All this month we will be focusing on the life and legacy of George Washington. To mark the anniversary of his birth in 1732. Up next, George Washingtons role in the Constitutional Convention in 1787. The Founding Fathers crafted a new document to replace the articles of confederation which was in i confess for washington was voted to preside over the convention, taking an active role in shaping the constitution we know today. George Washingtons Mount Vernon hosted this hourlong event. This concludes an amazing year that began the year ago last september with the opening of the library for the study of George Washington. During that year as a library fellow, i finished my book on washington which just came out this week and i was able to get a copy today. During that time while i was here, i learned what a rich treasure we all have, especially those of you who live near it the staff here is extraordinarily dedicated loyal , and for 150 years the Mount Vernon Ladies Association has kept this place national. With the new library and the Orientation Center in the education center, i would say that no group of women have done better, at least since martha did it alone. Among those remarkable women i want to mention them in particular for their wonderful generosity and how much they welcome to me. Let me begin by saying that americans generally recognized George Washingtons indispensable role as the commanderinchief of American Forces during the revolutionary war and that the first president of the United States under the constitution, many know he presided over the convention that drafted the constitution but few today appreciate his key role in forging and framing that document. My last lecture i was able to talk about the years of his retirement of to the Philadelphia Convention when he had this wonderful magnificent trip west when he saw the danger of losing the front tier, when he worked at the potomac navigation project, when he began to reengage in public leadership. But few people appreciate his role in forging and framing the document. If James Madison was the chief architect, as many textbooks say, then i say George Washington was his general contractor. He more than anyone got the work done. You know the general contractor is the one who is finally responsible. So allow me to elaborate on that comparison. Washington did intend to retire from Public Service following the war and leave the countrys political future to others. He envisioned an energetic republic, uniting the coastal states with the vast western states ceded by britain in the treaty recognizing american independence. He said as much in his 1783 circular letter to the United States issued at a time when he despaired over the con federacys ability to pay its troops and his creditors, his 1784 trip to the western lands which showed him the tenuous nature of the hold on the west reinforced his convincing that the articles of con federation then looping the states into a loose alliance, that it lacked the power to tax or to command individuals and must be revised to give the Central Government direct control over interstate commerce, foreign affairs, National Defense and its own revenue. To him, these were essential for promoting liberty, protecting property, and preserving our very independence. The subsequent breakdown of public order in some states, reckless paper money by others and worsening economic concerns everywhere deepened his concern and those of many other americans. So to illustrate this i could draw on his correspondence with people all over the country, trying to see what could be done, talking about other leading americans. But just somewhat at random but as a representative example, let me focus on his exchanges with the confederates brilliant but beleaguered foreign secretary, john jay. Early in 1786, jay sent a desperate appeal to washington here at mount vernon, begging him to emerge from retirement long enough to lead an effort for constitutional reform. An opinion begins to prevail, he wrote, that a General Convention for revising the articles of con federation would be expedient. Whether the people are right for such a measure or the system proposed to be attained by it, it is difficult to ascertain, he wrote, but if a con federation is called, i am fervent in my wishes that you favor your country with your counsels on such an important and singular occasion. Well, washington knew that to make a difference, he could not come out of retirement for a single occasion. If he participated in a convention to reform the National Constitution he would have to see the matter through or watch it fail. Further, even jay conceded that the time might not yet be right for constitutional reform, that people might not yet be ready to accept those radical changes and washington did not want to expend his Political Capital prematurely. Thus washington put them off. He wrote, i coincide perfectly in sentiments with you but my fear is that the people are not yet significantly misled to retract from error. Washington blamed the situation on ignorance among the people regarding the dangers to freedom and property from the excesses of democracy and wickedness by some who sought to take advantage of those excesses. He wrote, ignorance and design are difficult to combat. Out of these proceed illiberality, and a train of evils which oftentimes in republican governments must be sorely felt before they can be removed. Conceding that something must be done or the fabric will fail washington remained uncertain if the time had come to act. He wrote, i scarcely know what to entertain of a General Convention. That it is necessary i entertain no doubt, and he underlined the word no, but what may be the consequences of such an appeal. Doubtful. Washington preferred to wait until the calamitous consequences of the current course became clear to all people of goodwill. He concluded, virtue, i fear, has in a great degree taken its departure from our land and the want of justice is a source of national embarrassment. well, we can see from this that the anxiety over constitutional reform reflected in this and in a variety of other letters washington is writing at this time to dozens of other people betray a far more fundamental concern than fears of losing the west, hopes for a National Market economy and a plain desire to repay government creditors and former soldiers. Those issues certainly weighed heavily on both men, but their letters spoke in terms of calamity and commotion, loss of public virtue and disposition of due justice and breakdown of the social fabric under the excesses of majority faction. Liberty itself was at risk, both men declared, much as it had been in 1776, but this time the threat. Came from within, which made it much worse. By the end of 1786, with a debtors insurrection in massachusetts, wholesale printing of devalued paper money by rhode island, and open rebellion in vermont, washington began to doubt if americans were capable of selfgovernment. This is a picture of him from that time. Who besides a tory could have foreseen or a briton could have predicted such events, he wrote to henry knox, then the confederation secretary of war notwithstanding the boasted virtue of america, we are far gone in everything ignoble and bad. And so to James Madison, who was already thinking about a new National Political structure washington wrote in november 13 sovereignties pulling against each other and all tugging at the federal head will soon bring ruin to the whole whereas a liberal and energetic closely watched to prevent encroachments, might restore to us that degree of respectability and consequence to which we had a fair claim. in march, 1787, three months after the disturbances in massachusetts died down, washington wrote to his former aide and confidante, marquis de lafayette, about their Ongoing Campaign for constitutional reform. These disorders, he wrote of the shays rebellion, are defective marks. Most of the legislatures have appointed and the rest it is said will appoint delegates to meet in philadelphia on the second monday of may next. In General Convention of the states to revise and correct the defects of the federal system. By this point virginia had picked washington to lead its delegation to the convention and he was debating with himself and others whether he should go. His main worries were whether the convention had been called merely to provide articles of the constitution and not to overhaul. He did not want to waste his precious time and preliminary capital on tinkering with a failed system. He now wrote to madison, a thorough reform of the present system is indispensable, and with hand to heart i hope the business will be as seayed in the upcoming convention. Hearing that some states might impose limits on their delegates, washington reiterated his hope that the convention would probe the defects of the constitution to the bottom and provide radical cures. Only on these terms would he go to philadelphia. Well, by this point, washington had win to jay, to knox, and to madison requesting their advice on a restructured government. Struck by the similarities of their responses, washington here at mount vernon prepared an abstract, a single paper comparing those three responses. All three, as his abstract shows, envisioned a National Government with separate legislative, judicial, and executive branches. All would divide congress into an elite upper house and a popular lower house. Madison elaborated more than the others on the judiciary. He viewed National Courts as essential to avoid local bias in expounding National Laws in deciding cases of citizens of different states. Like jay and knox, madison was obsessed with reining in the states. The National Government should be armed with positive and complete authority in all cases which require uniformity, he wrote to washington, and as the regulation, over the regulation of interstate trade. He recommended placing state militias under state control and suggested that, as in colonial days, the Central Government should appoint state governors. Recognizing the inexpediency of abolishing the states altogether, which is of course what hamilton wanted to do madison called for a federal system, some middle ground, he called it, which may at once support a new supremacy of National Authority and not exclude the local authorities whenever they can be subordinately useful. That was his description. He maintained that the government must retain power to act directly on the people, not just through the states. All three men, jay, knox madison, agreed on this key point. In his responses to knox, jay, and madison, washington embraced their proposals and made them his own. Those enumerated in your letters are so obvious and sensibly felt that no logic can couldnt ro vert them. The but is the public mind mature for such a change, he asked . Expressing similar sentiments to knox, washington stated his fears that the political machine will yet be much tumbled and tossed and possibly wrecked altogether before such a system as you have defined will be adopted. Jealous of power, state officials, quote, would give their weight of opposition to such a revolution, washington predicted. Nevertheless, he wrote to jay, he wished to try the Convention Route and try what could be affected. It represented, he said, the last peaceful means to save the union. Should it devise a vigorous new constitution under his leadership, knox assured washington that he, washington would have, im quoting knox here, would have doubly earned the glorious republican epitaph, the father of your country. All of them recognized washington at the center of constitutionmaking. Make no mistake about it. Washington did not want to leave mount vernon. He wanted to stay right here. But he now saw it as his civic duty, so he went to philadelphia. Americans everywhere understood this and discussed its significance. An article in the connecticut journal of may 2 wrote, it is with particular satisfaction we he form the public that our illustrious fellow citizen George Washington has consented to serve in the ensuing federal convention. What happy consequence may not all true friends of federal government promise themselves . Calling him the american fabius the legendary roman general and statesman a rhode island paper printed a poem may 5 about washingtons muchanticipated arrival in philadelphia. And im picking these two at random. I could pick out literally hundreds of similar comments. So here is from rhode island. The hero comes, each voice resounds his praise. No envious shafts can dare to chill his rays. All hail great man who for our countrys cause flew to her call to protect its laws. these and other widely circulated accounts show that even before it began, americans expected radical cures from the constitution. Upon the events of this Great Council depend everything in our national character. The philadelphia paper, when he arrived, wrote in a leading editorial that the the proposal to give congress complete power over all things which are a like concern of all states was the essential drive of what the convention was about. The more we abridge the states of their sovereignties and the more supreme power we congregate in the assembly of states, the more safety, liberty and prosperity will be enjoyed by each of the states and all of the people. Reflecting his commitment to serve, washington was one of president few delegates to arrive in philadelphia on time. He duly went to the state house on the appointed hour, may 14, to find only madison and the pennsylvanians present. They returned daily as the other delegates gradually trickled in, but it took 10 more days to obtain a quorum. In the meantime, meeting privately, the virginians present and apparently the pennsylvanians, cobbled together the outlines of a new government. It became known as the virginia plan because the Virginia Governor, edmund randolph, formally offered it at the convention. Little is known about those meetings, but letters from those present suggest that washington attended every meeting and supported the outcome. As one virginian depicted the stillforming plan, nothing less than a revolution in government was brewing. He wrote to his son, the most prevalent idea seems to be a total obliteration of the present federal system and substituting a Great National council with full legislative powers upon all objects of the union. this sentence effectively summarized the virginia plan. People were to replace the states as Building Blocks of the National Republic and congress would no longer go, hat in hand, to the states on everything. On matters of National Interest it would either dictate to the states or deal directly with the people. When the convention did obtain a quorum, it promptly chose washington as its president and turned to matters of rules. This is a painting of washington made after the convention. Those rules provided at the outset provided that so long as it was represented, each state would have one vote. A majority of states represented would carry a vote. And, most controversially, secrecy would obtain throughout. With windows shuttered and doors closed, the members met day after day, six days a week or over three months. Individuals came and went and states gained and lost representation. New hampshire, for example, did not appear until late july, by which time new york had left altogether. Rhode island never sent delegates. Throughout the entire period only washington and madison attended every session. With secrecy strictly enforced the only record of the proceedings comes from madisons notes or minutes, the official tally of motions and votes, and a scattering of personal letters and writings. The silence engulfing the convention especially limits what is known about washingtons role because, as the presiding officer, as the speaker would know, he rarely spoke on substantive matters inside the hall where madison recorded the debate. Washington did talk privately with other members, of course and voted, which makes him different from the speaker of our congress now. He voted consistently with the virginia delegation. He also supervised the deliberations and called on members when they spoke. The other members likely knew where he stood on significant matters, but beyond his oftstated desire to create a Central Government with the power to tax, to maintain an army, and to regular late interstate and international commercial, positions on which he had publicly championed since 1783, the record of his specific contributions to the convention remains frustratingly oblique. We can only surmise those from the clues he has left. But those includes are revealing, especially his decisive vote in the virginia delegation, because his delegation was one of the most split. Indeed, in the end it was his vote that allowed virginia to endorse the constitution. The vote was 32. So his vote was decisive there. One day after the convention committed itself to secrecy, going back to the beginning, the virginia delegation dropped its bombshell the having participated in preparing it washington clearly conspired in the timing of that delivery. To begin the Main Business of the convention, as madison termed in his notes, washington called on edmund randolph. The Virginia Governor presented his delegations plan for a new constitution. Once he took the floor, randolph held it most of the day and left no doubt about his states radical intentions. As presented by randolph, the plan called for as he called it a National Government, with two houses of government, some sort of judiciary with supreme and inferior courts. This was the radical cure for americas woefully inadequate Central Government. Citing the discord among the states, the rebellion in massachusetts, the havoc of paper money, as he called it and the failure to pay its debts, randolph argued that the old con federation did not work and raised, as he put it, the prospect of anarchy from the laxity of government everywhere. Further, he stated, there were many advantages which the United States might acquire which were not attainable under the con federation, such as a productive impost, and the pushing of commercial. The hope, randolph said, lay in the National Government with power to leg legislate on matters of general concern and propel obedience. One scribble he wrote that day cove sovereignty is the integral thing. We ought to be one nation. no delegate could doubt where washington stood. He remained a Voting Member of virginias delegation, called on randolph to speak first, and never suffered any interruption in what one critic called the governors, quote, long and elaborate speech. Clearly washington sided with virginia in its plan. In doing so he had helped to hijack the convention. Congress endorsed this convention as a meeting to draft amendments to the convention. Virginia proposed to scrap it altogether and forge a new nation. That night, washington likely worked on a long letter he posted the next day to Thomas Jefferson in paris. He wrote, this is washingtons words the business of this convention is as yet too much in embryo to form any opinion of results. That something is necessary, everyone here agrees. For the situation be of the general government, if it can be called a government, is shaken to its foundations and liable to be overset by every blast. In a word, it, the confederation is at an end and unless a remedy is soon allied, anarchy and confusion will inevitably ensue. These words echoed randolphs speech. After heatedly debating, the convention accepted the virginia plan as a starting point for its deliberations and never looked back. Washington said little of substance in the hall but surely spoke in private. Persuaded as i am that the primary cause of disorders lies in the different state governments and in the tenacity of that power which pervades the whole of their systems, so long as the states retain independent sovereignty, he wrote in this letter written at this time during the convention, the country would falter. The initial battle won, the war now raged over the precise structure and powers of congress, the nature of the executive, the establishment of inferior federal courts, the protections for statesanctioned slavery, and myriad other matters. Washington wrote privately, the men who oppose that are in my opinion narrow minded politicians who are under the local views. Hamilton most vocally defended an openended grant of power to the Central Government. After new jersey proposed a limiting list of powers in its alternative, hamilton exploded. The general power must swallow up the state powers. Otherwise it will be swallowed up by them, he declared. Between the national and state legislatures, he said, the former must therefore have indefinite authority. Wilson was more discreet distancing himself from hamiltons extreme remarks. He still argued that the states should only survive as lesser jurisdictions or subdivisions of the nation. Washington didnt need to. Ever since his 1783 circular letter, which was then the countrys bestknown Public Document other than the declaration of independence, read typically at all fourth of july ceremonies around the country, washington stood as the personification of nationalism in the United States. His daily presence at the dais spoke louder than speeches of anyone in the hall. It gave weight to the virginia plan, which implicitly bore his imprimatur. And what randolph drafted a broad delegation of the general powers, it included every single power that washington had publicly endorsed. And by the way, dropped many of the ones that madison had wanted. No issue mattered more to washington than president new governments supreme power and sovereignty. There were other topics for members to address. Some so divisive as to nearly derail the Convention Others that everyone knew would directly impact washington should he become the first president. They would look to him on these issues, too, and he in turn helped to shape the outcome, but National Supremacy mattered the most to him. He wrote, one day before the delegates approved randolphs list of powers, they need not look for tranquility. Until the wisdom and force is translated. You can see it with how he voted on the various measures when they came forward and for securing the compromises that kept the convention on track. But his role in crafting the executive office offers as good as example as any of the part er played in philadelphia. Since everyone presumed that washington would become the new governments first executive, no one could conceive of this position without thinking of him in it. Indeed, within a year, South Carolina delegate Pierce Butler flatly stated that his colleagues at the convention and im quoting a letter here, shaped their ideas and the powers to be given to the president by their opinion of washingtons virtue. Well, the presidency was the conventions most original creation. Groping for analogies, they looked at doges, kings of poland, even the pope as examples of political leaders chosen by some sort of elite electorate. None of these analogies really fit, though. The american presidency was something new under the sun. Having agreed to begin their deliberations by working through the virginia plan, the delegates reached the plans two resolutions regarding the executive on june 1. Perhaps because washington was sitting among them, when the delegates reached those resolutions, they all fell unusually silent. With the provisions coming from washingtons delegation no one seemed inclined to dispute them. Washington would be the first president , of course, and the delegates seemed reluctant to cross him. But who would follow washington . Benjamin franklin broke the silence the and heres a picture of him at the convention. Observing that the structure of the executive is of great importance. Franklin urged the delegates to deliver their sentiments on it before the question was punch. These comments burst dam and debate flooded the room. Four days later, with discussion still going, he could add, franklin said, the first plan put at the helm would be a good one. Nobody knows what sort would come afterwards. They debated at length three times during the convention. In june, the first of the occasions though raised virtually all the issues about the presidency that would later occupy them but had trouble resolving even whether one person or a committee of three should hold the office. With washington in the room, a unitary executive should have seemed obvious to all, especially since every state then had only one governor. Fearful of investing too much power in any Single Person however, some delegates, including two from virginia, one washingtons neighbor here, favored and executive triumvirate like those of late republican rome. Debouncing a single executive as, quote, a fetus of monarchy, randolph averred that the people would oppose it and that an executive troika would better represent the people. These comments, coming as they did from old friends, surely vexed washington, who prided himself on his republican virtue, public support and unbiased nationalism. Every delegate who knew him must have known that washington would never consent to serve as one member of an executive triumvirate. Nor would he be suited for such a post. They rallied to defend the sort that washington was so clearly qualified to lead by fixing responsibility on one person it serves as, quote, the best safeguard against tyranny. One from massachusetts stressed that a troika would be especially troublesome in war, like a general with three heads, he declared. While these positions came out in the course of the formal debate, delegates discussed them on other occasions as well. Like washington, some members regularly attended evening balls and teas where they could talk in semiprivate settings. And none were finer than the ones at Robert Morris house. Even those delegates who did not circulate in high society inevitably spent considerable time together outside the assembly hall. Most lived tightly packed into a handful of the citys best boarding houses and inns, where they dined at common tables. While washington could dine in every night if he chose, he frequently ate out with the other members. That was part of his political activity and indeed, on june 2 after the extent of disagreement over the power and structure of the executive first became apparent with that bitter debate, washington ate with the delegates at city tavern where the subject of the days heated debate likely came up and surely remained on everybodys mind. Now, later in that same day, as many of those delegates casually dined with the man who would be that king and in the same day where they could not resolve whether there should be, the United States should have one executive or three, washingtons presence must have reassured them. As a frequent guest at city tavern, Pierce Butler may have been present. If so, it might explain his later comment that the powers vested in the executive, quote who not have been so great had not many of the members cast their eyes to general washington at president. At the conventions flex session, the very next session the states voted by a margin of 73 for a single executive. Virginia, by a virginia narrow split vote with washington breaking the tie, joined the majority. And so it went for week after week as washington successfully guided the convention to its historic conclusion in september, when all of the states then present voted for the constitution even though many individual delegates objected to parts of it. The convention then approved the cover letter and two accompanying resolutions for transmitting the finished draft to congress. That cover letter stated the friends of our country have long seen and desired that the power of making war, peace treaties, and of levying money and regulating commerce should be fully, thats underlined. And effectively invested in a general government. These factors, it claimed, justified the consolidation of the union which involved by that consolidation, is involved our prosperity, our safety, and props our national existence. This letter effectively opened the Public Campaign for ratification. And the fact that this bore washingtons signature and this was the Public Document coming out of the constitution made it appear that the constitution itself was coming from him. Thats how it appeared in every paper in the country. Now, the accompanying resolutions asked congress to forward the constitution to the states and if they ratified it to send a time for choosing president ial electors and the date for the new government to assume power. Washingtons signature on these resolutions as well as on the cover letter assured they would command attention. Indeed, as i said, they made it look as though the constitution came from him, which was the backers intent all along all that remained was for the delegates to ceremonially sign the document itself. Have it written out on parchment and have it ready to sign next week. As the two larger than life leaders made them credible washington ant franklin took center stage for the signing. They do so in the monumental painting of the event, the bestknown painting of it, chandler christy, later commissioned for the u. S. Capitol. The shutters in the u. S. Background symbolically opened they were actually closed and a bright new day backlights the figures in almost a holy aura. Franklin sits facing the viewer at the center, surrounded by the other signers. Washington stands alone in near profile to the viewers right, towering over the others as he surveys the scene from an overly elevated dais. Christy rare brushed out all the people that voted no you can look, theyre not there. And he added other people who voted yes but had left home the last week. Yet despite these changes and opening the windows, the painting spirit rings true. Washington oversaw the signing much as he had the convention, by supervising events from an elevated chair. He called on franklin first, and franklin gave his famous speech. I agree with this constitution with all its faults. There is no form of government william may not be a blessing to the people if well administered and i believe further that this one is likely to be well administered for a course of years, he said with a verbal nod to washington. The alternative, franklin said was disunion. And im using his words with the states only to meet thereafter for the purpose of cutting one anothers throats. Despite the secrecy rule, this speech and only this one promptly played it into newspapers across the country alongside washingtons transmittal letters. The great men had spoken for all americans to hear. At the time, they were widely credited as the constitutions principal drafters. Although observed by no one except the conventions members and officers, the signing may have felt as historic to them as it looked in the great picture. Washington signed first above the rest in a bold, large hand somewhat reminiscent of John Hancocks already wellknown signature on the declaration of independence. George washington, president and deputy from virginia. Then the other 38 signers filed forward by state, beginning with new hampshires john langdon preceding southward to be Abraham Baldwin of georgia. While the last members were signing, franklin looked at the halfsun that adorned the crown of washingtons chair. I have, he said, often in the vicissitudes of the convention looked at the sun behind the president without being able to tell whether it was rising or setting. But now at length i have the happiness to know that it is a rising sun, not a setting. Madison chose this anecdote involving the sage of philadelphia and washingtons chair to close his notes of the convention. Elaborating somewhat, washington reported in his diary, quote the members adjourned to city tavern, dining together, and took a cordial leave. in that diary, washington then added that after dinner he retired to meditate on the momentous work that had been executed. the product of that labor, the constitution, if ratified, would transform the rest of his life and his country forever. One step done, a step that washington soon characterized in a letter to lafayette as, quote, little short of a miracle, more steps lay ahead, with the general deeply invested in them. These, however, are the subject of my final lecture next month. Please come again. Thank you. \[applause] i believe we have some time for questions. And they and the powers that be want to have you speak them into a microphone. Ill try to repeat them somewhat. So if there are any questions i would be delighted to try to answer them. Oh, right in the middle and back. Here comes the microphone. How close did Patrick Henry actually come to derailing . Wasnt he totally against everything that was going on even as a member from virginia . Well, he didnt show up. Please come back next week, next month. Patrick henry takes somewhat center stage next month. Patrick henry was, two people. Several delegates voted no, such as george mason and they would be involved as leading antifederalist in opposing ratification. But two people who werent there, governor George Clinton the great governor of new york. One of washingtons closest friends, they were almost like brothers together since the time of the war and were investment partners, and Patrick Henry of virginia were leading antifederalists but, see, Patrick Henry had not gone to the convention. He was elected a delegate from virginia but never showed up. If he had gone, maybe thats what washington meant that getting the constitution through the convention was little short of a miracle. That miracle might have been that Patrick Henry didnt show up. Well talk more about Patrick Henry next moment any other questions . Right down here. Wait, hes going to hand up a microphone. Thank you. Well, good question. The question is how was the constitution written . It was written by a committee. It was started, because the other states were late in getting there, madison washington, when the constitution was he was committed to radical changes. He didnt want to just tinker with the articles of confederation he wrote to john jay, henry fronks, the secretary of war and to madison, asking their advice what should be in the new government. They all wrote letters and he compiled them and he came madison came up and stayed right here at mount vernon and they worked on for a considerable amount of time, on formalizing the idea. They went to the convention. Washington and madison both arrived on time. The only other people were the representatives from pennsylvania. Since the convention didnt have a quorum for 10 days, for all those days, that group would meet we dont know exactly who was there but from letters it certainly suggests that washington and madison were always there. As more virginians showed up they joined the group and the best historians of the convention argue that at least the key philadelphians Gouverneur Morris and wilson were there and they drafted up what became known as the virginia plan. That was then approved as the starting point for operations and then what happened is you literally spent three months tinkering with those various resolutions that were part of the virginia plan, adding this changing this, inventing this, creating things like the Electoral College or creating the senate, with two members for every date because the virginia plan didnt provide for that. They provided for the senate to be picked by the house of representatives. Deciding details of the powers of the presidency, working out all these details. They were hammered out repeatedly, first with the convention acting as a committee of the whole, when washington was on the floor, all the states voting, washington voting and then taking it in the convention and reworking through those documents and then handing it off to a Committee First to pull all the separate adopted pieces together, thats how Congress Works in that, or in this way, a large convention works, then that came back and then they sent it back. After that was tinkered with yet again, they sent it back to a committee to polish it and thats when morris added that beautiful preamble which people actually remember, as opposed to to the rest of it, that was the handiwork mostly of Gouverneur Morris. Washington meanwhile, was serving as the president of the convention, which was a perfect role for him. While most of you know who know washington well, he was a wonderful conversationalist. He people loved talking with him. I guess the term is a retail politician, whether you are working oneonone . He wasnt a good public speaker, partly because of his teeth, partly because of his nature. So it was perfect for him to sorted of work the crowd in the receive inning and work out the compromises and work with the different people while he let other people speak but thats how the document was hammered out over three very long months in philadelphia, all behind closed doors with the press never getting word from it. You can read what the press is reporting. They didnt have a clue what was going on inside. Their reports were way off. My favorite report, it was published all around the country that the convention had decided to call on the duke of york, the kings second son, to be the new king of the United States. And another one that went around, they had voted to exclude rhode island from the union. So the reports were wild. They were probably as exaggerated as some of the news reports we get today on what is being decided. But nobody corrected them. And that goes back to the earlier idea that Patrick Henry had no clue what was going on the question down here . Well go with this one and then go back right over here the you can hand it in to the person whoever it was. Could you give a little background on how George Washington and madisons relationship evolved . Did it start during the revolution . When madison was in congress . Did it start before then . Theyd known each other but when they became close was really during this period. Madison became almost like a son to washington. Madison was a member of the congress at the end. Washington was, of course, off in the military. He began to develop trust in madison. Madison was not married then. He was about 35 ands if there ever was a policy wonk, it was James Madison. He was just, i guess you would call him a nerd today. He would sit there and work out details. He loved the detailed part of politics the and so he became absolutely convinced in congress that this, the articles of con federation were an utter failure. He, like washington, was very concerned with, and you will remember this from madisons later works, with majority faction. He became convinced that these states were petty basic tyrannies and they were takeing away the individual liberties and the Property Rights of the minorities. And in some, it was religious. In some it was the debtors taking over, in . It was the creditors taking over. He just saw the whole write being palled part and so he deeply believed he began to think about this issue and believed there should be a separation of powers within the government but his fundamental libertarian rationale for the constitution was that if you had the problem was that there was a small, little entity like a delaware or a pennsylvania and you could get a little local majority, whether it was religious or whether it was based on economics, and he thought those were the two big forces that tend to create factions, its economics or religion and that they would form together and lord it over the others and take away the freedom for other people. He thought if you had an extended republic, if you went all the way from georgia to new hampshire, it would be so big that you couldnt get any majority faction. So he, while we remember him for the checks and balances within the government, which we remember, certainly, he saw that massachusetts and new york had pretty effective balanced governments, while pennsylvania and rhode island, you basically had total power in a Single Chamber of the legislature. He didnt have an effective judiciary, you didnt have any power in the governor, you basically had all power in one lower house and those, he was saying, were passing laws that were taking away the freedom and property of others. So he saw those two solutions and of course he would later write about them in the federalist papers but that was his libertarian view, his protecting liberty view of the constitution. Now, he was coming and explaining this to washington, and washington became persuaded of this view. He spent considerable time month after month, because he didnt have any wife to go back to, living right here in mount vernon. He was almost like a son to washington. Then up asked, and i shouldnt talk too long, but you asked about evolved. It did evolve after that. When washington takes power, its generally viewed that madison, who washington persuaded to run for congress madison didnt want to run. He didnt like it. He didnt like campaigning, he didnt like debating. He didnt like that part. He liked being a policy wonk back in the background. But washington virtually insisted that he run for congress. Hes narrowly elected and then he virtually becomes washingtons they refer to him as washingtons prime minister. He was there at the inaugural address, wrote the bill of rights. He got washington to reluctantly support the bill of rights because washington had opposed it at the Constitutional Convention, but basically washington sort of tired of his intrigues and gradually hamilton, his second pick for treasury secretary, hamilton who had been his aide for a while during the revolutionary war, hamilton gains ascendancy and hamilton by midway through the first term becomes washingtons closest advisor and washington pulls away somewhat from madison. Sco its an evolving relationship but when the federalist papers first come out and are just essays printed in new york, washington writes to madison, this is the best thing ive ever read, the best argument for government. And he sends them around to other newspapers, around the country. And he becomes very involved in the battle for ratification, which i will talk about next time, about pushing madisons ideas of balanced government especially the balance that comes from, the reduced risk of a majority faction from a large country. Long answer. Good question, though. Someone over here . Yes . It seems like the role of the secrecy at the convention, how did that come to pass . And what was washingtons role in passing that . Secrecy was vital. Some when they heard about it thought it was appalling. Jefferson said you dont understand the role of a free press in the republic. Fortunately he was off in paris, writing letters back. But washington took it very seriously and washington enforced it very vigorously. I can give a variety of examples but one that is captured
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.