The Constitution being signed by all the members, except Mr. Randolph, Mr. Mason, and Mr. Gerry, who declined giving it the sanction of their names, the Convention dissolved itself by an adjournment sine die.269 Whilst the last members were signing, Dr. FRANKLIN, looking towards the president's chair, at the back of which a rising sun happened to be painted, observed to a few members near him, that painters had found it difficult to distinguish, in their art, a rising from a setting sun. "I have," said he, "often and often, in the course of the session, and the vicissitudes of my hopes and fears as to its issue, looked at that behind the president, without being able to tell whether it was rising or setting; but now, at length, I have the happiness to know that it is a rising, and not a setting sun." 48 LETTERS WRITTEN AFTER THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION. TO GENERAL WASHINGTON, NEW YORK, September 30, 1787. DEAR SIR, I found, on my arrival here, that certain ideas, unfavorable to the act of the Convention, which had created difficulties in that body, had made their way into Congress. They were patronized chiefly by Mr. R. H. Lee, and Mr. Dane, of Massachusetts. It was first urged, that, as the new Constitution was more than an alteration of the Articles of Confederation, under which Congress acted, and even subverted those Articles altogether, there was a constitutional impropriety in their taking any positive agency in the work. The answer given was, that the resolution of Congress in February had recommended the Convention as the best means of obtaining a firm national government; that, as the powers of the Convention were defined, by their commissions, in nearly the same terms with the powers of Congress given by the Confederation on the subject of alterations, Congress were not more restrained from acceding to the new plan, than the Convention were from proposing it. If the plan was within the powers of the Convention, it was within those of Congress; if beyond those powers, the same necessity which justified the Convention would justify Congress; and a failure of Congress to concur in what was done would imply, either that the Convention had done wrong in exceeding their powers, or that the government proposed was in itself liable to insuperable objections; that such an inference would be the more natural, as Congress had never scrupled to recommend measures foreign to their constitutional functions, whenever the public good seemed to require it; and had in several instances, particularly in the establishment of the new western governments, exercised assuined powers of a very high and delicate nature, under motives infinitely less urgent than the present state of our affairs, if any faith were due to the representations made by Congress themselves, echoed by twelve states in the Union, and confirmed by the general voice of the people. An attempt was made, in the next place, by R. H. L., to amend the act of the Convention before it should go forth from Congress. He proposed a Bill of Rights, provision for juries in civil cases, and several other things corresponding with the ideas of Col. Mason. He was supported by Mr. Melancthon Smith, of this state. It was contended, that Congress had an undoubted right to insert amendments, and that it was their duty to make use of it in a case where the essential guards of liberty had been omitted. On the other side, the right of Congress was not denied, but the inexpediency of exerting it was urged on the following grounds; - first, that every circumstance indicated that the introduction of Congress as a party to the reform was intended by the states merely as a matter of form and respect; secondly, that it was evident, from the contradictory objections which had been expressed by the different members who had animadverted on the plan, that a discussion of its merits would consume much time, without producing agreement even among its adversaries ; thirdly, that it was clearly the intention of the states that the plan to be proposed should be the act of the Convention, with the assent of Congress, which could not be the case, if alterations were made, the Convention being no longer in existence to adopt them; fourthly, that as the act of the Convention, when altered, would instantly become the mere act of Congress, and must be proposed by them as such, and of course be addressed to the legislatures, not conventions of the states, and 1quire the ratification of thirteen instead of nine states, and as the unaltered act would go forth. to the states directly from the Convention, under the auspices of that body, some states might ratify the one and some the other of the plans, and confusion and disappointment be the least evils that would ensue. These difficulties, which at one time threatened a serious division in Congress, and popular alterations, with the yeas and nays on the Journals, were at length fortunately terminated by the following resolution: "Congress having received the report of the Convention lately assembled in Philadelphia, Resolved unanimously, that the said report, with the resolutions and letter accompanying the same, be transmitted to the several legislatures, in order to be submitted to a convention of delegates chosen in each state by the people thereof, in conformity to the resolves of the Convention made and provided in that case.' Eleven states were present the absent ones, Rhode Island and Maryland. A more direct approbation would have been of advantage in this and some other states, where stress will be laid on the agency of Congress in the matter, and a handle be taken by adversaries of any ambiguity on the subject. With regard to Virginia and some other states, reserve on the part of Congress will do no injury. The circumstance of unanimity must be favorable every where. The general voice of this city seems to espouse the new Constitution. It is supposed, nevertheless, that the party in power is strongly opposed to it. The country must finally decide, the sense of which is as yet wholly unknown. As far as Boston and Connecticut have been heard from, the first impression seems to be auspicious. I am waiting with anxiety for the echo from Virginia, but with very faint hopes of its corresponding with my wishes. TO EDMUND RANDOLPH. NEW YORK, October 21, 1787. DEAR SIR, We hear that opinions are various in Virginia on the plan of the Convention. I have received, within a few days, a letter from the chancellor, by which I find that he gives it his approbation; and another from the president of William and Mary, which, though it does not absolutely reject the Constitution, criticises it pretty freely. The newspapers in the Northern and Middle States begin to teem with controversial publications. The attacks seem to be principally levelled against the organization of the government, and the omission of the provisions contended for in favor of the press, and juries, &c. A new combatant, however, with considerable address and plausibility, strikes at the foundation. He represents the situation of the United States to be such as to render any government improper and impracticable which forms the states into one nation, and is to operate directly on the people. Judging from the newspapers, one would suppose that the adversaries were the most numerous and the most earnest. But there is no other evidence that it is the fact. On the contrary, we learn that the Assembly of New Hampshire, which received the Constitution on the point of their adjournment, were extremely pleased with it. All the information from Massachusetts denotes a favorable impression there. The legislature of Connecticut have unanimously recommended the choice of a convention in that state, and Mr. Baldwin, who is just from the spot, informs me, that, from present appearances, the opposition will be inconsiderable; that the Assembly, if it depended on them, would adopt the system almost unanimously; and that the clergy and all the literary men are exerting themselves in its favor. Rhode Island is divided; the majority being violently against it. The temper of this state cannot yet be fully discerned. A strong party is in favor of it. But they will probably be outnumbered, if those whose numbers are not yet known should take the opposite side. New Jersey appears to be zealous. Meetings of the people in different counties are declaring their approbation, and instructing their representatives. There will probably be a strong opposition in Pennsylvania. The other side, however, continue to be sanguine. Dr. Carroll, who came hither lately from Maryland, tells me, that the public voice there appears at present to be decidedly in favor of the Constitution. Notwithstanding all these circumstances, I am far from considering the public mind as fully known, or finally settled on the subject. They amount only to a strong presumption that the general sentiment in the Eastern and Middle States is friendly to the proposed system at this time. TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. [EXTRACT.] NEW YORK, October 24, 1787 DEAK SIR,- When the plan of the Constitution proposed by the Convention came before Congress for their sanction, a very serious effort was made by R. H. Lee and Mr. Dane, from Massachusetts, to embarrass it. It was first contended, that Congress could not properly give any positive countenance to a measure which had for its object the subversion of the Constitution under which they acted. This ground of attack failing, the former gentleman urged the expediency of sending out the plan with amendments, and proposed a number of them corresponding with the objections of Col. Mason. This experiment had still less effect. In order, however, to obtain unanimity, it was necessary to couch the resolution in very moderate terms. TO GENERAL WASHINGTON. [EXTRACT.] NEW YORK, October 28, 1787. DEAR SIR,―The mail of yesterday brought me your favor of the 22d instant. The communications from Richmond give me as much pleasure as they exceed my expectations. As I find by a letter from a member of the Assembly, however, that Col. Mason has not got down, and it appears that Mr. Henry is not at bottom a friend, I am not without fears that their combined influence and management may yet create difficulties. There is one consideration which I think ought to have some weight in the case, over and above the intrinsic inducements to embrace the Constitution, and which I have suggested to some of my correspondents. There is at present a very strong probability that nine states at least will pretty speedily concur in establishing it. What will become of the tardy remainder? They must be either left, as outcasts from the society, to shift for themselves, or be compelled to come in, or must come in of themselves when they will be allowed no credit for it. Can either of these situations be as eligible as a prompt and manly determination to support the Union, and share its common fortunes? My last stated pretty fully the information which had arrived here from different quarters, concerning the proposed Constitution. I recollect nothing that is now to be added, further than that the Assembly of Massachusetts, now sitting, certainly gives it a friendly reception. I enclose a Boston paper, by which it appears that Gov. Hancock has ushered it to them in as propitious a manner as could have been required. Mr. Charles Pinckney's character is, as you observe, well marked by the publications which I enclosed. His printing the secret paper at this time could have no motive but the appetite for expected praise; for the subject to which it relates has been dormant a considerable time, and seems likely to remain so. TO EDMUND RANDOLPH. NEW YORK, November 18, 1787. DEAR SIR, -I have not, since my arrival, collected any additional information concerning the progress of the Federal Constitution. 1 discovered no evidence, on my journey through New Jersey, that any opposition whatever would be made in that state. The Convention of Pennsylvania is to meet on Tuesday next. The members returned, I was told by several persons, reduced the adoption of the plan in that state to absolute certainty, and by a greater majority than the most sanguine advocates had calculated. One of the counties, which had been set down by all on the list of opposition, had elected deputies of known attachment to the Constitution. I do not find that a single state is represented except Virginia, and it seems very uncertain when a Congress will be made. There are individual members present from several states; and the attendance of this and the neighboring states may, 1 suppose, be obtained, when it will produce a quorum. TO EDMUND RANDOLPH. [EXTRACT.] NEW YORK, December 2, 1787. DEAR SIR,-No recent indications of the views of the states as to the Constitution have come to my knowledge. The elections in Connecticut are over, and, as far as the returns are known, a large majority are friendly to it. Dr. Johnson says, it will be pretty certainly adopted; but there will be opposition. The power of taxing any thing but imports appears to be the most popular topic among the adversaries. The convention of Pennsylvania is sitting. The result there will not reach you first through my hands. The divisions on preparatory questions, as they are published in the newspapers, show that the party in favor of the Constitution have forty-four or forty-five versus twenty-two or twenty-four, or thereabouts. The enclosed paper contains two numbers of the Federalist. This paper was begun about three weeks ago, and proposes to go through the subject. I have not been able to collect all the numbers, since my return from Philadelphia, or I would have sent them to you. I have been the less anxious, as I understand the printer means to make a pamphlet of them, when I can give them to you in a more convenient form. You will probably discover marks of different pens. I am not at liberty to give you any other key than that I am in myself for a few numbers, and that one besides myself was a member of the Convention.270 TO THOMAS JEFFERSON. [EXTRACT.] NEW YORK, December 20, 1787. DEAR SIR,- Since the date of my other letter, the convention of Delaware have unanimously adopted the new Constitution. That of Pennsylvania has adopted it by a majority of 46 against 23. That of New Jersey is sitting, and will adopt pretty unanimously. These are all the conventions that have met. I hear, froin North Carolina, that the Assembly there is well disposed. TO GENERAL WASHINGTON. [EXTRACT.] NEW YORK, December 20, 1787 DEAR SIR,-I was favored on Saturday with your letter of the 7th instant, along with which was covered the printed letter of Col. R. H. Lee to the governor. [See p. 503, Vol. I. Elliot's Debates.] It does not appear to me to be a very formidable attack on the new Constitution; unless it should derive an influence from the names of the correspondents, which its intrinsic merits do not entitle it to. He is certainly not perfectly accurate in the statement of all his facts; and I should infer, from the tenor of the objections in Virginia, that his plan of an executive would hardly be viewed as an amendment of that of the Convention. It is a little singular that three of the most distinguished advocates for amendments, and who expect to unite the thirteen states in their project, appear to be pointedly at variance with each other on VOL. V. 72 |