It was seen that the public debt, rendered so sacred by the cause in which it had been incurred, remained without any provision for its payment. The reiterated and elaborate efforts of Congress, to procure from the States a more adequate power to raise the means of payment, had failed. The effect of the ordinary requisitions of Congress had only displayed the inefficiency of the authority making them; none of the States having duly complied with them, some having failed altogether, or nearly so, while in one instance, that of New Jersey, a compliance was expressly refused; nor was more yielded to the expostulations of members of Congress, deputed to her legislature, than a mere repeal of the law, without a compliance. The want of authority in Congress to regulate commerce had produced in foreign nations, particularly Great Britain, a monopolizing policy, injurious to the trade of the United States, and destructive to their navigation; the imbecility, and anticipated dissolution of the Confederacy, extinguishing all apprehensions of a countervailing policy on the part of the United States. The same want of a general power over commerce, led to an exercise of the power, separately, by the States, which not only proved abortive, but engendered rival, conflicting, and angry regulations. Beside the vain attempts to supply their respective treasuries by imposts, which turned their commerce into the neighboring ports, and to coerce a relaxation of the British monopoly of the West India navigation, which was attempted by Virginia, the States having ports for foreign commerce, taxed and irritated the adjoining States trading through them-as New York, Pennsyl vania, Virginia, and South Carolina. Some of the States, as Connecticut, taxed imports from others, as from Massachusetts, which complained in a letter to the Executive of Virginia, and doubtless to those of other States. In sundry instances, as of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, the navigation laws treated the citizens of

other States as aliens. In certain cases, the authority of the confederacy was disregarded-as in violation, not only of the treaty of peace, but of treaties with France and Holland; which were complained of to Congress. In other cases, the Federal authority was violated by treaties and wars with Indians, as by Georgia; by troops raised and kept up without the consent of Congress, as by Massachusetts; by compacts without the consent of Congress, as between Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and between Virginia and Maryland. From the legislative journals of Virginia, it appears, that a vote, refusing to apply for a sanction of Congress, was followed by a vote against the communication of the compact to Congress. In the internal administration of the States, a violation of contracts had become familiar, in the form of depreciated paper, made a legal tender, of property substituted for money, of instalment laws, and of the occlusions of the courts of justice, although evident that all such interferences affected the rights of other States, relatively creditors, as well as citizen creditors within the State. Among the defects which had been severely felt, was want of a uniformity in cases requiring it, as laws of naturalization and bankruptcy; a coercive authority operating on individuals; and a guarantee of the internal tranquillity of the States.

As a natural consequence of this distracted and disheartening condition of the Union, the federal authority had ceased to be respected abroad, and dispositions were shown, particularly in Great Britain, to take advantage of imbecility, and to speculate on its approaching downfall. At home, it had lost all confidence and credit; the unstable and unjust career of the States had also forfeited the respect and confidence essential to order and good government, involving a general decay of confidence and credit between man and man. It was found, moreover, that those least partial to popular government, or most distrustful of its efficacy, were

yielding to anticipations, that, from an increase of the confusion, a government might result more congenial with their taste or their opinions; whilst those most devoted to the principles and forms of republics were alarmed for the cause of liberty itself, at stake in the American experiment, and anxious for a system that would avoid the inefficacy of a mere loose confederacy, without passing into the opposite extreme of a consolidated government. It was known that there were individuals who had betrayed a bias toward monarchy, and there had always been some not unfavorable to a partition of the Union into several confederacies, either from a better chance of figuring on a sectional theatre, or that the sections would require stronger governments, or, by their hostile conflicts, lead to a monarchical consolidation. The idea of dismemberment had recently made its appearance in the newspapers.

Such were the defects, the deformities, the diseases, and the ominous prospects, for which the Convention was to provide a remedy, and which ought never to be overlooked in expounding and appreciating the constitutional charter, the remedy that was provided.

As a sketch on paper, the earliest, perhaps, of a constitutional government for the Union, (organized into regular departments, with physical means operating on individuals,) to be sanctioned by the people of the States, acting in their original and sovereign character, was contained in the letters of James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, of the 19th of March; to Governor Randolph, of the 8th of April; and to General Washington, of the 16th of April, 1787.

The feature in these letters which vested in the general authority a negative on the laws of the States, was suggested by the negative in the head of the British Empire, which prevented collisions between the parts and the whole, and between the parts themselves. It was supposed that the substitution of an elective and responsible authority for an

hereditary and irresponsible one would avoid the appearance even of a departure from republicanism. But, although the subject was so viewed in the Convention, and the votes on it were more than once equally divided, it was finally and justly abandoned, as, apart from other objections, it was not practicable among so many States, increasing in number, and enacting, each of them, so many laws. Instead of the proposed negative, the objects of it were left as finally provided for in the Constitution.

On the arrival of the Virginia deputies at Philadelphia, it occurred to them, that from the early and prominent part taken by that State in bringing about the Convention, some initiative step might be expected from them. The resolutions introduced by Governor Randolph were the result of a consultation on the subject, with an understanding that they left all the deputies entirely open to the lights of discussion, and free to concur in any alterations or modifications which their reflections and judgments might approve. The resolutions, as the journals show, became the basis on which the proceedings of the Convention commenced, and to the developments, variations, and modifications of which, the plan of government proposed by the Convention may be traced.

APPOINTMENT OF DELEGATES BY STATES.

NEW HAMPSHIRE.-By Act of June 27, 1787, John Langdon, John Pickering, Nicholas Gilman, and Benjamin West, or any two of them, were "appointed and authorized to act as deputies from this State to meet at Philadelphia, delegates from the other States of this Confederacy, to devise ways to avert the dangers which threaten our existence as a free people."

MASSACHUSETTS.-Francis Dana, Elbridge Gerry, Nathaniel Gorham, Rufus King, and Caleb Strong were chosen

by the General Court, April 9, 1787, and any three of them authorized to act.

CONNECTICUT.-William S. Johnson, Roger Sherman, and Oliver Ellsworth, appointed by Act of the General Assembly of the second Thursday of May, 1787.

NEW YORK.-Robert Yates, John Lansing, Jr., and Alexander Hamilton, appointed by Act of Assembly, March 6, 1787.

NEW JERSEY.-David Brearly, Wm. C. Houston, William Patterson, and John Neilson, appointed by the Council and Assembly, November 23, 1786. On the 18th May, 1787, William Livingston and Abraham Clark,—and on the 5th June following, Jonathan Dayton, were added to those first appointed, and any three of them empowered to act.

PENNSYLVANIA.-December 30, 1786, Thomas Mifflin, Robert Morris, George Clymer, Jared Ingersoll, Thomas Fitzsimmons, James Wilson, and Gouverneur Morris were appointed by an Act of the General Assembly; and by Act of 28th March, 1787, Benjamin Franklin was added to the list.

DELAWARE.-George Read, Gunning Bedford, Joha Dickinson, Richard Basset, and Jacob Broom, or any three of them, were appointed by Act of Assembly of February, 1787.

MARYLAND.-James McHenry, Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, Daniel Carroll, John Francis Mercer, and Luther Martin were appointed by the House of Delegates and Senate, May 26, 1787.

VIRGINIA.-On the 4th December, 1786, by the House of Delegates, with the concurrence of the Senate, Geo-ge Washington, Patrick Henry, Edmund Randolph, John Blair, James Madison, George Mason, and George Wythe, were appointed. Mr. Henry declined, and James McClurg