for four long months upon the new document; for they realized that upon their judgment hung the fate of a country.

From the beginning the debates in the Convention were hot and fierce. Not only were the delegates anxious to give the very best form of government to the people, but they were constantly harassed by what their States might say when the document should be given into their hands. Every delegate was zealous and jealous for his own State and suspicious of every other. Because many did not even yet believe in a strong Central Government, every clause had to be fought out tooth and nail.

"Would we not better revise the Articles of Confederation," said some, ," said some, “lest our people censure us?”

"If to please the people we offer something in which we do not ourselves believe," said Washington, "how are we to defend ourselves when the time comes to place our work before the people? LET US RAISE

A STANDARD TO WHICH THE WISE AND THE HONEST

MAY REPAIR. THE RESULT IS IN GOD'S HANDS."

In the end, the opinion of Washington prevailed, and the Convention went to work to make an entirely new document, which they called a CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

Randolph of Virginia opened this convention by proposing that a strong Central Government be formed and that it be divided into three departments:° a Legislative, which should make laws, an Executive, which should carry out the laws, and a Judicial, which should settle all matters of legal dispute.

To this the Convention finally agreed; and the

825899

next question was, Who shall elect officers to these departments?

"The people should elect them," said some of the delegates.

"The people can never be trusted to elect important officers," said other delegates.

"Let us not have an excess of democracy," said Gerry cynically, one of the delegates from Massachusetts.

This question, after days of debate, was settled, however, largely in favor of the people, as we shall see when we come to study the Constitution itself.

It having been settled that the people should send their representatives to this National Congress for which the new Constitution was providing, the next question, was, "How many representatives shall each State send?

And now the debate ran high. The small States were afraid of the larger States, and the large States were inclined to domineer over the small States.

"A large State should have more representation," said they.

"We might as well be out of the Union if that is to be," said the small States.

"That is true," said the fair-minded statesmen; and still there seems no way to apportion representatives except according to population, one representative to a certain number of people.

Days were taken up debating this question, and one day a delegate from New Jersey rose to his feet and said that too much power was already given into the hands of the large States. "I move," said he,

"that we begin all over again, and that instead of making a new Constitution we be content to revise the Articles of Confederation. Indeed, that is what we were sent to do, not to frame a new Constitution."

The New Jersey delegate's plan was not accepted, and the debate went on. One delegate from Delaware became especially virulent. "Pretenses to support ambition," said he, "are not wanting in this convention. It is insisted that although the power of Central Government is to be increased, yet it will be for the good of the whole. We are told that although three large states form a majority of all the people in the thirteen, yet these three States will never do any harm to the rest of the States. Gentlemen, I do not believe you. If three States possess so great power, the abuse of that power could not be checked by any clause in the Constitution. Rather than be ruined by these States, there are foreign powers that will take us by the hand."

The situation was indeed becoming dangerous. There must be a union of all the States, or none at all. And here was a delegate threatening to withdraw from the convention rather than to accept the existing conditions. The convention was on the verge of dissolution. What could be done? It was at this point that Franklin turned the sentiment of the convention and saved the day by offering a compromise.

"When a carpenter wishes to make a table," said he, "and the boards are too broad, he cuts a little off both boards and so makes a perfect joint."

Franklin's kindly words had their effect upon the

convention, and it was moved that a committee be appointed to draft a compromise.

At the end of a long debate among themselves the committee reported that each State should have representatives in Congress, according to their population; but that in order that there should be some provision for equality of influence in both large and small States, each State, regardless of size, should have two senators. This, then, is how it happens that we have a Senate and a House of Representatives; that there are two senators for each State in the Senate; but that the representatives are in proportion to the population.

This compromise, when finally settled, proved to be a very good thing for the convention. A few hot-headed delegates went home declaring that they would have nothing to do with such high-handed proceedings. The small States as a whole were pleased with the arrangements for equal number of Senators, and all again went to work with a will to finish up the work of the convention.

TOPICS FOR CLASS RESEARCH

James Madison.

Why were France and America friendly?

Why had France lent troops to the colonists?

Why had Rhode Island no delegate at this Convention?
Washington's safe words.

Randolph.

The force of the Three Departments.

Gerry - his story in Massachusetts politics.

Appreciate the importance of this Compromise — look

ahead in the history of the country and see what sorrow came because of it.

WHAT THE CONSTITUTION TELLS US*

I THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT

As we read the Constitution, we come first upon The Preamble, as it is called. The Preamble states the objects for which the Constitution was made. These objects were as follows:

a "To form a more perfect union.
b "To insure domestic tranquillity."
c "To establish justice."

d "To provide for the common defense."
e. "To promote the general welfare."

f "To secure the blessings of liberty to our
selves and to our posterity."

As we read these six points, knowing what we do of the things that had happened and were happening in the country, we appreciate the meaning and the force of the statements which make up the Preamble. Can you not name some one event or group of events which might have been in the minds of the framers of the Constitution when they drew up this Preamble? Certainly there had been "suffering" enough during the recent war because of lack of "perfect union." Certainly there had been anything but "domestic *The pupils should compare this text with a copy of the Constitution. (See page 141.)