body, not with a view to lessen those exalted characters, but to show how far the greatest and best of men may be led to adopt very improper measures, through error in judgment, state influence, or by other causes, and to show that it is our duty not to suffer our eyes to be so far dazzled by the splendor of names, as to run blind-folded into what may be our destruction.

Mr. Speaker, I revere those illustrious personages as much as any man here. No man has a higher sense of the important services they have rendered this country. No member of the convention went there more disposed to pay a deference to their opinions but I should little have deserved the trust this state reposed in me, if I could have sacrificed its dearest interests to my complaisanco for their sentiments.

When contrary to our hopes it was found, that a majority of the members of the convention had in the committee agreed to the system, I have laid before you, we then thought it necessary to bring forward the propositions, which such of us who had disapproved the plan before had prepared-The members who prepared these resolutions were principally of the Connecticut, New-York, Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland delegations. The honorable Mr. Patterson, of the Jerseys, laid them before the convention; of these propositions I am in possession of a copy, which I shall beg leave to read to you.

These propositions were referred to a committee of the whole house unfortunately the New-Hampshire delegation had not yet arrived, and the sickness of a relation of the honorable Mr. M'Henry, obliged him still to be absent, a circumstance, sir, which I considered much to be regretted, as Maryland thereby was represented by only two delegates, and they unhappily differed very widely in their sentiments.

The result of the reference of these last propositions to a committee, was a speedy and hasty determination to

reject them-I doubt not, sir, to those who consider them with attention, so sudden a rejection will appear surprising; but it may be proper to inform you, that on our meeting in convention, it was soon found there was among us three parties of very different sentiments and views.

One party, whose object and wish it was to abolish and annihilate all state governments, and to bring forward one general government over this extensive continent, of a monarchical nature, under certain restrictions and limitations: Those who openly avowed this sentiment were, it is true, but few, yet it is equally true, sir, that there was a considerable number who did not openly avow it, who were by myself, and many others of the convention, considered as being in reality favorers of that sentiment, and acting upon those principles, covertly endeavoring to carry into effect what they well knew openly and avowedly could not be accomplished.

The second party was not for the abolition of the state governments, nor for the introduction of a monarchical government under any form; but they wished to establish such a system as could give their own states undue power and influence in the government over the other states.

A third party was what I considered truly federal and republican; this party was nearly equal in number with the other two, and were composed of the delegations from Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Delaware, and in part from Maryland; also of some individuals from other representations. This party, sir, were for proceeding upon terms of federal equality; they were for taking our present federal system as the basis of their proceedings, and as far as experience had shewn us that there were defects, to remedy those defects; as far as experience had shewn that other powers were necessary. to the federal government, to give those powers-They considered this the ob

ject for which they were sent by their states, and what their states expected from them; they urged, that if after doing this, experience should shew that there still were defects in the system (as no doubt there would be) the same good sense that induced this convention to be called, would cause the states when they found it necessary, to call another; and if that convention should act with the same moderation, the members of it would proceed to correct such errors and defects as experience should have brought to light--That by proceeding in this train, we should have a prospect at length of obtaining as perfect a system of federal government, as the nature of things would admit. On the other hand, if we, contrary to the purpose for which we were entrusted, considering ourselves as master-builders, too proud to amend our original government, should demolish it entirely, and erect a new system of our own, a short time might shew the new system as defective as the old, perhaps more so : should a convention be found necessary again, if the members thereof acting upon the same principles, instead of amending and correcting its defects, should demolish that entirely, and bring forward a third system, that also might soon be found no better than either of the former, and thus we might always remain young in government, and always suffering the inconveniencies of an incorrect, imperfect system.

But, sir, the favourers of monarchy, and those who wished the total abolition of state governments, well knowing that a government founded on truly federal principles, the basis of which were the thirteen state governments, preserved in full force and energy, would be destructive of their views; and knowing they were too weak in numbers, openly to bring forward their system, conscious also that the people of America would reject it if proposed to them, joined their interest with that party, who wished a system, giving particular states the power and

influence over the others, procuring in return mutual sacrifices from them, in giving the government great and undefined powers as to its legislative and executive, well knowing that by departing from a federal system, they paved the way for their favorite object, the destruction of the state governments, and the introduction of monarchyAnd hence, Mr. Speaker, 1 apprehend, in a great measure, arose the objections of those honorable members, Mr. Mason and Mr. Gerry. In every thing that tended to give the large states power over the smaller, the first of those gentlemen could not forget he belonged to the ancient dominion, nor could the latter forget that he represented Old Massachusetts; that part of the system which tended to give those states power over the others met with their perfect approbation; but when they viewed it charged with such powers as would destroy all state governments, their own as well as the rest—when they saw a president so constituted as to differ from a monarch, scarcely but in name, and having it in his power to become such in reality when he pleased; they being republicans and federalists, as far as an attachment to their own states would permit them, they warmly and zealously opposed those parts of the system. From these different sentiments, and from this combination of interest, I apprehend, sir, proceeded the fate of what was called the Jersey resolutions, and the report made by the committee of the whole house.

The Jersey propositions being thus rejected. the convention took up those reported by the committee, and proceeded to debate them by paragraphs; it was now that they who disapproved the report found it necessary to make a warm and decided opposition, which took place upon the discussion of the seventh resolution, which related to the inequality of representation in the first branch. Those who advocated this inequality. urged, that when the articles of confederation were formed, it was only

from necessity and expediency that the states were admitted each to have an equal vote; but that our situation was now altered, and therefore those states who considered it contrary to their interest, would no longer abide by it.— They said no state ought to wish to have influence in government, except in proportion to what it contributes to it; that if it contributes but little it ought to have but a small vote; that taxation and representation ought always to go together; that if one state had sixteen times as many inhabitants as another, or was sixteen times as wealthy, it ought to have sixteen times as many votes ; that an inhabitant of Pennsylvania ought to have as much weight and consequence as an inhabitant of Jersey or Delaware; that it was contrary to the feelings of the human mind; what the large states would never submit to; that the large states would have great objects in view, in which they would never permit the smaller states to thwart them; that equality of suffrage was the rotten part of the constitution, and that this was a happy time to get clear of it. In fine, that it was the poison which contaminated our whole system, and the source of all the evils we experienced.

This, sir, is the substance of the arguments, if arguments they may called, which were used in favor of inequality of suffrage. Those who advocated the equality of suffrage, took the matter up on the original principles of government; they urged, that all men considered in a state of nature, before any government formed, are equally free and independent, no one having any right or authority to exercise power over another, and this without any regard to difference in personal strength, understanding or wealth-That when such individuals enter into government, they have each a right to an equal voice in its first formation, and afterwards have each a right to an equal vote in every matter which relates to their government-That if it could be done conveniently, they have a