CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
1787
INTRODUCTION: GEORGE WASHINGTON’S SPEECH
MAY 25, 1787
DELEGATE BIOGRAPHIES: GEORGE WASHINGTON WILL READ HIS BIOGRAPHY FIRST
AND THEN ANNOUNCE ALL OTHER DELEGATES.
SECRECY: (1) MAY 29, 1787- (1)GEORGE MASON OF VIRGINIA RECOMMENDS TO THE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE THAT ALL DEBATES, DISCUSSIONS AND DECISIONS OF
THE CONVENTION BE KEPT IN SECRET. WASHINGTON TAKES A VOTE BY STATE
DELEGATION AND ALL STATES VOTE AYE (yes) TO THIS PROPOSAL. GW “THIS
PROPOSAL PASSES” (STRIKE THE GAVEL ONCE)
VIRGINIA PLAN PROPOSED: (2) EDMUND RANDOLPH OF VIRGINIA PROPOSES THE
VIRGINIA PLAN-MAY 29, 1787
THE VOTE: WASHINGTON TAKES A VOTE FROM EACH OF THE STATE DELEGATIONS.
LARGE STATES VOTE IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL, SMALL STATES VOTE AGAINST
THE PROPOSAL. GW “THIS PROPOSAL FAILS” (STRIKE THE GAVEL ONCE).
NEW JERSEY PLAN PROPOSED: (3) WILLIAM PATERSON OF NEW JERSEY PROPOSES
THE NEW JERSEY PLAN-JUNE 15, 1787
THE VOTE: WASHINGTON TAKES A VOTE FROM EACH OF THE STATE DELEGATIONS.
LARGE STATES VOTE AGAINST THE PROPOSAL. MARYLAND, AND GEORGIA ALSO
VOTE AGAINST THE PROPOSAL. ALL OTHER SMALL STATES VOTE FOR THE
PROPOSAL. GW “THIS PROPOSAL FAILS”. (STRIKE THE GAVEL ONCE)
1ST GREAT DEBATE: (4) JUNE 19, 1787-JAMES MADISON OF VIRGINIA PROPOSES THAT
THE DELEGATES CONSIDER WRITING A NEW DOCUMENT RATHER THAN REVISING THE
ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION.
(5)BENJAMIN FRANKLIN OF PENNSYLVANIA MAKES A SPEECH
(6)ALEXANDER HAMILTON OF NEW YORK ALSO MAKES A SPEECH IN FAVOR
(7)RUFUS KING OF MASSACHUSETTS ALSO MAKES A SPEECH IN FAVOR.
THE VOTE: ALL STATE DELEGATES WILL BE CALLED UPON INDIVIDUALLY BY MR.
WASHINGTON TO MAKE THIS DECISION. ALL WILL VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROPOSAL
EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING:
ALEXANDER MARTIN JOHN MERCER
LUTHER MARTIN
OLIVER ELLSWORTH
JOHN LANSING,JR. ROBERT YATES
GW “THIS PROPOSAL PASSES” (STRIKE THE GAVEL ONCE)
THE GREAT COMPROMISE: (8) ROGER SHERMAN OF CONNECTICUT WILL PROPOSE
THE GREAT COMPROMISE. JULY 12, 1787
(9)WILLIAM BLOUNT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASKS THAT THE COUNCIL CLARIFY
WHETHER TAXATION WILL BE BASED ON POPULATION OR IF EACH STATE WILL BE
TAXED EQUALLY.
(10)GOUVERNOR MORRIS OF PENNSYLVANIA INSURES MR. BLOUNT THAT
TAXATION WILL BE BASED ON POPULATION.
(11)WILLIAM S. JOHNSON OF CONNECTICUT PROTESTS THE COMPROMISE
WITH AN EMOTIONAL SPEECH.
THE VOTE: WASHINGTON WILL TAKE A VOTE FROM EACH OF THE STATE
DELEGATIONS AND ALL WILL VOTE IN FAVOR EXCEPT FOR NEW YORK AND VIRGINIA.
GW “THIS PROPOSAL PASSES”.(STRIKE THE GAVEL ONCE)
THE THREE-FIFTHS COMPROMISE: (12) GOUVENOR MORRIS OF PENNSYLVANIA WILL
BRING UP THE ISSUE OF SLAVE REPRESENTATION IN THE STATES. AUGUST 25, 1787
(13)JOHN RUTLEDGE OF SOUTH CAROLINA SPEAKS OUT
(14)CHARLES PINCKNEY OF SOUTH CAROLINA SPEAKS OUT
(15)ROBERT MORRIS OF PENNSYLVANIA SPEAKS OUT
(16) WILLIAM SAMUEL JOHNSON OF CONNECTICUT READS HIS PROPOSAL
THE VOTE: WASHINGTON TAKES A VOTE FROM EACH STATE DELEGATION. ALL VOTE
IN FAVOR EXCEPT GEORGIA, NORTH CAROLINA AND NEW YORK. GW “THIS PROPOSAL
PASSES” (STRIKE THE GAVEL ONCE)
END OF THE CONVENTION: WASHINGTON: “I WOULD LIKE TO THANK ALL OF THE
DELEGATES WHO CHOSE TO STAY FOR THE DURATION OF THIS CONVENTION. WE
HAVE WORKED LONG AND HARD ON THIS DOCUMENT (HOLDING IT UP) BUT IT IS
WORTH THE EFFORT AND SACRIFICE. PLEASE COME FORWARD AND SIGN THE
FINISHED DOCUMENT AS YOUR STATE DELEGATION IS CALLED.”
AFTER THE SIGNING IS COMPLETE-”THIS CONVENTION IS OFFICIALLY OVER.” (HITS
THE GAVEL SEVERAL TIMES OVER)
ALL DELEGATES: EXCESSIVE POUNDING ON THE TABLES IN CELEBRATION!!!
***EXTRA CREDIT: ALL DELEGATES RE-UNITE TO SING THE PREAMBLE***
INDIVIDUAL SPEECHES MADE AT THE CONVENTION
(1) GEORGE MASON OF VIRGINIA- “I PROPOSE THAT NO COPY BE
TAKEN OF ANY ENTRY ON THE JOURNAL, THAT MEMBERS ONLY BE
PERMITTED TO INSPECT THE JOURNAL, AND THAT NOTHING SPOKEN IN
THE HOUSE BE PRINTED, OR OTHERWISE COMMUNICATED WITHOUT
PERMISSION”
(2)EDMUND RANDOLPH OF VIRGINIA –THE VIRGINIA PLAN
(3)WILLIAM PATERSON OF NEW JERSEY- THE NEW JERSEY PLAN
(4)JAMES MADISON OF VIRGINIA- ”I BELIEVE THE MAJORITY HAVE
A RIGHT TO BIND THE REST IN THE FORMING OF A NEW CONSTITUTION
IF WE CONSIDER THE FEDERAL UNION TO BE A WHOLE AS DESIGNATED
BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATES.”
(5)BENJAMIN FRANKLIN OF PENNSYLVANIA – ”THE NATIONAL
GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT SWALLOW THE STATE GOVERNMENTS..
WE MUST PRESERVE THE IDEA OF THE STATES BUT THERE IS NO
REASON THAT THE STATE AND NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS CANNOT
SUBSIST TOGETHER.”
(6)ALEXANDER HAMILTON OF NEW YORK- ” NO BOUNDARY
SHOULD BE DRAWN BETWEEN THE NATIONAL AND STATE
LEGISLATURES. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MUST HAVE INDEFINITE
AUTHORITY OR THE RIVALRY OF THE STATES MAY EVENTUALLY
DISSOLVE THE AUTHORITY OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT.”
(7)RUFUS KING OF MASSACHUSETTS- ” THE WORDS “STATES,
SOVEREIGNTY, NATIONAL AND FEDERAL HAVE OFTEN BEEN USED
INACCURATELY”. STATE SOVEREIGNTY DOES NOT ALLOW STATES TO
MAKE WAR, PEACE, ALLIANCES OR TREATIES THEREFORE EACH LEVEL
OF THE GOVERNMENT HAS IT’S ROLES.
(8)ROGER SHERMAN OF CONNECTICUT- THE GREAT
COMPROMISE aka THE CONNECTICUT COMPROMISE
(9)WILLIAM BLOUNT OF NORTH CAROLINA – “ I NEED THE
COUNCIL TO CLARIFY WHETHER TAXATION WILL ALSO BE BASED ON
POPULATION OR IF EACH STATE WILL BE TAXED EQUALLY ACCORDING
TO THE PROVISIONS OF MR. SHERMAN’S PROPOSAL.”
(10)GOUVERNOR MORRIS OF PENNSYLVANIA – ”MR. BLOUNT, THE
ISSUE AT HAND IS OVER REPRESENTATION IN OUR PROPOSED 2 HOUSE
LEGISLATURE AND I ASSURE YOU ALL MONEY ISSUES WILL BE GIVEN
FAIR TREATMENT AT THIS COUNCIL AND NO STATE SHALL BE UNDULY
TAXED.”
(11)WILLIAM S. JOHNSON OF CONNECTICUT- ”I HOPE THE
PROPOSITION WILL SIMPLY BE WITHDRAWN BECAUSE WE HAVE
ALREADY DECIDED ON A 2 HOUSE LEGISLATURE AND I BELIEVE THIS
COUNCIL IS ENTERING TOO MUCH DETAIL TO THIS DOCUMENT.”
(12)GOUVERNOR MORRIS OF PENNSYLVANIA- THE THREE-FIFTHS
COMPROMISE
(13)JOHN RUTLEDGE OF SOUTH CAROLINA- ”REPRESENTATION
SHOULD BE ACCORDING TO THE FULL NUMBER OF INHABITANTS,
INCLUDING THE BLACKS.”
(14)CHARLES PINCKNEY OF SOUTH CAROLINA- ”I LIKE THE IDEA
AND THINK MANY OF MY SOUTHERN COLLEAGUES WILL AGREE TO THIS
PROPOSAL AS LONG AS THE RULE IS FIXED BY THIS COUNCIL.”
(15)ROBERT MORRIS OF PENNSYLVANIA – ”I APPROVE OF THIS
PRINCIPLE BUT AM UNCLEAR HOW IT WOULD BE CARRIED OUT UNLESS
IT IS TIED DIRECTLY TO TAXATION“
(16)WILLIAM S. JOHNSON OF CONNECTICUT- ”IN ORDER TO CARRY
INTO EFFECT THE PRINCIPLE ESTABLISHED I MOVE TO ADD THE
FOLLOWING CLAUSE “ THAT THE RULE OF CONTRIBUTION BY DIRECT
TAXATION FOR THE SUPPORT OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE U.S. SHALL
BE THE NUMBER OF WHITE INHABITANTS AND THREE-FIFTHS OF EVERY
OTHER DESCRIPTION IN THE SEVERAL STATES.”
SCRIPT FOR THE NON-SIGNERS
JAMES MCCLURG:
Quiet Exit-GW reads;”I regret to inform the council that family business has taken the
Honorable James McClurg of Virginia from these council meetings.”
Angry Exit-GC says, “I have sworn allegiance to my state to reveal all proceedings of
this council-I cannot abide by this request with a clear conscience-Gentlemen, I take my leave”.
EDMUND RANDOLPH:
Angry Exit- “I came here with a plan in my hand to help this council. You gentlemen
obviously cannot respect the gifts the state of Virginia brings to this council. I shall take my skills
and documents home to Virginia where my heart and mind will not be trampled.”
GEORGE WYTHE:
Quiet Exit : GW reads, “I regret to inform the council that another of the great delegates
from the state of Virginia has had to take his leave. We shall miss Mr. Wythe.”
Angry Exit- KP says, “The small states obviously have control of this council. I cannot
stay and see my state lose power as we work on this document!”
WILLIAM C. HOUSTON
Angry Exit- “ It is obvious to me that the divisions between the states are reappearing
here at this meeting. I thought we were here to get above these differences, maybe that is not
possible!
GEORGE MASON
Quiet Exit: GW reads, “A delegate, close friend and neighbor of mine has chosen to exit
the convention for personal reasons. A moment of silence while we remember Mr. Mason of
Virginia for his many contributions to this council”
Angry Exit: I can’t, I can’t sign this document. Not without the protection of civil
liberties. Gentlemen I take my leave.
JOHN MERCER
LUTHER MARTIN
Angry Exit: Mercer-”Nothing has gone as I expected at this meeting!” Martin-”We have
tried to compromise but we have our limits. We choose of our own free will, for the record, to
leave this convention!”
NOTE: 7TH HOUR MICHAEL SAYS THE WHOLE SPEECH SINCE THERE IS NOT A
JOHN MERCER IN 7TH HOUR.
JOHN LANSING
ROBERT YATES
Angry Exit: Lansing says, “Compromise, Compromise, Compromise,
We watch the great state of New York Lose influence” Yates says, “We watch our colleague
(Both Look at Hamilton) agree to “deals” at this convention. New York will not be party to this
treason!!” (one last look at Hamilton and then leave)
ELDRIDGE GERRY
CALEB STRONG
Angry Exit: Gerry says, “We are expected to sit by while our state of Massachusetts
loses power and prestige to this council.” Strong says, “ You forget Massachusetts was the home
of the fight for Independence-Our vote should be worth more as was our sacrifice!”
Quiet Exit- GW reads, “Mr. Strong/Mr. Gerry has had to leave us due to family concerns.
We are sorry to lose another delegate but we understand.”
WILLIAM DAVIE
ALEXANDER MARTIN
Quiet Exit-GW reads “ Mr. Davie and Mr. Martin of North Carolina have chosen to
leave us do to philosophical differences with this council.”
WILLIAM PIERCE
WILLIAM HOUSTOUN
Angry Exit: Pierce says, “Our slaves are worth a whole man and should count as
nothing less than a whole man!” Houston says, “This council is not done with the slavery issue,
but it is done with us!” Good Day Gentlemen!!
OLIVER ELLSWORTH
Quiet Exit: GW reads, “Gentlemen, we must say goodbye to Mr. Ellsworth. He has
given so much to this council. I am sorry to see him go.”
Angry Exit”I see that it is meant by some gentlemen here to deprive the southern states
of any share of representation for their blacks. If the northern states mean to exclude the blacks
altogether then this business is at an end!”
THREE-FIFTHS COMPROMISE:
1. For The purposes of taxation and representation:
a. Each state’s ‘free persons’ will count as one.
b. All other persons will count as three-fifths
c. Actual counts will be taken within the next 3 years.
THE VIRGINIA PLAN:
1. Legislature of two houses, both based on proportional
representation:
a. Members of the lower house will be elected by the people.
b. Members of the upper house elected by the lower house
c. The executive would mainly carry out the policy set by the
leigislature.
THE NEW JERSEY PLAN:
1. A single house legislature based on the principle of one state, one
vote.
a. The executive will be elected by the legislature.
b. The Supreme Court will be appointed by the Executive
THE CONNECTICUT COMPROMISE: (THE GREAT COMPROMISE)
1. The congress shall have two houses based on 2 different systems of
representation
a. The lower house will be based on the states population.
b. The upper house will represent each state equally.