“Mr. Martin I saw at Convention,” Elbridge Gerry wrote in a letter today to his wife, Anne. “Martin rode from Trenton in the forenoon and had nearly fainted when he dismounted, on account of the heat. This city is now and has been for several days excessive hot.” The few Philadelphians who have a second home or property in the countryside, such as the Robert Morris’s and the Andrew William’s, may go there seeking relief from the heat, but most simply endure it, doing their best to cope with flies, mosquitoes, dusty roads, and periodic outbreaks of sickness and disease.
Trudging to the State House under the mid-morning sun, the delegates were fully prepared to consider the next part of the report of the Committee of Detail - Article VI, Sect. 9. It provides that members of both the House and Senate shall be ineligible for any other office under the authority of the United States while they are serving in Congress. It further makes Senators ineligible for such offices until one year after they leave the Senate. Charles Pinckney was appalled at such an idea. It is “degrading to them,” he protested. ” After all, their election proved they have the confidence of the people.” It is also “inconvenient. The Senate is supposed to contain the fittest men. I hope to see that body become a school of public ministers, a nursery of statesmen.” It is also “impolitic,” he continued, “because the legislature would cease to be a magnet to the first talents and abilities.”
Pinckney moved to postpone discussion of this section in order to take up his own proposition - that the restriction be applied only to offices for which they would receive “any salary, fees, or emoluments of any kind.” His motion to postpone failed, but only after a very lengthy discussion on the merits of the two propositions before them.
George Mason wanted to strike the entire section, while John Mercer supported restrictions on the legislators as a guard against aristocracy. The legislators, “being few, can and will draw emoluments for themselves.” In fact, he asserted, America is already aristocratic. Gerry sided with Mercer, against Pinckney. The restrictions are not “degrading,” he said, but are a safeguard. “If the Senate were to appoint ambassadors, they will multiply embassies for their own sakes. I am not so fond of those productions as to wish to establish nurseries for them,” he retorted. “If our best citizens are actuated by such mercenary views, we had better choose a single despot at once. It will be more easy to satisfy the rapacity of one than of many.”
Gouverneur Morris is not so quick to restrict legislators in government service. “Why should we not avail ourselves of their services if the people choose to give them their confidence?”
Pinckney pointed out that “no State has rendered the members of the legislature ineligible to offices. In South Carolina, the judges are eligible to the legislature.” James Wilson followed, noting that his own State, Pennsylvania, “which has gone as far as any State into the policy of fettering power, has not rendered the members of the legislature ineligible to offices of the government.” The question to postpone in order to take up Pinckney’s motion failed 5 – 5 – 1, an odd vote because, for all practical purposes, they had already debated it. Pinckney tried again; this time assisted by Pierce Butler - postpone consideration of the restrictions on eligibility until the Convention considers what powers will be vested in the Senate. Then, he suggested, “it will be more easy to judge of the expediency of allowing the officers of State to be chosen out of that body.” Agreed to nem.con.
Article VI, Sect. 10 was taken up next, providing that members of the national legislature “shall be paid by their respective States.” The debate was robust, but the end result was a decidedly strong vote against the proposition. Instead, the Convention voted they should be “paid out of the national treasury.” It was Oliver Ellsworth who made the substitute motion. Being paid by the States would create “too much dependence” on them, he said. Morris agreed, adding, “it would throw an unequal burden on the distant States, which would be unjust because the legislature is to be a national assembly.”
Pierce Butler made an interesting point, which Gerry acknowledged. “Payment by the States,” Butler said, is important particularly for Senators. Appointed by the State legislatures and serving for six years in the national capitol, “they will lose sight of their constituents unless dependent upon them for their support.”
“There are difficulties on both sides,” Gerry conceded. “The observation of Mr. Butler has weight in it. On the other side, the State legislators may turn out the Senators by reducing their salaries. Such things have been practiced.” Mason spoke next. “It has not yet been noticed,” he reminded his colleagues, “that the clause as it now stands makes the House of Representatives also dependent on the State legislatures; so that both Houses will be made the instruments of the politics of the States whatever they may be.”
“I see no danger in trusting the general legislature with the payment of themselves,” offered Jacob Broom. Broom has said little during the Convention, prompting William Pierce to describe him in his “sketches” as “silent in public, but cheerful and conversable in private.” Unlike Broom, Ellsworth does not trust the legislature. His objections notwithstanding, the vote was 9 - 2 for national legislators to be paid out of the national treasury.
But how much? Ellsworth moved five dollars a day during their attendance and for every thirty miles travelling to and from the Congress. Caleb Strong preferred four dollars. But do we need this level of detail in a constitution? Both motions were resoundingly defeated 2 – 9, followed by unanimous consent that the amount shall be “ascertained by law,” leaving it in the hands of the legislators themselves.
The lesson for today - slow progress is better than no progress.