The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 1Madison, James
History
The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 1
Madison, James
Constitutional law -- United States; Constitutions -- United States; United States. Constitution
It was moved and 2^{ded} to amend it by adding "and not according to the
present system"--which was agreed to.
It was then moved & 2^{ded} to alter the resolution so as to read "that
the rights of suffrage in the national Legislature ought not to be
according to the present system."
It was then moved & 2^{ded} to postpone the Resolution moved by M^r
Randolph & M^r Madison, which being agreed to:
M^r Madison, moved, in order to get over the difficulties, the following
resolution--"that the equality of suffrage established by the articles
of Confederation ought not to prevail in the national Legislature, and
"that an equitable ratio of representation ought to be substituted."
This was 2^{ded} by M^r Gov^r Morris, and being generally relished,
would have been agreed to; when,
M^r Reed moved that the whole clause relating to the point of
Representation be postponed; reminding the Com^e that the deputies from
Delaware were restrained by their co[~m]ission from assenting to any
change of the rule of suffrage, and in case such a change should be
fixed on, it might become their duty to retire from the Convention.
M^r Gov^r Morris observed that the valuable assistance of those members
could not be lost without real concern, and that so early a proof of
discord in the Convention as the secession of a State, would add much to
the regret; that the change proposed was however so fundamental an
article in a national Gov^t, that it could not be dispensed with.
M^r Madison observed that whatever reason might have existed for the
equality of suffrage when the Union was a federal one among sovereign
States, it must cease when a National Governm^t should be put into the
place. In the former case, the acts of Cong^s depended so much for their
efficacy on the cooperation of the States, that these had a weight both
within & without Congress, nearly in proportion to their extent and
importance. In the latter case, as the acts of the Gen^l Gov^t would
take effect without the intervention of the State legislatures, a vote
from a small State w^d have the same efficacy & importance as a vote
from a large one, and there was the same reason for different numbers of
representatives from different States, as from Counties of different
extents within particular States. He suggested as an expedient for at
once taking the sense of the members on this point and saving the
Delaware deputies from embarrassment, that the question should be taken
in Committee, and the clause on report to the House, be postponed
without a question there. This however did not appear to satisfy Mr.
Read.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account