Log In Register

Source & Citation Info

title:“Notes on Debates by John Lansing”
authors:John Lansing, Jr.
date written:1787-6-9

permanent link
to this version:
http://consource.org/document/notes-on-debates-by-john-lansing-1787-6-9/20130122080238/
last updated:Jan. 22, 2013, 8:02 a.m. UTC
retrieved:July 21, 2018, 3:18 p.m. UTC

transcription
citation:
Lansing, John, Jr. "Notes on Debates by John Lansing." Supplement to Max Farrand's The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787. Ed. James H. Hutson. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. 63-64. Print.

Notes on Debates by John Lansing (June 9, 1787)

Met pursuant to Adjournm't.
Gerry moved to reconsider Appointment of Executive—agreed to reconsider it—He then moved that the Executives of the several States should elect national Executive—and that each Executive should have the same Number of Votes in the Election as the State he represents has Members of the first Branch. Reason—Fewer Persons greater Responsibility.
1
Randolph—Necessary to cloathe national Executive with every possible Confidence—this cannot be obtained in any Mode more effectually than by Election by national Legislature.
Is it probable that all the Executives will be disposed to promote the Growth of the large Oak which is to reduce them to insignificant Shrubs?
Individual Executives not qualified—they have not the Information—their Interests are distinct. It is not their Interest to elect the best Men to fill that Station—It must also cause a periodical Interregnum.
On Question—I0 Noes—Deleware divided.
The 11th Resolve was then read—Upon which Mr. Brearly called for the 2nd general Proposition marked C.
Brearly—This Mode of Representation just if all 2considered as one Nation—but if State Distinctions still obtain—if Measures are pursued to perpetuate their seperate Interests—let the whole be divided into Districts of nearly equal Size and Numbers of Inhabitants—but in our present Situation the Interests of the Smaller States must be sacraficed. He had made a calculation of the relative Representation which had been repeatedly hinted at which need only be read to enable us to determine the probable Consequence—this was on Number of free Inhabitants.
Georgia .......................1 South Carolina .............. 6
Deleware ................... 1 North Carolina ............... 6
Rhode Island ............ 2 New York ........................ 8
New Hampshire ....... 3 Connecticut .................... 8
New Jersey ............... 5 Maryland ......................... 6
Massachusetts ...................... I4
Pennsylvania .......................... I2
Virginia .................................... 163
He was appointed to give fœderal Powers—but these too extensive.
Patterson—Powers of Convention inadequate to this System. Confederation is Basis of our proceeding.
Representation exemplified by two Men possessing different Shares of Property—both have a Vote—but the Man of Property has more to protect by Government and he has greater Influence.4 Equal Division of Territory—Hints had been thrown out by Gentleman from Pennsylvania [Wilson] that a new Confederation between some of States would be formed—If Jersey would not be inattentive to her Interest—that State never would agree to the present System.
Wilson—If Confederation dissolved either Majority or Minority may Confederate.
Compound Ratio of Property and Numbers would perhaps be best to determine Representation—Pennsylvania has not yet been taught to adapt itself to the Scale of Representation proposed by Jersey—Never will—The States are now as in State of Nature—Each Individual ought to have an equal Weight in Government.5 He has no Authority to divide States.
He will uniformly vote against every State Establishment.
Postponed.
Adjourned till Monday.

Resource Metadata

Type

Date

1787-6-9

Authors

Collections