Yesterday George Washington dined with his friend William Hamilton at his large home in Bush Hill in the city of Philadelphia. Hamilton is the grandson of Andrew Hamilton, from whom he inherited 300 acres of land in the countryside near the bend in the Schuylkill River. It was Andrew Hamilton who defended John Peter Zenger from charges of criminal libel back in 1735. William Hamilton has spent the last twenty years building an imposing mansion surrounded by a picturesque landscape in the style of grand English gardens, complete with a large botanical collection. He calls it The Woodlands.
Washington and Hamilton share interests in plants and landscapes as well as architecture. On more than one occasion, Washington has asked Hamilton’s advice about improvements Washington has been making at Mt. Vernon, including “a long open gallery in front of my house which I want to give a stone or some other kind of floor which will stand the weather.” Hamilton had spent nearly two years touring England country estates which inspired changes at The Woodlands and are of great interest to Washington.
This morning, Washington and his colleagues are back in the East Room, prepared to take up issues they had wrestled with on Friday but had not concluded. James Wilson and Edmund Randolph began the session proposing that the requisite term of citizenship for members of the House of Representatives should be reduced from seven to four years. The number does not matter to Elbridge Gerry: he opposes any foreigner serving in the government. “Persons having foreign attachments will be sent among us and insinuated into our councils,” he warned. Alexander Hamilton has just returned from New York after several weeks absence and takes a different view, while recognizing good points on both sides. Rather than clutter the constitution with “minute restrictions,” he said, simply limit them to “citizenship and inhabitancy.” Leave the “rule of naturalization to the legislature.”
“Pennsylvania is proof of the advantage of encouraging emigrations,” James Wilson asserted, noting that “almost all of the general officers of the Pennsylvania line of the late army were foreigners” and three of Pennsylvania’s delegates to the Convention are not natives – Robert Morris, Thomas Fitzsimmons, and himself. (Alexander Hamilton is also foreign-born.) When the vote was taken, Wilson’s motion for four years failed 3 – 8. Gouverneur Morris then moved that the seven years citizenship requirement should not affect any person now a citizen, sparking another spirited debate which spilled over into the question of a minimum age for being elected to the House of Representatives.
John Mercer warned against “disenfranchising” people who have become citizens. They should “be on a level in all respects with natives.” John Rutledge countered, “It might as well be said that all qualifications are disenfranchisements and that to require the age of 25 years is a disenfranchisement.” Morris “considered the case of persons under 25 years as very different from that of foreigners” and proceeded to explain the difference.
The debate rehashed arguments made last week about the dangers as well as advantages of allowing “foreigners,” or naturalized citizens, in the councils of government. Morris’s motion to exempt people who are now citizens from such restrictions was rejected 5 – 6 but the Convention voted to retain the seven years requirement and not exclude “foreigners.”
The next order of business was to re-consider the “origin of money bills.” Randolph proposed new language, substituting “for the purpose of revenue” for “raising money;” requiring that such bills originate only in the House of Representatives; and prohibiting the Senate from making changes. George Mason expounded at length on this, pointing out an important distinction between the two branches. The House is elected by the people and responsible to the people. The Senate is elected by the State legislatures and responsible to them. “In all events,” he concluded, “the purse strings should be in the hands of the representatives of the people.”
“With regard to the purse strings,” Wilson opined, “the purse should have two strings, one of which is in the hands of the House of Representatives, the other in those of the Senate…War, commerce, and revenue are the great objects of the general government, and all of them are connected with money.” He opposed Randolph’s motion.
Both Madison and John Dickinson agreed, Madison fearing they are “laying a foundation for disputes between the two houses and Dickinson putting the issue in a new light. “Experience must be our only guide,” he began. “Reason may mislead us. It was not reason that discovered the admirable mechanism of the English constitution. It was not reason that discovered or could have discovered…trial by jury. Accidents probably produced these discoveries, and experience has given a sanction to them.” Experience, he declared, “has verified the utility of restraining money bills to the immediate representatives of the people.” Moreover, eight States have inserted in their constitutions the exclusive right of originating money bills in the popular branch of the legislature. However, most of them also allow the other branch to amend.
John Rutledge is convinced the people will see the origination clause “as but a mere tub to the whale. It is of no new real consequence.” The people will “be more likely to be displeased with it as an attempt to bubble them, than to impute it to a watchfulness over their rights.” Throw a tub to the whale? To “bubble” the people? Whether Rutledge intended a little humor or sarcasm is uncertain, but slang terms do have meaning. To “throw a tub to the whale” means to create a diversion to avoid a dangerous or unpleasant situation. To “bubble” is to disprove or destroy someone’s fantasy or delusion. Rutledge got his point across.
At the end of the day, the Convention voted 4 – 7 against exclusive origination of money bills in the House. Consensus seems nearly as elusive as when the Convention first convened over two months ago.