After three days spent in organizing, adopting rules, and determining on plans, the debate began. GOVERNOR RANDOLPH, of Virginia, presented the first plan and opened his speech as follows, as given by Madison:

He observed, that, in revising the Federal system we ought to inquire, first, into the properties which such a government ought to possess; secondly, the defects of the Confederation; thirdly, the danger of our situation; and fourthly, the remedy.

(1.) The character of such a government ought to be secure, first against foreign invasion; secondly against dissensions between members of the Union, or seditions in particular States; thirdly to procure to the several States various blessings of which an isolated situation was incapable; fourthly, it should be able to defend itself against, encroachments; and fifthly, to be paramount to the State Constitutions. Journal of the Constitutional Convention, p. 59.

Then, after discussing the defects and dangers, he proposed fifteen resolutions as the basis of a remedy. Among these resolutions the following may be cited:

1. Resolved, that the Articles of Confederation ought to be so corrected and enlarged as to accomplish the objects proposed by their institution; namely, "common defense, security of liberty, and general welfare." 3. Resolved, that the National Legislature ought to consist of two branches.

7. Resolved, that a National Executive be instituted;

9. Resolved, that a National Judiciary be established; .-Ib., pp. 59-62.

On May 30 MR. RANDOLPH made a motion which led to action that has been much discussed, and concerning which very different opinions have been expressed. He moved that his first proposition, above cited, should be postpened in order to consider the three following:

(1.) That a union of the States merely federal will

not accomplish the objects proposed by the Articles of Confederation, namely

(2.) That no treaty or treaties among the whole or part of the States, as individual sovereignties, would be sufficient.

(3.) That a national government ought to be established, consisting of a supreme Legislative, Executive and Judiciary.

Consideration of the first and second of the above resolutions was deferred; the third, after some debate, was adopted. In the course of the debate Gen. Pinckney said:

he doubted whether the act of Congress recommending the convention, or the commissions of the Deputies to it, would authorize a discussion of a system founded on different principles from the Federal Constitution.

MR. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS explained the distinction between a federal and a national, supreme government, the former being a mere compact resting on the good faith of the parties; the latter having a complete and compulsive operation.

After the adoption of this resolution, in the discussion of another question, MR. MADISON observed, that, whatever reason might have existed for the equality of suffrage when the Union was a federal one among sovereign States, it must cease when a national government should be put into the place.

May 31, a debate took place over Mr. Randolph's fourth resolution, "that the members of the first branch of the National Legislature ought to be elected by the people of the several states," which throws much light on the spirit of the time, and of the convention.

MR. SHERMAN opposed the election by the people, insisting that it ought to be by the State Legislatures. The people, he said, immediately should have as little to do as may be about the government. They want information, and are constantly liable to be misled.

MR. GERRY. The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy. The people do not want virtue,

but are the dupes of pretended patriots.

He

had, he said, been too republican heretofore; he was still, however, republican; but had been taught by experience the danger of the leveling spirit.

MR. MASON. He admitted that we had been too democratic, but was afraid we should incautiously run into the opposite extreme.

MR. WILSON contended strenuously for drawing the most numerous branch of the Legislature immediately from the people. He was for raising the federal pyramid to a considerable altitude, and for that reason wished to give it as broad a basis as possible. No government could long subsist without the confidence of the people.

MR. MADISON considered the popular election of one branch of the National Legislature as essential to every plan of free government.

MR. RANDOLPH.

He observed that the general object was to provide a cure for the evils under which the United States labored; that in tracing these evils to their origin, ever man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy; that some check therefore was to be sought for against this tendency of our governments; and that a good senate seemed more likely to answer the purpose.—Ib., pp. 73-81.

COL. MASON. Under the existing Confederacy, Congress represents the States, and not the people of the States; their acts operate on the States, not on the individuals. The case will be changed in the new plan of government. The people will be represented; they ought therefore to choose the Representatives. -Ib., p. 116.

MR. WILSON. He did not see the danger of the States being devoured by the national government. On the contrary, he wished to keep them from devouring the National Government. .-Ib., p. 128.

One of the most difficult questions before the convention was how to settle the varying interests of the large and the small states At one time it seems as if the convention would break up over the question. A few expressions taken here and there from the debate may help us to understand the bitterness of feeling.

MR. PATTERSON.

The convention, he said,

was formed in pursuance of an act of Congress; that the amendment of the Confederacy was the object of all the laws and commissions on the subject. The idea of a National Government, as contradistinguished from a federal one, never entered into the mind of any of them. He was strongly attached to the plan of the existing Confederacy, in which the people choose their legislative representatives; and the Legislatures their federal representatives. . . He alluded to the hint thrown out by MR. WILSON, of the necessity to which the large States might be reduced, of confederating among themselves. New Jersey will never confederate on the plan before the Committee. She would not be swallowed up. He had rather submit to a monarch, to a despot, than to such a fate.

MR. WILSON hoped, if the Confederacy should be dissolved, that a majority,-nay, a minority of the States would unite for their safety.-Ib., pp. 139-41.

At this point Mr. Patterson introduced the socalled New Jersey plan, which provided only for amending the Articles of Confederation. The debate was renewed with the following result:

MR. WILSON.

With regard to the power of the convention, he conceived himself authorized to conclude nothing, but to be at liberty to propose anything. With regard to the sentiments of the people, he conceived it difficult to know precisely what they are. Why should a National Government be unpopular? Will a citizen of Delaware be degraded by becoming a citizen of the United States?

MR. PINCKNEY. The whole thing comes to this Give New Jersey an equal vote, and she will dismiss her scruples, and concur in the National system.-Ib., pp. 171-174.

On June 19, by a vote of seven states to three, it was carried to take up Mr. Randolph's plan instead of Mr. Patterson's.

MR. WILSON. Can we forget for whom we are form

ing a government? Is it for men, or for the imaginary beings called States? .-Ib., p. 272.

DR. FRANKLIN. The diversity of opinions turns on two points. If a proportional representation takes place, the small States contend that their liberties will be in danger. If an equality of votes is to be put in its place, the large States say their money will be in danger.

MR. DAYTON.

He considered the system on the table as a novelty, an amphibious monster; and was persuaded that it never would be received by the people.

MR. MARTIN would never confederate, if it could not be done on just principles.

MR. BEDFORD contended, that there was no middle way between a perfect consolidation, and a mere confederacy of the States. The first is out of the question; and in the latter they must continue, if not perfectly, yet equally sovereign. . . The large States dare not dissolve the confederation. If they do the small States will find a foreign ally, of more honor and good faith, who will take them by the hand, and do them justice.

MR. GERRY. If no compromise should take place, what will be the consequence. A secession he foresaw would take place, for some gentlemen seemed decided on it. . .-Ib., p. 297.

MR. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS regretted the 'turn of the debate. The States, he found, had many representatives on the floor. Few, he feared, were to be deemed the Representatives of America. He thought the Southern States have, by this Report, more than their share of representation. .-Ib., p. 317.

On Monday, July 16, the turning point in the convention came. After a very deep and earnest, if not bitter, discussion, a compromise was seen to be practicable, by which the Senate and the House, as we now have them, came into being. It was some days later, however, before the formal terms were agreed upon.

MR. RANDOLPH. He could not but think that we were unprepared to discuss this subject further. It will probably be in vain to come to any final decision