This morning, shaken by yesterday’s vote, “before the hour of the Convention, a number of the members from the larger States met for the purpose of consulting on the proper steps to be taken in consequence of the vote in favor of an equal representation in the 2nd branch, and the apparent inflexibility of the smaller States on that point. Several members from the latter States also attended.”
According to James Madison, the time “was wasted in vague conversation on the subject, without any specific proposition or agreement.” It is probable, Madison concluded, “that the result of the consultation satisfied the smaller States that they had nothing to apprehend from a Union of the larger, in any plan whatever against the equality of votes in the 2nd branch.”
Nevertheless, as soon as today’s session opened, Pennsylvania’s Gouverneur Morris moved “to reconsider the whole Resolution agreed to yesterday concerning the constitution of the two branches of government.” His supposed reasoning was that the powers of the government should be determined before deciding on its form. The motion was not seconded. The prolonged standoff has ended.
History will record this as the Great Compromise, and rightly attribute it to Connecticut’s Roger Sherman. Unlike many of the delegates, well-born and well-bred, Sherman is of humble origins, the son of a farmer and shoemaker. Born in 1721, he spent most of his youth in Stoughton, Massachusetts. Money was scarce, but his home had books and he was a voracious reader. He had access to a good library and was encouraged by both his father and a Harvard-educated parish minister. When his father died, he moved with his mother and siblings to Connecticut to join his brother. There Sherman worked as a cobbler and surveyor, opened a store, and married his childhood sweetheart, Elizabeth Hartwell. Soon he opened another store in nearby Wallingford. In the meantime, he studied law on his own and was admitted to the bar in 1754.
In 1760, Elizabeth died, leaving Sherman with seven children. His business prospered and he became involved in civic and religious affairs, serving as town selectman, justice of the peace, county judge and state senator. In 1763, he married Rebecca Prescott. Together, they had eight children. In an era of high child mortality, thirteen of Sherman’s fifteen children survived to adulthood.
Sherman was a well-respected member the First and Second Continental Congresses. Thomas Jefferson said, “he never said a foolish thing in his life.” Unashamed of his Christian faith, he once objected to a motion for Congress to sit on a Sunday “on an occasion which he thought did not require it out of regard of the commands of his Maker.” Benjamin Rush remembered coming out of Congress one day, and “upon hearing the defeat of the American army on Long Island during the war, where the army was entrenched and fortified by a chain of hills,” Sherman recited Jeremiah 12:23: “Truly in vain is salvation hoped for from the hills, and from the multitude of mountains.”
A signer of the Articles of Association, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation, Sherman is once again at the crossroads of American history. Pierce’s “sketches” describe him as “awkward, un-meaning, and unaccountably strange in his manner. But in his train of thinking there is something regular, deep and comprehensive.” He has “that strange New England cant which runs through his public as well as his private speaking…yet he deserves infinite praise – no man has a better heart or a clearer head.”
Equality in the Senate finally approved, the Convention can now turn its attention to other matters, including the powers to be assigned to Congress. It was Sherman who opened the discussion, observing “it would be difficult to draw the line between the powers of the general legislature and those left with the States.” However, he made an attempt with respect to taxation, admitting his list was not complete. It was rejected.
Next, Gunning Bedford moved the legislature be authorized to act “in all cases for the general interests of the Union, and also in those to which the States are separately incompetent. or in which the harmony of the United States may be interrupted by the exercise of the individual legislation.” Earlier this language had been rejected for being too vague. Randolph was surprised at its breadth. “This is a formidable idea indeed,” he said. “It involves the power of violating all the laws and constitutions of the States and of intermeddling with their police.” Bedford countered that his motion was merely a matter of wording, not substance. The motion passed 6 – 4.
Related to issues just discussed is whether the national legislature should be empowered to “negative all laws passed by the several States if they contravene the articles of Union or treaties authorized by the Union.” Sherman believes such a veto power is unnecessary, “as the courts of the States would not consider as valid any law contravening the authority of the Union.” Luther Martin went further, considering it both “improper and inadmissible.” Are State laws supposed to be sent to the national legislature before they go into effect?” he asked rhetorically. A brief discussion ensued before the question was defeated.
Next to be considered was the ninth resolution of the Report of the Committee of the Whole, “that the national executive consist of a single person.” It was agreed to nem. con. That it “be chosen by the national legislature” passed after a vigorous debate, but such a lively debate assures it will be reconsidered in the days to come. The matter of the executive is not a small one.