William Jackson, secretary of the Constitutional Convention, entered into today’s Journal that “the report from the Committee of revision, as corrected and amended yesterday, being taken up, was read, debated by paragraphs, amended, and agreed to as far as the first clause of the 10th section of the first article inclusive. The House adjourned.” Appended to Jackson’s notes is a list of eighteen motions, indicating how each State voted on each one, as has been Jackson’s practice throughout the Convention. However, Jackson omits the language of eight of the motions, leaving the record incomplete. Most of his records of other motions are wholly inadequate, such as “to insert the word enumeration” without indicating where the words are to be inserted.
Fortunately, notes and interlineations of David Brearley’s copy of the report as well as James Madison’s notes can supply the omissions, but Madison’s complete notes will not be available for many years. However, his interim notes and recollections will help fill the gap. Jackson’s most important task during the Convention has been to keep an accurate record of its decisions, but it appears he may have been a poor choice for the job.
Some of the revisions proposed today were easily and quickly disposed of - approved without dissent - including a simple correction to assure that both Senators from a single State will not be up for re-election at the same time. In another section of the draft, “ex officio” was struck as being superfluous, and language was added to assure that “all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”
Other proposed amendments required at least some discussion. John Rutledge and Gouverneur Morris moved that “persons impeached be suspended from their office until they be tried and acquitted.” Madison provided the reason why this should not be accepted: “The President,” he argued, “is made too dependent already on the legislature by the power of one branch to try him” after being impeached by the other. “This intermediate suspension will put it in the power of one branch only.” Madison prevailed and the motion failed 3 – 8.
Earlier the Convention had approved Congress’s authority, “to appoint a treasurer by joint ballot.” Today, Rutledge moved to strike it from the plan and let the treasurer be appointed in the same manner as other officers. Nathaniel Gorham and Rufus King opposed Rutledge, asserting that, “if agreed to, it would have a mischievous tendency.” The people are accustomed to and attached to that mode of appointing treasurers, they argued. Additionally, “the innovation will multiply objections to the system.” Morris supported Rutledge’s motion. If the treasurer is not appointed by the legislature, he suggested, “he will be more narrowly watched and more readily impeached.” General Pinckney agreed. In South Carolina, he observed, the treasurer is appointed by both houses of the legislature and “the consequence is that bad appointments are made, and the legislature will not listen to the faults of their own officer.” By a vote of 8 – 3, Rutledge’s motion was approved.
The implications of specific words, phrases, and seemingly minor details are not lost on these delegates who have spent nearly four months carefully crafting comprises and managing competing interests. For example, the plan before them assigns power to Congress to “define and punish piracies and felonies on the high seas and punish offenses against the law of nations.” Morris moved to strike out “punish” before “offenses against the law of nations.” He reasoned that removing “punish” in that place would make the sentence read such that Congress could define offenses against the law of nations as well. In short, the placement or omission of one word can make a meaningful difference.
The difference was not without dissent, however. James Wilson opposed the motion. Congress cannot pretend to define the laws of nations, he asserted. Rather, “that depends on the authority of all the civilized nations of the world.” Having pretensions to the contrary, he added, “would have a look of arrogance that would make us ridiculous.” Morris countered. “The word define is proper,” he argued, “when applied to offenses in this case; the law of nations being often too vague and deficient to be a rule.” The Convention supported Morris by a close vote of 6 – 5.
As the hours passed, the Convention approved with little debate a requirement that taxes or duties laid on exports not give preference to one State over another, and that an accounting of public expenditures be published “from time to time.”
However, as some proposed changes were approved, many were rejected. Hugh Williamson continued his effort to increase the size of the House of Representatives and moved that the number be increased for the first legislature. It failed 6 – 5. Benjamin Franklin’s proposal authorizing Congress to “provide for cutting canals where necessary” also failed, in part due to Sherman’s observation that “the expense in such cases will fall on the United States, and the benefit accrue to the places where the canals may be cut.”
James Wilson attempted to overcome the parochial interest underlying Sherman’s comments. “It is necessary,” he insisted, “to prevent a State from obstructing the general welfare.” Madison suggested an “enlargement” of Franklin’s motion, giving Congress “a power to grant charters of incorporation where the interest of the United States might require, and the legislative provisions of individual States may be incompetent.” Rufus King was not convinced. It will be considered the same as “the establishment of a bank,” he declared, which has been a subject of contention.” At this point in the process, the delegates are simply not prepared to bring up a new contentious issue.
Still concerned with a standing army, George Mason proposed to insert “that the liberties of the people may be better secured against the danger of standing armies in time of peace.” Morris disagreed. The motion has no practical effect. It does not do anything and “would set a dishonorable mark of distinction on the military class of citizens.” It failed easily by 2 – 9.