Unit Summary: The first attempt at a new U.S. government was a failure, so delegates from the states came together in Philadelphia, to see if they could fix it. Instead, they ended up created the U.S. Constitution.
Unit Opener: The Articles of Confederation Directions: Complete the reading below, Then, watch the short video at the bottom and fill out the chart on the Articles of Confederation.
If you were given the task to create a brand new government from scratch, do you think you could do it? Think about everything the government does. It's a huge undertaking. Now consider creating that government while trying to win a war against the greatest army in the world. That's exactly what our founding fathers were tasked with. The signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776 gave birth to the U.S., but it also left it with no central government. It had to design and install a new government–and quickly. As early as May 1776, Congress advised each of the colonies to draw up plans for 13 individual state governments and by 1780, all thirteen states had adopted written constitutions of their own. In June 1776, the Continental Congress began to work on a plan for a central government. It took five years for it to be approved, first by members of Congress and then by the states. This first attempt at a central government for the United States was laid out in in a document called the Articles of Confederation. Since the U.S. was still at war for its independence, this first government was composed of a body that directed most of its attention to fighting and winning the American Revolution. It came into being at a time when Americans had deep fears of a central authority and long-standing loyalty to the state in which they lived and often called their "country." Ultimately, it was this very combination of fear of central authority and loyalty to state that led to the failure of the Articles of Confederation. Thankfully, its failure would not be the end of the nation. On the contrary, this first attempt at governing marked a crucial step toward creating one of the most revered forms of government ever established. |
|
Part 1: Opening the Constitutional Convention
Clearly the Articles of Confederation didn't form the most perfect government. If we're being honest, it was in fact a major FAILURE, so the leaders of the very young United States of America decided to get back together and discuss either "fixing" the AOC or starting over and writing a new Constitution. They quickly realized that starting fresh was the best idea, but like many good ideas, this one would require a lot of work.
Anytime that a large number of people get in a room and try to hash out some really important decisions, there are going to be a lot of squabbles and disagreements. For a new Constitution to be decided upon, the delegates had to come to some hard decisions, which you will discover.
Anytime that a large number of people get in a room and try to hash out some really important decisions, there are going to be a lot of squabbles and disagreements. For a new Constitution to be decided upon, the delegates had to come to some hard decisions, which you will discover.
Opening the Convention: Philadelphia was already hot and humid when delegates began drifting into the city. On May, 25, 1787, the Constitutional Convention met for the first time in the east room of the Pennsylvania State House (now known as Independence Hall). The Declaration of Independence had been debated in this very room just 11 years earlier. The delegates would meet in the east room all summer. On some days, temperatures rose well into the nineties.
The delegates' first action was to elect George Washington president of the convention. No man was more admired and respected than the former commander in chief of the Continental army. When the war ended, Washington could have used his power and popularity to make himself a king. Instead he went home to Virginia to resume his life as an ordinary citizen. But, despite his reluctance to return to public life, Washington would play a key role by presiding over the convention and lending his prestige.
1. When and where did the convention take place, and what were the conditions like?
2. Who did the delegates' elect to oversee the convention?
The delegates' first action was to elect George Washington president of the convention. No man was more admired and respected than the former commander in chief of the Continental army. When the war ended, Washington could have used his power and popularity to make himself a king. Instead he went home to Virginia to resume his life as an ordinary citizen. But, despite his reluctance to return to public life, Washington would play a key role by presiding over the convention and lending his prestige.
1. When and where did the convention take place, and what were the conditions like?
2. Who did the delegates' elect to oversee the convention?
The Delegates: Fifty-five delegates from 12 states attended the Constitutional Convention. Rhode Island, which prided itself as "the home of the otherwise minded" and feared a strong national government, boycotted the meeting.
Some leaders of the revolution were missing. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were representing the United States in Great Britain and France, respectively. Others who did not attend included Sam Adams, John Hancock, and Patrick Henry. They feared that a strong national government would endanger the rights of states.
Some leaders of the revolution were missing. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were representing the United States in Great Britain and France, respectively. Others who did not attend included Sam Adams, John Hancock, and Patrick Henry. They feared that a strong national government would endanger the rights of states.
As a group, the delegates were, in the words of a modern historian, "the well-bred, the well-fed, and the well-wed". Their average age was 42. At 81, Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania was the oldest. He arrived at the convention each day in a sedan chair carried by four good-natured prisoners from a nearby jail.
Most of the delegates brought extensive political experience to the meeting. More than two-thirds were lawyers. Most had served in their states legislatures or held a state office. Thomas Jefferson was so impressed by the ability and experience of these men that he called the convention "an assembly of demi-gods"
3. List five qualities that the delegates shared in common. (use the picture above, as well as the text.)
Most of the delegates brought extensive political experience to the meeting. More than two-thirds were lawyers. Most had served in their states legislatures or held a state office. Thomas Jefferson was so impressed by the ability and experience of these men that he called the convention "an assembly of demi-gods"
3. List five qualities that the delegates shared in common. (use the picture above, as well as the text.)
The Father of the Constitution: The best prepared of the delegates was James Madison of Virginia. One delegate wrote of Madison, "In the management of every great question he evidently took the lead in the Convention." Indeed, Madison's influence was so great that later he would be called the "Father of the Constitution."
Madison addressed the convention numerous times. When he was not speaking, he took notes. Sitting near the front of the room so that he could hear everything that was said, Madison wrote down nearly every word. All together, his notes covered more that 600 printed pages. From this remarkable record, we know what went on inside the convention day by day.
4. Who is considered the "father of the Constitution" and why?
The Rule of Secrecy: At the time, however, no one outside the convention knew what was happening. After choosing a president, the delegates voted on rules for the convention. The most important of these was the rule of secrecy. The delegates wanted to feel free to speak their minds without causing alarm or opposition among the general public. They agreed to keep secret whatever was said in the meeting room until their work was done.
Madison addressed the convention numerous times. When he was not speaking, he took notes. Sitting near the front of the room so that he could hear everything that was said, Madison wrote down nearly every word. All together, his notes covered more that 600 printed pages. From this remarkable record, we know what went on inside the convention day by day.
4. Who is considered the "father of the Constitution" and why?
The Rule of Secrecy: At the time, however, no one outside the convention knew what was happening. After choosing a president, the delegates voted on rules for the convention. The most important of these was the rule of secrecy. The delegates wanted to feel free to speak their minds without causing alarm or opposition among the general public. They agreed to keep secret whatever was said in the meeting room until their work was done.
One day, Washington was handed some notes that had been dropped in the hall outside the east room. Washington pocketed the paper until the end of the debate the next day. Then, in his sternest voice, he lectured the delegates on the importance of secrecy. "I know not whose paper it is," Washington said as he flung the notes on his desk. "But there it is, let him who owns it take it." The notes were never claimed. Instead, they lay on Washington's desk for days.
Like Washington, the delegates took the rule of secrecy seriously. During that long summer, not a single word about the convention debates appeared in any newspaper.
5. Explain the rule of secrecy and why it was in place.
Shared Beliefs and Clashing Views: Once the convention was organized, the delegates got down to business. As a group, the delegates had much in common. For instance, all the delegates were committed to the ideals of the Declaration of Independence. The basic purpose of government, they believed, was to protect the rights of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
However, they also had very different views on many issues facing the new nation. Most importantly, how much power would the federal government have, and how would the voices of the different states be represented in that federal government? Many delegates wanted to keep government close to the people by preserving the rights of the states. They feared that a strong national government would threaten individual liberty. Others, including Madison, argued just the opposite. "Look at what has happened under the Articles of Confederation", they said, referring to events like Shays' Rebellion. If the central government is too weak, it cannot do its job of protecting liberty and property.
As they met behind closed doors, the delegates wrestled with these and other issues. Tempers often flared. Several times it seemed the convention might collapse in failure. But in the end, the delegates found a way to save the convention -- and the nation.
6. What were the two main issues to be decided at the Constitutional Convention?
Like Washington, the delegates took the rule of secrecy seriously. During that long summer, not a single word about the convention debates appeared in any newspaper.
5. Explain the rule of secrecy and why it was in place.
Shared Beliefs and Clashing Views: Once the convention was organized, the delegates got down to business. As a group, the delegates had much in common. For instance, all the delegates were committed to the ideals of the Declaration of Independence. The basic purpose of government, they believed, was to protect the rights of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
However, they also had very different views on many issues facing the new nation. Most importantly, how much power would the federal government have, and how would the voices of the different states be represented in that federal government? Many delegates wanted to keep government close to the people by preserving the rights of the states. They feared that a strong national government would threaten individual liberty. Others, including Madison, argued just the opposite. "Look at what has happened under the Articles of Confederation", they said, referring to events like Shays' Rebellion. If the central government is too weak, it cannot do its job of protecting liberty and property.
As they met behind closed doors, the delegates wrestled with these and other issues. Tempers often flared. Several times it seemed the convention might collapse in failure. But in the end, the delegates found a way to save the convention -- and the nation.
6. What were the two main issues to be decided at the Constitutional Convention?
Part 2: Mock Convention
In this task, we will do our best to recreate the Constitutional Convention here in class. Each student will be assigned one of the delegates below who attended the Constitutional Convention. Students will then play the role of their delegate as we discuss the issues addressed at the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
Meet your delegate: First Things First - Students will need to know and understand who their delegate is, where they are from and what their point of view is. Once you've been assigned your delegate, find them and click on their name below to read their information. Make sure to study your delegate's information thoroughly, because you will need to know this information when we start to debate. Then, create a name tag that meets the following requirements:
In this task, we will do our best to recreate the Constitutional Convention here in class. Each student will be assigned one of the delegates below who attended the Constitutional Convention. Students will then play the role of their delegate as we discuss the issues addressed at the Constitutional Convention in 1787.
Meet your delegate: First Things First - Students will need to know and understand who their delegate is, where they are from and what their point of view is. Once you've been assigned your delegate, find them and click on their name below to read their information. Make sure to study your delegate's information thoroughly, because you will need to know this information when we start to debate. Then, create a name tag that meets the following requirements:
Part 2: Meet and Greet
Now it's time to meet your fellow delegates. Put your name tag on (front side out) and circulate the room. Mingle with the other delegates and get to know them and write down the following information:
(Issue 1). Circulate the classroom and mingle with the other delegates to complete the following tasks:
Now it's time to meet your fellow delegates. Put your name tag on (front side out) and circulate the room. Mingle with the other delegates and get to know them and write down the following information:
(Issue 1). Circulate the classroom and mingle with the other delegates to complete the following tasks:
- Find a delegate (from a different state), that AGREES with you on how to structure the national legislature (Issue 1). Then, answer the following questions:
- What state are they from and what is their state's population size (small, medium, or large).
- Do they believe the national legislature should be unicameral (1 house) or bicameral (2 houses)?
- How do they propose representation should be divided (equally, based on population, etc.), and why do you think they are proposing this?
- Now, find a delegate (from a different state than you) that DISAGREES with you, and answer the same questions above.
Part 3: How Should Representation be Divided?
Counting Votes Fairly, A Dance Theme Simulation: When making decisions that impact a group of people, very often we default to the idea of majority rule, or in other words, whatever the majority decides. This sounds like a simple idea, but what happens when a large group of people are separated into smaller groups. When making decisions, should "majority rules" mean the majority of the entire group of people, or the majority of the groups. This can be a little confusing, so let's consider the example below.
Directions (Part 3a): Imagine that 13 classes were asked to vote for the 8th Grade Dance theme, and that the results are shown in the spreadsheet below. Click on the spreadsheet, and preview the results. Then use the spreadsheet to answer the questions to the right. Be sure to write your answers as complete sentences.
Directions (Part 3a): Imagine that 13 classes were asked to vote for the 8th Grade Dance theme, and that the results are shown in the spreadsheet below. Click on the spreadsheet, and preview the results. Then use the spreadsheet to answer the questions to the right. Be sure to write your answers as complete sentences.
1. What theme wins if it's decided based on a simple majority (total student votes)?
2. What if each class voted independently and then submitted a single class vote (total class votes)?
3. If the theme was decided based on the total student votes, which class has the least voting power, and why?
4. Which system (Total Student Votes or Total Class Votes) benefits Mrs. Pletzer's class most and why?
5. Do you think that each class should get 1 vote, or that each class's voting power should be based on how many students they have?
Directions (Part 3b): Read about the two plans below, as you read about The New Jersey Plan and The Virginia Plan, answer the orange questions at the end of the section.
The New Jersey Plan vs. The Virginia Plan
When the convention began, most delegates believed that their task was to revise the Articles of Confederation. To their surprise, the Virginia delegation presented them with a completely new plan of government. After a lengthy debate, the delegates made a bold move. They agreed to throw out the Articles of Confederation and write a new constitution.
While the delegates - later known as the framers - agreed to design a new framework of government, they were divided on a key issue. Where should the government's power to rule come from? From the states? Or from the people? Under the Articles of Confederation, the answer was the states, but some delegates like James Madison argued that the government's power should come directly from the people. States or people? This question would lead to two different plans for how to structure our national legislature:
When the convention began, most delegates believed that their task was to revise the Articles of Confederation. To their surprise, the Virginia delegation presented them with a completely new plan of government. After a lengthy debate, the delegates made a bold move. They agreed to throw out the Articles of Confederation and write a new constitution.
While the delegates - later known as the framers - agreed to design a new framework of government, they were divided on a key issue. Where should the government's power to rule come from? From the states? Or from the people? Under the Articles of Confederation, the answer was the states, but some delegates like James Madison argued that the government's power should come directly from the people. States or people? This question would lead to two different plans for how to structure our national legislature:
The Virginia Plan: Drafted by James Madison and proposed by Edmund Randolph, the Virginia Plan called for a strong national government with three branches, or parts. A legislative branch would make laws. An executive branch would carry out, or execute, the laws. A judicial branch, or system of courts, would apply and interpret the laws:
Legislative Branch:
1. Congress made up of two houses, the House of Representatives and the Senate.
2. Number of lawmakers a state could send to Congress depended on the state's population.
3. States with large populations would have more representatives than smaller states would have.
**Delegates from large states liked the Virginia Plan. Having the new government represent people, not states, would give them more representatives and more power in both houses of Congress, because they had a larger population.
1. Congress made up of two houses, the House of Representatives and the Senate.
2. Number of lawmakers a state could send to Congress depended on the state's population.
3. States with large populations would have more representatives than smaller states would have.
**Delegates from large states liked the Virginia Plan. Having the new government represent people, not states, would give them more representatives and more power in both houses of Congress, because they had a larger population.
The New Jersey Plan: Not surprisingly, delegates from the small states disliked the Virginia Plan, Just as the convention was about to vote on it, William Paterson of New Jersey introduced a rival proposal.
Like the Virginia Plan, the New Jersey Plan called for a government with three branches. However, the legislative branch would have just one house, not two. Each state would have an equal vote in Congress, no matter how big or small. This plan, Paterson argued, would keep the small states from being "swallowed up" by their more populous neighbors.
1. Create a venn diagram that outlines the differences and similarities of the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan.
2. Study the map to the right and consider how your delegate's state's population compares to that of the other states'. Then, answer the following questions:
a. According to the chart, approximately what is your state's
population?
b. Is your delegate more likely to support a system where each
state gets equal representation, or a system where state
representation is proportionate to it's population? WHY?
c. What other states might share your opinion? WHY?
2. Study the map to the right and consider how your delegate's state's population compares to that of the other states'. Then, answer the following questions:
a. According to the chart, approximately what is your state's
population?
b. Is your delegate more likely to support a system where each
state gets equal representation, or a system where state
representation is proportionate to it's population? WHY?
c. What other states might share your opinion? WHY?
Directions (Part 3d): So how did the delegates solve the issue of how to structure the national legislature (Issue 1)? It's time to find out. Read A Good... No, a Great Compromise, below to learn how the delegates came to a compromise on this issue. As you read, answer the orange questions at the end of each section.
A Good... No a Great Compromise
Tempers Rise: The New Jersey Plan was warmly received by delegates from small states. The majority of delegates, however, saw William Paterson's plan as offering little improvement over the Articles of Confederation and rejected it. But they could not agree on what should replace it. The debate over representation in Congress continued into July, with tempers rising day by day. To most delegates from large states, representation based on population seemed both logical and fair. "Can we forget for whom we are forming a Government?" asked James Wilson of Pennsylvania. Is it for men, or for the imaginary beings called States?"
To Wilson, the answer was obvious. But his logic could not overcome the fears of small-state delegates. One hot Saturday afternoon, Gunning Bedford of Delaware tore into the delegates from large states. "They insist," he said, "they will never hurt or injure the lesser states." His reply to his own concern was straightforward. "I do not, gentlemen, trust you!" If the large states continued in their efforts to "crush the smaller states," Bedford warned, "the small ones will find some foreign ally of more honor an good faith who will take them by the hand and do them justice."
Rufus King of Massachusetts was shocked at this reference to foreign powers. He said that he was "grieved", that such a thought had entered his heart." Still, every delegate knew that Great Britain, France, and Spain were just waiting for the United States to fall apart so they could pick up the pieces.
1. Why did the majority of the delegates reject the New Jersey Plan?
2. What did Gunning Bedford mean when he threatened "If the large states continue in their efforts to] crush the smaller states, the small ones will find some foreign ally of more honor and good faith who will take them by the hand and do them justice."
A Compromise is Reached: Finally, a compromise was proposed based on a plan put forward by Roger Sherman of Connecticut. The compromise proposed...
Tempers Rise: The New Jersey Plan was warmly received by delegates from small states. The majority of delegates, however, saw William Paterson's plan as offering little improvement over the Articles of Confederation and rejected it. But they could not agree on what should replace it. The debate over representation in Congress continued into July, with tempers rising day by day. To most delegates from large states, representation based on population seemed both logical and fair. "Can we forget for whom we are forming a Government?" asked James Wilson of Pennsylvania. Is it for men, or for the imaginary beings called States?"
To Wilson, the answer was obvious. But his logic could not overcome the fears of small-state delegates. One hot Saturday afternoon, Gunning Bedford of Delaware tore into the delegates from large states. "They insist," he said, "they will never hurt or injure the lesser states." His reply to his own concern was straightforward. "I do not, gentlemen, trust you!" If the large states continued in their efforts to "crush the smaller states," Bedford warned, "the small ones will find some foreign ally of more honor an good faith who will take them by the hand and do them justice."
Rufus King of Massachusetts was shocked at this reference to foreign powers. He said that he was "grieved", that such a thought had entered his heart." Still, every delegate knew that Great Britain, France, and Spain were just waiting for the United States to fall apart so they could pick up the pieces.
1. Why did the majority of the delegates reject the New Jersey Plan?
2. What did Gunning Bedford mean when he threatened "If the large states continue in their efforts to] crush the smaller states, the small ones will find some foreign ally of more honor and good faith who will take them by the hand and do them justice."
A Compromise is Reached: Finally, a compromise was proposed based on a plan put forward by Roger Sherman of Connecticut. The compromise proposed...
- a Congress with houses (bicameral), a House of Representatives, and a Senate.
- The first house, the House of Representatives, would represent the people. In this house, the number of representatives from each state would be based on the state's population.
- The second house, the Senate, would represent the states. Each state would have two senators, to be elected by their state legislatures. The vote was very close, but the compromise plan was approved. This plan saved the convention and became known as the Great Compromise.
3. What parts of the Great Compromise satisfied the large states and why?
4. What parts of the Great Compromise satisfied the small states and why?
Part 4: Should Slaves be Counted as "People"?
Directions (Part 4a): Same as Part 3a, imagine that 13 classes were asked to vote for the 8th Grade Dance theme and the results are shown in the spreadsheet below. Click on the spreadsheet and preview the results, then use the spreadsheet to answer the following questions to the right. Be sure to write your answers as complete sentences.
- Should the students NOT Attending the Dance be allowed to vote and why?
- How Might Coach Carter's voting power be impacted if the students NOT Attending the Dance were not allowed to vote?
Directions (Part 4b): Read Counting Slaves below, to learn about the issue concerning whether or not to count slaves. As you read, answer the orange questions at the end of each section.
Counting Slaves
The Great Compromise kept the framers working together. But having agreed to base representation in one house of congress on state population, they faced a new and difficult question. As Gouverneur Morris (Gouverneur is his name) of Pennsylvania put it, "Upon what principle shall slaves be computed in the representation?"
People or Property?: By the time of the convention, 9/10 of the slaves in the United Stated lived in the South. Like everyone else, southerners wanted as many representatives in the House of Representatives as possible. They argued that slaves should be counted the same as any other people in the population when determining representation.
The Great Compromise kept the framers working together. But having agreed to base representation in one house of congress on state population, they faced a new and difficult question. As Gouverneur Morris (Gouverneur is his name) of Pennsylvania put it, "Upon what principle shall slaves be computed in the representation?"
People or Property?: By the time of the convention, 9/10 of the slaves in the United Stated lived in the South. Like everyone else, southerners wanted as many representatives in the House of Representatives as possible. They argued that slaves should be counted the same as any other people in the population when determining representation.
Delegates from the North challenged this idea. Were slaves to be considered people with a right to be represented in Congress? Or were they property? "Blacks are property and are used to the southward as horses and cattle to the northward," argued Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts. Most northern delegates agreed: Slaves should be counted only as property that could be taxed like any other property. If slaves were to be counted as people in determining representation in Congress, said Morris, "then make them citizens and let them vote."
1. Summarize the issue concerning whether or not to count slaves. Why were the delegates debating this issue?
2. How does your delegate feel about this issue? Does this surprise you, considering what state they come from? Why or why not?
3. Which four states would have benefited the most from counting slaves?
1. Summarize the issue concerning whether or not to count slaves. Why were the delegates debating this issue?
2. How does your delegate feel about this issue? Does this surprise you, considering what state they come from? Why or why not?
3. Which four states would have benefited the most from counting slaves?
New Thinking on Slavery: This argument signaled a growing division among white Americans. The Declaration of Independence and the fact that many blacks fought for Washington in the American Revolution forced many whites to reexamine their views on slavery. Some became active in trying to end what they now saw as a great evil. Benjamin Franklin, for example, became president of an antislavery society in 1787. In the North, this new thinking led one state after another to pass laws ending slavery.
Although many southerners were uneasy about slavery, they were not yet ready to abolish it. The South's economy was still very dependent on the labor of enslaved African Americans. But some southern states did pass laws making it easier for owners to free their slaves.
Although many southerners were uneasy about slavery, they were not yet ready to abolish it. The South's economy was still very dependent on the labor of enslaved African Americans. But some southern states did pass laws making it easier for owners to free their slaves.
4. How did some American's views on slavery begin to change during this time, and why?
Directions (Part 4c): Now it's time to find out what the other delegates think about whether or not to count slaves (Issue 2). Circulate the classroom and mingle with the other delegates to complete the following task:
Directions (Part 4d): So, how did the delegates solve the issue whether or not to count slaves (Issue 2)? It's time to find out. Read The 3/5 Compromise below, to learn how the delegates came to a compromise on this issue. As you read, answer the orange questions at the end of each section.
- Find a delegate (from a different state than you), that AGREES with you on how to count slaves (Issue 2). Then, answer the following questions:
- What state are they from and what is the state's slave population?
- How does this delegate propose counting slaves, and why do you think they are proposing this?
- What other concerns does this delegate have related to slavery?
- Now, find a delegate (from a different state than you) that DISAGREES with you, and answer the same questions above.
Directions (Part 4d): So, how did the delegates solve the issue whether or not to count slaves (Issue 2)? It's time to find out. Read The 3/5 Compromise below, to learn how the delegates came to a compromise on this issue. As you read, answer the orange questions at the end of each section.
More Compromises on Slavery:
After a bitter debate, Madison proposed a compromise. Count each slave as three fifths of a person, he suggested, when determining a states population. The delegates approved the idea, known as the 3/5 compromise.
Declaring a slave to be three-fifths of a person made a mockery of the statement in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal." Still, the delegates adopted the compromise because it seemed to be the only way to keep moving forward.
Another question about slavery was raised by a dispute over trade. Northern delgates favored giving Congress broad power to control trade between states and other countries. They believed that this power would be used to help business in the North. This proposal made delegates from the South nervous. They worried that Congress might try to tax southern export goods such as rice and tobacco. Southerners also worried that Congress would use its power over trade to outlaw the slave trade.
Southerners had reason to fear this. By 1787, several states had already outlawed the slave trade within their boundaries. And a majority of the convention's delegates, including many southerns, favored ending the slave trade completely. Two states, however, objected that their economies would collapse without a constant supply of fresh slaves. "south Carolina and Georgia cannot doo without slaves," said Charles Pinckney of South Carolina. Neither state would agree to any constitution that threatened the slave trade.
Again, the delegates settled on a compromise. Congress would have the power to control trade, but with two limitations. First, Congress could not place any tax on exports to other countries. Second, Congress could not interfere with the slave trade for 20 years, or until 1808.To satisfy southerners, the delegates also agreed to the addition of something known as the Fugitive Slave Clause. This clause said that escaped slaves had to be returned to their owners, even if they were caught in free states.
Without such compromises, the states might never have come together in a single union. Still the compromises only postponed the day when Americans would have to resolve the terrible contradiction between slavery and the ideals of liberty and equality. Meanwhile, generations of African Americans would spend their lives in bondage.
1. How did the delegates solve the slave represenation delema?
2. In what ways were these compromises not really compromises at all?
3. What did the Fugitive Slave Clause state?
4. What is the picture to the right? Read it over. Is it a primary or secondary source?
After a bitter debate, Madison proposed a compromise. Count each slave as three fifths of a person, he suggested, when determining a states population. The delegates approved the idea, known as the 3/5 compromise.
Declaring a slave to be three-fifths of a person made a mockery of the statement in the Declaration of Independence that "all men are created equal." Still, the delegates adopted the compromise because it seemed to be the only way to keep moving forward.
Another question about slavery was raised by a dispute over trade. Northern delgates favored giving Congress broad power to control trade between states and other countries. They believed that this power would be used to help business in the North. This proposal made delegates from the South nervous. They worried that Congress might try to tax southern export goods such as rice and tobacco. Southerners also worried that Congress would use its power over trade to outlaw the slave trade.
Southerners had reason to fear this. By 1787, several states had already outlawed the slave trade within their boundaries. And a majority of the convention's delegates, including many southerns, favored ending the slave trade completely. Two states, however, objected that their economies would collapse without a constant supply of fresh slaves. "south Carolina and Georgia cannot doo without slaves," said Charles Pinckney of South Carolina. Neither state would agree to any constitution that threatened the slave trade.
Again, the delegates settled on a compromise. Congress would have the power to control trade, but with two limitations. First, Congress could not place any tax on exports to other countries. Second, Congress could not interfere with the slave trade for 20 years, or until 1808.To satisfy southerners, the delegates also agreed to the addition of something known as the Fugitive Slave Clause. This clause said that escaped slaves had to be returned to their owners, even if they were caught in free states.
Without such compromises, the states might never have come together in a single union. Still the compromises only postponed the day when Americans would have to resolve the terrible contradiction between slavery and the ideals of liberty and equality. Meanwhile, generations of African Americans would spend their lives in bondage.
1. How did the delegates solve the slave represenation delema?
2. In what ways were these compromises not really compromises at all?
3. What did the Fugitive Slave Clause state?
4. What is the picture to the right? Read it over. Is it a primary or secondary source?
The Constitution's Immoral Compromise
The New York Times recently had five university professors give their opinions on the necessity of the Constitution's Three-Fifths Compromise, which inherently condoned the continuation of slavery, yet increased the southern states' representation in Congress. The questions these professors faced:
Directions (Part 4e):
Americans today are repulsed by the fact that the Constitution let each state’s House delegation be determined by adding all free citizens, except most Indians, and “three fifths of all other Persons.” Southerners wanted all slaves counted. Northerners thought none should be. The compromise let the South keep humans as property, increasing the region’s political power.
But did the framers have a choice? Could the compromise have been avoided? Would any other path have prevented a united United States or did the bargain only delay that division?
Read the opinions of the professors below. Then, in a one paragraph (5-7) sentences, summarize the professors answers and state and explain your own opinion to the blue questions listed above.
- Did the framers have a choice?
- Could the compromise have been avoided?
- Would any other path have prevented a united United States or did the bargain only delay that division?
Directions (Part 4e):
Americans today are repulsed by the fact that the Constitution let each state’s House delegation be determined by adding all free citizens, except most Indians, and “three fifths of all other Persons.” Southerners wanted all slaves counted. Northerners thought none should be. The compromise let the South keep humans as property, increasing the region’s political power.
But did the framers have a choice? Could the compromise have been avoided? Would any other path have prevented a united United States or did the bargain only delay that division?
Read the opinions of the professors below. Then, in a one paragraph (5-7) sentences, summarize the professors answers and state and explain your own opinion to the blue questions listed above.
Part 5: How Should we Elect the Chief Executive?
Though the delegates had shown their willingness to compromise on important issues, their job was not yet finished. Now the delegates were faced with the question of who would head the new government's executive branch, and how would that man be elected.
One Executive or Three: James Wilson proposed that a single person serve as the chief executive. A sudden silence fell over the convention. The very idea brought to mind unhappy memories of King George III. Wilson broke the silence by explaining that a good government depends on clear, timely, and responsible leadership. Such leadership, he said, is most likely to be found in a single person. Edmund Randolph of Virginia disliked this proposal. He preferred a three-member executive drawn from different parts of the country. Three people, he argued, could lead the country better than one. Benjamin Franklin opposed a single executive for different reasons. "The first man put at the helm will be a good one," said Franklin, thinking of George Washington. "Nobody knows what sort may come afterwards." The next chief executive, he warned, might be overly ambitious or too "fond of war."
In spite of these objections, the framers agreed to a single executive, to be called the president. To keep this leader from becoming too kinglike, they limited the president's term to four years. A vice president was also to be elected to fill that term, and would replace the president, if he died in office. Now the only question would be how to elect the President.
In spite of these objections, the framers agreed to a single executive, to be called the president. To keep this leader from becoming too kinglike, they limited the president's term to four years. A vice president was also to be elected to fill that term, and would replace the president, if he died in office. Now the only question would be how to elect the President.
The Electoral College
Choosing the Chief Executive: Some delegates wanted Congress to appoint the president. Gouverneur Morris objected. The president "must not be made the flunky of the Congress," he argued. "It must not be able to say to him: 'You owe your appointment to us.'" Several delegates thought that the people should elect the president. Madison, however, argued that voters would naturally vote for someone from their own states. As a result, this method wold not be fair to candidates from small states.
After some 60 votes on the issue of how to elect the president, the framers reached another compromise. Neither Congress nor the people, they decided, should choose the president and vice president. Instead, a special body called the Electoral College would elect the government's leader.
Choosing the Chief Executive: Some delegates wanted Congress to appoint the president. Gouverneur Morris objected. The president "must not be made the flunky of the Congress," he argued. "It must not be able to say to him: 'You owe your appointment to us.'" Several delegates thought that the people should elect the president. Madison, however, argued that voters would naturally vote for someone from their own states. As a result, this method wold not be fair to candidates from small states.
After some 60 votes on the issue of how to elect the president, the framers reached another compromise. Neither Congress nor the people, they decided, should choose the president and vice president. Instead, a special body called the Electoral College would elect the government's leader.
|
The Electoral College: The Electoral College is made up of electors specially chosen group of "electors" from each state who cast votes to elect the president and vice president every four years. The Founding Fathers felt that such a group wold be able to look beyond state interests to make a wise choice for the entire country. In reality, the Founders did not trust "the people" to make an appropriate choice.
Structure: Each state has as many electors in the Electoral College as the number of senators and representatives it sends to Congress. The votes cast by electors are called electoral votes. Originally, the electors voted for two candidates without saying which one they preferred for president or vice president. The candidate receiving the most votes became president. The runner-up became vice president. This system caused great confusion in the election of 1800 and was later changed. |
Directions: The Electoral College is a little confusing. To alleviate some of this confusion, watch the short video above on How the Electoral College Works. Then, we'll have a brief discussion and answer any questions you may have.
|
Political Parties and Elections: The Electoral College system seems very odd to most Americans today. In our age of instant communication, it is hard to appreciate the framers' concern that voters would not know enough about candidates outside their own state to choose a president wisely.
The delegates could not have predicted how quickly communications would improve in the United States. Nor could they foresee the rise of national political parties. Within a few years of the convention, political parties were nominating candidates for president and educating voters in every state about those candidates. |
Directions: Want to learn how to become President with only 22% of the vote? Watch the video above on The Trouble with the Electoral College. Then, we'll have a brief discussion and answer any questions you may have.
Problems with the Electoral College: The Electoral College system still affects presidential elections. In most states, the candidate who gets the most votes - even if less than a majority - wins all of that state's electoral votes. As a result, a candidate can win a majority in the Electoral College without necessarily winning a majority of the votes cast across the country. In the presidential election of 2000, George W. Bush won the presidency over Al Gore by getting the most Electoral votes, even though Gore received more votes than Bush in the popular election.
Problems with the Electoral College: The Electoral College system still affects presidential elections. In most states, the candidate who gets the most votes - even if less than a majority - wins all of that state's electoral votes. As a result, a candidate can win a majority in the Electoral College without necessarily winning a majority of the votes cast across the country. In the presidential election of 2000, George W. Bush won the presidency over Al Gore by getting the most Electoral votes, even though Gore received more votes than Bush in the popular election.