The Personal Website of Mark W. Dawson

The Divisions at the Constitutional Convention

The Divisions

As I mentioned in my other History Article, “The Constitutional Founding Fathers Goals” all the Founding Fathers knew that they needed a better form of government than The Articles of Confederation provided. To achieve this goal, they knew that accommodation and compromise were required between themselves, as each founder had their own ideas and concerns about a new government. At the time of the Constitutional Convention, there were several divisions amongst and within the Founding Fathers that required this accommodation and compromise. There was no easy division amongst the Founding Fathers, as each member of the convention could take different positions on each individual issue. They also had to contend with border disputes between the States and the territories west of the Appalachian Mountains, as ceded by England after the Revolutionary War, as the following map illustrates.

They needed a Federal Government that could resolve the issues and concerns to achieve their goals, and with a means to resolve interstate commerce issues and territorial disputes. The major divisions at the Constitutional Convention, and an explanation of them, were:

Big (Population) States vs. Small (Population) States

When the Founding Fathers discussed Big States vs. Small States, they were primarily concerned that the Big States would dominate the Smaller States in the Legislature and Executive Branches of government. At the time of the founding, most people considered themselves as citizens of a State, and not the citizens of a Confederation of States. They, therefore, had strong loyalties to their States, and a strong suspicion of a national government that could intrude upon their hard-gained rights.

A bicameral legislature, the House of Representatives (the people's house) and a Senate (the States house) was the solution to this division for the Legislative powers in the Constitution. By creating separate but equal branches of the Legislature, they hoped to balance out the peoples and the States prerogatives. This is why, originally, the Senators were chosen by the State Legislators and not by direct election by the people of the State. The States would be represented in the Senate, while the people of a State would be represented in the House. This appointment of Senators by State Legislatures was considered integral to the Balance of Power between the States and the Federal government. It also made the election of State Legislators more important in Federal governance than it is today with the direct election of Senators by the people of a State.

The Electoral College for the election of the President and Vice President of the Executive Branch was the solution that was proposed and implemented to check the big States from dominating the Small States in the Executive Branch, as I have outlined in my Article, “The Electoral College”. As one of the most important Founding Fathers stated:

"The mode of appointment of the Chief Magistrate of the United States is almost the only part of the system . . . which has escaped without severe censure. . . . I venture somewhat further, and hesitate not to affirm that if the manner of it be not perfect, it is at least excellent."
- Alexander Hamilton

And many of the other Founding Fathers agreed. The Founding Fathers knew from their studies of history that direct democratic governments often collapse upon themselves in a short period of time. This was often the case because the minority was often repressed by the majority, and the repressed minority often rose in revolt. They were also concerned that mob passions in a Democracy could replace careful consideration in public policy matters. They also knew that the large States could overwhelm the smaller States in a popular vote and that the smaller States would have no significant say in the election of the President and Vice President. They wanted each State to have an (important) role in the election of the President and Vice President. They, therefore, created a Republic that was democratically elected in the House, with State Legislators appointing Senators as a check on this mob passions problem. The election of the President and Vice President through the Electoral College was the means that they chose to give the Small States an important role in the Presidential and Vice Presidential elections, and to avert the possibility of a revolt of the small States against the large States.

This balance of powers between the large and small States in the Federal government would also alleviate the concerns about the resolution of territorial disputes between the States. A resolution in which both sides of the dispute would get a fair and equal hearing on their claims, which would lead to a just and peaceful resolution of these disputes.                    

Pro-Slavery States vs. Anti-Slavery States

The three-fifths clause, and the postponing of the slavery question in the Constitution, was not for the purposes of placing a value upon a person, but for political power within the House of Representatives, as I have elaborated in my Article, “Slavery in the United States Constitution”. The Constitution skirted the slavery issue in these two clauses, and never even mentioned slavery in the document. The first skirting was in how to count slaves for the purposes of the number of legislators in the House of Representatives. The second skirting was in how to avoid the slavery issue as the Constitution was being implemented in the first two decades of its adoption. This was the means that they utilized to bridge this division and to get and keep the southern states within the Federal government. A skirting that was antithetical to the Principles of the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.“

A skirting that had terrible consequences for the future of the United States, and which resulted in the Civil War. But this was the only means that they thought would bring the southern States into the Federal government under the Constitution, so they skirted this issue.

East Coast States vs. Western States

The East Coast States were those States that bordered the Atlantic seacoast, which had major ports of entry for commercial activities, or those States who had ports with easy access to the Atlantic Ocean (such as Philadelphia). The Founding Fathers were also concerned about the future States that would be formed from the territories west of the Appalachian Mountains, future States that would essentially be landlocked. The Founding Fathers were aware that this could cause problems between the East Coast States and the new States, and they wanted a means to resolve these problems.

State tariffs, laws, and regulations on interstate commerce and local taxes and rules on interstate commerce passing through the local jurisdiction were rampant. Restrictions on the importation of goods and services between the States were commonplace. All of these issues were stifling the economy of all the States, which was part of the reason for the bad economies that were plaguing the States at the time of the Constitutional Convention.

The Founding Fathers resolved this division by the Federal government assuming all the responsibilities for interstate commerce through the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The Federal government was restricted to imposing uniform laws and regulations on interstate commerce, and by imposing uniform tariffs for interstate commerce.

Strong Federal Government vs. Strong State Government

As the States were very protective of their rights, duties, and responsibilities, and the rights of their citizens, they were very wary of a strong Federal government that could infringe upon their prerogatives and their citizens’ rights. This division was resolved by specifying Limited and Enumerated powers for the Federal government. Limited and Enumerated powers in the body of the Constitution that restricted the Federal government’s actions, and which were further constrained in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution:

Amendment IX:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Thus, they were able to ameliorate the concerns of a strong Federal government and bridge this division.

Approval of the Constitution

Monday, September 17, 1787, was the last day of the Constitutional Convention. There was very much a concern that the Constitution would not be approved by the delegates, as there were many parts of the Constitution that many delegates disapproved of. Prior to the vote on the Constitution, Pennsylvania delegate Benjamin Franklin requested to give short remarks in support of the Constitution. Too weak to actually give the remarks himself, he had fellow Pennsylvanian James Wilson deliver the remarks. “Franklin's Speech to the Constitutional Convention” is considered a masterpiece of conciliation. After this speech was given, the members present voted to unanimously approve the Constitution. They also kept silent about their doubts and objections and worked to have the Constitution endorsed by the people, and turn their future thoughts & endeavors to the means of having it well administered as Franklin suggested.