Events Leading Up To the Philadelphia Convention

Mt Vernon Conference, 1785.

          The circumstances that led to the Mount Vernon Conference of 1785 began as the country emerged victorious from the Revolutionary War. Lacking a strong central government, the states quarreled among themselves and some even established proprietary regulations, tariffs, and currency. To ensure mutually profitable commerce on the shared waterways of the Potomac River, the legislators of Virginia and Maryland recognized the need for an agreement between the two states regarding the jurisdiction of the waters.

Representatives from Maryland were duly empowered to discuss with Virginia shared concerns involving the Potomac and Pocomoke Rivers, and the Chesapeake Bay. To the contrary, the Virginia legislature's instructions to its appointees focused solely on the Potomac, thereby failing to include critical waters that required negotiation and in the process severely limiting the authority of the Virginia commissioners. Virginia Governor Patrick Henry further snarled the proceedings by neglecting to notify the state's commissioners of their appointments. Consequently no Virginia representatives were on hand to greet the Maryland commissioners upon their arrival in Alexandria for the meeting on March 21, 1785. George Washington first heard of the proposed conference the day before from one of the Maryland commissioners visiting as a guest at Mount Vernon.

Washington offered the hospitality of Mount Vernon for the group of Maryland and Virginia representatives to meet. Although not an official participant in the conference, Washington—with his authoritative knowledge of the issues and active interest in Potomac navigation—inspired the delegates and lent considerable prestige to the proceedings.

The resulting “Mount Vernon Compact” was a thirteen-point agreement that addressed transportation and trade issues involving more than the Potomac River. It was subsequently ratified by the Virginia and Maryland legislatures, and Pennsylvania and Delaware were invited to participate in the agreement.

From George Washington’s Mount Vernon: <https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/mount-vernon-conference>

 

 

 

 

Annapolis Convention, 1786

The Annapolis Convention, formally titled as a “Meeting of Commissioners to Remedy Defects of the Federal Government,” was a national political convention held September 11-14, 1786. The meeting aimed at constructing uniform parameters to regulate trade between states during a time of political turbulence and economic strain. While chartered as a purely commercial convening, and attended by only a handful of delegates from five states, the Annapolis Convention served as a decisive stepping-stone to the Constitutional Convention, effectively laying the groundwork for our nation’s constitutional formation.

The Convention’s attendees, “dictated by an anxiety for the welfare of the United States,” came to the collective realization that trade was altogether inseverable from the widespread “embarrassments” characterizing the then-present state of affairs, and that to discuss commerce without first addressing the inadequacies of America’s broader political framework was thoroughly unavoidable. Articulating these sentiments in a report issued to all states and Congress, the Annapolis delegates recommended a convention be held in Philadelphia the following year; the Constitutional Convention, which, of course, became the Philadelphia constitutional convention.

From George Washington’s Mount Vernon: https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/annapolis-convention. See also Madison’s comments in his proposed “Preface” to his Notes of Debates, first published in 1840. 

Formal Call for a Constitutional Convention, 1787

          Following the Annapolis meeting, the Congress of the Confederation on 21 February 1787, voted eight to one (Connecticut opposed) to call a convention to meet in Philadelphia on 14 May “for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation and reporting to Congress and the several [state] Legislatures such alterations and provisions therein as shall when agreed to in Congress and confirmed by the States render the federal Constitution  adequate to the exigencies of Government and the preservation of the Union.” Though this initiative in Congress largely owed its life to the Annapolis Convention report, no reference was made to the report.

From the Center for the Study of the American Constitution: https://csac.history.wisc.edu/2021/02/24/the-confederation-congress-calls-a-constitutional-convention-21-february-1787/. Madison’s more extensive comments in his Preface to the Notes of Debates.

The Virginia Plan

          A set of fifteen resolutions presented to the Convention by Governor Edmund Randolph of Virginia on May 29, 1787, that served as the basis for discussion until it was challenged, unsuccessfully, on June 15th by William Paterson of New Jersey. It represented a complete replacement of the Articles of Confederation by a more consolidated/national/unitary form of government. See Notes of Debates, 30-33.

The Pinckney Plan

          James Madison’s Notes report that Charles Pinckney of South Carolina allegedly proposed an alternative plan of government to the Convention, also on May 29th, but no authentic copy of that draft has ever been found. It was supposedly similar to the Virginia Plan and was used by the Convention’s Committee of Detail in its August 6th draft. See reference at Notes of Debates, 33.

The New Jersey Plan

          After more than two weeks of the convention discussing a totally new structure of government outlined in Randolph’s Virginia Plan, William Patterson of New Jersey proposed a more modest plan of amendment known as the New Jersey Plan on June 15th. Since several delegations had been instructed by their states to consider only amending, not replacing, the Articles of Confederation, there was more support for this alternative than just the New Jersey delegation. See Notes of Debates, 118-121.

Alexander Hamilton’s Plan

          Upon the introduction by Patterson of the “New Jersey Plan” three days prior, Alexander Hamilton said, in effect, that he could not contain his respectful silence any longer. He was not totally committed to Randolph’s Virginia Plan, but was totally opposed to Patterson’s alternative. Hamilton was concerned about America’s great size and need for strong central authority and professed his deep admiration for the British form of monarchical government. Yet his proposal for structuring the new government followed an outline similar to the VA Plan. According to Madison’s Notes, his speech was met with silence and was not actively discussed thereafter in the Convention. See Notes of Debates, 138-139

Earlier Precedents

 

Magna Carta, 1216

The “great charter of liberties” wrung out of King John to recognize a series of rights that the barons won from King John. As the English historian Stubbs remarked: “The whole of the Constitutional History of England is a commentary on this charter.” It established the model for later “bills of rights.” The Charter was a collection of disparate rights and liberties that the barons wanted King John and his successors to honor; it was not a coherent, comprehensive theory or plan of government.

Mayflower Compact, 1620 [Notable as a written agreement to form a society]

IN THE NAME OF GOD, AMEN. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God, of Great BritainFrance, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, &c. Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the first Colony in the northern Parts of Virginia; Do by these Presents, solemnly and mutually, in the Presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid: And by Virtue hereof do enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions, and Officers, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general Good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due Submission and Obedience. IN WITNESS whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape-Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of EnglandFrance, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, Anno Domini; 1620.

Mr. John Carver, Mr. William Bradford, Mr Edward Winslow, Mr. William Brewster, Isaac Allerton, Myles Standish, John Alden, John Turner, Francis Eaton,
James Chilton, John Craxton, John Billington, Joses Fletcher, John Goodman, Mr. Samuel Fuller, Mr. Christopher Martin, Mr. William Mullins, Mr. William White,
Mr. Richard Warren, John Howland, Mr. Steven Hopkins, Digery Priest, Thomas Williams, Gilbert Winslow, Edmund Margesson, Peter Brown, Richard Britteridge
George Soule, Edward Tilly, John Tilly, Francis Cooke, Thomas Rogers, Thomas Tinker, John Ridgdale, Edward Fuller, Richard Clark, Richard Gardiner, Mr. John Allerton, Thomas English, Edward Doten, Edward Liester.

English Bill of Rights 1689

          Several states in the United States, influenced in part by the 1689 English Bill of Rights that contributed to the end of the English civil war known as the Glorious Revolution in 1688, had bills of rights as parts of their state constitutions. The demand for a national bill of rights by several state conventions debating whether to ratify the propose constitution led James Madison and others to make a bill of rights one of the very first issues taken up by the new federal Congress.