Mostly for myself, but follow along if you wish.
- Click here for the source.
May 25, 28, 29:
- Quorum reached. Rules established.
May 30: Met as committee of the whole.
- Three proposals introduced:
“2. That no treaty or treaties among the whole or part of the States, as individual sovereignties, would be sufficient.
“3. That a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme Legislative, Executive and Judiciary.”
As voted on:
“that a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary,”
— Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, aye — 6; Connecticut, no — 1; New York, divided (Colonel HAMILTON, aye, Mr. YATES, no).
Discussed, but did not vote on: whether representation should be based on population or the amount of each State’s financial contribution.
May 31:
- The third 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 Doctor FRANKLIN, who was understood to be partial to a single house of legislation.
- On the question [fourth resolution] for an election of the first branch of the National Legislature by the people, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, aye — 6; New Jersey, South Carolina, no — 2; Connecticut, Delaware, divided.
- the fifth Resolution, that the second [or senatorial] branch of the National Legislature ought to be chosen by the first branch, out of persons nominated by the State Legislatures. — Massachusetts, Virginia, South Carolina, aye — 3; Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, North Carolina, Georgia, no — 7.
- The sixth Resolution, stating the cases in which the National Legislature ought to legislate, was next taken into discussion. On the question whether each branch should originate laws, there was an unanimous affirmative, without debate. On the question for transferring all the legislative powers of the existing Congress to this assembly, there was also an unanimous affirmative, without debate.
- On the proposition for giving legislative power in all cases to which the State Legislatures were individually incompetent, — Mr. PINCKNEY and Mr. RUTLEDGE objected to the vagueness of the term “incompetent,” and said they could not well decide how to vote until they should see an exact enumeration of the powers comprehended by this definition. - On the question for giving powers, in cases to which the States are not competent — Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye — 9; Connecticut, divided, ( SHERMAN, no, ELLSWORTH, aye.)
- The other clauses, giving powers necessary to preserve harmony among the States, to negative all State laws contravening, in the opinion of the National Legislature, the Articles of Union, down to the last clause, (the words, “or any treaties subsisting under the authority of the Union,” being added after the words “contravening, &c. the Articles of the Union,” on motion of Doctor FRANKLIN) were agreed to without debate or dissent.
- The last clause of the sixth Resolution, authorizing an exertion of the force of the whole against a delinquent State, came next into consideration. He hoped that such a system would be framed as might render this resource unnecessary, and moved that the clause be postponed. This motion was agreed to.
