Randolph now began to speak of the constitution as a plan which would end in tyranny; and proposed that the state conventions, on receiving it, should have power to adopt, reject, or amend it; after which another general convention should meet with full power to adopt or reject the proposed alterations, and to establish finally the government. Franklin sec onded the motion. Out of respect to its authors, the proposition was allowed to remain on the table; but by a unani mous vote it was ordered that the constitution should be established on its ratification by the conventions of nine states.t Finally, a committee of five was appointed to revise its style and the arrangement of its articles. * *Gilpin, 1542; Elliot, 535. Gilpin, 1571; Elliot, 541. CHAPTER XI. THE LAST DAYS OF THE CONVENTION. SEPTEMBER 12 TO SEPTEMBER 17, 1787. THE Committee to whom the constitution was referred for the arrangement of its articles and the revision of its style were Johnson, Hamilton, Gouverneur Morris, Madison, and King. The final draft of the instrument was written by Gouverneur Morris,* who knew how to reject redundant and equivocal expressions, and to use language with clearness and vigor; but the convention itself had given so minute, long-continued, and oft-renewed attention to every phrase in every section, that there scarcely remained room for improvement except in the distribution of its parts. Its first words are: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America." Here is no transient compact between parties: it is the institution of government by an act of the highest sovereignty; the decree of many who are yet one; their law of laws, inviolably supreme, and not to be changed except in the way which their forecast has provided. The names of the thirteen states, so carefully enumerated in the declaration of independence and in the treaty of peace, were omitted, because the constitution was to go into effect on its acceptance by nine of them, and the states by which it would * G. Morris to T. Pickering, 22 December 1814, in Life by Sparks, iii., 323. be ratified could not be foreknown. The deputies in the convention, representing but eleven states, did not pretend to be "the people;" and could not institute a general government in its name. The instrument which they framed was like the report of a bill beginning with the words "it is enacted," though the binding enactment awaits the will of the legislature; or like a deed drawn up by an attorney for several parties, and awaiting its execution by the principals themselves. Only by its acceptance could the words "we the people of the United States" become words of truth and power. The phrase "general welfare," * adopted from the articles of confederation, though seemingly vague, was employed in a rigidly restrictive sense to signify "the concerns of the union at large, not the particular policy of any state." The word "national" was excluded from the constitution, because it might seem to present the idea of the union of the people without at the same time bringing into view that the one republic was formed out of many states. Toward foreign powers the country presented itself as one nation. The arrangement of the articles and sections is faultless; the style of the whole is nearly so. The branches of the legislature are definitively named senate and house of representatives, the senate, at last, having precedence; the two together take the historic name of congress. The veto of the president could still be overruled only by three fourths of each branch of congress; the majority of the convention, fearing lest so large a requisition would impose too great a difficulty in repealing bad laws, ‡ at this last moment substituted the vote of two thirds. Williamson pointed out the necessity of providing for juries in civil cases. "It is not possible," said Gorham, "to discriminate equity cases from those in which juries would be proper; and the matter may safely be trusted to the representatives of the people." # Gerry urged the necessity of juries as a safeguard against corrupt judges. "A general principle laid down on this and some other points would be sufficient," *Gilpin, 1543; Elliot, 558. Washington to William Gordon, 8 July 1783. #Gilpin, 1565; Elliot, 538. said Mason, and he joined with Gerry in moving for a bill of rights. The declaration of American independence, by the truths which it announced, called forth sympathy in all parts of the world. Could the constitution of the United States have been accompanied by a like solemn declaration of the principles on which it rested, the states would have been held together by the holiest and strongest bonds.* But the motion was lost by the unanimous vote of ten states, Massachusetts being absent, and Rhode Island and New York not represented. The style of the executive, as silently carried forward from the committee of detail, was still "his Excellency;" this vanished in the committee of revision, so that he might be known only as the president of the United States. Following a precedent of the first congress, Mason, on the thirteenth, seconded by Johnson, moved for a committee to report articles of association for encouraging economy, frugality, and American manufactures. It was adopted without debate and without opposition. The proposal was referred to Mason, Franklin, Dickinson, Johnson, and William Livingston; but they made no report. From the work of the committee of detail the word "servitude" survived as applied to the engagement to labor for a term of years; on the motion of Randolph the word "service" * Here manuscripts and printed texts differ in an astonishing manner. Text of Madison in Elliot, i., 306. It was moved and seconded to appoint a committee to prepare a bill of rights; which passed UNANIMOUSLY in the negative. Manuscript of Madison. On the question for a committee to prepare a bill of rights N. H. no, Mas. abst., Ct. no, N. J. no, Pa. no, Del. no, Md. no, Va. no, N. C. no, S. C. no, Geo. no. Text of Madison in Gilpin, 1566; in Elliot, 538. On the question for a committee to prepare a bill of rights New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, aye—5; Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no—5; Massachusetts, absent. The manuscript of Madison, which is plainly written, represents the motion as negatived unanimously; the printed edition, as lost by a purely geographical division. The change remains as yet a mystery. Gilpin, 1568; Elliot, 540. was unanimously substituted for it, servitude being thought to express the condition of slaves, service an obligation of free persons.* * On the same day Johnson, from the committee on style, reported + resolutions for the ratification of the constitution through congress by conventions of the people of the several states; and then for the election of senators, representatives, and electors, and through them of president. Nothing was omitted to make it certain that at a fixed time and place the government under the constitution would start into being. On the fourteenth it was confirmed without dissent that congress should have no right to change the places of the election of senators. The appointment of the treasurer as the keeper of the purse had thus far been jealously reserved to the two houses of congress. It marks the confidence of the convention in its own work, that at this period the selection of that officer was confided to the president and senate. On the same day Franklin, seconded by Wilson, moved to add, after the authority to establish post-offices and post-roads, a power "to provide for cutting canals." # "The expense," objected Sherman, "will fall on the United States, and the benefit accrue to the places where the canals are cut." "Canals," replied Wilson, "instead of being an expense to the United States, may be made a source of revenue." Madison, supported by Randolph, suggested an enlargement of the motion into a warrant to grant charters of incorporation which might exceed the legislative provisions of individual states, and yet be required by the interest of the United States; political obstacles to an easy communication between the states being removed, a removal of natural ones ought to follow. The necessity of the power was denied by King. "It is necessary," answered Wilson, "to prevent a state from obstructing the general welfare." "The states," rejoined King, "will be divided into parties to grant charters of incorporation, in Philadelphia and New York to a bank, in other places to mercantile * Gilpin, 1233, 1544, 1569; Elliot, 379, 540, 559. Gilpin, 1570, 1571; Elliot, 541. Gilpin, 1574; Elliot, 542. #Gilpin, 1576; Elliot, 548. |