A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

was called for May, 1787. The convention met in Philadelphia. Mr. Madison was chosen as one of the delegates from Virginia. Washington was another, and was elected president of the con vention. It met at the appointed time-one of the most able, earnest, conscientious and dignified bodies of men ever aszembled. It was an assembly of giants-"of demigods," as Jefferson said. Nor were the men greater than the occasion The old confederation of states had proved itself inadequate in many particulars. It was a body without a head. It was a government by congress, in session only a part of a time, a government without system or fundamental law. So poorly did it work that many were losing confidence in popular government. In many of the best minds there was a turning back to monarchy as the only hope of stability and peace. Those of tory proclivities were beginning to say: "I told you so; the people are too unstable to know what they want." The call for a stronger government was getting loud. The time had fully come when something must be done, or the fruits of the long war might be lost in anarchy and disunion, and the hope of free government postponed for a long time. The great men who met in that convention realized the importance of their work. They were the patriots, who, for country and humanity, had staked everything in resistance of British tyranny and who now were in danger of losing everything in popular incapacity and anarchy. And yet the difficulty was not in the people, but in their having no systematic way of conducting their government.

Mr. Madison, probably more than any other man, realized the importance and greatness of the work of this convention. He had conceived and proposed it. It had struck the popular heart from the beginning. The people hoped for relief and safety from it. From the moment of its conception, the study of a plan of a constitution, became a profound meditation with Mr. Madison. For two years he studied and sketched and consulted other minds and wrought at his plan.

Among General Washington's papers was found one, after

his death, in his own writing, purporting to be the substance of a constitution, which Mr. Madison conceived to be about what was needed, and had written to him in a letter some time before the convention. Mr. Madison's letter has never been found. The portion of it which Washington transcribed is as follows: "Mr. Madison thinks an individual independence of the states utterly irreconcilable with their aggregate sovereignty, and that a consolidation of the whole into one simple republic would be as inexpedient as it is unattainable. He therefore proposes a middle ground, which may at once support a due supremacy of the national authority and not exclude the local authorities whenever they can be subordinately useful.

"As the groundwork, he proposes that a change be made in the principle of representation, and thinks there would be no great difficulty in effecting it.

"Next, that in addition to the present federal powers, the national government should be armed with positive and complete authority in all cases which require uniformity; such as regulation of trade, including the right of taxing both exports and imports, the fixing the terms and forms of naturalization, etc.

"Over and above this positive power, a negative, in all cases whatever, on the legislative acts of the states, as heretofore exercised by the kingly prerogative, appears to him absolutely necessary, and to be the least possible encroachment on the state jurisdictions. Without this defensive power, he conceives that every positive law which can be given on paper will be evaded.

"This control over the laws would prevent the internal vicissitudes of state policy and the aggressions of interested majorities.

"The natural supremacy ought also to be extended, he thinks, to the judiciary departments; the oaths of the judges should at least include a fidelity to the general as well as local constitution; and that an appeal should be to some national tribunal in all cases to which foreigners or inhabitants of other

states may be parties. The admiralty jurisdictions to fall entirely within the purview of the national government.

"The national supremacy in the executive departments is liable to some difficulty, unless the officers administering them could be made appointable by the supreme government. The militia ought entirely to be placed, in some form or other, under the authority which is entrusted with the general defense.

"A government composed of such extensive powers should be well organized and balanced.

"The legislative departments might be divided into two branches, one of them chosen every years, by the people at large, or by the legislatures; the other to consist of fewer members, and to hold their places for a longer term, and to go out in such rotation as always to leave in office a large majority of old members.

"Perhaps the negative on the laws might be most conveniently exercised by this branch.

"As a further check, a council of revision, including the great ministerial officers, might be superadded.

"A national executive must also be provided. He has scarcely ventured as yet to form his own opinion, either of the manner in which it ought to be constituted, or of the authorities with which it ought to be clothed.

"An article, especially guaranteeing the tranquility of the states against internal as well as external dangers.

"In like manner the right of coercion should be expressly declared. With the resources of commerce in hand, the national administration might always find means of exerting it either by sea or land; but the difficulty and awkwardness of operating by force on the collective will of a state, render it particularly desirable that the necessity of it might be precluded. Perhaps the negative on the laws might create such a mutual dependence between the general and particular authorities as to answer; or perhaps some defined objects of taxation might be submitted along with commerce, to the general authority.

"To give a new system its proper validity and energy, a ratification must be obtained from the people, and not merely

from the ordinary authority of the legislatures. This will be more essential, as inroads on the existing constitutions of the states will be unavoidable."

Probably no other man in the country made such preparation for the convention as did Mr. Madison. He gave the many subjects to be considered careful and earnest study. He made, at least, this outline of what he thought should go into the constitution. Anyone who will compare this outline with the actual constitution will see how much of Mr. Madison's suggestion went in. Some of his suggestions were left out, that perhaps would better have gone in. It is clear that he wanted a strong government, a supreme government over the states in all that pertained to its functions. He did not intend to have secession, or disunion, possible by any of the states.

The great question of the time was, how much of the general power of government shall be given to the states, and how much to the general government. The federalists wanted a strong central government; the high federalists wanted it absolute. The republicans wanted to keep the power near the people, in the states as much as possible and not have a general government at all. Washington, Madison, Adams, and especially Hamilton and Morris, wanted strength in the general government. The two latter were high federalists of the strongest type. Madison was a moderate federalist, at this time. Later, he inclined more to trust the people, and became a moderate republican. Whatever partisan he was, he was moderate. He had a cool, judicial, constructive mind, which kept him from party extremes and usually on the middle ground of moderation. He was in close sympathy with Washington. Their spirits were in accord, only Washington was more a man of action, while Madison was more a man of meditation. In the formation of the constitution he sought to put strength into the general government over the states, in all that was peculiarly national. He wanted a nation, a union that was indissolublenot only a union of states but of all the people. For national purposes, he would have state lines in abeyance. The old confederacy was too weak as a national compact. It was too much

subject to state dictation. All the wise men were feeling this; so much so that many were beginning to swing back toward monarchical institutions. The states were jealous of their rights, and in the convention sought to keep them strong. Under the confederacy, they had been almost supreme. They were slow to give up prerogatives to the general government. This, then, was the great thing to adjust, the proper balance between the state governments and the general government. Mr. Madison did not secure all he desired for the general government. And the experience of a hundred years has proved that the general government has been often put to the strain in just those places where he wanted it stronger. Its weakest place was against the states. And it was just at this point that the rebellion of 1861 came in. Here too was where South Carolina nullification set up its claim in the administration of Andrew Jackson. It was over this that the great arguments of Haynes and Webster were made. There has always been a class of politicians who have claimed more for the states than the general government could safely grant. This weakness in the constitution, allowed against Mr. Madison's judgment, has always been a bone of contention and cost us one great civil war. Our experience has proved how wise was the great original outliner of the constitution. Gradually its special amendments have fortified its original weakness. Experience has proved that the moderate federalists were essentially right in their notion of the necessity of strength in the general government, and that our danger has come from a too little governed democracy. As between the dangers of monarchy on one side and democracy on the other, America has been most exposed to the latter. Her chief danger still lies in that direction. A strong and just government usually makes a happy people, just as a well-governed family or school is usually happy. So essential was the part that Mr. Madison acted in the constitutional convention that he has been called "The Father of the Constitution." He seems to have been raised up for this special work as Washington was to lead the armies, and Jefferson to draft the declaration of independence and Adams to argue the way