Constitutional Convention of 1787: State Debates, Intellectual Foundations, and the Virginia Plan

Local Debates and State Opposition: The Connecticut Case Study

• The decision to send delegates to the Philadelphia convention was not universally accepted among the states, sparking intense local debates.

• In Connecticut, four specific legislators actively opposed the state's participation in the convention:

  • Elijah Fitch: Arguing from a decentralist perspective, he claimed that the convention would endanger individual rights by establishing a robust, centralized national government.

  • Daniel Perkins: Expressed a populist concern that the delegates chosen would be primarily "rich, aristocratic men." He feared this elite group would make decisions favoring their own class interests rather than the common good, eventually stripping rights from the populace.

  • Hosea Humphrey: Focused on state sovereignty; he warned that Connecticut would lose its power to protest or veto national actions, resulting in a significant loss of state-level authority to a central body.

  • Abraham Granger: Represented the direct opposition of his constituents, stating he was bound to vote against sending a delegation because the people he represented did not want it. He also privately expressed the belief that the convention intended to establish a monarchy.

• Conversely, nine men in the Connecticut legislature advocated for attending, arguing that the future well-being of both the state and the Union was dependent upon the creation of a stronger national government.

The Constitutional Convention: Logistical Framework and Procedural Secrecy

• Formal Name and Location: Officially known as the Federal Convention, the assembly took place in Philadelphia between $\text{May}$ and $\text{September}$ of $1787$.

• Attendance and Profile: A total of $55$ delegates attended. Every attendee possessed experience in either colonial political structures or revolutionary institutions. Notably, those fundamentally opposed to any revision of the Articles of Confederation chose not to attend, ensuring the assembly was composed of men who at least agreed on the necessity of structural change.

• Leadership and Legitimacy:

  • George Washington: Presided over the convention. His involvement provided the assembly with immense legitimacy, as many believed his presence precluded any "nefarious" or "sinister" motives.

  • Benjamin Franklin: His attendance further bolstered the public credibility of the proceedings.

• Strict Secrecy Protocols:

  • The convention was kept entirely secret from the public to prevent ideas from being prematurely rejected, ridiculed, or sensationalized in the press before they were fully formed.

  • An anecdote highlights this secrecy: George Washington famously rebuked the delegates after a set of notes was found, urging them to be more careful to ensure proceedings did not end up in newspapers.

  • James Madison’s Documentation: Madison served as the primary, albeit unofficial, record-keeper. He took extensive notes during sessions and revised them every evening. These notes, published much later, became the primary source for understanding the internal debates of the convention.

James Madison’s Intellectual Preparation and the Virginia Plan

• Before the convention, James Madison engaged in exhaustive research into the history of governance, focusing specifically on the failures of past republics and democracies, such as $\text{Athens}$ and the $\text{Roman Republic}$.

• He concluded that previous republics failed because they were too small and frequently fell victim to the "whims of the majority," where a single dominant faction would seize power and slide into authoritarianism.

• The Virginia Plan: Though presented by another Virginia delegate, this was Madison's blueprint for a new government. It proposed a radical departure from the Articles of Confederation through a tripartite structure:

  • Branch 1: The Legislative: A bicameral ($2$-house) legislature.

    • The Lower House would be elected directly by the people.

    • The Upper House would be selected by the members of the lower house.

    • Representation in both houses was to be determined by population ($\text{proportional representation}$).

    • This body would have the power to nullify unconstitutional laws and veto state laws.

  • Branch 2: The Executive: Proposed a presidency with the power to veto acts of Congress, creating a system of checks and balances. The original plan did not specify whether the executive should be a single individual or a committee, nor did it define term limits.

  • Branch 3: The Judicial: Envisioned one or more supreme court judges and a system of lower courts to be established by Congress.

Comparative Analysis: The Articles of Confederation vs. The Virginia Plan

• The Articles of Confederation:

  • Branch Structure: Only a legislative branch existed.

  • Legislative Type: Unicameral ($1$-house).

  • Representation: Equal representation ($1\, \text{vote per state}$).

  • Authority: Minimal central power with no federal court system and no executive veto.

• Madison’s Departure: The Virginia Plan represented a drastic revision. It introduced a strong executive with controversial veto power, a federal judiciary, and a legislature that could override state legislation. This was viewed as a massive threat to those accustomed to state-level supremacy.

The Theory of the Large Republic

• Madison’s central innovation was flipping the conventional wisdom that republics must be small to survive.

• The Large Republic Argument: He argued that by creating one large republic out of the $13$ individual state republics, the government would cover so much territory and so many diverse interests that no single majority faction could easily organize to monopolize power.

• This was his proposed solution to the "tyranny of the majority." By having the $13$ states cede certain powers to a unifying national government, the size and diversity of the nation would act as a safeguard for liberty.

Upcoming Discourse and Counter-Proposals

• The Virginia Plan’s emphasis on population-based representation and centralized power immediately faced opposition from smaller states.

• Future discussions will include:

  • The New Jersey Plan: Also known as the "small state plan," devised as a direct response to Madison’s proposal.

  • Alexander Hamilton’s Proposals: An investigation into why Hamilton proposed a system resembling a monarchy, a move considered "ludicrous" by many in the post-Revolutionary context.