Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/595

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
1787.]
CORRESPONDENCE.
569

members returned, I was told by several persons, reduced the adoption of the plan in that state to absolute certainty, and by a greater majority than the most sanguine advocates had calculated. One of the counties, which had been set down by all on the list of opposition, had elected deputies of known attachment to the Constitution. I do not find that a single state is represented except Virginia, and it seems very uncertain when a Congress will be made. There are individual members present from several states; and the attendance of this and the neighboring states may, I suppose, be obtained, when it will produce a quorum.




TO EDMUND RANDOLPH.

New York, December 2, 1787.

[extract.]

Dear Sir,—No recent indications of the views of the states as to the Constitution have come to my knowledge. The elections in Connecticut are over, and, as far as the returns are known, a large majority are friendly to it Dr. Johnson says, it will be pretty certainly adopted; but there will be opposition. The power of taxing any thing but imports appears to be the most popular topic among the adversaries. The convention of Pennsylvania is sitting. The result there will not reach you first through my hands. The divisions on preparatory questions, as they are published in the newspapers, show that the party in favor of the Constitution have forty-four or forty-five versus twenty-two or twenty-four, or thereabouts.

The enclosed paper contains two numbers of the Federalist. This paper was begun about three weeks ago, and proposes to go through the subject. I have not been able to collect all the numbers, since my return from Philadelphia, or I would have sent them to you. I have been the less anxious, as I understand the printer means to make a pamphlet of them, when I can give them to you in a more convenient form. You will probably discover marks of different pens. I am not at liberty to give you any other key than that I am in myself for a few numbers, and that one besides myself was a member of the Convention.270




TO THOMAS JEFFERSON.

New York, December 20, 1787.

[extract.]

Dear Sir,—Since the date of my other letter, the convention of Delaware have unanimously adopted the new Constitution. That of Pennsylvania has adopted it by a majority of 46 against 23. That of New Jersey is sitting, and will adopt pretty unanimously. These are all the conventions that have met I hear, from North Carolina, that the Assembly there is well disposed.




TO GENERAL WASHINGTON.

New York, December 20, 1787.

[extract.]

Dear Sir,—I was favored on Saturday with your letter of the 7th instant, along with which was covered the printed letter of Col. R. H. Lee to the governor. [See p. 503, Vol. I Elliott's Debates.] It does not appear to me to be a very formidable attack on the new Constitution; unless it should derive an influence from the names of the correspondents, which its intrinsic merits do not entitle it to. He is certainly not perfectly accurate in the statement of all his facts; and I should infer, from the tenor of the objections in Virginia, that his plan of an executive would hardly be viewed as an amendment of that of the Convention. It is a little singular that three of the most distinguished advocates for amendments, and who expect to unite the thirteen states in their project, appear to be pointedly at variance with each other on


vol. v.72