Article

July 10, 1787: A New Division

George Washington wearing a black coat with his right arm outstreched.
George Washington by Gilbert Stuart, 1796.

National Portrait Gallery

"The Men who oppose a strong & energetic government are, in my opinion, narrow minded politicians."

--George Washington (VA) letter to Alexander Hamilton

Tuesday, July 10, 1787: The Convention Today

The delegates continued their discussion of representation in the first house focusing on the number of representatives in congress that would be elected from each state. The Committee of Eleven, appointed the previous day, recommended increasing the number of representatives from 56 to 65.

Rutledge (SC) and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney (SC) proposed cutting New Hampshire from three to two representatives. King (MA) disagreed, noting that New Hampshire's population was growing rapidly and that the four New England states had a larger total population than the four southernmost states (assuming only three fifths of the enslaved population were counted), and yet the southern states had a third more representatives. While delegates throughout the Convention had so far focused on the different interests of large and small states, King said that the real divide was between northern and southern states. Gouverneur Morris (PA) agreed with King.

C.C. Pinckney said that the southern states wanted equality of representation with northern states, or close to it, since they didn't trust a national government to manage the economy if Congress was controlled by northern politicians.

Williamson (NC) didn't want to reduce New Hampshire's representation, but he did want to reduce that of other states in the north.

Randolph (VA) supported New Hampshire, but further argued that commercial regulations passed by Congress should require more than a majority vote.

A vote was taken for reducing New Hampshire's representatives. It failed, 8–2, supported only by the Carolinas.

C.C. Pinckney and Alexander Martin (NC) moved for North Carolina to get six representatives instead of five. This failed, 7–3, with the Carolinas and Georgia in support.

C.C. Pinckney and Houston (GA) moved for Georgia to get four representatives instead of three. This failed 7–4, with only the support of the southern states.

Madison (VA), Gerry (MA), Mason (VA), and Read (DE) argued for more than 65 representatives, saying that this would reduce corruption and make representation more effective. Ellsworth (CT), Sherman (CT), and Rutledge disagreed, arguing that having more representatives would make it harder to pass legislation. A motion to double the first house failed, 9–2.

The Convention then agreed, 9–2 (South Carolina and Georgia opposed), to support the Committee of Eleven's apportionment of 65 representatives to the states.

Randolph proposed that Congress be required to do a periodic census and then reallocate representation accordingly. G. Morris disagreed. He worried that new states created west of the Atlantic coast might one day be so populous as to have more representatives than the original thirteen states and he wanted the original states to have the power to maintain a permanent majority in the House. The motion was postponed.

Yates and Lansing, the only remaining delegates from New York, left the proceedings, dismayed by the movement to centralize power and fearful that the Convention was overstepping its authority.
Synopsis
  • The Committee of Eleven proposed that the House of Representatives would initially have 65 members.
  • Southern delegates tried to reduce the number of representatives New Hampshire would get in the first Congress and to increase the number of representatives for the Carolinas and Georgia. These motions failed.
  • Delegates argued over whether the House should have more than 65 members, but ultimately voted to stick with that number.
  • New York's last delegates abandoned the Convention.
Delegates Today
  • Washington dined with his host Rober Morris (PA), then attended a play, James Townley's High Life Below the Stairs, at the Southwark Opera House just south of the city limits.
Philadelphia Today
  • The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania summoned two Quakers to serve as jurors. Because their faith prohibited taking oaths, the men disqualified themselves from service. The chief justice refused to accept their position and fined them 61 pounds each and sent them to jail until they paid the penalty. The two Quakers challenged the decision with a writ of habeas corpus, questioning whether the judge had the authority to impose the fine and commit them to jail for non-payment.

Part of a series of articles titled The Constitutional Convention: A Day by Day Account for July 1 to 15, 1787.

Independence National Historical Park

Last updated: September 21, 2023