Page 96

II. STATE CONVENTION CALLED
could be compared (CDR, 250-53, and Farrand, I, 241-47). On 19 June the Committee
of the Whole rejected the New Jersey amendments and reported the amended Virginia
resolutions (Farrand, I, 312-13). Martin and Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, the only two
Maryland delegates present, were divided. New Hampshire was not represented in the
Convention until 23 July.
See Baltimore Maryland Gazette, 15 February 1788, for what is probably Martin's version
of the New Jersey amendments (RCS:Md., 303-6).
6. For a discussion of the reference to a kingly government favored by delegates to
the Constitutional Convention, see Appendix IV (below). On the broader question of
monarchical tendencies in America, see CC:51.
7. On 9 June James Wilson stated "that as all authority was derived from the people,
equal numbers of people ought to have an equal no. of representatives, and different
numbers of people different numbers of representatives. This principle had been im-
properly violated in the Confederation, owing to the urgent circumstances of the time."
William Paterson, speaking in defense of the New Jersey amendments, replied to Wilson
on 16 June (Farrand, I, 179-80, 250-51, 258-59, 274, 275).
8. For the amendments to the Articles of Confederation proposed by the states, see
CDR, 96-137.
9. Robert Yates and John Lansing, Jr., left the Convention on 10 July, and thereafter
Alexander Hamilton attended sporadically. Even when Hamilton attended, New York did
not have a vote because it was represented by only one delegate. Two delegates were
needed to have an official delegation qualified to vote.
10. On 25 July a motion that the delegates might "take copies of the resolutions which
have been agreed to" by the Convention was defeated 6 states to 5. Maryland voted no
(Farrand, II, 107-8, 115). In his "Genuine Information" III, Martin said that he had
made the motion (Baltimore Maryland Gazette, 4 January 1788 [RCS:Md., 150]).
Daniel Carroll to Benjamin Franklin
Annapolis, 2 December 17871
Some occurrences having taken place since the meeting of our Leg-
islature, of such a nature that I wish you to be informd of them more
clearly than I can do by letter, I hope Majr. McHenry who was in Con-
vention with me for this State will have an opportunity of delivering
this letter himself-This leads to a Subject which gives me considerable
uneasiness. I am afraid you will think, that I have transgressd on your
act of Kindness, when I inform you that I have been compelld to make
use of yi observations deliverd in the Cofinittee of Convention on the
Subject of Representation, & those deliverd on the 17th. of Sepr.2-
The House of Delegates having pass'd a Resolve requesting the atten-
dance of their Deputies to give them information of the proceedings
in Convention, Messrs. McHenry, Jenifer, Martin, & myself attended. I
have reason to think the Motion for that purpose originated from an
Antifederal disposn., but believe many concur'd in it from the purest
motives-
We thought it necessary to attend to prevent as far as in our power
the impressions which might be receivd from the picture we knew Mr.
Martin wou'd draw, & it woud have afforded pleasure & a pretext for
96