Scholar. To a clear and strong judgment he unites the ornaments of fancy, and whilst he is able, convincing, and engaging in his eloquence, the Heart and Head sympathize in approving him. Yet there is something too feeble in his voice to be equal to the strains of oratory—it is my opinion that he is rather a convincing Speaker, that [than] a blazing Orator. Col. Hamilton requires time to think, he inquires into every part of his subject with the searchings of phylosophy, and when he comes forward he comes highly charged with interesting matter, there is no skimming over the surface of a subject with him, he must sink to the bottom to see what foundation it rests on. His language is not always equal, sometimes didactic like Bolingbroke's, at others light and tripping like Stern's. His eloquence is not so defusive as to trifle with the senses, but he rambles just enough to strike and keep up the attention. He is about 33 years old, of small stature, and lean. His manners are tinctured with stiffness, and sometimes with a degree of vanity that is highly disagreeable.

Mr. Wilson ranks among the foremost in legal and political knowledge. He has joined to a fine genius all that can set him off and show him to advantage. He is well acquainted with Man, and understands all the passions that influence him. Government seems to have been his peculiar Study, all the political institutions of the World he knows in detail, and can trace the causes and effects of every revolution from the earliest stages of the Grecian commonwealth down to the present time. No man is more clear, copious, and comprehensive than Mr. Wilson, yet he is no great Orator. He draws the attention not by the charm of his eloquence, but by the force of his reasoning. He is about 45 years old.

Mr. Governeur Morris is one of those Genius's in whom every species of talents combine to render him conspicuous 4 Hamilton was born in 1757.

and flourishing in public debate. He winds through all the mazes of rhetoric, and throws around him such a glare that he charms, captivates, and leads away the senses of all who hear him. With an infinite streach of fancy he brings to view things when he is engaged in deep argumentation, that render all the labor of reasoning easy and pleasing. But with all these powers he is fickle and inconstant, never pursuing one train of thinking, nor ever regular. He has gone through a very extensive course of reading, and is acquainted with all the sciences. No Man has more wit, nor can anyone engage the attention more than Mr. Morris. He was bred to the Law, but I am told he disliked the profession, and turned Merchant. He is engaged in some great mercantile matters with his namesake Mr. Robt. Morris. This Gentleman is about 38 years old, he has been unfortunate in losing one of his Legs, and getting all the flesh taken off his right arm by a scald, when a youth."

Mr. Maddison is a character who has long been in public life; and, what is very remarkable, every Person seems to acknowledge his greatness. He blends together the profound politician, with the Scholar. In the management of every great question he evidently took the lead in the Convention, and tho' he cannot be called an Orator, he is a most agreeable, eloquent, and convincing Speaker. From a spirit of industry and application which he possesses in a most eminent degree, he always comes forward the best informed Man of any point in debate. The affairs of the United States, he perhaps has the most correct knowledge of, of any Man in the Union. He has been twice a Member of Congress, and was always thought one of the ablest Members that ever sat in that Council. Mr. Maddison is about 37 years of age, a Gentleman of great modesty, with

6

5 Gouverneur Morris was born in 1752. He lost a leg because of an accident with a runaway carriage in 1780. No accident, as far as we know, injured his arm, at least permanently.

• Madison was born in 1751.

a remarkably sweet temper. He is easy and unreserved among his acquaintance, and has a most agreeable style of conversation.

Mr. Chs. Cotesworth Pinckney is a Gentleman of Family and fortune in his own State. He has received the advantage of a liberal education, and possesses a very extensive degree of legal knowledge. When warm in a debate he sometimes speaks well, but he is generally considered an indifferent Orator. Mr. Pinckney was an Officer of high rank in the American Army, and served with great reputation through the War. He is now about 40 years of age.

Mr. Charles Pinckney is a young Gentleman of the most promising talents. He is, altho' 24 years of age, in possession of a very great variety of knowledge. Government, Law, History, and Phylosophy are his favorite studies, but he is intimately acquainted with every species of polite learning, and has a spirit of application and industry beyond most Men. He speaks with great neatness and perspicuity, and treats every subject as fully, without running into prolixity, as it requires. He has been a Member of Congress, and served in that Body with ability and éclat.

Mr. Baldwin is a Gentleman of superior abilities, and joins in a public debate with great art and eloquence. Having laid the foundation of a compleat classical education at Harvard College, he pursues every other study with ease. He is well acquainted with Books and Characters, and has an accommodating turn of mind, which enables him to gain the confidence of Men, and to understand them. He is a practicing Attorney in Georgia, and has been twice a member of Congress. Mr. Baldwin is about 38 years' of age.

7 Baldwin was born in 1754. He was educated at Yale, not Harvard. Charles Pinckney was born in 1758.

Notes of Major William Pierce on the Federal Convention of 1787, in the American Historical Review, 1897-8, Vol. III, pp. 325 ff.

QUESTIONS

If you were writing an account of the Convention, what facts regarding its members would you think it safe to adopt from these notes? Which facts would you reject? How would you undertake to supply facts such as you would not trust Pierce for?

XVIII

THE CONSTITUTION

It is difficult for us at this day to know just what the Constitution meant to the men of 1788. Not that the document is clumsily and awkwardly written on the contrary, it is as clear as well chosen words and clever phrasing can make it, and perhaps as definite and precise as the conditions of the problem permitted; but it is short, its terms are general and not sharply descriptive in all particulars; probably no document which outlined at length with great particularity the form of government and the methods of its work could have been framed by the men at Philadelphia or been adopted by the States. Precise details would have given too much opportunity for differences of opinion. As the Constitution was general and broad in its terms, it furnished opportunity for growth and for adaptation to actual needs as they arose. The theory always has been that the Constitution is unvarying save as it is amended by formal process (See Const., Art. V); but the Constitution has grown in its meaning by constant interpretation and by the actual development of government under it. And, more than that, almost every phrase has been given meaning either by the courts, in cases they have decided, or by the practical action of the government.

When we look upon the Constitution now, therefore, and when we read its clauses, we gather a definite mean

ing about many things that could have had no definite meaning to the men who adopted it. We see actual working institutions like the presidency, courts, Congress, administrative officers; we see the government as a real thing at work; we find that we know and take for granted the relations between the different departments. In reading the Constitution we must always remember that after it was first adopted the government had to be made a reality, that the government has grown tremendously, that there have been, all along the line, chances for differences of opinion as to just how much should be done, and, moreover and above all, that the forms, offices, activities of government, were taken on little by little. Any consideration of the Constitution requires that we should remember that it means to us more than it meant one hundred and twenty-five years ago.

1

Some things were plainly provided for by the document as it came from the hands of its framers; and to the men discussing it in 1788 there were things no one could fail to see. There was provision for a central government with wide powers and capable of being strong and effective. This government no longer like the old Congress need depend on State governments 1 for action; it could pass its own laws and carry them into effect with its own officers; it could raise money for its own purpose; and it could carry on negotiations with foreign powers, with assurance that it was a government, a government that could raise troops and equip navies and do other things that great world governments were accustomed to do. Even those that believed that the States retained the right to secede or break up the Union - if such there were in 1789 —

1 State legislatures were to choose senators and the right to vote even for the president was to be determined by State laws (See Const., Art. I, Sec. 3, Par. I and Art. I, Sec. 2, Par. 1). But on the whole the governments of the States and of the United States work apart.