Page View
Jensen, Merrill; Kaminski, John P.; Saladino, Gaspare J. (ed.) / Ratification of the Constitution by the states: Pennsylvania
(1976)
B. The Dissent of the Minority of the Convention, pp. 617-640
Page 619
B. DISSENT OF MINORITY/18 DEC. were set at naught by some of the states, while others complied with them by legislative acts, but were tardy in their payments, and Con- gress found themselves incapable of complying with their engage- ments, and supporting the federal government. It was found that our national character was sinking in the opinion of foreign nations. The Congress could make treaties of commerce, but could not enforce the observance of them. We were suffering from the restrictions of foreign nations, who had shackled our commerce, while we were un- able to retaliate; and all now agreed that it would be advantageous to the union to enlarge the powers of Congress; that they should be enabled in the amplest manner to regulate commerce, and to lay and collect duties on the imports throughout the United States. With this view a convention was first proposed by Virginia,3 and finally recommended by Congress for the different states to appoint deputies to meet in convention, "for the purposes of revising and amending the present articles of confederation, so as to make them adequate to the exigencies of the union."4 This recommendation the legislatures of twelve states complied with so hastily as not to consult their constitu- ents on the subject; and though the different legislatures had no authority from their constituents for the purpose, they probably ap- prehended the necessity would justify the measure; and none of them extended their ideas at that time further than "revising and amend- ing the present articles of confederation." Pennsylvania by the act appointing deputies expressly confined their powers to this object;5 and though it is probable that some of the members of the assembly of this state had at that time in contemplation to annihilate the present confederation, as well as the constitution of Pennsylvania, yet the plan was not sufficiently matured to communicate it to the public. The majority of the legislature of this commonwealth were at that time under the influence of the members from the city of Philadelphia. They agreed that the deputies sent by them to convention should have no compensation for their services, which determination was cal- culated to prevent the election of any member who resided at a dis- tance from the city. It was in vain for the minority to attempt elect- ing delegates to the convention, who understood the circumstances, and the feelings of the people, and had a common interest with them. They found a disposition in the leaders of the majority of the house to choose themselves and some of their dependents. The minority attempted to prevent this by agreeing to vote for some of the leading members, who they knew had influence enough to be appointed at any rate, in hopes of carrying with them some respectable citizens of Philadelphia, in whose principles and integrity they could have more confidence; but even in this they were disappointed, except in one 619
Copyright 1976 Wisconsin Historical Society Press.| For information on re-use see: http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/Copyright