The Lincoln Myth (35 page)

Mr. GERRY stated his objections which determined him to withhold his name from the constitution. 1. the duration and re-eligibility of the Senate. 2. the power of the House of Representatives to conceal their journals. 3. the power of Congress over the places of election. 4 the unlimited power of Congress over their own compensation. 5. Massachusetts has not a due share of Representatives allotted to her. 6. 3/5 of the Blacks are to be represented as if they were freemen. 7. Under the power over commerce, monopolies may be established. 8. The vice president being made head of the Senate. He could however he said get over all these, if the rights of the Citizens were not rendered insecure 1. by the general power of the Legislature to make what laws they may please to call necessary and proper. 2. raise armies and money without limit. 3. have a union to which there be no withdrawal. What say all of you if there comes a time when a State no longer desires to be part of this grand association?

Col. MASON noted that any Government that proclaims itself perpetual becomes dangerous, concluding that it would end either in monarchy, or a tyrannical aristocracy. Which one, he was in doubt, but one or other, he was sure. This constitution had been formed without the knowledge or idea of the people. It is improper to say to the people, take this or nothing and take it forever. As the constitution now stands, he could neither give it his support or vote in Virginia; and he could not sign here what he could not support there.

Mr. RANDOLPH rose to the indefinite and dangerous power given by the constitution to Congress, expressing the pain he felt at differing from the body of the Convention, on the close of the great and awful subject of their labours, and anxiously wishing for some accommodating expedient which would relieve him from his embarrassments. His concern was shared by many others present in that the States might well reject the plan if there be offered no way to leave. What would happen if the national government becomes oppressive? What would prevent it from doing so if no State was allowed to withdraw? Some accommodation must be made and should this proposition be disregarded, it would he said be impossible for him to put his name to the instrument. Whether he should oppose it afterwards he would not then decide, but he would not deprive himself of the freedom to do so in his own State, if that course should be prescribed by his final judgment.

Mr. PINKNEY. These declarations from members so respectable at the close of this important scene, give a peculiar solemnity to the present moment. He too is concerned about a plan that must be accepted in its entirety, with no alterations, and, once accepted, a State is bound by the decision forever. A suggestion was made that another Convention could solve any disputes. He descanted on the consequences of calling forth the deliberations and amendments of the different States on the subject of Government at large at another gathering. Nothing but confusion and contrariety could spring from such an experiment. The States will never agree in their plans, and the Deputies to a second Convention coming together under the discordant impressions of their Constituents will never agree. Conventions are serious things and ought not to be repeated. He was not without objections as well as others to the plan. He objected to the contemptible weakness and dependence of the Executive. He objected to the power of a majority only of Congress over Commerce. He was not content with silence on the issue of the length of any union. He wondered if there might be a solution that could avoid the danger of a general confusion and an ultimate decision by the sword.

The circulating murmurs of the States indicated that thought was being given to Mr. Pinkney’s question. In order to gain the dissenting members it was agreed to put the issue into the hands of informal discussion so that it might have the better chance of resolution.

Stephanie had listened to every word Katie Bishop had read, cognizant of the fact that she, Luke, and the president were the first people in over two hundred years to hear the account.

“This is incredible,” Katie said. “I’ve read Madison’s notes. Part of my master’s thesis dealt with them. None of this is there.”

And Stephanie knew why since Madison himself had said that the record was
in addition
to the main body, hidden away, for presidential eyes only.

“Tell me about this notion of a second convention,” Daniels asked.

“It was talked about a lot. Several of the delegates worried that they were ramming an all-or-nothing proposition on the states. You’ve got to remember, they were sent to Philadelphia only to revise the Articles of Confederation, not throw them out and start over.”

“So they thought a second convention would solve that?” Luke asked.

“Not solve it, but soften it. Their Constitution would be out there, every word debated. If it failed to be ratified, then the backup plan was to call a second convention and work through the disagreements.”

The president chuckled. “That’s like saying,
Let Congress solve the problem
. You get 535 different opinions. Eventually they’ll compromise, but the country in 1787 didn’t have that kind of time. The world was a tough place then. The French, the Spanish, and the English all wanted us to fail. They were just waiting for an opportunity to pounce.”

“The convention had to act definitively,” Katie said. “They knew there was only one chance to get it done. They couldn’t kick the can down the street for long, and they didn’t. Listen to this.”

Mr. SHERMAN preferred the option of a State being allowed to leave if that state so desired. Having just thrown off the yoke of an oppressive tyranny through the shedding of much blood, he harbored no desire to create a new oppressive government from which there would be no relief. He doubted any of the states would ratify the document if that was not allowed.

Col. MASON agreed and observed that the States being differently situated such a rule ought to be formed as would put them as nearly as possible on a level. Small states would be more inclined to ratify if they were allowed the act of withdrawal as a check on any oppression by large States. Such a reservation to the States would likewise be a check on the national government, one that would restrain tyranny since a State could withdraw if disagreements between that State and the national government became so grand and permanent as to warrant a separation. Otherwise, a majority of States could impose whatever they desired onto the minority.

Col. HAMILTON urged that there ought to be neither too much nor too little dependence on popular sentiments. The checks in the other branches of Government would be but feeble if the association of States was deemed forever. He noted that no empire has lasted. Not the Egyptians, the Romans, the Turks, or the Persians. They all failed and that was because of overreaching, complexity, domination, inequality, and stratification. He expressed his belief that the States are merely delegating certain powers to the new national government, not their sovereignty. To think otherwise would be an evil complained of in all of the States.

“They’re debating an out clause,” Katie said. “A way for a state to leave the Union. That’s never been discussed before in the context of the Constitutional Convention. From everything I’ve read, that subject was never openly discussed.”

“That’s because Madison left it out of his notes,” the president said. “And he modified the rest of his remembrances. He had fifty-three years to jiggle those notes, make them read however he wanted. We have no idea what happened at that convention. We only know what Madison wanted us to know. Now we learn that he hid this part away.”

“So secession could be legal?” Katie asked.

“You tell me,” Daniels said.

“What we’re reading is dated September 15, 1787. The convention was over. The final session came on the 17th with the signing.
They’re doing this at the end, probably to counter lingering fears from the delegates that their states might not ratify. States were important entities to those delegates. Maybe the most important, even over the people. That was the way these men thought. It wasn’t until 1861 that Lincoln changed all that.”

“So you’ve read his first inaugural address?” the president asked.

“Of course. To Lincoln, the states were never sovereign. He said the Continental Congress created them, not the people. They were meaningless to him. He believed that, once made, any constitutional contract among the states was irrevocable.”

“Was he right?”

“Jefferson and Madison would say no.”

Stephanie smiled. This young lady knew her stuff.

“According to their theory the states existed long before 1787, and the Continental Congress had nothing to do with them. And, by the way, they’re right. The Constitution is clearly a compact among sovereign states. Each one, by ratifying, delegated certain powers to the federal government as their agent. The rest of the powers were reserved to the people
and
the states. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments make that point. Secession would not only be legal under that view, it would be sacred.”

The president pointed to the journal. “So what do the Founding Fathers have to say about that?”

Mr. L. MARTIN contended that the general government ought to be formed for the States, not for individuals. It will be in vain to propose any plan offensive to the rulers of the States, whose influence over the people will certainly prevent their adopting it.

This discourse was delivered with much diffuseness & considerable vehemence, which others likewise stated.

Mr. WILLIAMSON thought that if any political truth could be grounded on mathematical demonstration, it was that if the States were equally sovereign now they would remain equally sovereign.

Mr. SHERMAN. The question is not what rights naturally belong to men; but how they may be most equally & effectually guarded in Society. And if some give up more than others in order to attain this end, there can be no room for complaint. To do otherwise, to require an equal concession from all, if it would create danger to the rights of some, would be sacrificing the end to the means. The rich man who enters into Society along with the poor man, gives up more than the poor man, yet with an equal vote he is equally safe. Were he to have more votes than the poor man in proportion to his superior stake, the rights of the poor man would immediately cease to be secure. This consideration prevailed when the Articles of Confederation were formed and should prevail now. The best protection from tyranny is the right to escape it. There should be no need for another revolution. No blood should be spilt. If a State wishes to no longer be part of this association, it should be free to withdraw.

Col. MASON notes that for the States to know that the new association could be so easily dissolved might be both good and bad. As in a marriage, for a political union to succeed there must be a perpetual element or one party to the union could chose withdrawal instead of diligence and compromise. He agreed that a State should possess the right to leave, but it should be tempered with the realization of the hard work from the past few months and grand plan that has been conceived. It must have a chance for success equal or greater to that of failure.

Mr. MADISON proposed a solution. A document, signed by all who support the new constitution, which provides that the States have the right, in perpetuity, to withdraw from the union. He urged that this be in a separate writing since, if such provision were expressly incorporated, the ratification of the main document as a whole would be unlikely. What be the point of forming an association, if it be so easily dissolved. Further, once formed, if the States knew they could just as easily withdraw then the strength of any such union would be brittle at best. Instead, a separate agreement would be executed in private as clear intent from the delegates of their belief that a State remains sovereign in all respects. The document would be given to Gen. Washington to hold and utilize as he deemed appropriate. The desire being that its existence need not be revealed unless necessary to secure the ratification of a State, or to later sanction the withdrawal of State from the association. On the whole, he expressed a wish that every member of the Convention who may still have objections would, with him, on this occasion doubt a little of his own infallibility and put his name to this instrument.

Mr. MADISON then moved that the document be drawn, signed, and offered the following as a convenient form viz. “Done in Convention by the unanimous consent of the States present the 15th. of Sepr.—In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names.”

FORTY-SEVEN

S
ALZBURG

S
ALAZAR STOOD IN THE OUTER ROOM OF HIS SUITE, ONE FLOOR
above where Cassiopeia was awaiting him. He was still shocked by the angel’s revelation that he was Joseph Smith. The honor that had been bestowed upon him weighed heavily. He’d come to rely on the emissary, but now to know that it was the Prophet Joseph himself seemed glorious. He’d prayed for nearly an hour after the vision departed before falling asleep, managing his usual four hours of rest. He’d wondered what was next, and the call he’d just answered from Elder Rowan seemed to be answering that inquiry.