September 5, 1787: Refining the Proposal

George Mason by Dominic Boudet after John Hesselius, 1811

Gunston Hall, https://gunstonhall.org/learn/george-mason/

“[I] would prefer the Government of Prussia to one which will put all power into the hands of seven or eight men, and fix an aristocracy worse than absolute monarchy.”

--George Mason

Wednesday, September 5, 1787: The Convention Today
Brearly (NJ), chairman of the Committee of Eleven which was considering various unresolved issues, released more of the committee’s report.

The report permitted Congress to create a standing peacetime army. Gerry (MA) still thought of this “as dangerous to liberty.” Sherman (CT) was less opposed but still desired “a reasonable restriction” on this power. Despite these objections, the state delegations unanimously approved the article.

Gerry was so skeptical of federal power that a relatively unthreatening proposal—letting Congress acquire land within a state’s territory for building forts, dockyards, “and other needful buildings”—alarmed him. “This power might be made use of to enslave any particular State by buying up its territory, and that the strong-holds proposed would be a means of awing the State into an undue obedience to the General Government.” King (MA) conciliated him by moving that Congress could only acquire land with the consent of a state’s legislature. Gouverneur Morris (PA) seconded, and the motion passed unanimously.

For most of the rest of the day, the delegates continued their debate from yesterday over the proposal for the President to be chosen by an Electoral College.

Charles Pinckney (SC) did not like the plan. The electors would be insufficiently knowledgeable and they’d all vote for people from their home states. He also didn’t like how the plan had the Senate choose the President in circumstances where no one won the votes of a majority of the electors. He thought the diffusion of the electoral votes would result in the Senate almost always choosing the President, and this would give the Senate too much power over the President.

Rutledge (SC) moved to go back to the plan they’d previously settled on: having Congress appoint the President. His motion failed 2–8–1, with the Carolinas in support and New Hampshire divided.

Mason (VA) thought the Electoral College plan could be fixed by taking the Senate out of the process and letting a President be elected with only a plurality of electoral votes. He made a motion to that effect and was seconded by Williamson (NC).

Gouverneur Morris (PA) “thought the point of less consequence than it was supposed on both sides.” In most elections, there would be a candidate who won a majority. Mason responded that if G. Morris were so confident of that, he shouldn’t mind getting rid of the requirement for a majority.

Sherman liked the Committee of Eleven’s plan because it balanced small and large states’ interests: the Electoral College would be dominated by large states, but the Senate gave outsized representation to small states.

Mason’s motion failed by a wide margin.

Wilson (PA) moved to have Congress as a whole (not just the Senate) choose the President when the Electoral College didn’t give any candidate a majority. This motion also failed.

Madison (VA) and Wiliamson moved to require the President to win only a one-third plurality of the elector’s votes instead of a majority. This would reduce the frequency with which the Senate would choose the President, but also ensure that the President wouldn’t be someone with an absurdly low level of support.

Gerry “objected, that this would put it in the power of three or four States to put in whom they pleased.” When put to a vote, only Virginia and North Carolina supported the motion.

The proposed plan had the Senate choose the President from among the top five vote getters in the Electoral College. Mason moved, and Gerry seconded, to reduce that to the top three. The motion failed 2–9, with Virginia and North Carolina in support.

Spaight (NC) and Rutledge moved to increase the number to thirteen. Only the Carolinas supported that motion.

Synopsis

• The delegates continued to debate the proposed Electoral College and again failed to find consensus.

Delegates Today

• Pennsylvania Assemblyman (legislator) Jacob Hiltzheimer wrote in his diary about his interaction with the Convention and how the space in Independence Hall was being shared: “Took a ride with the Hon. Mr. Langdon [NH] in his Phaeton. Met the Assembly at the State House in Lower room, and adjourned to meet to morrow 1/2 past 9 o’clock in the upper room, Leaving the Lower room as before to the Gentlemen of the Convention.”
• Washington (VA) dined at Mrs. House’s and drank tea at Mr. Bingham’s. Like Madison (VA), Read (DE), and Dickinson (DE), who were all boarding at Mrs. House’s, the General was a long-time acquaintance of Mrs. House and her family.
• Gorham (MA) borrowed 36 pounds from fellow delegate Robert Morris (PA) to pay his board bill and for the trip home.
• McClurg (VA) wrote from Richmond to give Madison some long-distance medical advice: “I am not surprised that you have been indisposed, at this season, with such a weight of business upon you. I am more surprised that you have been able to persevere in the application, which that business required.” He advised Madison to take some rest when not working in the Convention, saying he (McClurg) “would readily give up the satisfaction he takes in your letters, for the pleasure of hearing that you are in health."
• One Robert Fenning wrote a long letter from London to Washington, outlining his experience at horticulture and estate management, giving as references “Mr. Laurence [Henry Laurens] of Charles Town, South Carolina and Mr. Samuel Chase of Maryland in America,” and asked whether he could be of use to the General, or to any Gentleman in America. It is typical of Washington that he responded briefly but courteously in January 1788.

Philadelphia Today

• The day was cool and pleasant, with partly cloudy skies.
• Today’s Gazette reported “we hear that the Convention propose to adjourn next week, after laying America under such obligations to them for their long, painful and disinterested labors, to establish her liberty upon a permanent basis.”