Founding America (Barnes & Noble Classics) - Jack N. Rakove [351]
44
Edmund Randolph (1753-1813), governor of Virginia.
45
William Paterson ( 1745-1806), of the New Jersey delegation.
46
(this plan had been concerted among the deputations or members thereof, from Cont. N. Y N. J. Del. and perhaps Mr Martin from Maryd. who made with them a common cause on different principles. Cont. and N. Y were agst. a departure from the principle of the Confederation, wishing rather to add a few new powers to Congs. than to substitute, a National Govt. The States of N. J. and Del. were opposed to a National Govt. because its patrons considered a proportional representation of the States as the basis of it. The eagourness displayed by the Members opposed to a Natl. Govt. from these different [motives] began now to produce serious anxiety for the result of the Convention.—Mr. Dickenson said to Mr. Madison you see the consequence of pushing things too far. Some of the members from the small States wish for two branches in the General Legislature, and are friends to a good National Government ; but we would sooner submit to a foreign power, than submit to be deprived of an equality of suffrage, in both branches of the legislature, and thereby be thrown under domination of the large States.) [James Madison’s note]
47
(This copy of Mr. Patterson’s propositions varies in a few clauses from that in the printed Journal furnished from the papers of Mr. Brearley a Colleague of Mr. Patterson. A confidence is felt, notwithstanding, in its accuracy. That the copy in the Journal is not entirely correct is shewn by the ensuing speech of Mr. Wilson (June 16) in which he refers to the mode of removing the Executive by impeachment & conviction as a feature in the Virga. plan forming one of its contrasts to that of Mr. Patterson, which proposed a removal on the application of a majority of the Executives of the States. In the copy printed in the Journal, the two modes are combined in the same clause; whether through inadvertence, or as a contemplated amendment does not appear.) [James Madison’s note]
48
Oliver Ellsworth ( 1745-1807), representative from Connecticut; later the principal author of the Judiciary Act of 1789 and chief justice of the Supreme Court.
49
James Wilson (1742-1798), delegate from Pennsylvania, was later a justice of the first Supreme Court.
50
Literally, “adjournment without a day [set]” (Latin); a permanent adjournment of the Convention.
51
General Charles Cotesworth Pinckney ( 1746-1825), a delegate from South Carolina.
52
Jacob Broom ( 1752-1810) represented Delaware.
53
Elbridge Gerry (1744-1814), delegate from Massachusetts and later vice president during James Madison’s second administration.john Rutledge ( 1739-1800) of South Carolina.
54
Rufus King ( 1755-1787) of Massachusetts.
55
In the printed copy of the draft, the number VI was repeated in error. We have here renumbered articles VII to the end and include the original, incorrect, numbers in brackets.
56
Charles Pinckney ( 1757-1824) of South Carolina.
57
Pierce Butler (1744-1842), delegate from South Carolina.tin this and the following document, square brackets are used to indicate later insertions to Madison’s notes from the journals, and angled brackets are used to identify later additions or clarifications to the delegate’s speeches.
58
Roger Sherman (1721-1793) represented Connecticut.
59
George Mason ( 1725-1792), representative of Virginia.
60
On the remark by Mr. King that “make” war might be understood to “conduct” it which was an Executive function, Mr. Elseworth gave up his objection [and the vote of Cont was changed to—ay] [James Madison’s note].
61
Gouverneur Morris ( 1752-1816) of Pennsylvania.
62
Nathaniel Gorham ( 1738-1796), delegate from Massachusetts.
63
John Dickinson (1732-1808), a Delaware delegate.
64
William Samuel Johnson ( 1727-1819) of Connecticut.
65
Richard Henry Lee.
66
George Mason; see note on p. 387.
67
melancton Smith, a delegate to Congress from New