The 1787 Constitutional Convention – More Legislative Fine Tuning

August 11, 1787 (click the link to read Madison’s notes)

Summary

The delegates spent this day fine tuning details of the working of Congress. They took up the recording of sessions and votes and adjournment and finish by promising to revisit the pesky issue of where to locate money bills (i.e., the House, Senate, both).

Influences on the Delegates

Edmund Randolph moved to reconsider the issue of the source of legislation relating to money using Britain as a positive example.

 Mr. RANDOLPH moved, according to notice, to reconsider Article 4, Sect. 5, concerning money bills, which had been struck out. He argued, — first, that he had not wished for this privilege, whilst a proportional representation in the Senate was in contemplation: but since an equality had been fixed in that House, the large States would require this compensation at least. Secondly, that it would make the plan more acceptable to the people, because they will consider the Senate as the more aristocratic body, and will expect that the usual guards against its influence will be provided, according to the example of Great Britain. Thirdly, the privilege will give some advantage to the House of Representatives, if it extends to the originating only; but still more, if it restrains the Senate from amending. Fourthly he called on the smaller States to concur in the measure, as the condition by which alone the compromise had entitled them to an equality in the Senate. He signified that he should propose, instead of the original section, a clause specifying that the bills in question should be for the purpose of revenue, in order to repel the objection against the extent of the words, “raising money,” which might happen incidentally; and that the Senate should not so amend or alter as to increase or diminish the sum; in order to obviate the inconveniences urged against a restriction of the Senate to a simple affirmation or negative.

1787 Constitutional Convention Series

To read my series examining the proceedings of the Constitution Convention, click here.  In this series, I am writing about any obvious influences on the development of the Constitution which were mentioned by the delegates to the Convention. Specifically, I am testing David Barton’s claim that “every clause” of the Constitution is based on biblical principles. Thus far, I have found nothing supporting the claim. However, stay tuned, the series will run until mid-September.

Constitutional Convention Series (click the link)

To follow on social media, click the following links:

Facebook (blog posts and news)

Facebook (Getting Jefferson Right – history news)

Twitter

 

"Well actually, the existence of broad scientific consensuses in many areas shows that data from ..."

Wishful Thinking, Forced Intimacy, and The ..."
"Unless I am mistaken..Please consider for a moment that you are. You are describing the ..."

Wishful Thinking, Forced Intimacy, and The ..."
"I have no problem with deductive reasoning. I have a problem when one form of ..."

Wishful Thinking, Forced Intimacy, and The ..."
"No, they’re not the majority. Neither are the indigenous homosexual population the majority. Since both ..."

Wishful Thinking, Forced Intimacy, and The ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment