Constitutional Convention of 1787: A Revolution in Government, The

Phi Kappa Phi Forum, Summer 2006 by Beeman, Richard R

America's "Revolution of 1787"was no accident. The men who deliberated in the Pennsylvania State House during the summer of 1787 were hardly wild-eyed radicals; they were, overwhelmingly, men of property and prestige, the acknowledged leaders of their political communities. Yet, as they prepared to conclude their business on September 17, 1787, after nearly four months of debate, disagreement, and compromise, they were being asked to add their assent to a document that would effect a radical revolution in the character of their continental government.

It did not begin auspiciously. On May 14, 1787, the day on which the convention that was called to amend the Articles of Confederation was due to begin, James Madison found himself in a gloomy mood. Only a handful of delegates had turned up, and indeed, eleven more days would pass before the Convention finally was able to get underway with a bare quorum of state delegations assembled. As things turned out, however, that eleven-day hiatus would provide for those few delegates who had bothered to turn up on time a rare opportunity to plan the revolution in government.

SEIZING THE INITIATIVE

The ringleader was the thirty-seven-year-old Madison. Historian, Forrest McDonald has said of Madison that "he had read so much and remembered so much that he could sound wise when actually he was only quoting somebody wise," but that assessment, though containing a grain of truth, is unfair. Standing only a few inches over five feet tall, scrawny, suffering from a combination of poor physical health and hypochondria, and painfully awkward in any public forum, Madison nevertheless possessed a combination of intellect, energy, and political savvy that would mobilize the effort to create an entirely new form of continental union.

Madison was gradually joined over the days between May 14 and May 25 by a group of delegates from Virginia and Pennsylvania who would combine to concoct a plan not merely to "amend" the Articles of Confederation, but instead to set the proceedings of the Convention on a far more ambitious course. The first gathering of these nationalist-minded delegates took place on the evening of May 16, in the home of Benjamin Franklin, where dinner was served in his impressive new dining room along with a "cask of Porter," which, Franklin reported, received "the most cordial and universal approbation" of those assembled. The Pennsylvania and Virginia delegates would meet frequently thereafter during the days leading up to May 25, both in the afternoons in the state house itself and in the evenings in City Tavern or the Indian Queen.

Franklin's and Washington's presence gave the group both dignity and gravitas, but it was Madison and James Wilson and Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania who provided much of the intellectual leadership. Wilson, a dour but brilliant Scotsman, brought to the business of constitution-making a contradictory mix of beliefs. He was, on the one hand, the only delegate in the Convention who was, intellectually, a true "democratic nationalist." On the other hand, he was instinctively uneasy with the "comman man" in his real-life, day-to-day interactions with ordinary citizens. Gouverneur Morris was nearly as intellectually brilliant as Wilson, but personally much more outgoing (particularly when it came to his amorous relationships with women) and more avowedly elitist in his views about the dangers of "democracy."

THE VIRGINIA PLAN

By seizing the initiative, this small group of nationalist-minded politicians was able to set the terms of debate during the initial stages of the Convention, gearing the discussion toward not whether, but how, a vastly strengthened continental government would be constructed. The plan of government that these men proposed during the opening days of the Convention would form the basis for a revolution in government. The "Virginia Plan," as it came to be called, featured:

* A "national" legislature consisting of two branches, with membership to be apportioned according either to "quotas of contribution" or the "number of free inhabitants." This body would have the power to "legislate in all cases to which the separate States are incompetent" and to "negative all laws passed by the several States."

* A powerful "national executive," to be elected by the national legislature.

* A "Council of Revision," composed of the chief executive and a "convenient number of the national judiciary," which could veto laws passed by either the national legislature or the various state legislatures.

The Virginia Plan constituted not a mere revision of the Articles of Confederation but a bold start on an entirely new kind of government. The word "national" rather than "federal" was used repeatedly to describe the various branches, and the powers of this national government were consistently defined as superior to those of the states. The Virginia Plan reflected some of the deep reservations that its authors had about democratic political processes. Of all the branches of the government, only the lower house was to be directly elected by the people; officials in the other branches were to be either appointed or indirectly elected.