Skip to Main Content

Convention: A Daily Journal

Center for Civics Education

Convention: A Daily Journal

Convention: A Daily Journal is a day-by-day journal of the 1787 Constitutional Convention convened by twelve of the original thirteen states to amend the Articles of Confederation and create a “more perfect union.” It chronicles the daily activities of the Convention, profiles the delegates and their interactions with each other, and looks back to life in America in the 1780s. Writing in the first person, the story is told from an “observer” hearing events as told in contemporary newspaper accounts and delegates’ personal notes and letters.


Saturday, August 18, 1787

August 18, 2020 - 4 minute read


Founding Fathers

The Convention is nearly finished considering the list of legislative powers proposed by the Committee of Detail. The final three are the powers to raise armies, build and equip fleets, and “call forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, enforce treaties, suppress insurrections and repel invasions.”

But the end is not yet. James Madison, Charles Pinckney, and several other delegates believe the list of enumerated powers is seriously deficient. Today, Madison came armed with nine additional powers he wished to have referred to the Committee of Detail. At eleven, Pinckney’s list was even longer. Joining them with recommendations of their own were John Rutledge, George Mason, Rufus King, and Elbridge Gerry. The need to remedy omissions was expected and while there is some overlap in the proposals, the list is still very extensive.

Examining the long list, John Rutledge voiced his concern about “the length of the sessions, the probable impatience of the public and the extreme anxiety of many members of the Convention to bring the business to an end.” Most delegates have already assumed the Convention will not adjourn for at least another month, but today’s revelations may have extended that time by weeks. To move the business along, Rutledge moved the Convention begin meeting at 10:00 o’clock in the morning instead of 11 o’clock and adjourn exactly at 4:00 p.m. without the necessity of a motion for that purpose.

Adhering to its practice of utilizing committees, the Convention referred the new list to the Committee of Detail, except for the proposal that the national government should assume current debts of the States, most of which are related to the Revolutionary War. The issue is exceptionally sensitive. After a testy debate, Rutledge proposed it be considered separately by another ad hoc committee. His motion passed by a divided vote of 6 – 4 – 1 and the committee members were immediately chosen by ballot: John Langdon (N.H.), Rufus King (Mass.), Roger Sherman (Conn.), William Livingston (N.J.), George Clymer (Penn.), John Dickinson (Del.), James McHenry (Md.), George Mason (Va.), Hugh Williamson (N. Car.), Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (S. Car.), and Alexander Baldwin (Geo.).

Madison’s ambitious list of proposed new powers includes disposing of unappropriated lands; instituting temporary governments for new States arising in those lands; regulating affairs with the Indians; establishing a seat for the national government; granting charters of incorporations in certain cases; providing copyrights for literary authors; establishing a university; encouraging the advancement of useful knowledge and discoveries; and procuring land for the erection of forts, magazines and other necessary buildings.

Mercifully, some of Pinckney’s list overlaps with Madison’s, but does include new grants of power, including the powers to grant letters of marque and reprisal; regulate stages on the post roads; secure the payment of the public debt; and secure all creditors under the new constitution from a violation of the public faith when pledged by the authority of the legislature. Pinckney would also require that funds appropriated for the payment of public creditors not be diverted to any other purpose.

George Mason proposed that Congress be authorized to regulate the militia, hoping there will be no standing army during peacetime Elbridge Gerry’s contribution to the ever-expanding list was a vague reference “in favor of public securities.”

There is much work to be done. Oliver Ellsworth observed that a council for the President has not yet been considered. He has his own ideas of how it should be constructed but John Langdon suggested the subject be held over until they consider the presidency in its entirety. Besides, he added, Gouverneur Morris has some specific ideas on this subject but is not on the floor.

Hours had already passed before the delegates finally returned to the original list of enumerated powers proposed in the report of the Committee of Detail. The first to be considered was the power of Congress to “raise an army.” Accepting Nathaniel Gorham’s amendment to add “and support” after “raise,” the clause was agreed to nem. con. After the vote, Gerry noticed “there was no check here against standing armies in time of peace…Great opposition to the plan would spring from such an omission,” he warned. “An army is dangerous in time of peace and I will never consent to a power to keep up an indefinite number.” Seconded by Luther Martin, Gerry proposed that the legislature may raise and army “provided that in time of peace the army shall not consist of more than ----- thousand men.” He left the number blank but thinks it should be two or three thousand.

Gen. Pinckney was taken aback. “Are no troops ever to be raised until an attack should be made on us?” he asked. Pinckney had joined the colonial militia in 1772 and is a battle-tested veteran who played a major role in the Patriot cause. Gerry’s feeble, confusing response was,“ if there be no restriction, a few States may establish a military government.” New Jersey’s Jonathan Dayton backed Pinckney. “Preparations for war are generally made in peace,” he said, “and a standing force of some sort may become unavoidable.” In short order, Gerry’s motion was defeated without objection.

But what about the militia? Mason proposed that the legislature should “make laws for the regulation and discipline of the militia of the several States, reserving to the States the appointment of the officers.” Gen. Pinckney weighed in again, noting that experience during the war proved that “dissimilarity in the militia of different States had produced the most serious trouble.” Ellsworth believes Mason’s proposal takes too much authority from the States. In vain, he said, would they take the militia out of the hands of the States. The debate was heated and for Gerry, “this is the last point remaining to be surrendered. If it be agreed to by the Convention, the plan will have as black a mark as was set on Cain.”

Back to top