The Constitution and the Confederation Congress

ArticleVBlog ^ | April 16th 2018 | Rodney Dodsworth

[Jacquerie]

Subtitle: When to Amend?

Congress, that poor substitute for an actual government, was on the verge of collapse in 1787. Not a single state complied with the tax requisition of 1786. When the Federal Convention in Philadelphia adjourned on September 17th, the prospects of adequate tax collections for 1787 were equally dim. James Madison wrote, “The Treasury Board seems to be in despair of maintaining the shadow of government much longer. Without money, the offices must be shut up, and the handful of troops on the frontier disbanded.” Nothing but the hope of better things inspired by the convention did in fact keep them from packing their saddle-bags and silently steal away to their homes.

This was the atmosphere in which a hot potato, the draft Constitution, fell in the lap of Congress on September 20th, 1787. Congress was in session when the convention adjourned, and when ten Congressmen who attended the convention returned to Congress sitting in New York City, eleven states were represented. Supporters pressed for fast endorsement and transmittal, but others resolved instead to delay and take up the Constitution for debate on September 26th.

The convention’s letter to Congress which accompanied the Constitution opened with, “Resolved, that the preceding Constitution be laid before the United States in Congress assembled, and that it is the opinion of this Convention that it should afterwards be submitted to a Convention of delegates, chosen in each state by the people thereof, . . . for their assent and ratification.”

While this request appears innocuous today, many felt insulted by the “take it or leave it” nature of the letter. No one, including delegates to the convention regarded the Constitution as perfect, as being without faults, so why not amend a defective document before implementation?

[PGalt]

Compare our Framers’ sense of honor to members of our current congress.

(Men creating v criminals destroying ALERT)

the silent, powerful, and ever active conspiracy of those who govern.

Great work, Jacquerie. Thank you.

BUMP!

[Louis Foxwell]

Despite the logic of Madison and King, Richard Henry Lee thought it silly and dangerous not to consider amendments. To not do so assumed “all wisdom centers in the convention” and nowhere else. From the nature of government, he wrote that a Bill of Rights was needed to protect the just rights and liberty of mankind from “the silent, powerful, and ever active conspiracy of those who govern.” Lee’s objections to the Constitution were gathered into a series of newspaper articles under the title, Letters of the Federal Farmer. Along with other Anti-Federalists, Lee pressed hard for a Bill of Rights which found its way into our Constitution.

[VanDeKoik]

The best thing about the writing on the constitution was that the “Federalists” had already virtually won the debate on the need of one before the convention even started (mainly because the delegates that actually liked the Articles of Confederation really didnt form a coherent opposition), and that they lost a lot of battles with people that offered needed revisions to Madison’s initial vision of it.

In the end Madison went from thinking that his vision was severely compromised, to seeing the genius of those compromises.

[Jacquerie]

Thanks PG!