treaty and eleven since the Declaration of Independence. In between, the state constitutions had been drafted and adopted. There had even been prior experience with the union of separate colonial entities. Both Massachusetts and New Jersey had formed during the 17th century out of separate settlements.
 &

A remarkable "spirit of compromise" was also present - emanating from the widespread belief that the young, fragile Union was in peril - its fate in the hands of the men at the Convention.

  Bowen presents the men at the Convention, with their differing manners, circumstances, prejudices, and their varying personal and sectional interests: "South against North, East against West, merchant against planter." However, a remarkable "spirit of compromise" was also present - emanating from the widespread belief that the young, fragile Union was in peril - its fate in the hands of the men at the Convention.
 &
  They had thus been instructed by the Confederation Congress and their individual state legislatures - of which many of the delegates were leading members - to revise the Articles of Confederation and create a national government "adequate to the exigencies of government and the preservation of the Union."
 &
  With George Washington (Va.) presiding, and men like James Madison (Va.), Benjamin Franklin (Pa.) and Alexander Hamilton (N.Y.) urging a concern for the national interest, the members were driven to find the compromises and accommodations that made the United States possible. The presence of Franklin and, especially, Washington, was essential to assure the popular legitimacy of the Convention and broad acceptance of its outcome.
 &

  The Constitution of the United States is now the oldest and most successful national constitution in the world. (The Massachusetts constitution - drafted by John Adams - is the oldest existing constitution.) Henry Steele Commager provides an introduction for Bowen's book in which he sums up the accomplishments of the Convention - most of them unique at that time.

• A unified nation was peacefully created out of a confederation of independent states;

• A federal system of shared sovereignty was implemented;

• A constitution that was the "supreme law of the land" was ratified by the people of the independent states;

• An intricate network of checks and balances was contrived to "secure liberty," including separation of powers - an independent judiciary with final authority over the legitimacy of legislation - and a division of authority among local, state and national governments;

• Conversion of new territories into full-fledged states was provided for;

• Separation of church and state and a ban on religious tests for public office were included;

• Civilian control over the military was assured by making the President the Commander in Chief and providing Congress with total power of the purse and the (not-so-total) power to declare war.

• Regular elections were required for all political offices.

• The "general welfare" was designated as one of the primary purposes of the government;

• Procedures to amend the Constitution were included.

They already had a heritage of political freedom - the common law - economic freedom - and the rights of Englishmen running back to the earliest settlements in the 17the century.

  The 55 men who at various times attended the Convention were sent by 12 of the 13 states. Rhode Island did not participate.
 &
  These men had extensive experience in self government from colonial and Revolutionary times, and under the Articles of Confederation and state constitutions. They already had a heritage of political freedom - the common law - economic freedom - and the rights of Englishmen running back to the earliest settlements in the 17the century. They were already a "melting pot" of differing ethnic and religious groups. They were familiar with political philosophy from ancient times to contemporary times. They had built their own towns, churches, businesses and farms, and adapted the common law to suit their new world needs.
 &
  They were young - many in their twenties and thirties. The average age was 44, with Benjamin Franklin the oldest at 81. "Men aged sooner and died younger in those days," Bowen reminds us. They met in secret from May to September, 1787, and they were confined for their deliberations in the Pennsylvania State House - subsequently renamed Convention Hall - through one of the hottest summers in recent memory.
 &
  It was not called a "Constitutional Convention" until afterwards. It was authorized by the Confederation Congress to only revise the Articles of Confederation. Bowen sums up some of the weaknesses of that system.
 &

  The national government was broke and broken. Its "requisitions" were paid by some states that deeply resented those that didn't. "The Confederation, resting only on good faith, had no power to collect taxes, defend the country, pay the public debt, let alone encourage trade and commerce."
 &
  The need for reform was widely appreciated, but most effectively promoted by Washington, Hamilton and Madison. Washington had struggled to keep the Continental Army in the field during the Revolution despite the meager support that could be provided by the Continental Congress. Loyalties still most profoundly attached to the individual states, not to the Union. Madison prepared himself early and thoroughly to participate in and influence the Convention. In the April before it met he had provided Washington with a prophetic outline of the most important points to be debated. Hamilton was as early as 1780 already agitating for a convention to provide for a strong national government. He had been relentless in his efforts - and unsuccessful.

  "Throughout the country, the opposition was strong; its roots lay deep from Maine to Florida. Sovereign and independent of each other, the states had fought through six years of war. They had won the war, they had beat the enemy. Why fight a war and achieve independence only to be taxed by a powerful Congress instead of by a powerful Parliament?"

  But Maryland and Virginia had a quarrel over navigation of the Potomac River. They decided to bring their dispute to George Washington in Mount Vernon. When neighboring states expressed interest in the matter, the result was a meeting in Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss the subject.
 &
  Sensing opportunity, Hamilton came down from New York to attend. The result was a recommendation to the Confederation Congress - with a report written by Hamilton - that all 13 states appoint delegates for a Philadelphia convention "to take into consideration the trade and commerce of the United States." Bowen explains:

   "Commerce was a far-reaching word; it covered a multitude of troubles. The war debt still hung heavy; states found their credit failing and small hope of betterment. Seven states had resorted to paper money. True, the postwar depression was lifting. But prosperity remained a local matter; money printed by Pennsylvania must be kept within Pennsylvania's own borders. State and section showed themselves jealous, preferring to fight each other over boundaries as yet unsettled and to pass tariff laws against each other. New Jersey had her own customs service; New York was a foreign nation and must be kept from encroachment. (New York had already absconded with Staten Island.) States were marvelously ingenious at devising mutual retaliations; nine of them retained their own navies. -- Virginia had even ratified the peace treaty separately. -- The shipping arrangements of Connecticut, Delaware and New Jersey were at the mercy of Pennsylvania, New York and Massachusetts."

  States imposed tariffs and passport duties on the commerce of other states. "The little states feared the big states and hated them." The bigger states were having trouble maintaining control over their western regions.
 &

Madison was making himself the intellectual force that would drive the Convention.

  Shay's Rebellion in 1786 started with about 2,000 indebted farmers in western Massachusetts protesting mortgage foreclosures and higher taxes caused by the post-Revolution depression. Although quelled militarily, it had ultimately resulted in Massachusetts acceding to the rebel's demands for more lenient laws, Bowen points out. There was unrest in Maryland and populist excesses in the governments of Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. The propertied men who attended the Convention felt themselves vulnerable.
 &
  Fifty five of the 74 delegates chosen by the states straggled in as the Convention proceeded. Some of the delays were caused by trouble getting state legislatures to appropriate moneys to cover expenses. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were preoccupied as foreign diplomats in Paris and London but played significant roles through their correspondence and influence. John Adams wrote an influential book on constitutions past and present just prior to the Convention. But it was Madison who was making of himself the intellectual force that would drive the Convention.
 &

  Madison sought widely for books on political philosophy and government. Jefferson sent him hundreds of volumes from Europe - many of them multi-volume tomes.

  "[There were] thirty seven volumes of the new Encyclopédie Méthodique, books on political theory and the law of nations, histories, works by Burlamaqui, Voltaire, Diderot, Mably, Necker, d'Albon. There were biographies and memoirs, histories in sets of eleven volumes and such timely productions as Mirabeau on The Order of the Cincinnati."

  Madison analyzed and critiqued prior confederacies. He concluded that the national government must have "positive and complete authority in all cases where uniform measures are necessary," and must have "a negative" over the acts of the states.
 &
  Other notable scholars of political theory and government at the Convention included James Wilson (Pa.), George Wythe (Va.), John Dickinson (Del.), and Hamilton. To many of the rest, there was no notion of how sovereignty could be shared between levels of government. Bowen provides brief biographies and character sketches of these and many of the other more active delegates.
 &

The opposition included Sam Adams and Patrick Henry - two of the firebrands of the Revolution.

  The difficulties that lay ahead both at the Convention and during the ratification process were fully understood by Washington and Madison. The opposition included Sam Adams and Patrick Henry - two of the firebrands of the Revolution. John Adams described such men as being better at tearing down than building something up. The likelihood and implications of failure were all too real and strengthened the resolve to drive ahead.

 "Reading Madison's long letters on politics, with their cool forceful arguments, or Washington's with their stately rhythm, one senses beneath the elaborate paragraphs a very fury of concern for the country. And one takes comfort in this solemnity."

  With Washington presiding, and Madison and Hamilton and many others determinedly driving the process, that seriousness and concentration on practical results would pervade the Convention.
 &

The Constitutional Convention:

  Bowen sets the scene in Philadelphia and the country. Her sources include accounts of America written at that time by European - mostly French - visitors.
 &

  The people were prosperous, literate and gloriously free by 18th century standards. The continent was still a heavily forested wilderness where only the hardy and hard working could survive, roads between towns were still frequently nonexistent, the landscape was both grand and daunting, and the weather was subject to extremes. The thirteen states extending down the long seacoast were so different and isolated as to be more like separate nations. The customs of the people differed greatly from across the different regions, and slavery was still in existence in most states. But it is in the south where slavery and some white poverty mar the scene.
 &
  There were no legal impediments to travel such as existed in Europe, and people were on the move about the young nation and towards the frontier. The classes mixed with an easy familiarity that was astounding to European visitors. Numerous newspapers - weeklies and biweeklies - kept people informed, and everyone talked politics. There was a widespread appreciation of education - even on the frontier. Numerous additional colleges had sprouted since the Revolution. Education and intellectual interest were geared heavily towards the practical rather than the theoretical.
 &
  But life was still  disease-ridden, hard and short. Cities and towns were unsanitary places, and doctors were a menace. Death was a familiar visitor to every family.
 &
  And everything was different and raw beyond the crest of the Alleghenies and on the frontiers.
 &

The limited authority granted to the Convention by the Confederation Congress was to meet in convention "for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation."

  The most populous states were Virginia, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts. The largest towns were Baltimore with about 13,000 inhabitants, Boston with about 18,000, and New York - still showing the affects of the Revolutionary War - with about 33,000.
 &
  Philadelphia was the largest city in the Union, with about 43,000 inhabitants. A brief sketch of several pages in length of life in the City and its rich mixture of inhabitants, commerce and other activities is provided by the author.
 &
  Philadelphia happened to be also hosting two other conventions that same summer - the war veterans of the Society of the Cincinnati, and a Presbyterian convention - and was most pleased with its prominence. A splendid assortment of social gatherings was held for the delegates' after-hours entertainment. The various taverns and inns provided venues for impromptu meetings of state delegations and other delegate groups for informal discussions and planning sessions. The maintenance of secrecy under such circumstances was inevitably less than perfect, yet was remarkable considering the number of men involved, the length of time of the Convention, and the bitter disputes involved.

  "There was criticism of the secrecy rule; Jefferson did not like it when he heard. Yet it is difficult to see how a Constitution could have evolved had the Convention been open to abuse and suggestion from the public. Sentries were placed at the State House doors; members could not copy the daily journal without permission. Secrecy in legislative assemblies was no new thing. All the Revolutionary colonial assemblies were secret; the first Continental Congress had been so of necessity, and Congressional debates still were not reported. American politicians knew that for centuries unauthorized visitors had not been allowed in the British House of Commons."

  The Philadelphia State House was commodious and cool in the mornings, but oppressively hot by the afternoons. Open windows invited an invasion of insects and so was avoided.
 &
  The last delegate didn't arrive until August. The Confederation Congress was also in session that summer in New York, and many of the delegates were also members of Congress. There were constant comings and goings for Congressional, personal or state political business, so that there were seldom much more than 30 delegates present and eleven states represented. There was a real fear at times that the Convention would dissolve - but encouragingly, new delegates kept arriving and those that had left usually returned from their absences.
 &
  Bowen relates some of the expressed opinions for and against a stronger national government, for and against particular provisions, and for and against various degrees of democracy. The delegate credentials from their state legislatures generally repeated the extent of the limited authority granted to the Convention by the Confederation Congress - to meet in convention "for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation." The New Hampshire and Virginia delegate credentials, however, recognized the need for broader reform and the strengthening of the national government. The smaller states emphasized their status as "free, sovereign and independent."
 &

"In London, John Adams had recently been told that His Majesty's government could negotiate only with the thirteen separate states, the Confederacy having proved unreliable."

  The delegates were aware of the need for extensive revision.

  "Not a man in the Convention but knew the humiliations of our position with respect to Europe, knew that Spain and England looked on the disorganized infant republic with a hungry eye, calculated their own interests in Louisiana, Florida, the Ohio country and the long, vital trade route of the Mississippi River. The British still occupied posts south of the Canadian border, to the great disadvantage of the American fur traders and frontier settlers. These complained to Congress about the warlike designs of their British guardians. In New Orleans and Natchez, Spain throttled southern outlets to the sea and to European commerce, bribed politicians in the back country to her purpose, used the Indians -- Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasaws -- to harass the border from Nashville to southern Georgia. Every delegate  knew moreover that neither England nor Spain believed the states could achieve an effectual union. Britain met such plans with indifference or contempt. In London, John Adams had recently been told that His Majesty's government could negotiate only with the thirteen separate states, the Confederacy having proved unreliable." - - -
 &
  "Martial law had been declared in Georgia. Savannah was fortified against the Creek Indians, supposed to be incited by Spain. There was a rumor that a certain group in the New York legislature -- the "seditious party" -- had 'opened communications with the Viceroy of Canada.'"

   Another nagging problem was the expense of attendance at the Convention. Many of the delegates were rich in lands but poor in cash. Some of the apparently wealthiest - men like Pennsylvania delegates James Wilson, Gouverneur Morris and Robert Morris - were actually on the verge of bankruptcy. The paper currencies of several of the colonies were worthless in Pennsylvania, and delegates had to repeatedly plead with their state governments for additional funds to cover their expenses.
 &

The Constitutional Convention convenes:

Washington's presence kept the  Federal Convention together, kept it going.

  On May 25th, 1787, a quorum being present, Washington was unanimously elected president of the Convention and took his place at its head.

  "Washington showed himself firm, courteous, inflexible. When he approved a measure, delegates reported that his face showed it. Yet it was hard to tell what the General was thinking and impossible to inquire. In his silence lay his strength. His presence kept the  Federal Convention together, kept it going, just as his presence had kept the straggling, ill-conditioned army together throughout the terrible years of war."

  Madison kept up a journal that was remarkably detailed and thorough. He nevertheless was able to take an active part in the proceedings. He was present throughout the Convention, and addressed it 161 times. There were many others who took some notes, but these were relatively sketchy.
 &
  Judged by the number of times they addressed the Convention, the most active members included Gouverneur Morris (Pa.), James Wilson (Va.), Madison (Va.) and Roger Sherman (Conn.). Edmund Randolph (Va.) and Charles Pinckney (S.C.) would also be among the most influential - but Randolph would ultimately refuse to sign the Constitution.
 &

Practical matters were the concerns of these men. They would debate "the rights of states, but not the rights of man in general."

They believed in republican principles, but sought to separate republican governance as much as possible from the immediate influence of the public.

  The Convention never dwelled long on theory, Bowen points out. Ideals and theory had been resolved in July, 1776. Practical matters were the concerns of these men. They would debate "the rights of states, but not the rights of man in general." They were concerned with the practical aspects of a working government. When they discussed political power and government authority, it was "in terms of what was likely to happen to Delaware and Pennsylvania, New Jersey or Georgia." Experience, not pure reason or theory, was their guide.
 &
  Nor were they enthusiasts for "democracy." "[The] word democracy carried another meaning than it does today," the author notes. Shays Rebellion had left a deep imprint - and not just on the Massachusetts delegation. Washington had expressed deep dismay over these events. They had been a victory for those who advocated despotism over political freedom. The delegates were men of property and commerce, and they feared the mob. They believed in republican principles, but sought to separate republican governance as much as possible from the immediate influence of the public.
 &
  The merchants and planters were concerned with their immediate needs. It would be the scholars - Madison (Va.), George Wythe (Va.), John Dickinson (Del.), James Wilson (Pa.) - who took the longer view.
 &

  Belief in systems of political freedom did not divide along class lines, the author points out. Virginia grandees like the slave-owning Thomas Jefferson and George Mason - a planter with about 200 slaves who was already a long-time abolitionist - ardently believed in popular government, as did the wealthy businessman Benjamin Franklin, while men of lesser means like the merchant Eldridge Gerry (Mass.) - a firebrand of the Revolution - and Roger Sherman (Conn.) - a shoemaker - feared it.
 &

  The extent of the reform plans of Hamilton and Madison were not immediately apparent to the delegates. Some would be stunned as these proposals were presented. However, ultimately, only three of those present at the signing would refuse to sign the finished document - and only four of those absent are known as opponents who would have refused to sign.
 &

Matters once voted upon could be subsequently taken up for reconsideration - a time consuming but most useful  provision in assuring the broadest possible support for the finished document.

  After reading credentials, the rules of the Convention were established. Speakers would address their remarks to the president - no distractions were permitted during delegate speeches - all attention would be directed towards the speaker - nobody would speak more than twice on any matter without special leave - and will not speak a second time until all who desire to speak have had their first chance.
 &
  Seven states would make a quorum, but matters once voted upon could be subsequently taken up for reconsideration - a time consuming but most useful  provision in assuring the broadest possible support for the finished document. Most notably, the votes of the individual delegates would not be officially recorded, thus facilitating individual reconsideration as well. Madison, however, kept an unofficial tally of votes. (Voting would be by state delegations - not by individual delegates.)

  "There is something impressive about these rules," Bowen states. "They show determination; the Convention was to be formal and parliamentary and behave as an authorized assembly. Moreover, a group of less experienced men would not have dared to be so simple, or would not have known how to free themselves from small and hampering considerations, leaving room for delegates to differ and change their minds. Reading the rules, one sees here a group of reasonable men, strong enough to yield. [As Madison wrote to Jefferson], 'The names of the members will satisfy you that the States have been serious in this business.'"

The Virginia Resolves:

&

  The substantive business of the Convention was initiated by Edmund Randolph, governor of Virginia. He spoke for three or four hours outlining fifteen "Resolves" that, rather than just revising the Articles, would establish a whole new system of national government.
 &

"The Virginia Plan would form the basis of the Convention's procedure -- and the basis of the United States Constitution -- to be debated clause by clause in Committee of the Whole, with every Resolve reconsidered, reargued, passed or discarded."

  There would be an executive and a judiciary, a bicameral legislature with one chamber elected by the people and a second elected by the first chamber. The Resolves were the initial proposals hammered out by Madison and a few of the other Virginia delegates. However, there was also strong opposition among the Virginia delegates, and only three of the seven would sign the Constitution.

  "On the morning of May twenty-ninth, when the Resolves were read to the Convention, not a man in the room but understood their import and felt they were indeed innovations. There was, however, no immediate expression of shock and very little protest. Members recognized the plan as only suggestive -- 'a mere sketch,' Madison called it later, 'in which omitted details were to be supplied, and the general terms and phrases to be reduced to their proper details.' Delegates knew also that they must have something upon which to proceed, some agenda to follow. For the rest of the summer the Virginia Plan would form the basis of the Convention's procedure -- and the basis of the United States Constitution -- to be debated clause by clause in Committee of the Whole, with every Resolve reconsidered, reargued, passed or discarded."

  Charles Pinckney (S.C.) also read a prepared plan similar in purport to that of Virginia, but it had little if any influence.
 &

Defining "federal," "national," and "supreme:"

 The Convention formed itself into a Committee of the Whole House the next day, May 30th, to discuss matters informally and without binding votes. Nathaniel Gorham (Mass.), not Washington, presided over these sessions. Three of the Resolves were discussed.
 &

Gouverneur Morris (Pa.) supported the Resolve, but questioned how both national and state governments could both by "supreme."

  Randolph began by proposing "a national government, consisting of a supreme legislative, executive and judiciary." He asserted that a merely federal union of states would not do 

  "Silence followed, complete and ominous. A government of three separate parts was entirely acceptable; six of the new state constitutions specified separation of powers. But a government national, supreme? How were the words to be defined, what powers did they comprehend?"

  The debate was launched - and would continue for days to come. Some expressed immediate hostility and others acclaimed national supremacy as necessary. Gouverneur Morris (Pa.) supported the Resolve, but questioned how both national and state governments could both by "supreme."

  "It was not surprising the Convention found itself confused," Bowen explains. 'What they were attempting was to discover a new kind of federalism, controlled by a supreme power that was directly responsible to the people. - - - The Confederation and the state constitutions were a long step ahead, but even so, the Convention found no overall example to follow. - - - True, there had been federations in the world. Greece had her city-states and the Convention was to hear much of them. Senators were no new thing nor was government by representation new. But never attempted on so large a scale, with a union comprising three and a half million people, thirteen states, a territory that reached, potentially, across a continent."

  The term "federal," Bowen explains, was being used differently at that moment as  government comprised of states, not their people.

  During the Convention, "federal" meant a relatively weak confederation of sovereign states. This should not be confused with the beliefs of the "Federalists," which was the party favoring a strong national government during the ratifying conventions and the first two decades under the Constitution.

The legislature:

  Discussion turned to the allocation of representatives and their election. How should the vote be apportioned - by population or property? Should the senate be elected by the state legislatures?
 &

  The Committee of the Whole adjourned at the end of the month, having agreed to two of the Resolves and a part of the third.

• A "national" bicameral legislature was approved under Resolve 3. This was already employed in 11 of the 13 States, and both Pennsylvania and Georgia would soon amend their constitutions to adopt this form of governmental architecture. Upon later reconsideration, the word "national" would be deleted.
• Popular election of the federal House of Representatives under Resolve 4 was approved - but with New Jersey and South Carolina voting No, and Connecticut and Delaware divided. This, too, was subsequently brought up for reconsideration.
• Congressional authority over state law under one segment of Resolve 6 was approved - but would later be rejected on reconsideration. Another segment - authorizing the use of force against recalcitrant states - was upon reflection postponed by Madison - permanently.

The chief executive:

  Resolve 7, the national executive, was discussed by the Committee of the Whole on June 1. It was only much later that they referred to the national executive as the "President."
 &

Wilson explained the need for energy, dispatch and responsibility in a chief executive.

Roger Sherman (Conn.) declared in opposition that the executive should be "nothing more than an instrument for carrying the will of the legislature into effect." He should be appointed by the legislature. The legislature should be "the supreme will of society."

Despite the recent revolution, all delegates recognized that the English government and common law comprised the freest system on earth.

  A "vigorous executive" was urged by Charles Pinckney (S.C.).  James Wilson (Pa.) followed urging an individual chief executive.
 &
  "A sudden silence followed. 'A considerable pause,' Madison wrote." There was menace in the words "a single executive." Nine states had governors, but they were subservient to their legislatures.
 &
  Franklin (Pa.) and John Rutledge (S.C.) broke the silence, urging members to express their feelings and assuring them that they would not be held to their initial views should they subsequently change their minds. Wilson explained the need for energy, dispatch and responsibility in a chief executive.
 &
  Roger Sherman (Conn.) declared in opposition that the executive should be "nothing more than an instrument for carrying the will of the legislature into effect." He should be appointed by the legislature. The legislature should be "the supreme will of society." Indeed, he preferred to divide the executive among three individuals.
 &
  Wilson countered that the shear size of the country required the vigor of a monarch, but in a republican official. But monarchy was a dirty word at that time - and the fear of its reestablishment was widespread.

  "Already the Convention was becoming accustomed to certain phrases: the fetus of monarchy - - - the fixed genius of this country - - - the sense of the nation - - -. Members were also growing used to references concerning the British form of government. - - - How is it in England? The question was insistent. How is it with the House of Commons? Have the judges in England a share in legislature or are they merely advisory?

  Despite the recent revolution, all delegates recognized that the English government and common law comprised the freest system on earth.
 &
  Bowen goes at some length into the debate over a single or plural executive. The debate became increasingly heated.
 &

A veto power could be used to gain increases in power over that of the legislature.

  Resolve 8, the veto power over legislation soon was added into the debate, with some who favored a strong, individual executive nevertheless opposed to the veto. In the Convention, the presidential veto was called "the executive negative."
 &
  Franklin was fiercely opposed, having had to deal with the abuse of veto power by the Pennsylvania Proprietors who used it to extort money and favorable legislation from the Pennsylvania colonial Assembly. A veto power could be used to gain increases in power over that of the legislature. Franklin opposed any veto by one person over the acts of the entire legislature.
 &

  The discussion turned to impeachment provisions and other methods of legislative control. Everybody knew who would be the first chief executive and had confidence in him. He was presiding at the Convention and sat - impassively - as a delegate with the Virginia delegation - as the debate about the chief executive continued during the proceedings of the Committee of the Whole. But who would come after Washington? And what if the chief executive were to become incapacitated? Franklin thus favored a plural executive.
 &
  Franklin also opposed salaries for high officials. Both he and Washington had served without pay or had donated their pay to national causes. Franklin's views on pay were treated with great respect, but a motion on executive pay was simply postponed. Ultimately, the single executive position prevailed 7 states to 3 - with Washington recorded by Madison as voting "ay."
 &

The veto power was accepted subject to overrule by supermajority vote in Congress.

  Resolve 8 - The executive veto - suggested that "a convenient number of the National Judiciary" be involved in the exercise of the veto "to revise the laws" when necessary. But, Rufus King (Mass.) asked, if judges were already charged with examining the constitutionality of the laws, how could they also be charged with making them? Even the negative power of veto would raise a conflict between these two duties. Dickinson (Del.) agreed that the judiciary and executive functions must remain separate.
 &
  Madison countered that a judicial advisory role would not undermine the separation of powers between the executive and judiciary. But Eldridge Gerry (Mass.) denounced any wider role for judges. He reflected the popular dislike for the lawyers and judges - the agents of authority - who frequently afflicted the populace by enforcing contracts, jailing debtors, and foreclosing on property. However, most of the delegates at the Convention were lawyers.
 &
  An absolute veto was rejected, 10-to-0. However, Madison had suggested that some supermajority of the Congress might be considered beyond the power of the veto. Discussion along this line continued until June 18, when the veto power was accepted subject to overrule by supermajority vote in Congress.
 &

The judiciary:

  Resolve 9 on creation of inferior courts was discussed on June 5.
 &

  Should judges be appointed or elected? If appointed, by whom - the executive or Congress - and under what procedure? What powers should the national judiciary have in the states?
 &
  Franklin raised other possibilities - of having judges elected by the people or chosen by the bar. It was decided to leave this issue open for further reflection.
 &

New states, state governments, Confederation Congress, amendments, oaths of office, ratification:

  The remaining six Resolves were then plowed through by the Committee of the Whole.

• Resolve 10 - provision for admission of new states - approved.
• Resolve 11 - guarantee of republican form of state government - postponed until the representation issue was resolved.
• Resolve 12 - continuation of Confederation Congress until a set date and completion of its current business - approved without discussion.
• Resolve 13 - procedure for amendment of Constitution without assent of Congress - postponed as three states announced their opposition.
• Resolve 14 - oaths of office for state officials affirming support for national government - postponed.
• Resolve 15 - ratification - hotly debated.

Madison viewed popular ratification as essential. If the Constitution was to be more than a mere treaty between sovereign states, it must be approved by the source of all sovereign power, the people themselves.

  Should the ratifying process involve state legislatures or conventions of popularly elected representatives? What should be the role of the Confederation Congress?
 &
  Roger Sherman (Conn.) supported the mechanism used for changes in the Articles - the assent of the Confederation Congress and nine states. But Madison viewed popular ratification as essential. If the Constitution was to be more than a mere treaty between sovereign states, it must be approved by the source of all sovereign power, the people themselves. It must be a ratification "in the most unexceptional form, and by the supreme authority of the people themselves."
 &
  Shays Rebellion cast a shadow over the debate. The debate proceeded between those who trusted and those who feared popular governance.
 &
  Then, Wilson (Pa.) reminded them of the real risks of defeat for the new Constitution "by the inconsiderate or selfish opposition of a few states." (This risk was much greater if the Confederation Congress and the state legislatures were involved.) The process must not require unanimity. A partial union with an open door for later accession of the rest must be provided. Charles Pinckney (S.C.) - doubtful of the acceptability of so bold an initiative as this Constitution - suggested that approval of nine states should suffice. The issue was postponed for further consideration.
 &

Representation in the legislature:

  Resolve 4 - representation in the legislature - the thorniest problem that had to be resolved - was revisited on June 6 by the Committee of the Whole.
 &

The people must play a significant role in the selection process if national government was to benefit from popular support.

  Opposition to representation based on population came, of course, from the smaller states, and also from those who distrusted popular governance. They advocated election by state legislatures. However, they were aware that the people must play a significant role in the selection process if national government was to benefit from popular support. The extent of suffrage came up for discussion.
 &

"[Every] one, by his property, or by his satisfactory situation, is interested in the support of law and order."

"In the end the United States Constitution required no property qualifications for the men who were to govern the country, whether senators, judges or chief executive."

  "Property" as a qualification for suffrage and office holders was widely supported. Bowen explains that property was abundant and labor scarce in 18th century America. Indeed, property rights were widely recognized as the essential basis for maintaining individual liberty and pursuing "happiness." There was no excuse for indigence. Anyone lacking property or other substantial means of self support - anyone that didn't qualify as "respectable 40 shilling freeholders" - simply hadn't tried. And, such people could not be trusted with political influence or office.

  "To the eighteenth century, property gave a man a stake in society, made him responsible, worthy of a vote in government. 'The true foundation of republican government,' wrote Thomas Jefferson, 'is the equal right of every citizen, in his person and property. - - - In the American States,' Jefferson said further, 'every one may have land to labor for himself, if he chooses.' And 'every one, by his property, or by his satisfactory situation, is interested in the support of law and order.'"

    The Convention was, of course, not influenced by anything like modern sensibilities. Property redistribution and social philosophy played no role in their deliberations. Charity was a local concern. Practical questions of governance, the maintenance of order and the safeguarding of people and their property were their immediate concern, Bowen explains.

  "The Convention of '87 discussed America not in terms of social philosophy but in relation to the country as they saw it around them. In the fields were no wretched peasant tenants, subsisting by their lord's favor. These men owned the land they cultivated. Even the mean desolate cabins of the frontier were inhabited by settlers who had gone west of their own free will."

  Moreover, most of the delegates had investments in the public debt. These securities would rise in value under a stronger government.
 &
  Free elections without property qualifications were already established in Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Hampshire. However, other states imposed property requirements ranging from 20£ to 40£. Qualifications for state chief executive officers were as high as 1,000£ in Massachusetts and 10,000£ in S. Carolina. Qualifications for legislative offices were also sometimes expressed in terms of acreage or money.
 &
  Discussion of property qualifications for suffrage and office would continue for three months. Bowen sums up the results:

  "It is significant that the Convention simply overrode these traditions and that in the end the United States Constitution required no property qualifications for the men who were to govern the country, whether senators, judges or chief executive. This was achieved not without a struggle."

  The argument for popular election of legislators was put best by George Mason (Va.).

  "'Under the existing Confederacy,' he said, 'Congress represents the states, not the people of the states.' It was natural for Madison to underline the words; after all, this had been largely his idea. 'The case will be changed in the new plan of government,' George Mason went on. 'The people will be represented; they ought therefore to choose the representatives. The requisites in actual representation are that the representatives should sympathize with their constituents, should think as they think and feel as they feel, and for these purposes should even be residents among them. Much has been alleged against democratic elections. - - - But it is to be considered that no government is free from imperfections and evils, and that improper elections in many instances are inseparable from republican governments.'"

  Then, surprisingly, George Read from the small state of Delaware disputed the need for concern about the prerogatives of the state governments. The Convention "must look beyond their continuance." Ultimately, state authority would be swallowed up by the national government. The Confederation was beyond repair. A new effective system of government must be established lest we "go to ruin or have the work to do over again."
 &
  However, the vote that evening was 8-to-2 against popular elections. The personal letters written by Washington and Madison that day expressed discouragement.
 &

The Senate:

  Resolve 5 - the Senate - was taken up the next day.
 &

In recognition of the continuing role of the states, Senators should be appointed by the state legislatures.

  Should selection be by popular election, election by state legislatures, appointment by the national executive, or by the House of Representatives?
 &
  Dickinson (Del.) then provided a clarifying metaphor for the new concept of shared sovereignty - of "two supremes." The states were like the planets - at the same time attracted towards and repelled from the national government at the center of their governmental system. The solar system metaphor would thereafter be used repeatedly in the Convention and during the ratification process. In recognition of the continuing role of the states, Senators should be appointed by the state legislatures.
 &
  Dickinson's motion was approved unanimously. The question was settled, and the provision included in the 1787 Constitution.
 &

The legislative veto over state laws:

  Resolve 6 - veto power of the national legislature over state laws - was taken up on June 8.
 &

Seven small states voted against the legislative veto. It would not be reconsidered.

  Debate was heated. Small state delegates were emphatic in their rejection of being placed at the mercy of a distant national government possibly controlled by several large states. Bowen reminds us of the distances and difficulties of travel between the states. Mail traveled faster to Savannah, Georgia from London than from Boston.
 &
  Dickinson (Del.) and Wilson (Va.) - mindful of how state interests had overwhelmed national interests under the Articles of Confederation - spoke in favor of the legislative veto. However, seven small states voted against the legislative veto. It would not be reconsidered.
 &

Representation:

  Resolve 4 - representation in the national legislature - was again considered on Saturday, June 9.
 &

  Again, it was little states against big states. Delegates from New Jersey - David Brearley and William Patterson - reminded the Convention that they met under the auspices of an Act of the Confederation Congress: "For the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation." The Convention had "no power to go beyond the federal scheme," they insisted, and if it does, the results would be rejected by the people. The people "are not ripe for it." The big states could unite under such circumstances if they wished. The small states would never join.
 &
  Wilson (Va.) responded just as adamantly. It was unjust for New Jersey to have the same weight in the national government as Pennsylvania. He opposed any confederation under such principles. "If no state will part with any of its sovereignty it is in vain to talk of a national government."
 &

Washington's letters reflected his gloomy outlook. Mason's letters reflected the awareness of the vast impact on posterity of success or failure of the Convention and the government it might establish.

"A sense of destiny is no comfortable thing, nor does a man feel easy when he confesses that posterity will bless or curse him for what he is about to do or leave undone."

  The Committee of the Whole House adjourned at noon for the weekend. Huge problems remained. How would western people vote? How would slaves be counted in the franchise? The issues involving slavery were yet to be even initially considered.
 &
  It was now clear that it would be a long convention. Washington's letters reflected his gloomy outlook. Mason's letters reflected the awareness of the vast impact on posterity of success or failure of the Convention and the government it might establish.
 &
  The letters and speeches of many of the others also reflected this view. "A sense of destiny is no comfortable thing, nor does a man feel easy when he confesses that posterity will bless or curse him for what he is about to do or leave undone," Bowen points out. Such sentiments hardly support the view of some historians that the delegates were primarily propertied gentlemen intent only "on commerce and their own financial security." The letters of leaders outside the Convention - Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Rush, Henry Knox - also reflected awareness of the significance of the moment and the awful price of failure.
 &
  Washington was held in awe. His presence kept tempers in bounds and reinforced the seriousness of the delegates. His presence, as well as that of Franklin and many of the other influential leaders of the young nation created great expectations among the people - expectations reflected in the press - for the outcome of the Convention.
 &

The Connecticut Compromise:

&

  Roger Sherman (Conn.) offered his fateful compromise on representation in the legislature on June 11. As Madison recorded it:

  "Mr. Sharman proposed that the proportion of suffrage in the 1st branch [the House] should be according to the respective numbers of free inhabitants; and that in the second branch or Senate, each state should have one vote and no more."

Since slaves are used like horses and cattle and counted as property and wealth in the south, why not count horses and cattle in the north?

  This solution to the problem had been offered as far back as 1776, when the Continental Congress was drafting the Articles of Confederation. It was not accepted then - and it was not immediately accepted now.
 &
  However, everyone thus recognized that some solution was at least possible. Did not the House of Lords protect particular interests in England? There was increased concentration on how suffrage should be apportioned in the lower house. South Carolina delegates John Rutledge and Pierce Butler asserted that wealth should be taken into account. After all, money was power.
 &
  Gerry (Mass.) offered a stinging reply. Since slaves are used like horses and cattle and counted as property and wealth in the south, why not count horses and cattle in the north? This repost would be repeated by abolitionists for years to come.
 &

The suffrage would be in proportion to the "whole number of white and other free citizens and three-fifths of all other persons except Indians not paying taxes - - -."

  Wilson then proposed the "three-fifths rule." This had been proposed by the Confederation Congress back in 1783. The suffrage would be in proportion to the "whole number of white and other free citizens and three-fifths of all other persons except Indians not paying taxes - - -." The "all other persons" of course were slaves.
 &
  Franklin - in an address delivered by Wilson because of Franklin's infirmities - then made the first of his pleas for calm and a spirit of compromise. He noted that Scotland had fears similar to those of the small states, but had not been ruined in Parliament.

  "We are sent here to consult, not to contend with each other; and declarations of a fixed opinion, and of determined resolution never to change it, neither enlighten nor convince us. Positiveness and warmth on one side, naturally beget their like on the other; and tend to create and augment discord and division in a great concern, wherein harmony and union are extremely necessary to give weight to our councils, and render them effectual in promoting and securing the common good."

  Franklin was in fragile health at this time. He had to be carried into the State House in a sedan chair. 

  Franklin's address continued at length, offering a possible wealth-based plan for suffrage. By the time it was finished, tempers had cooled. Sherman asked for a vote on his motion. It lost narrowly 6-to-5. The vote for proportional representation for both houses won narrowly 6-to-5 - but it would be reconsidered.
 &

  Philadelphia was plagued by a heat wave and insects which forced everyone to keep their windows shut. Bowen goes at some length into the depressing conditions endured by the delegates. However, there were also fireflies and hummingbirds, and the delights of the countryside that began just after Ninth Street. The Convention plowed along through June.
 &

  Other characteristics of the legislative bodies had to be determined.

• How long should the terms of office last? Opinions ranged from one year to three for the lower house. A motion for a single year term lost 7-to-4. The country was just too big and complex for single year terms. A triennial term seemed to be favored.
• How were legislators to be paid? Madison rejected reliance on the states "whose parsimony toward their local legislators was notorious." Franklin - ever the spirit of compromise - agreed on the need for a moderate stipend. Payment out of the national treasury was approved 8-to-3.
• How long should terms of office last for Senators? Opinions ranged from 3 to 7 years. Randolph (Va.) made the case for a long term - supporting 7 years.

  "The object of this second branch is to control the democratic branch of the national legislature. If it be not a firm body, the other branch being more numerous and coming immediately from the people, will overwhelm it. - - - A firmness and independence may be the more necessary also in this branch, as it ought to guard the Constitution against encroachments of the executive, who will be apt to form combinations with the demagogues of the popular branch."

  Madison, too, favored longer terms in order to give stability to the government. Instability had long been the bane of republican forms of government.

• Gerry moved to restrain the Senate from originating money bills. Only the Commons could originate money bills in England, he pointed out. Gerry's motion lost 7-to-3. (This principle would eventually be adopted, but the Senate would be authorized to propose amendments to money bills.)

The New Jersey Plan:

&

  By June 13, all of the Virginia Resolves - now numbering 19 along with many subdivisions - had been discussed. Some had been approved, others voted down. The Committee of the Whole House was ready with its report. An official vote was expected on June 14.
 &

  On June 14, however, time was requested and granted for preparation of an alternative plan offered for the small states by New Jersey.

  "[It was] a states rights plan, drastic, federal not national, and counter to the Virginia Plan."

  A long hard contest over the nature of the union was expected by all. On Friday, June 15, William Patterson (N.J.) presented the New Jersey plan. On Saturday, the delegates began hearing the contrasting resolutions suggested by the two plans.
 &

  The New Jersey Plan affirmed the Articles of Confederation "revised, corrected and enlarged as to render the federal Constitution adequate to the exigencies of Government and the preservation of the Union." The sovereignty of the states would be preserved. It included a unicameral legislature of narrowly limited jurisdiction in which each state had one vote. There would be multiple executives who could be removed by majority vote of the legislature. Small minorities could hold up action, and there would be no national judiciary.
 &
  Proponents included New York delegates Robert Yates and John Lansing, Gunning Bedford (Del.), Luther Martin (Md.), as well as New Jersey delegates Patterson and Brearley. Supporters included Gerry (Mass.), Connecticut delegates Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth, and George Mason (Va.), who shared Jefferson's dislike for strong central government. 
 &
  Patterson argued that the state governments and the people would not accept a strong national government. He noted the great expense that would be imposed on the nation's impoverished finances by all the new officeholders of the three branches of government proposed under the Virginia Plan. He again emphasized that the Convention was not authorized to do more than revise the Articles.
 &

Wilson conceded that the Convention was not authorized to do anything - but insisted that it could propose anything.

  Wilson responded by first outlining the differences between the two plans - resulting in a flurry of note taking by the delegates. Then, he conceded that the Convention was not authorized to do anything - but insisted that it could propose anything. He rejected the facile conclusion that popular opinion opposed a national government, and warned against inferring general opinion from the opinion of one's own circle. He was not convinced that the state governments were so widely beloved by their people, and that a national government so widely detested, as assumed by Patterson.

  "Why should a national government be unpopular? Has it less dignity? Will each citizen enjoy under it less liberty or protection? Will a citizen of Delaware be degraded by becoming a citizen of the United States?"

  Opponents of the New Jersey Plan then emphasized the importance of dealing with the recognized evils that had led to the Convention, and of proposing whatever was needed to save the Republic. Only a properly constituted national government could suffice. Randolph (Va.) concluded that failure at this moment would cause the people to "yield to despair." With that warning - to be frequently repeated during later sessions, the Convention adjourned for the weekend.
 &

Hamilton speaks:

  Hamilton addressed the delegates on Monday, June 18 - for six hours.
 &

  Hamilton was "brilliant, daring, politically ruthless," Bowen tells us. He was widely admired and supported - and even more widely feared and detested.

  "Hamilton had a vision of the United States as a single unified nation, rivaling both Britain and France and powerful also on the sea. - - - Moreover he was convinced that he knew the way to achieve his end, where to begin and what to do."

  Hamilton proposed a national government far stronger than even under the Virginia Plan. He proposed a single executive - "the governor" - chosen for life by electors and having an absolute veto over legislation. Senators also would serve for life, while a lower house would be popularly elected for 3 year terms. State governors would be appointed by the national government. It was frankly modeled on the British government that Hamilton greatly admired.
 &
  Hamilton disparaged "the mass of the people" and invoked fears of popular passions. He questioned the practicality of republican governance for so large a country with its many divisive geographic and economic interests. "States will prefer their particular concerns to the general welfare." If states remain sovereign, they will always come to dominate the national government. State distinctions and operations should be annihilated. He asserted that the people were in fact getting tired of democracy.
 &

The patience with which Hamilton's address was received was a remarkable testament to the civility that permeated the Convention. The speech was simply too radical, too extreme, too unsupported to require rebuttal.

  Hamilton was permitted to speak without interruption. He was likely antagonizing every small state delegate at the Convention and distressing most of the others. Instead, Hamilton was widely praised - and his proposals simply ignored! It was a remarkable testament to the civility that permeated the Convention. The speech was simply too radical, too extreme, too unsupported to require rebuttal.
 &
  Although undoubtedly a true statement of Hamilton's beliefs, it was totally out of character with his skilled support of the Constitution during the ratification process. The speech would support charges of monarchism that would be leveled against him for the rest of his short life.
 &
  By early in July, the entire three man New York delegation had left the Convention. Hamilton would return from time to time and be on hand to sign the Constitution. The political miracle of gaining ratification from a politically fractured New York lay in his future.
 &

Defeat of the New Jersey Plan:

  The nationalist position was reestablished by Madison when he addressed the Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, June 19.
 &

  He attacked the New Jersey Plan "coldly, logically, point by point" with a series of questions.

• Would the New Jersey Plan prevent the states from trespassing upon each other, as debtor states had done by issuing paper money in retaliation against creditor states?
• Would the Plan prevent internal state turmoil such as Massachusetts had experienced in Shay's Rebellion?
• Would it protect the Union against foreign powers?
• Had the small state delegates considered their expenses under the Plan, under which each state bore the expenses of their delegations to Congress?
• Could the nation survive under a compact that did not bind the whole?
• What would be the impact of a failure of the Convention to adopt any plan?

  The Committee of the Whole voted immediately thereafter - 7-to-3 - in favor of "Mr. Randolph's Plan." After several weeks of debate, the delegates had had time to reflect - and evaluate what at first had appeared shocking. The small state opposition then fell back to defend their position on the question of representation - a dispute that would continue for another four weeks.
 &

The Constitutional Convention reconvenes:

How could the national taxes be collected? Who would tolerate a national judiciary extending into a state?

  The Constitutional Convention - Washington presiding - resumed the next day, June 20th. The delegates quickly got rid of the politically loaded word "national" in the First Virginia Resolve, substituting instead "that the government of the United States ought to consist - - -."
 &
  Then John Lansing (N.Y.), Luther Martin (Md.) and George Mason (Va.) resumed the attack on the vast powers proposed for the new Congress. How could Congress review the vast number of state laws passed each year - or even be competent to judge what is appropriate under the conditions of particular states? How could the national taxes be collected? Who would tolerate a national judiciary extending into a state?
 &

The Senate:

&

  The suffrage issue was put aside in favor of focus on less controversial issues. How should pay be set? Should members of Congress be permitted to hold executive offices during their terms as in Parliamentary systems - and as in some states at that time? Wasn't Washington made Commander in Chief of the Continental Army while a member of the Continental Congress? But wouldn't that give Congress direct control over executive agencies?
 &

It was agreed that bills could originate in either house and members could serve as state officials but not in the national government.

  The Convention decided that Senators could be chosen by state legislatures - thus easing fears that the national government would not have sufficient concern for state interests. Senators must be 30 years of age. After voting against a 9 year term, the term was set at 6 years with one-third of the Senate standing for election every two years. The term of representatives in the lower house had been set earlier at 2 years.
 &
  That Senators would be paid was approved 10-to-1, but that the pay would come from the national treasury was approved by just 6-to-5. Mason suggested a property qualification, but his proposal died when it wasn't seconded. It was agreed that bills could originate in either house and members could serve as state officials but not in the national government.
 &
Progress was being made.
 &

Representation - again:

&

  The question of suffrage in the lower house at last had to be faced. On June 27, Luther Martin (Md.) got the Convention off to a bad start on this intractable issue by speaking interminably - for two days - against the Virginia Plan. Then others joined in, airing a multitude of views as the hot days passed away, and the disagreement became more entrenched and heated.
 &

Franklin: "We shall be divided by our little  partial local interests; our projects will be confounded and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages."

  Then, Franklin addressed the Convention. He recommended prayer and warned that without God's aid, the Convention might fail.

  "We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance despair of establishing government by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest."

  Franklin's address reminded the delegates of the solemnity and importance of the Convention's deliberations. Even the firebrand, Gerry (Mass.), now decried the contentiousness of the delegates. Gorham (Mass.) vowed to stay the course as long as even one other state continued to try to reach an agreement on a plan to be recommended to the people. Mason (Va.) - although a stalwart opponent of the Virginia Plan - proclaimed he would die in Philadelphia rather than leave without some solution.
 &

Madison and Wilson insisted that equality of representation was unjust.

Franklin: "[Both] sides must part with some of their demands in order that they may join in some accommodating proposition."

  However, the suffrage issue remained deadlocked through several votes. The Connecticut Compromise was submitted for the third time, but voted down by the large states. Madison and Wilson insisted that equality of representation was unjust. The debate again became heated. Franklin again urged compromise. "[Both] sides must part with some of their demands in order that they may join in some accommodating proposition."
 &
  However, the dispute continued unabated and became increasingly heated. Gunnar Bedford (Del.) blasted the large states for their intransigence on this issue. To their assurances that they would not hurt the small states or undermine their interests, he responded: "I do not, gentlemen, trust you!" He warned that the small states would be forced to join in a separate coalition and "take a foreign power by the hand" to protect their interests if this Convention failed.
 &

Gerry: "If we do nothing, it appears to me we must have war and confusion."

  Physical foreign intervention and meddling through bribery was a fear hitherto unspoken at the Convention, but now brought into the room. The European powers inevitably engaged the interests and exercised influence in the small new nation. All of Europe's recent wars had had their military counterparts in the colonies - King William's War, Queen Anne's War, King George's War. "Struggle as they might to be free of 'foreign entanglements,''' Bowen points out, "the states would never be free."
 &
  In a few years the French Revolution would roar into life, followed by the Napoleonic Wars. These conflicts would reach across the Atlantic and find fertile ground for extending themselves among the disparate sympathies and interests of the people of the states - if there were no Union strong enough to resist European influence and hold the nation together.
 &
  On July 2, the Convention voted again - splitting 5-to-5 with Georgia divided. "If we do nothing, it appears to me we must have war and confusion," Gerry (Mass.) feared. The suffrage question was submitted to a committee composed of one delegate from each state to report back after the July 4 celebrations.
 &
  All throughout the nation, people were looking with confidence to the Convention to resolve the Union's problems of governance. The newspapers provided calm assurances of the outcome. But the committee could not agree, and the days continued to pass in fruitless debate.
 &
  On July 10, Yates and Lansing - the two New York delegates opposed to the Virginia Plan - left the Convention in disgust and protest - never to return. They would bitterly oppose ratification in New York, but would ultimately be beaten by Hamilton. A French observer and veteran of the Revolution wrote home that Washington looked as gloomy as at Valley Forge. Washington wrote of his despair to Hamilton who was in New York.
 &
  See, Bowen, "Miracle at Philadelphia," Part II, "Compromises and Accommodations that Made the Nation."