It may be expected also that the British creditors will feel several motives to indulgence. And I will not suppress a hope that the new government will be both able and willing to effect something by negotiation. Perhaps it might not be amiss for the Assembly to prepare the way by some act or other, for drawing the attention of the first session of the Congress to this subject. The possession of the posts by Great Britain, after the removal of the grounds of her complaint by the provision in the new Constitution with regard to the treaty, will justify a renewal of our demands, and an interference in favor of American citizens on whom the performance of the treaty on our side depends. TO EDMUND RANDOLPH. NEW YORK, October 17, 1788. DEAR SIR, I have a letter from Mr. Jefferson, but it contains nothing of much consequence. His public letters, to which it refers, have not yet been communicated from the office of foreign affairs. Through other authentic channels, I learn that the States-General will pretty certainly be convened in May next. The efficacy of that cure for the public maladies will depend materially on the mode in which the deputies may be selected, which appears to be not yet settled. There is good reason also to presume that, as the spirit which at present agitates the nation has been in a great measure caught from the American revolution, so the result of the struggle there will be not a little affected by the character which liberty may receive from the experiment now on foot here. The tranquil and successful establishment of a great reform, by the reason of the community, must give as much force to the doctrines urged on one side, as a contrary event would do to the policy maintained on the other. As Col. Carrington will be with you before this gets to hand, I leave it with him to detail all matters of a date previous to his departure. Of a subsequent date I recollect nothing worth adding. I requested him also to confer with you in full confidence on the appointments to the Senate and House of Representatives, so far as my friends may consider me in relation to either. He is fully possessed of my real sentiments, and will explain them more conveniently than can be done on paper. I mean not to decline an agency in launching the new government, if such should be assigned me, in one of the Houses, and I prefer the House of Representatives, chiefly because, if I can render any service there, it can only be to the public, and not, even in imputation, to myself. At the same time my preference, I own, is somewhat founded on the supposition, that the arrangements for the popular elections may secure me against any competition which would require, on my part, any step that would speak a solicitude which I do not feel, or have the appearance of a spirit of electioneering, which I despise. TO EDMUND RANDOLPH. NEW YORK, November 2, 1788. DEAR SIR,-I received yesterday your favor of the 23d ultimo. The first countenance of the Assembly corresponds with the picture which my imagination had formed of it. The views of the greater part of the opposition to the federal government have, ever since the Convention, been regarded by me as permanently hostile, and likely to produce every effort that might endanger or embarrass it. My last letter, with Col. Carrington's communications, to which it referred, will have sufficiently explained my sentiments with regard to the legislative service under the new Constitution. My first wish is, to see the government put into quiet and successful operation, and to afford any service that may be acceptable from me for that purpose. My second wish, if that were to be consulted, would prefer, for reasons formerly hinted, an opportunity of contributing that service in the House of Representatives, rather than in the Senate, provided the opportunity be attainable from the spontaneous suffrage of the constituents. Should the real friends of the Constitution think this preference inconsistent with any primary object, as Col. Carrington tells me is the case with some who are entitled to peculiar respect, and view my renouncing it as of any material consequence, I shall not hesitate to comply. You will not infer, from the freedom with which these observations are made, that I am in the least unaware of the probability that, whatever my inclinations or those of my friends may be, they are likely to be of little avail in the present case. I take it for certain that a clear majority of the Assembly are enemies to the government, and I have no reason to suppose that I can be less obnoxious than others on the opposite side. An election into the Senate, therefore, can hardly come into question. I know, also, that a good deal will depend on the arrangements for the election of the other branch, and that much may depend, moreover, on the steps to be taken by the candidates, which will not be taken by me. Here again, therefore, there must be great uncertainty, if not improbability, of my election. With these circumstances in view, it is impossible that I can be the dupe of false calculations, even if I were in other cases disposed to indulge them. I trust it is equally impossible for the result, whatever it may be, to rob me of any reflections which enter into the internal fund of comfort and happiness. Popular favor or disfavor is no criterion of the character maintained with those whose esteem an honorable ambition must court: much less can it be a criterion of that maintained with one's self. And when the spirit of party directs the public voice, it must be a little mind, indeed, that can suffer in its own estimation, or apprehend danger of suffering in that of others. APPENDIX TO THE DEBATES IN THE FEDERAL CONVENTION. No. 1. See page 125. Letter from James M. Varnum, of Rhode Island, to the President of the Convention, enclosing the subjoined Communication, from certain Citizens of Rhode Island, to the Federal Convention. NOTE. The following letter from Rhode Island to the Convention was intended to have been delivered by Gen. VARNUM, who had, however, left Philadelphia before its arrival. On his return to Rhode Island, he wrote the letter enclosing it. NEWPORT, June 18, 1787. SIR, THE enclosed address, of which I presume your Excellency has received a duplicate, was returned to me, from New York, after my arrival in this state. I flattered myself that our legislature, which convened on Monday last, would have receded from the resolution therein referred to, and have complied with the recommendation of Congress in sending delegates to the Federal Convention. The upper House, or governor and council, embraced the measure; but it was negatived in the House of Assembly by a large majority, notwithstanding that the greatest exertions were made to support it. Being disappointed in their expectations, the minority in the administration, and all the worthy citizens of this state whose minds are well informed, regretting the peculiarities of their situation, place their fullest confidence in the wisdom and moderation of the national council, and indulge the warmest hopes of being favorably considered in their deliberations. From these deliberations they anticipate a political system which must finally be adopted, and from which will result the safety, the honor, and the happiness, of the United States. Permit me, sir, to observe, that the measures of our present legislature do not exhibit the real character of the state. They are equally reprobated and abhorred by gentlemen of the learned professions, by the whole mercantile body, and by most of the respectable farmers and mechanics. The majority of the administration is composed of a licentious number of men, destitute of education, and many of them void of principle. From anarchy and confusion they derive their temporary consequence; and this they endeavor to prolong by debauching the minds of the common people, whose attention is wholly directed to the abolition of debts, public and private. With these are associated the disaffected of every description, particularly those who were unfriendly during the war. Their paper money system, founded in oppression and fraud, they are determined to support at every hazard; and, rather than relinquish their favorite pursuit, they trample upon the most sacred obligations. As a proof of this, they refused to comply with a requisition of Congress for repealing all laws repugnant to the treaty of peace with Great Britain, and urged, as their principal reason, that it would be calling in question the propriety of their former measures These may be attributed partly to the extreme freedom of our constitution, and partly to the want of energy in the Federal Union; and it is greatly to be apprehended that they cannot speedily be removed, but by uncommon and very serious exertions. It is fortunate, however, that the wealth and resources of this state are chiefly in possession of the well-affected, and that they are entirely devoted to the public good. I have the honor of being, sir, His Excellency, Gen. WASHINGTON. *The signing was omitted through inadvertence, but the letter was from Gen. Varnum. 73 49 Letter from certain Citizens of Rhode Island to the Federal Convention, enclosed in the preceding. PROVIDENCE, May 11, 1787. GENTLEMEN, Since the legislature of this state have finally declined sending delegates to meet you in Convention, for the purposes mentioned in the resolve of Congress of the 21st February, 1787, the merchants, tradesmen, and others, of this place, deeply affected with the evils of the present unhappy times, have thought proper to communicate in writing their approbation of your meeting, and their regret that it wid fall short of a complete representation of the Federal Union. The failure of this state was owing to the non-concurrence of the upper House of Assembly with a vote passed in the lower House, for appointing delegates to attend the said Convention, at their session holden at Newport, on the first Wednesday of the present month. It is the general opinion here, and, we believe, of the well-informed throughout this state, that full power for the regulation of the commerce of the United States, both foreign and domestic, ought to be vested in the national council, and that effectual arrangements should also be made for giving operation to the present powers of Congress in their requisitions for national purposes. As the object of this letter is chiefly to prevent any impression unfavorable to the commercial interest of the state from taking place in our sister states, from the circumstance of our being unrepresented in the present national Convention, we shall not presume to enter into any detail of the objects we hope your deliberations will embrace and provide for, being convinced they will be such as have a tendency to strengthen the union, promote the commerce, increase the power, and establish the credit, of the United States. The result of your deliberations, tending to these desirable purposes, we still hope may finally be approved and adopted by this state, for which we pledge our influence and best exertions. [* This will be delivered you by the Hon. JAMES M. Varnum, Esq., who will communicate (with your permission) in person, more particularly, our sentiments on the subjectmatter of our address.] In behalf of the merchants, tradesmen, &c., we have the honor, &c. &c. The Honorable the Chairman of the General Convention, Philadelphia. Committee. No. 2. Note of Mr. Madison to the Plan of Charles Pinckney, May 29, 1787. The length of the document laid before the Convention, and other circumstances, having prevented the taking of a copy at the time, that which is inserted in the debates was taken from the paper furnished to the secretary of state, and contained in the Journal of the Convention, published in 1819; which, it being taken for granted that it was a true copy, was not then examined. The coincidence in several instances between that and the Constitution, as adopted, having attracted the notice of others, was at length suggested to mine. On comparing the paper with the Constitution in its final form, or in some of its stages, and with the propositions and speeches of Mr. Pinckney in the Convention, it was apparent that considerable error had crept into the paper, occasioned possibly by the loss of the document laid before the Convention, (neither that nor the This paragraph was in the letter enclosed by Gen. Varnum, but not in the dupl'cate alluded to by his letter. resolution offered by Mr. Patterson being among the preserved papers,) and by a consequent resort for a copy to the rough draught, in which erasures and interlineations, following what passed in the Convention, might be confounded, in part at least, with the original text, and, after a lapse of more than thirty years, confounded also in the memory of the author. There is in the paper a similan. in some cases, and an identity in others, with details, expressions, and definitions, the results of critical discussions and modification in the Convention, that could not have been anticipated. Examples may be noticed in Article VIII. of the paper; which is remarkable also for the circumstance, that, whilst it specifies the functions of the President, no provision is contained in the paper for the election of such an officer, nor indeed for the appointment of any executive magistracy, notwithstanding the evident purpose of the author to provide an entire plan of a federal government. Again, in several instances where the paper corresponds with the Constitution, it is at variance with the ideas of Mr. Pinckney, as decidedly expressed in his propositions, and in his arguments, the former in the Journal of the Convention, the latter in the report of its debates. Thus, in Article VIII. of the paper, provision is made for remov ing the President by impeachment, when it appears that, in the Convention, on the 20th of July, he was opposed to any impeachability of the executive magistrate. In Article III., it is required that all money bills shall originate in the first branch of the legislature; which he strenuously opposed on the 8th of August, and again on the 11th of August. In Article V., members of each House are made ineligible to, as well as incapable of holding, any office under the Union, &c., as was the case at one stage of the Constitution,—a disqualification highly disapproved and opposed by him on the 14th of August. A still more conclusive evidence of error in the paper is seen in Article III, which provides, as the Constitution does, that the first branch of the legislature shall be chosen by the people of the several states; whilst it appears that, on the 6th of June, according to previous notice, too, a few days only after the draught was laid before the Convention, its author opposed that mode of choice, urging and proposing, in place of it, an election by the legislatures of the several states. The remarks here made, though not material in themselves, were due to the authenticity and accuracy aimed at in this record of the proceedings of a public body so much an object, sometimes, of curious research, as at all times of profound interest.* No. 3. Project communicated by Mr. E. Randolph, July 10, as an accommodating Proposi tion to small States. See page 317. 1. Resolved, That in the second branch each state have one vote in the following cases: 1. In granting exclusive rights to ports. 2. In subjecting vessels or seamen of the United States to tonnage duties, or other impositions. 3. In regulating the navigation of rivers. 4. In regulating the rights to be enjoyed by citizens of one state in the other states 5. In questions arising in the guaranty of territory. 6. In declaring war, or taking measures for subduing a rebellion. 7. In regulating corn. 8. In establishing and regulating the post-office. * Striking discrepancies will be found on a comparison of his plan as furnished to Mr. Adams, and the view given of that which was laid before the Convention, in a pamphlet published by Francis Childs, at New York, shortly after the close of the Convention. The title of the pamphlet is, "Observations on the plan of government submitted to the Federal Convention on the twenty-eighth of May, 1789, by Charles Pinckney," &c. A copy is preserved among the "Select Tracts," in the library of the Historical Society of New York. But what conclusively proves that the choice of the House of Representatives by the people could not have been the choice in the lost paper, is a letter from Mr. Pinckney to James Madison, of the 28th of March, 1789, now on his files, in which he emphatically adheres to a choice by the state legislatures. The following is an extract: “ Are you not, to use a full expression, abundantly convinced that the theoretical nonsense of an election of the members of Congress by the people, in the first instance, is clearly and practically wrong that it will in the end be the means of bringing our councils into contempt and that the legislatures [of the states] are the only proper judges of who ought to be elected?" |