For a look at the Articles of Confederation, click here.
- Click here for the Wikipedia entry.
- Who was Edmund Randolph?
- Who was James Madison?
- Click here for a source for the text below.
Mr. RANDOLPH then opened the main business: –
He expressed his regret, that it should fall to him, rather than those who were of longer standing in life and political experience, to open the great subject of their mission. But as the Convention had originated from Virginia, and his colleagues supposed that some proposition was expected from them, they had imposed this task on him.
He then commented on the difficulty of the crisis, and the necessity of preventing the fulfilment of the prophecies of the American downfall.
He observed, that, in revising the federal system we ought to inquire,
first, into the properties which such a government ought to possess;
secondly, the defects of the Confederation;
thirdly, the danger of our situation; and
fourthly, the remedy.
The character of such a government ought to secure,
first, against foreign invasion;
secondly, against dissensions between members of the Union, or seditions in particular States;
thirdly, to procure to the several States various blessings of which an isolated situation was incapable;
fourthly, it should be able to defend itself against encroachment; and
fifthly, to be paramount to the State Constitutions.
In speaking of the defects of the Confederation, he professed a high respect for its authors, and considered them as having done all that patriots could do, in the then infancy of the science of constitutions, and of confederacies; when the inefficiency of requisitions was unknown — no commercial discord had arisen among any States — no rebellion had appeared, as in Massachusetts — foreign debts had not become urgent — the havoc of paper-money had not been foreseen — treaties had not been violated — and perhaps nothing better could be obtained, from the jealousy of the States with regard to their sovereignty.
He then proceeded to enumerate the defects: —
First, that the Confederation produced no security against foreign invasion; Congress not being permitted to prevent a war, nor to support it by their own authority. Of this he cited many examples; most of which tended to show, that they could not cause infractions of treaties, or of the law of nations, to be punished; that particular States might by their conduct provoke war without control; and that, neither militia nor drafts being fit for defence on such occasions, enlistments only could be successful, and these could not be executed without money.
Secondly, that the Federal Government could not check the quarrel between States, nor a rebellion in any, not having constitutional power nor means to interpose according to the exigency.
Thirdly, that there were many advantages which the United States might acquire, which were not attainable under the Confederation — such as a productive impost — counteraction of the commercial regulations of other nations — pushing of commerce ad libitum, &c. &c.
Fourthly, that the Federal Government could not defend itself against encroachments from the States.
Fifthly, that it was not even paramount to the State Constitutions, ratified as it was in many of the States.
