



Produced by the Bookworm, <bookworm.librivox AT gmail.com>,
Ernest Schaal, and the Online Distributed Proofreading
Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This book was produced from
scanned images of public domain material from the Google
Print project.)









                           The Journal of the
                       Debates in the Convention
                              Which Framed
                        The Constitution of the
                             United States
                          May-September, 1787


                             As Recorded by
                             James Madison


                               Edited by
                             Gaillard Hunt


                             In Two Volumes
                               Volume I.


                          G. P. Putnam's Sons
                          New York and London
                        The Knickerbocker Press
                                  1908




                   The Knickerbocker Press, New York




                             [Illustration]


                          CONTENTS OF VOLUME I.


                                                                PAGE
    The Records of the Constitutional Convention (Introduction
    by the Editor)                                               vii

    Chronology                                                   xix

    Journal of the Constitutional Convention of 1787               1


                             [Illustration]




                             [Illustration]


                          LIST OF FAC-SIMILES.


                                                              FACING
                                                                PAGE

    First Page of Madison's Journal, actual size                   2

    Charles Pinckney's Letter                                     20

    The Pinckney Draft                                            22

    Hamilton's Principal Speech                                  154


                             [Illustration]




                             [Illustration]


                   THE RECORDS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL
                              CONVENTION.


James Madison's contemporaries generally conceded that he was the
leading statesman in the convention which framed the Constitution of
the United States; but in addition to this he kept a record of the
proceedings of the convention which outranks in importance all the
other writings of the founders of the American Republic. He is thus
identified, as no other man is, with the making of the Constitution
and the correct interpretation of the intentions of the makers. His is
the only continuous record of the proceedings of the convention. He
took a seat immediately in front of the presiding officer, among the
members, and took down every speech or motion as it was made, using
abbreviations of his own and immediately afterwards transcribing his
notes when he returned to his lodgings. A few motions only escaped him
and of important speeches he omitted none. The proceedings were ordered
to be kept secret, but his self-imposed task of reporter had the
unofficial sanction of the convention. Alexander Hamilton corrected
slightly Madison's report of his great speech and handed him his plan of
government to copy. The same thing was done with Benjamin Franklin's
speeches, which were written out by Franklin and read by his colleague
Wilson, the fatigue of delivery being too great for the aged Franklin,
and Madison also copied the Patterson plan. Edmund Randolph wrote out
for him his opening speech from his notes two years after the convention
adjourned.[1]

    [1] Madison to Randolph, April 21, 1789.

In the years after the convention Madison made a few alterations and
additions in his journal, with the result that in parts there is much
interlineation and erasure, but after patient study the meaning is
always perfectly clear. Three different styles of Madison's own
penmanship at different periods of his life appear in the journal,
one being that of his old age within five years of his death. In
this hand appears the following note at the end of the journal:
"The few alterations and corrections made in the debates which are
not in my handwriting were dictated by me and made in my presence
by John C. Payne."[2] The rare occasions where Payne's penmanship is
distinguishable are indicated in the notes to this edition.

    [2] Mrs. Madison's brother.

The importance attached by Madison to his record is shown by the terms
of his will, dated April 15, 1835, fourteen months before his death:

    "I give all my personal estate ornamental as well as useful,
    except as herein after otherwise given, to my dear Wife; and
    I also give to her all my manuscript papers, having entire
    confidence in her discreet and proper use of them, but subject
    to the qualification in the succeeding clause. Considering the
    peculiarity and magnitude of the occasion which produced the
    Convention at Philadelphia in 1787, the Characters who composed
    it, the Constitution which resulted from their deliberations,
    its effects during a trial of so many years on the prosperity of
    the people living under it, and the interest it has inspired
    among the friends of free Government, it is not an unreasonable
    inference that a careful and extended report of the proceedings
    and discussions of that body, which were with closed doors, by a
    member who was constant in his attendance, will be particularly
    gratifying to the people of the United States, and to all who
    take an interest in the progress of political science and the
    course of true liberty. It is my desire that the Report as made
    by me should be published under her authority and direction."[3]

    [3] Orange County, Va., MSS. records.

This desire was never consummated, for Mrs. Madison's friends advised
her that she could not herself profitably undertake the publication of
the work, and she accordingly offered it to the Government, by which it
was bought for $30,000, by act of Congress, approved March 3, 1837. On
July 9, 1838, an act was approved authorizing the Joint Committee on the
Library to cause the papers thus purchased to be published, and the
Committee intrusted the superintendence of the work to Henry D. Gilpin,
Solicitor of the Treasury. The duplicate copy of the journal which Mrs.
Madison had delivered was, under authority of Congress, withdrawn from
the State Department and placed in Mr. Gilpin's hands. In 1840
(Washington: Lantree & O'Sulivan), accordingly, appeared the three
volumes, _The Papers of James Madison Purchased by Order of Congress_,
edited by Henry D. Gilpin. Other issues of this edition, with changes of
date, came out later in New York, Boston, and Mobile. This issue
contained not only the journal of the Constitutional Convention, but
Madison's notes of the debates in the Continental Congress and in the
Congress of the Confederation from February 19 to April 25, 1787, and a
report Jefferson had written of the debates in 1776 on the Declaration
of Independence, besides a number of letters of Madison's. From the text
of Gilpin a fifth volume was added to Elliot's _Debates_ in 1845, and it
was printed in one volume in Chicago, 1893.

Mr. Gilpin's reading of the duplicate copy of the Madison journal is
thus the only one that has hitherto been published.[4] His work was both
painstaking and thorough, but many inaccuracies and omissions have been
revealed by a second reading from the original manuscript journal
written in Madison's own hand, just as he himself left it; and this
original manuscript has been followed with rigid accuracy in the text of
the present edition.

    [4] Volume iii of _The Documentary History of the United States_
        (Department of State, 1894) is a presentation of a literal
        print of the original journal, indicating by the use
        of larger and smaller type and by explanatory words the
        portions which are interlined or stricken out.

The editor has compared carefully with Madison's report, as the notes
will show, the incomplete and less important records of the convention,
kept by others. Of these, the best known is that of Robert Yates, a
delegate in the convention from New York, who took notes from the time
he entered the convention, May 25, to July 5, when he went home to
oppose what he foresaw would be the result of the convention's labors.
These notes were published in 1821 (Albany), edited by Yates's colleague
in the convention, John Lansing, under the title, _Secret Proceedings
and Debates of the Convention Assembled at Philadelphia, in the Year
1787, for the Purpose of Forming the Constitution of the United States
of America_. This was afterwards reprinted in several editions and in
the three editions of _The Debates on the Federal Constitution_, by
Jonathan Elliot (Washington, 1827-1836). Madison pronounced Yates's
notes "Crude and broken." "When I looked over them some years ago," he
wrote to J. C. Cabell, February 2, 1829, "I was struck with the number
of instances in which he had totally mistaken what was said by me, or
given it in scraps and terms which, taken without the developments or
qualifications accompanying them, had an import essentially different
from what was intended." Yates's notes were  by his prejudices,
which were strong against the leaders of the convention, but, making
allowance for this and for their incompleteness, they are of high value
and rank next to Madison's in importance.

Rufus King, a delegate from Massachusetts, kept a number of notes,
scattered and imperfect, which were not published till 1894, when they
appeared in King's _Life and Correspondence of Rufus King_ (New York:
Putnam's).

William Pierce, a delegate from Georgia, made some memoranda of the
proceedings of the convention, and brief and interesting sketches of all
the delegates, which were first printed in _The Savannah Georgian_,
April, 18-28, 1828, and reprinted in _The American Historical Review_
for January, 1898.

The notes of Yates, King, and Pierce are the only unofficial record of
the convention extant, besides Madison's, and their chief value is in
connection with the Madison record, which in the main they support, and
which occasionally they elucidate.

December 30, 1818, Charles Pinckney wrote to John Quincy Adams that he
had made more notes of the convention than any other member except
Madison, but they were never published and have been lost or
destroyed.[5]

    [5] See p. 22, n.

In 1819 (Boston) was published the _Journal, Acts and Proceedings of the
Convention_, etc., under the supervision of John Quincy Adams, Secretary
of State, by authority of a joint resolution of Congress of March 27,
1818. This was the official journal of the convention, which the
Secretary, William Jackson, had turned over to the President, George
Washington, when the convention adjourned, Jackson having previously
burned all other papers of the convention in his possession. March 16,
1796, Washington deposited the papers Jackson had given him with the
Secretary of State, Timothy Pickering. They consisted of three
volumes,--the journal of the convention, the journal of the proceedings
of the Committee of the Whole of the convention, and a list of yeas and
nays, beside a printed draft of the Constitution as reported August 6th,
showing erasures and amendments afterwards adopted, and the Virginia
plan in different stages of development.

In preparing the matter for publication Secretary Adams found that for
Friday, September 14, and Saturday, September 15, the journal was a mere
fragment, and Madison was applied to and completed it from his minutes.
From General B. Bloomfield, executor of the estate of David Brearley, a
delegate in the convention from New Jersey, Adams obtained a few
additional papers, and from Charles Pinckney a copy of what purported to
be the plan of a constitution submitted by him to the convention. All of
these papers, with some others, appeared in the edition of 1819, which
was a singularly accurate publication, as comparison by the present
editor of the printed page with the original papers has shown.

The Pinckney plan, as it appeared in this edition of the journal, was
incorporated by Madison into his record, as he had not secured a copy of
it when the convention was sitting. But the draft furnished to Secretary
Adams in 1818, and the plan presented by Pinckney to the convention in
1787 were not identical, as Madison conclusively proved in his note to
his journal, in his letter to Jared Sparks of November 25, 1831, and in
several other letters, in all of which he showed that the draft did not
agree in several important respects with Pinckney's own votes and
motions in the convention, and that there were important discrepancies
between it and Pinckney's _Observations on the Plan of Government_, a
pamphlet printed shortly after the convention adjourned.[6]

    [6] See P. L. Ford's _Pamphlets on the Constitution_, 419.

It is, indeed, inconceivable that the convention should have
incorporated into the constitution so many of the provisions of the
Pinckney draft, and that at the same time so little reference should
have been made to it in the course of the debates; and it is equally
extraordinary that the contemporaries of Pinckney did not accord to him
the chief paternity of the Constitution, which honor would have belonged
to him if the draft he sent to Mr. Adams in 1818 had been the one he
actually offered the convention in the first week of its session. The
editor has made a careful examination of the original manuscripts in the
case. They consist (1) of Mr. Pinckney's letter to Mr. Adams of December
12, 1818, written from Winyaw, S. C., while Pinckney was temporarily
absent from Charleston, acknowledging Mr. Adams's request for the draft,
(2) his letter of December 30, written from Charleston, transmitting the
draft, and (3) the draft. The penmanship of all three papers is
contemporaneous, and the letter of December 30 and the draft were
written with the same pen and ink. This may possibly admit of a
difference of opinion, because the draft is in a somewhat larger
chirography than the letter, having been, as befitted its importance,
written more carefully. But the letter and the draft are written upon
the same paper, and this paper was not made when the convention sat in
1787. There are several sheets of the draft and one of the letter, and
all bear the same water-mark--"Russell & Co. 1797." The draft cannot,
therefore, claim to be the original Pinckney plan, and was palpably made
for the occasion, from Mr. Pinckney's original notes doubtless, aided
and modified by a copy of the Constitution itself. Thirty years had
elapsed since the close of the Constitutional Convention when the draft
was compiled, and its incorrectness is not a circumstance to occasion
great wonder.[7]

    [7] See p. 19, n.

Correspondence on the subject of the convention, written while it was in
session, was not extensive, but some unpublished letters throwing light
upon contemporaneous opinion have been found and are quoted in the
notes.

The editor desires to record his obligation for assistance in preparing
these volumes to his friend, Montgomery Blair, Esq., of Silver Spring,
Md.

                                                      GAILLARD HUNT.

    CHERRY HILL FARM, VA.,
        September, 1902.




                             [Illustration]


                      CHRONOLOGY OF JAMES MADISON.

                                 1787.


1787.       Prepares the "Virginia plan" in conjunction with the
May 6-25.   Virginia delegates.

May 14.     Attends the first gathering of the delegates.

May 30.     Moves postponement of question of representation by free
            population.

            Moves that congressional representation be proportioned
            to the importance and size of the States.

            Makes his first speech on this subject.

May 31.     Advocates representation in one house by popular
            election.

            Opposes uniting several States into one district for
            representation in Senate.

            Doubts practicability of enumerating powers of national
            legislature.

            Suggests the impossibility of using force to coerce
            individual States.

June 1.     Moves that the powers of the Executive be enumerated.

June 2.     Objects to giving Congress power to remove the President
            upon demand of a majority of the State legislatures.

June 4.     Favors giving power to more than a majority of the
            national legislature to overrule an Executive negative
            of a law.

June 5.     Opposes election of judges by both branches of Congress.

            Advocates submission of constitution to conventions of
            the people.

            Favors inferior judicial tribunals.

June 6.     Speaks for popular representation in the House.

            Seconds motion to include a portion of the Judiciary
            with the Executive in revisionary power over laws.

June 7.     Speaks for proportional representation in both houses
            of Congress.

June 8.     Seconds motion to give Congress power to negative State
            laws.

            Suggests temporary operation of urgent laws.

June 12.    Seconds motion to make term of Representatives three
            years.

            Thinks the people will follow the convention.

            Favors a term of seven years for Senators.

June 13.    Moves defining powers of Judiciary.

            Objects to appointment of judges by whole legislature.

            Thinks both houses should have right to originate money
            bills.

            Advocates a national government and opposes the "Jersey
            plan."

June 21.    Speaks in favor of national supremacy.

            Opposes annual or biennial elections of Representatives.

June 22.    Favors fixing payment of salaries by a standard.

June 23.    Proposes to debar Senators from offices created or
            enhanced during their term.

            Speaks for the proposition.

June 25.    Wishes to take up question of right of suffrage.

June 26.    Speaks for a long term for Senators.

            Opposes their payment by the States.

June 28.    Speaks for proportional representation.

June 29.    Insists that too much stress is laid on State
            sovereignty.

June 30.    Contends against equal State representation in the
            Senate.

            Speaks again on subject, but would preserve State
            rights.

July 2.     Opposes submission of the question to a special
            committee.

July 5.     Opposes compromise report of committee.

July 6.     Thinks part of report need not be postponed.

July 7.     Thinks question of representation ought to be settled
            before other questions.

July 9.     Suggests free inhabitants as basis of representation in
            one house, and all inhabitants as basis in the other
            house.

July 10.    Moves increase of Representatives.

July 11.    Favors representation based on population.

July 14.    Urges proportional representation as necessary to
            protect the smaller States.

July 17.    Advocates national power of negative over State laws.

            Thinks the branches of government should be kept
            separate.

            Thinks monarchy likely to follow instability.

            Thinks there should be provision for interregnum between
            adoption and operation of constitution.

            Moves national guarantee of States against domestic
            violence.

July 18.    Seconds motion forbidding a State to form any but a
            republican government.




                     JOURNAL OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL
                        CONVENTION OF 1787.


Monday May 14^{th} 1787 was the day fixed for the meeting of the
deputies in Convention for revising the federal System of Government. On
that day a small number only had assembled. Seven States were not
convened till,

Friday 25 of May, when the following members appeared to wit:

From _Massachusetts_, Rufus King. _N. York_, Robert Yates,[8] Alex^r
Hamilton. _N. Jersey_, David Brearly, William Churchill Houston, William
Patterson. _Pennsylvania_, Robert Morris, Thomas Fitzsimons, James
Wilson, Governeur Morris. _Delaware_, George Read, Richard Basset,[9]
Jacob Broome. _Virginia_, George Washington, Edmund Randolph, John
Blair,[10] James Madison, George Mason, George Wythe, James McClurg. _N.
Carolina_, Alexander Martin, William Richardson Davie, Richard Dobbs
Spaight, Hugh Williamson. _S. Carolina_, John Rutlidge, Charles
Cotesworth Pinckney, Charles Pinckney, Pierce Butler. _Georgia_, William
Few.[11]

    [8] William Pierce, delegate from Georgia, made an estimate
        of each member of the convention, the only contemporary
        estimate thus far brought to light. Yates did not speak in
        the Convention.

        "M^r Yates is said to be an able Judge. He is a Man of great
        legal abilities, but not distinguished as an Orator. Some of
        his Enemies say he is an anti-federal Man, but I discovered
        no such disposition in him. He is about 45 years old, and
        enjoys a great share of health."--Pierce's Notes, _Am. Hist.
        Rev._, iii., 327. For more about Pierce's Notes, see p.
        45, n.

    [9] "M^r Bassett is a religious enthusiast, lately turned
        Methodist, and serves his Country because it is the will of
        the people that he should do so. He is a Man of plain sense,
        and has modesty enough to hold his Tongue. He is Gentlemanly
        Man and is in high estimation among the Methodists. Mr.
        Bassett is about 36 years old."--Pierce's Notes, _Id._,
        iii., 330. He did not speak in the Convention.

    [10] "Mr. Blair is one of the most respectable Men in Virginia,
        both on account of his Family as well as fortune. He is one
        of the Judges of the Supreme Court in Virginia, and
        acknowledged to have a very extensive knowledge of the Laws.
        M^r Blair is however, no Orator, but his good sense,
        and most excellent principles, compensate for other
        deficiencies. He is about 50 years of age."--Pierce's Notes,
        _Am. Hist. Rev._, iii., 331. He did not speak in the
        Convention.

    [11] "M^r Few possesses a strong natural Genius, and from
        application has acquired some knowledge of legal
        matters;--he practises at the bar of Georgia, and speaks
        tolerably well in the Legislature. He has been twice a
        Member of Congress, and served in that capacity with
        fidelity to his State, and honor to himself. Mr. Few is
        about 35 years of age."--Pierce's Notes, _Id._, iii., 333.
        He did not speak in the Convention.

        The credentials of Connecticut and Maryland required but one
        deputy to represent the state; of New York, South Carolina,
        Georgia, and New Hampshire, two deputies; of Massachusetts,
        New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia, and North Carolina, three;
        of Pennsylvania, four.--_Journal of the Federal Convention_,
        16 _et seq._; _Documentary History of the Constitution_, i.,
        10 _et seq._

M^r Robert Morris[12] informed the members assembled that by the
instruction & in behalf, of the deputation of Pen^a he proposed George
Washington, Esq^r late Commander in chief for president of the
Convention. M^r Jn^o Rutlidge seconded the motion; expressing his
confidence that the choice would be unanimous, and observing that the
presence of Gen^l Washington forbade any observations on the occasion
which might otherwise be proper.

    [12] "Robert Morris is a merchant of great eminence and wealth;
        an able Financier, and a worthy Patriot. He has an
        understanding equal to any public object, and possesses an
        energy of mind that few Men can boast of. Although he is not
        learned, yet he is as great as those who are. I am told that
        when he speaks in the Assembly of Pennsylvania, that he
        bears down all before him. What could have been his reason
        for not Speaking in the Convention I know not,--but he never
        once spoke on any point. This Gentleman is about 50 years
        old."--Pierce's Notes, _Am. Hist: Rev._, iii., 328.

                             [Illustration]

                             [Illustration]

General Washington[13] was accordingly unanimously elected by ballot,
and conducted to the Chair by M^r R. Morris and M^r Rutlidge; from
which in a very emphatic manner he thanked the Convention for the
honor they had conferred on him, reminded them of the novelty of the
scene of business in which he was to act, lamented his want of better
qualifications, and claimed the indulgence of the House towards the
involuntary errors which his inexperience might occasion.

    [13] "Gen^l Washington is well known as the Commander in chief
        of the late American Army. Having conducted these States to
        independence and peace, he now appears to assist in framing
        a Government to make the People happy. Like Gustavus Vasa,
        he may be said to be the deliverer of his Country;--like
        Peter the great he appears as the politician and the
        States-man; and like Cincinnatus he returned to his farm
        perfectly contented with being only a plain Citizen, after
        enjoying the highest honor of the confederacy,--and now only
        seeks for the approbation of his Country-men by being
        virtuous and useful. The General was conducted to the Chair
        as President of the Convention by the unanimous voice of its
        Members. He is in the 52^d year of his age."--Pierce's
        Notes, _Am. Hist. Rev._, iii., 331.

(The nomination came with particular grace from Pe[~nn]a, as Doc^r
Franklin alone could have been thought of as a competitor. The Doc^r was
himself to have made the nomination of General Washington, but the state
of the weather and of his health confined him to his house.)

M^r Wilson[14] moved that a Secretary be appointed, and nominated M^r
Temple Franklin.

    [14] "Mr. Wilson ranks among the foremost in legal and political
        knowledge. He has joined to a fine genius all that can set
        him off and show him to advantage. He is well acquainted
        with Man, and understands all the passions that influence
        him. Government seems to have been his peculiar Study, all
        the political institutions of the World he knows in detail,
        and can trace the causes and effects of every revolution
        from the earliest stages of the Greecian commonwealth down
        to the present time. No man is more clear, copious, and
        comprehensive than Mr. Wilson, yet he is no great Orator. He
        draws the attention not by the charm of his eloquence, but
        by the force of his reasoning. He is about 45 years
        old."--Pierce's Notes, _Am. Hist. Rev._, iii., 329.

Col Hamilton[15] nominated Major Jackson.

    [15] "Col^o Hamilton is deservedly celebrated for his talents.
        He is a practitioner of the Law, and reputed to be a
        finished Scholar. To a clear and strong judgment he unites
        the ornaments of fancy, and whilst he is able, convincing,
        and engaging in his eloquence the Heart and Head sympathize
        in approving him. Yet there is something too feeble in his
        voice to be equal to the strains of oratory;--it is my
        opinion he is rather a convincing Speaker, that [than] a
        blazing Orator. Col^o Hamilton requires time to think,--he
        enquires into every part of his