ⅭⅭⅩⅬⅣ. Abraham Baldwin in the House of Representatives.[1]
I am well authorized to say, that the mingling the powers of the President and Senate was strongly opposed in the convention which had the honor to submit to the consideration of the United States, and the different States, the present system for the Government of the Union. Some gentlemen opposed it to the last; and finally, it was the principal ground on which they refused to give it their signature and assent. One gentleman called it a monstrous and unnatural connexion, and did not hesitate to affirm it would bring on convulsions in the Government.
ⅭⅭⅩⅬⅤ. Sherman to John Adams.[2]
Wherever the chief magistrate may appoint to office without control, his government may become absolute, or at least aggressive; therefore the concurrence of the senate is made requisite by our constitution.
ⅭⅭⅩⅬⅥ. Roger Sherman in the House of Representatives.[3]
August 14. 1789.
Mr. Sherman said, if they were now forming a constitution, he should be in favor of one representative for forty thousand, rather than thirty thousand. The proportion by which the several States are now represented in this House was founded on the former calculation. In the convention that framed the constitution, there was a majority in favor of forty thousand, and though there were some in favor of thirty thousand, yet that proposition did not obtain until after the constitution was agreed to, when the President had expressed a wish that thirty thousand should be inserted, as more favorable to the public interest; during the contest between thirty and forty thousand, he believed there were not more than nine States who voted in favor of the former.
ⅭⅭⅩⅬⅦ. James Madison to Edmund Randolph.[4]
I find in looking over the notes of your introductory discourse in the Convention at Philada that it is not possible for me to do
