HKB
of a State, would add much to the regret; that the change proposed was however so fundamental an article in a national Gov^t, that it could not be dispensed with.
M^r Madison observed that whatever reason might have existed for the equality of suffrage when the Union was a federal one among sovereign States, it must cease when a National Governm^t should be put into the place. In the former case, the acts of Cong^s depended so much for their efficacy on the cooperation of the States, that these had a weight both within & without Congress, nearly in proportion to their extent and importance. In the latter case, as the acts of the Gen^l Gov^t would take effect without the intervention of the State legislatures, a vote from a small State w^d have the same efficacy & importance as a vote from a large one, and there was the same reason for different numbers of representatives from different States, as from Counties of different extents within particular States. He suggested as an expedient for at once taking the sense of the members on this point and saving the Delaware deputies from embarrassment, that the question should be taken in Committee, and the clause on report to the House, be postponed without a question there. This however did not appear to satisfy Mr. Read.
By several it was observed that no just construction of the Act of Delaware, could require or justify a secession of her deputies, even if the resolution were to be carried thro' the House as well as the Committee. It was finally agreed however that the clause should be postponed: it being understood that in the event the proposed change of representation would certainly be agreed to, no objection or difficulty being started from any other quarter than from Delaware.
The motion of Mr. Read to postpone being agreed to,
The Committee then rose. The Chairman reported progress, and the House having resolved to resume the subject in Committee to-morrow,
Adjourned to 10 O Clock.
THURSDAY MAY 31[40]
[40] "This day the state of New Jersey was represented, so that there were now ten states in Convention."--Yates, Secret Proceedings*, etc., 99. But in the *Journal of the Federal Convention (1819), as in Madison's account, New Jersey is entered as present May 25th. On May 30 two votes are recorded by Madison and in the Journal without New Jersey. It is probable that an error was made in the Journal and that Madison followed it.
William Pierce, from Georgia took his seat.[41]
[41] Rufus King kept a few notes of the proceedings of the convention from May 31st to August 8th. They are meagre, but corroborate Madison's report. See King's Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, i., 587.
Pierce also kept a few rough notes of the proceedings which were printed in the Savannah Georgian, April 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 28, 1828, and reprinted in The American Historical Review*, iii., 317 *et seq. They throw little additional light on the debates, but wherever they do are quoted here, as are King's.
In Committee of the whole on Mr. Randolph's propositions.
The 3^d Resolution "that the national Legislature ought to consist of two branches" was agreed to without debate or dissent, except that of Pennsylvania, given probably from complaisance to Doc^r Franklin who was understood to be partial to a single House of Legislation.
Resol: 4. first clause, "that the members of the first branch of the National Legislature ought to be elected by the people of the several States," being taken up,
M^r Sherman opposed the election by the people, insisting that it ought to be by the State Legislatures. The people he said, immediately should have as little to do as may be about the Government. They want information and are constantly liable to be misled.