unless some superior authority should be established. which could curb this delusive and destructive passion. Shays's rebellion and the paper-money craze of 1785-86 completed the demonstration of the entire insufficiency of the Confederation under the Articles of 1781. The leaders of political opinion, the statesmen of that period, had not waited so long to be of the opinion that something must be done if the States which together had won independence were to remain in concord and union. In 1785 Governor Bowdoin suggested the appointment of delegates from the several States, to settle and define the powers with which Congress should be invested; but, the representatives from Massachusetts not concurring in this proposal, it was not submitted to Congress. Virginia was more active in the work of reform. That State, having been in controversy with Maryland over the navigation of the Chesapeake and the Potomac, appointed commissioners to confer with representatives of the latter State regarding their conflicting rights. This negotiation failed; but it led to an invitation given by Virginia, in January, 1786, to all the States to meet in convention, to decide upon the commercial relations of the country. Twelve States had already agreed to the proposed revenue system of 1783; but the hostile action of New York killed the measure. That State, however, while refusing to assent to this scheme, sent delegates, foremost among them Alexander Hamilton, to the convention, which was held at Annapolis, in September, 1786. The convention itself was a failure, since only New York, New Jer- The Annapsey, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and Virginia olls Convenwere represented; but it opened the way to tion. a larger success than had even been in contemplation. That very failure showed the uselessness of any effort short of a general constitutional convention. The dele gates to Annapolis departed after addressing Congress in terms, drawn by Hamilton, which induced that body to call a convention of the States, to meet at Philadelphia in May, 1787, "for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation." So desperate had the situation become, that the call of Congress was not unheeded, although one of the States was not represented, and the delegates came with very different minds as to what could and should be done. It is the proceedings of the body thus assembled, the Constitutional Convention of 1787, which is to form the subject of our next chapter. Only one word more remains to be said. While the career of the Confederation had been a most unhappy one, its existence had not been wholly without results of good. It had bridged over the interval till the people should be ready to establish a real and effective government; it had kept the idea of American nationality before the minds of all; and its very misfortunes and calamities had served to convince the country that something more must be done to secure the union of the States which had together won their independence. CHAPTER II THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1787 The Convention meets May 14th-Absence of Rhode Island-Delegates Appointed, 62-Number Attending at any Time, 55— Number Signing the Constitution, 39-Eminent Character of the State Delegations-Respective Contributions of Different Classes of Delegates-The Party of Obstruction-The Leading Spirits of the Convention-Doubts as to a Successful ResultViews Held as to the Relations between the Confederation and the States-The Three dominating Issues of the Convention - A Federal or a National Government-Equal or Proportional Representation of the States-Representation on Account of Slaves-Results on these Issues-The Work of the Committee on Detail Introduces Three New Issues-Taxation of Exports -The Slave trade-Two-thirds Vote on Navigation Acts-Extensive Disaffection of Delegates-Withdrawal of Some-Adoption of the Constitution-Nine States Sufficient for Ratification -This Measure Revolutionary-The Whole Work of the Convention Revolutionary-Called to Amend the Articles of Confederation, it Throws them Over at the Beginning-Impossibility of Deriving the Constitution Legitimately from Either the Confederation or the Revolutionary Congress-The Ordinance of 1787 among the Closing Acts of the Congress of the Confederation-Importance of this Measure. Rhode Island THE Convention met on May 14th; but there were not, on that day, delegates present from a majority of the States. Rhode Island was not represent- Absence of ed then or at any stage of the Convention; from the Conbut its Governor sent an address urging the vention. Convention to consider the interests and rights of that State in their deliberations, and holding out hopes that it would join the movement at a later period. The ab sence of Rhode Island has generally been explained by the domination of the paper-money party in the Legislature. Of all the offenders in the matter of paper-issues before the Revolution, Rhode Island had easily been the worst; and the passion for bad money thus created had not lost its hold upon the public mind. Now, if anything was certain in regard to a new Constitution, it was that it would prohibit paper-money issues by the States. Other and perhaps equally valid explanations of Rhode Island's absence from the Constitutional Convention have, however, been given.* From New Hampshire delegates did not arrive till July 23d; but by May 25th, a quorum, that is, at least two delegates from each of a majority of the thirteen States, had been obtained; and the Convention proceeded to its immensely important business. That business was in form, that is, according to the call, a revision of the Articles of Confederation of 1781; but only the briefest time elapsed before it was clearly seen that, if the Convention was to accomplish anything at all, it would be not through revision, but through the adoption of a substantially new form of government. The Articles of Confederation had been too conclusively found wanting, to make any change in them, however extensive, satisfactory. Member Convention. The total number of delegates, by all the States appointed, was 62. Of these, however, only 55 were at any time, earlier or later, in attendance. In ship of the the final result only 39 members signed the Constitution. In its membership the Convention was a noble body, recalling the early days of the Revolutionary Congress. After the unhappy experiences of the Congress of the Confederation, through so many years, this change was indeed refreshing, and gave * See a very able paper read before the Rhode Island Historical Society, in 1890, by Hon. Horatio Rogers. at least the hope of doing something. No commonplace gathering of second-rate men would have had the slightest chance of carrying the country with them in anything which they might propose. tions of differ ent classes of The contributions which the several members of the Convention were destined to make to the successful result of its deliberations and decisions were Contribuvery different. Some stood, first, foremost, and always, for union-for union in spite of delegates. obstacles; for union in defiance of State rights and local interests; for union under almost any form, provided only a strong and self-supporting government should be created. This was their contribution : zeal for union, devotion to the prime object of the Convention. Some of these delegates enjoyed the advantage of skill in debate, persuasive discourse, and fiery eloquence. Others made their influence felt mainly in personal conference and in the spirit with which, simply as voting members, they met and rose over the successive obstacles which for the time stopped the work of the Convention or threatened its dissolution. Others there were whose qualities of mind and temper fitted them especially to contribute to a fortunate result through the analysis of methods and details. A few were jurists and publicists, widely read in constitutional history and of a learning and intellectual power to lift discussion, at critical points, out of the common and the vulgar, up to high planes of statesmanship. Some contributed through prestige, derived from services in peace and in war, lending dignity and authority to the cause of union, both within and without the Convention, whether or not they were adroit in debate, or learned in political history, or powerful in appeal. Some contributed by parliamentary skill and tact, knowing how to avoid difficulties; how to pass around obstacles; how to conciliate opposition; |