who were specially prominent in the proceedings were James Wilson of Pennsylvania; William Samuel Johnson, Oliver Ellsworth, and Roger Sherman, of Connecticut; Elbridge Gerry and Rufus King, of Massachusetts; William Patterson, of New Jersey; John Dickinson, of Delaware; Luther Martin, of Maryland; and John Rutledge, C. C. Pinckney, Charles Pinckney, and Pierce Butler, of South Carolina.

Rhode Island was the only State which did not choose any delegates. New Hampshire did not appoint hers until late and they did not take their seats until July 23. Meanwhile two of New York's three delegates had withdrawn leaving Hamilton without a vote, so that not more than eleven States voted at any one time.

Organiza

tion and procedure

By May 25 a sufficient number of delegates had arrived to enable the convention to organize and Washington was elected president. The work of the convention was carried on behind closed doors and a rule of secrecy was imposed on its members. The official journal of the secretary, William Jackson, was very carelessly kept, but Madison kept copious notes for his own information which are much fuller and more accurate than the secretary's. Hasty notes were also made by Yates, King, and a few other members, and notwithstanding the rule of secrecy occasional letters were written by delegates to friends. When the convention adjourned Washington took charge of the journal and other papers, which he deposited with the Department of State in 1796. They were first printed by direction of Congress in 1819 and were followed later by the publication of Madison's journal and other material.

On May 29 Governor Edmund Randolph, acting for the Virginia delegation, introduced a series of resolutions emThe Virginia bodying what became known as the Virginia plan. plan This plan provided for a national legislature of two houses in which the States should be represented according to quotas of contributions or to the number of free

inhabitants; the members of the first branch were to be chosen by the people of the several States, and the members of the second branch were to be chosen by the first from a list of nominations made in each State by the legislature. It also provided for a national executive, and for a national judiciary; the latter was to have jurisdiction over suits in which foreigners were interested, which concerned the national revenue, or which involved the national peace and harmony, and was also to try impeachments. Provision was likewise made for the admission of new States, for the guaranty of a republican government to each State, and for amendments.

The conven

tion resolves

a national government

The Randolph resolutions were immediately taken up in detail and became the basis of the subsequent discussions. As they contemplated a national rather than a federal form of government, that question was at the start put before the convention, and on May to establish 30 a resolution was adopted declaring "that a national government ought to be established consisting of a supreme Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary." Thus the convention set itself the task not of patching up the old Articles of Confederation, but of framing a new constitution.

By June 13 the Virginia plan had been adopted by the committee of the whole without radical change and was reported to the convention. So far the national The New party appeared to be in control, but the opposi- Jersey plan tion of the smaller states was merely gathering force. Before proceeding with the discussion of the Virginia plan William Patterson of New Jersey asked permission to introduce a new and totally different plan. The New Jersey plan provided nothing more than a revision of the Articles of Confederation. It proposed a plural executive and a judiciary. Congress was to be given the right to levy duties on imports and to regulate trade, and the executive was to have the right to coerce a State, or any body of men in a

State, who refused obedience to the acts of Congress or to treaties.

Comparison

of the two plans

James Wilson made an excellent comparison of the two plans on the floor of the convention. He said: "The only difference between the plan from Virginia and the plan from New Jersey is, in a word this: Virginia proposes two branches to the legislature, Jersey one. Virginia would have the legislative power derived from the people, Jersey from the States. Virginia would have a single executive, Jersey more than one. By the Virginia plan the national legislature can act on all national concerns. By the New Jersey plan only to a limited extent. By the one the legislature can negative all State laws. By the other the executive can compel obedience by force.'

Patterson said that the basis of the old Confederation was "equal sovereignty," and that the work of the convention The New was limited to a revision of the Articles of ConJersey plan federation. In the discussion which followed rejected, but the word Wilson, Madison, and Hamilton attacked the New national Jersey plan with great force, and by a vote of stricken out of the Vir- seven to three it was finally declared inadmisginia plan sible. On June 19 the convention again took up the Virginia plan, but the opposition had developed such strength that on the following day the convention ordered that the word national be stricken out of the Randolph resolutions wherever it occurred. The word national as applied to the United States did not come into general use until after the Civil War. Even during that struggle the army of the United States was commonly spoken of as the Federal Army. This concession to the small State party encouraged them to renew the fight for a single legislative secure equal body in which the States should have equal representation. It was finally decided that there Senate should be two branches of the legislature and that in the first branch proportional representation should

The small states

representa

tion in the

prevail. The Connecticut men immediately demanded a decision as to the make-up of the second branch. Ellsworth described the union as partly federal and partly national and demanded that this fact be recognized. The whole subject was referred to a committee consisting of one member from each State, which finally recommended that representation in the first branch be proportional and that all revenue bills originate in that branch, but that each State should have an equal vote in the second branch. This report was adopted by the convention.

The next important question related to the basis of representation. Having decided that representation in the first branch of the legislature should be proportional, The three the convention now had to determine whether fifths comit should be proportional to population or to

wealth, and, in either case, whether slaves should be included. The delegates from South Carolina favored population as the basis for representation and insisted that slaves should be counted. To this the Northern States were stoutly opposed.

Williamson of North Carolina advocated counting three fifths of the slaves in taking the population, a proposition which had been brought forward in Congress four years before in connection with the apportionment of taxes. Gouverneur Morris moved that "taxation shall be in proportion to representation." This was a two-edged sword, for if the South should secure a larger representation through its slaves than it would otherwise be entitled to, it would have to pay proportionately heavier taxes. Mason amended Morris's motion so as to limit it to direct taxes. It was finally agreed that in apportioning representatives and direct taxes three fifths of the slaves should be counted.

Another problem in which the slavery question figured was the control of commerce. The Southern States being exclusively agricultural were opposed to giving the general government unrestricted control over commerce for fear

Control of commerce and the

slave trade

that the Northern States would use this power to enact protective tariffs. As Mason said: "The Southern States are the minority in both Houses. Is it to be expected that they will deliver themselves bound hand and foot to the Eastern States?" Furthermore South Carolina and Georgia were opposed to giving Congress the power to prohibit the foreign slave trade. Pinckney said: "South Carolina can never receive the plan if it prohibits the slave trade. In every proposed extension of the powers of Congress, that State has expressly and watchfully excepted that of meddling with the importation of negroes."

effected

Both questions were referred to a committee and a compromise was effected. The South Carolina and Georgia delegates agreed to vote for federal control over Compromise foreign and interstate commerce, provided Congress should be expressly prohibited from interof New Eng-fering with the foreign slave trade for a period of twenty years. Madison, Mason, and Martin made a valiant fight against this compromise, but when the

through aid

land votes

was taken Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Hampshire voted with Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia in favor of continuing the slave trade; while only New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware stood by Virginia in opposing it.

Rutledge of South Carolina made this appeal: "If the Northern States consult their interest, they will not oppose the increase of slaves which will increase the commodities of which they will become the carriers." Ellsworth of Connecticut eased his conscience by this utterance: "The morality or wisdom of slavery are considerations belonging to the States themselves. What enriches a part enriches the whole, and the States are the best judges of their particular interest." Madison, on the other hand, declared: "Twenty years will produce all the mischief that can be apprehended