II

Political Factions and Geographical Areas Represented in the Convention

THE several geographical areas, the political factions, and the economic interests represented in the Philadelphia Convention may be set forth and analyzed in three ways. The first is to scrutinize all the delegates elected—whether they served or declined to serve—in terms of the areas from which they came and the political factions with which they were identified in state affairs. The second is to examine the property holdings and means of gaining a livelihood of the fifty-five men who shared in the writing of the Constitution. The third is to look at their votes and conduct in the Convention itself to ascertain whether men of similar economic backgrounds tended to act together, and whether the members of given interest groups manifested the same measure of satisfaction with the finished product.

Each of these approaches throws light on the economic and political complexion of the Convention. Accordingly the analysis of the Convention which follows is divided into three chapters, each of which is devoted to one of the aspects named. The present chapter summarizes the political and geographical characteristics of the delegations selected to represent the several states in the Convention,¹ both those who served and those who declined to do so.

Delegates to the Convention were selected by the state legislatures as delegates-at-large—that is, a delegate represented his state as a whole rather than a particular part of it. But each state was made up of several areas—much as a city has its various neighborhoods—which were partly the result of topographic and other geographical variations and partly manifestations of historical, ethnic, social, and economic variations. In the 1780’s, before the advent of mechanically powered vehicles and significant turnpike roads, avenues of transportation, most often rivers, were the most important factor in determining these internal neighborhoods or areas in the various states. In speaking here of the geographical characteristics of delegations, it is these informal areas rather than formal political subdivisions of states that is meant.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

THE principal geographical areas in New Hampshire from which delegates could have been sent were four: 1) the Piscataqua River region; 2) the Merrimac River valley and the towns that traded with Newburyport by way of the Merrimac; 3) the Connecticut River valley; and 4) the semi-isolated northern half of the state. In the hills and mountains between these several areas were a large number of isolated towns.

State politics in New Hampshire involved two major factions and a number of minor factions. The major factions were 1) the Langdon faction, a state particularist group, based in Portsmouth and the Merrimac valley, and 2) the John Sullivan faction, a militant group of nationalizes with scattered bases, mainly in the Piscataqua region. Among the more important of the lesser factions were the former residents of the state of Connecticut, now living in the Connecticut valley of New Hampshire, who might be called the George Atkinson faction, and the Samuel Livermore faction, based in the semi-isolated northern half of the state.

Two delegates were elected to the Convention from New Hampshire who declined to attend: John Pickering of Portsmouth in the Piscataqua region, a member of the Langdon faction; and Benjamin West of Charleston in the Connecticut valley area, who belonged to the Sullivan faction.

The two delegates chosen to represent New Hampshire who did attend the Convention were John Langdon and Nicholas Gilman. Langdon, who lived in Portsmouth, was the head of the faction that bore his name. In the state he was a particularist and as a legislator he had voted for paper money and debtor relief.² He was, however, personally and through business connections associated with Robert Morris and ultra-nationalistic friends in Philadelphia and was inclined to vote with them in the Convention.

Gilman, a resident of Exeter, represented the Merrimac area. (Exeter is closer to Portsmouth, but it traded via the Merrimac with Newburyport.) He was independent politically; though friendly to Sullivan, he was somewhat localistic in his views.

The elected delegation, then, represented all three major nonisolated areas (two delegates were sent from the Piscataqua region) and both major political factions (two delegates were associated with the Langdon faction).

MASSACHUSETTS

MASSACHUSETTS was made up of nine major geographical areas: 1) Boston and its immediate environs; 2) the interior towns connected most directly with Boston by the Boston Post Road and tributary roads; 3) the Essex-Salem area; 4) the Newburyport-Merrimac area; 5) the District of Maine; 6) the Plymouth-Cape Cod area; 7) the towns surrounding Rhode Island in the south-eastern part of the state; 8) the Connecticut valley; and 9) the Berkshire Hills.

There were only two major political factions: the John Hancock, a faction of moderate state particularists, and the James Bowdoin, a strong nationalistic faction. Three smaller factions were allied with the Bowdoin faction—the Samuel Adams, Theodore Sedgwick, and Benjamin Lincoln factions. All the other subfactions were ordinarily allied with Hancock; the most important of these were the Benjamin Austin and Cushing factions.

Of the five delegates elected in Massachusetts one did not attend the Convention: Francis Dana of Cambridge, in the Boston Road area. Though an independent, Dana was personally friendly toward John Hancock.

The four delegates who did attend the Convention were Rufus King, Elbridge Gerry, Nathaniel Gorham, and Caleb Strong.

King had lived in and can be thought of as a representative of both Newburyport and Maine. Both areas and King personally leaned toward state particularism, and they supported the Hancock faction. King and the areas were not inflexible in their convictions, however.

Gerry, who resided in Marblehead in the Essex-Salem area, was a close personal and political friend of Samuel Adams. Gerry and the area in general were supporters of Bowdoin because of his vigorous action on state governmental problems. They were, however, moderately state particularistic in outlook.

Gorham, of Charleston in the Boston area, was also a Bowdoinite. The area, however, was divided in its loyalties, about sixty per cent of the inhabitants being supporters of Hancock. Paradoxically, the area was strongly nationalistic despite its support of Hancock.

Strong, of Northampton in the Connecticut valley, was an intimate of Theodore Sedgwick and a supporter of Bowdoin and was moderately nationalistic. The area, too, supported the Bowdoin faction and was, in the main, nationalistic.

The total elected delegation from Massachusetts, then, represented the Newburyport-Merrimac, the Essex-Salem, the Boston and Boston-interior, the Connecticut valley, and the Maine area. The major areas unrepresented were the Rhode Island area, the Plymouth-Cape Cod area, and the Berkshire Hills. Both major factions were represented, Hancock and his allies by two delegates, Bowdoin and his allies by three.

RHODE ISLAND

RHODE ISLAND refused to send official delegates to the Convention. A group of Providence merchants, however, were unofficially represented by James Varnum, who stayed in Philadelphia for the duration of the Convention, keeping his sponsors informed as best he could and acting as a sort of lobbyist for the Providence interests.

CONNECTICUT

CONNECTICUT was comprised of five main geographical regions: 1) the New Haven area; 2) the New London area; 3) the Connecticut valley; 4) the northeast interior area; and 5) the north-west interior area.

Politically the state was divided into two principal factions along the line of special economic interests: a continental creditors faction, headed by Jeremiah Wadsworth and a number of his friends, and a state creditors faction, headed by William Williams, Joseph Hopkins, and James Wadsworth.

One delegate elected in Connecticut, Erastus Wolcott of East Windsor in the Connecticut valley, a member of the continental creditors faction, declined to attend the Convention.

Three elected delegates attended the Convention: Roger Sherman, William Samuel Johnson, and Oliver Ellsworth.

Sherman, the mayor of New Haven, was loosely associated with the state creditors faction and was personally a creditor of the state. New Haven was a principal base of the state creditors faction.

Johnson, of Stratford in the New Haven area, was politically independent and inactive in state politics, but was personally a creditor of the state.

Ellsworth, who lived in Hartford in the Connecticut valley, was a continental creditor and an active partisan in the continental creditors faction.

The total elected Connecticut delegation comprised two delegates from the New Haven area and two from the Connecticut valley. The New London, northeast interior, and northwest interior areas were unrepresented in the Convention, but both major factions were represented.

NEW YORK

ONLY two sections of New York were as yet settled: the area around the City, including Long Island and Staten Island, and the Hudson valley, including fringe settlements north of Albany toward Lake Champlain and west of Albany on the Mohawk.

The two major political factions were the state particularistic George Clinton faction, which was supported by a great majority of the citizens of the state, and the nationalistic Philip Schuyler faction, which was little more than a group of aristocrats around which had gathered the small opposition to Clinton.

All three delegates elected from New York sat in the Convention, though none of them attended full time: Alexander Hamilton, Robert Yates, and John Lansing.

Hamilton, a resident of the City, was the son-in-law of Philip Schuyler and the most vocal leader of the Schuyler faction. As a state legislator he had voted for debtor-relief measures.³

Yates, of Albany in the Hudson valley, was an officeholder and political leader in the Clinton faction.

Lansing, the appointive mayor of Albany, was also a legislative leader in the Clinton faction; he had voted for debtor relief.⁴

Both major areas and both major factions were thus represented, the Hudson valley and the Clinton faction by two delegates, the City and the Schuyler faction by one delegate.

NEW JERSEY

NEW JERSEY’S topography divided the state into three parallel areas lying at a southwest-to-northeast angle across the state. Historically and economically, however, the line of division, cutting across topography, ran from southeast to northwest. The area northeast of that line corresponded to the colonial “East Jersey” patents and fell within the New York economic orbit; the area on the other side of the line corresponded to the colonial “West Jersey” patents and fell within the Philadelphia economic orbit. It is these two areas of East and West Jersey that must be considered in connection with regional representation in the Philadelphia Convention.

The two principal political factions in the state were an outgrowth of the east-west division, namely, the East Jersey and the West Jersey faction. Despite local differences on continental questions, both groups were essentially nationalistic in outlook.

Two delegates were chosen in New Jersey who declined to attend the Convention. Both were from East Jersey: Abraham Clark of Essex County, the most important of the leaders of the East Jersey faction, and John Neilson of New Brunswick, who was also politically active for that faction.

Five delegates were chosen who attended the Convention: David Brearley, William C. Houston, William Livingston, William Paterson, and Jonathan Dayton.

Brearley, who lived in Trenton in West Jersey, was chief justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court, and as such was not very active in politics on behalf of the West Jersey faction.

Houston, of Trenton, was an active West Jerseyite.

Livingston, of Elizabeth in East Jersey, was governor of the state and was politically a middle-of-the-road leader, popular with both factions.

Paterson, of New Brunswick in East Jersey, supported his faction only lukewarmly and was not very active politically.

Dayton, who also lived in New Brunswick, was active in politics and was a close disciple of Abraham Clark, the East Jersey leader. As a member of the state legislature Dayton had voted for a law staying executions on debts.⁵

The total elected delegation included five members from East Jersey and two from West Jersey. As originally constituted, however, before there were any resignations or additions, the delegation consisted of two members from each area. In terms of political factions, the total elected delegation consisted of four East Jerseyites, one independent, and two West Jerseyites.

PENNSYLVANIA

PENNSYLVANIA consisted of numerous geographical divisions, which for present purposes may be reduced to the four main areas which could have been represented in the Philadelphia Convention: 1) Philadelphia and the Liberties; 2) the interior counties, including those on the Delaware River, which fell within the Philadelphia economic orbit; 3) the Susquehanna valley; and 4) the western area.

There were two well-organized political parties in the state, the so-called Anti-Constitutionalist or Robert Morris party, and the Constitutionalist or anti-Morris party. The Morris group was probably the strongest group of nationalizers on the continent. The anti-Morris group was strongly state particularistic.

All delegates elected in Pennsylvania attended the Convention: Robert Morris, James Wilson, Gouverneur Morris, George Clymer, Thomas Fitzsimons, Thomas Mifflin, Benjamin Franklin, and Jared Ingersoll.

Morris, from Philadelphia, was the head of the Anti-Constitutionalist or Morris party.

Wilson, also of Philadelphia, was a leader in the Morris party and an intimate personal friend of Morris.

Gouverneur Morris was a New Yorker residing in Philadelphia at this time. He was a leader in the Morris party and an intimate personal friend of Robert Morris.

Clymer, of Philadelphia, was an active member of the Morris party, but less close to or dependent upon Morris than were Wilson and Gouverneur Morris.

Fitzsimons, also of Philadelphia, leaned toward the Morris party but was often independent of it; he was not of the Morris inner circle.

Mifflin, who lived outside the city in Philadelphia County, was an independent in politics who wavered between the Morris and the Constitutionalist party, leaning toward the latter.

Franklin, of Philadelphia, was an independent who leaned strongly toward the Constitutionalist party, of which he was often counted a member.

Ingersoll, also of Philadelphia, was a Constitutionalist.

Thus the delegation included seven representatives from Philadelphia and one from the area immediately adjacent to the city. The Susquehanna valley and the west were unrepresented. The Morris faction was represented by four delegates and two independent sympathizers with the faction; the Constitutionalist party was represented by two delegates, one of whom was an independent with Constitutionalist sympathies. For all practical purposes, however, the Constitutionalist party might have been unrepresented, for none of its leaders was present and it was greatly outnumbered by its opponents.

DELAWARE

DELAWARE consisted of three geographical areas: the relatively advanced area around the Brandywine and its tributaries, in northern New Castle County; the Nanticoke River area in the south-west corner of the state, together with the western fringe of the state, which were in every way except in political boundaries a part of Maryland’s Eastern Shore; and the remainder of the state, comprising the eastern portion of the state from the Brandywine area on the north to the Maryland border on the south, and unified by connections to the Delaware River and Delaware Bay.

There were no well-defined major political factions in the state, but many small political groups. Probably the most important of these were two opposing groups. One was a clique, based mainly in New Castle County and consisting chiefly of persons having Philadelphia connections, that had gathered around George Read and, to a lesser extent, John Dickinson. The other was an opposing group that had developed in lower Sussex County, at the center of which was the Mitchell family. The great majority of the population was connected only with small, shifting local cliques or family groups, or had no connections with any faction. Virtually all political groups in the state favored a stronger national union.

All the delegates chosen in Delaware attended the Philadelphia Convention: John Dickinson, George Read, Gunning Bedford, Jacob Broom, and Richard Bassett.

Dickinson lived outside Dover, but his closest connections were with New Castle County. He was a leader, though not a very active one, of the Dickinson-Read quasi-faction and was also intimately associated with and had been a leader of the Morris faction in Philadelphia.

Read, of the town and county of New Castle, was an active leader in the Dickinson-Read quasi-faction and he had occasional connections with the Morris faction in Philadelphia.

Gunning Bedford, Jr., of New Castle County, was unimportant politically and was not strongly attached to either of the two more important political groups.

Jacob Broom, of Kent County, was an independent in politics.

Bassett, a resident of Dover in Kent County, was an independent.

Thus the Delaware delegation consisted of three members from Kent County and two from New Castle County. The southwestern part of the state was not represented. Two delegates belonged to the Dickinson-Read group and three were independents. The Mitchell faction was unrepresented.

MARYLAND

THE principal geographical areas in Maryland were 1) the Eastern Shore; 2) the Susquehanna area; 3) the upper Western Shore (the Baltimore area); 4) the lower Western Shore; 5) the lower Potomac; and 6) the middle Potomac and western Maryland.

The four major factions in Maryland politics were the Charles Carroll faction, the Charles Ridgely faction (these two factions were closely allied in 1787), the Samuel Chase faction, and the Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer faction (the latter two factions were closely allied in 1787). There were several other small factions in the state, composed largely of family connections, but most of them were allied with one of the above-named factions. The Carroll faction was consistently nationalistic. The others vacillated; in 1787 only the opportunistic Chase faction was strongly state particularistic.

Five delegates elected in the state declined to attend the Philadelphia Convention: Charles Carroll of Carrollton, in the upper Western Shore area, was the head of the Carroll faction; Gabriel Duvall, of Prince George County in the lower Potomac area, supported the Ridgely faction; Thomas Sim Lee, of Frederick town in the middle Potomac and western Maryland area, was a member of the Carroll faction; Thomas Stone, of Charles County in the lower Potomac area, was a member of the Jenifer faction; and Robert Hanson Harrison, also of Charles County, was allied with the Carroll faction.

Five delegates elected in Maryland attended the Convention: James McHenry, Daniel Carroll, Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer, Luther Martin, and John Francis Mercer.

McHenry lived in Baltimore, in the upper Western Shore area. He was semi-independent in politics, but sympathized and was closely associated with Charles Ridgely and Charles Carroll.

Daniel Carroll, of Prince George County in the lower Potomac area, was a cousin of Charles Carroll and a member of the Carroll faction.

Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer lived in Charles County on the lower Potomac. He was the leader of his own faction and intendant of the revenues of Maryland, the state’s most important administrative office, and was allied politically with the Chase faction.

Luther Martin had residences and connections in Worcester County and Annapolis, in the Eastern Shore and lower Western Shore areas, respectively. He was the attorney-general of Maryland and an important figure in the Chase faction.

John Francis Mercer lived on the West River in Anne Arundel County, lower Western Shore, and was a member of the Chase faction.

The elected delegation included representatives from the Eastern Shore, upper Western Shore, lower Western Shore, lower Potomac, and middle Potomac and western Maryland areas. The Susquehanna area was not represented. All four major political factions were represented.

VIRGINIA

VIRGINIA embraced six areas east of the Blue Ridge Mountains: the 1) Potomac, 2) Rappahannock, 3) York, 4) Upper James, 5) Lower James, and 6) Roanoke river valleys (the latter area extended into the interior from the Roanoke River to form Virginia’s “Southside”); and three areas west of the Blue Ridge Mountains: 1) the Valley, 2) Trans-Alleghany, and 3) Kentucky.⁶

The political factions in the state were the Lee, Henry, Jefferson, and Randolph factions (the four of which controlled about seventy-five per cent of the voting power of the state and all of which were particularistic) and several independent factions.

Three delegates were chosen in Virginia who declined to attend the Philadelphia Convention: Patrick Henry of Prince Edward and Henry counties (the Roanoke area), the head of the Henry faction; Richard Henry Lee of Westmoreland County on the Potomac, the head of the Lee faction; and Thomas Nelson of Hanover on the York, the leader of an independent faction allied with the Jefferson faction.

Seven delegates from Virginia attended the Convention: George Washington, of Mount Vernon on the Potomac, who was connected with no faction in state politics but had a considerable personal following everywhere.

George Mason, of Fairfax County on the Potomac, leader of an independent faction.

James Madison, of Orange County on the Rappahannock, allied with the Jefferson faction, but often acting independently, who had nationalist sympathies.

James McClurg, of Williamsburg in the Lower James area, who was not active in state politics.

George Wythe, also of Williamsburg, member of the Jefferson faction.

John Blair, of York County on the York River, who had no factional connections and, as a judge, was inactive in politics.

Edmund Randolph, of Richmond in the Upper James area, leader of the Randolph faction.

The total elected delegation included three members from the Potomac area, two each from the York and Lower James areas, and one each from the Rappahannock, Upper James, and Roanoke-Southside areas. None of the three areas west of the Blue Ridge was represented. All four major factions and three independent factions were represented. Two delegates had no important political factional connections.

NORTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA was composed of six principal areas: 1) Albemarle Sound, including the navigable parts of the Chowan and Roanoke rivers (the upper tidewater); 2) Pamlico Sound, including the navigable parts of the Tar-Pamlico and Neuse rivers (the central tidewater); 3) the Cape Fear region (the lower tide-water); 4) the northeast piedmont, an extension of the Virginia Roanoke-Southside area; 5) the southwest piedmont; and 6) the area west of the mountains (most of which was Tennessee).

There were four principal political factions east of the mountains, those of Richard Caswell, Alexander Martin, Willie Jones, and Samuel Johnston, and a number of lesser factions. Most of the inhabitants of the western area were divided into two factions, one of which, led by John Tipton, opposed separate statehood, and the other, led by John Sevier, favored it.

Two delegates chosen in North Carolina, Richard Caswell and Willie Jones, declined to attend the Philadelphia Convention. Caswell, who lived in Lenoir County in the central tidewater area, was the head of the Caswell faction. Jones, who headed the Jones faction, had “home plantations” at both Halifax and Roanoke, and can be considered a representative of both the upper tide-water and the northeast piedmont.

Five delegates from North Carolina attended the Convention: William Blount, Alexander Martin, Hugh Williamson, Richard Dobbs Spaight, and William R. Davie.

Blount lived in Pitt County in the central tidewater area, but he had established important connections in Tennessee and was to move there shortly after the Convention; he may be considered at least a sympathetic representative of Tennessee. He had connections with the Caswell faction and with both Tennessee factions, but cannot be considered a “member” of either. As a state legislator he had voted for laws preventing the collection of debts due British merchants.⁷

Martin lived in Danbury, Stokes County, in the northeast piedmont. He headed the Martin faction, which was allied with the Caswell and Jones state particularist factions.

Williamson, of Edenton in the upper tidewater area, was an independent in politics.

Spaight, of New Bern in the central tidewater area, was not closely connected with any faction, but he was sympathetic with the Caswell and Jones factions.

Davie lived in Halifax, in the upper tidewater region at the foot of the northeast piedmont. He was associated with the Johnston faction, but only loosely. Like Blount, he had voted for laws preventing the collection of British debts.⁸

The total delegation elected in North Carolina thus included members from the upper tidewater, the central tidewater, north-east piedmont, and (in a limited way) the west. The lower tide-water and the southwest piedmont were not represented. All major factions in North Carolina proper were represented.

SOUTH CAROLINA

THE three general geographical areas in South Carolina were the low country, the middle country, and the up country.

The four major political factions in state politics, each corresponding to an economic interest group, were the low country-plantation aristocrats, the factors of foreign merchants (these two factions were allied in 1787), the middle country planters, and the South Carolina merchants (the latter two factions were allied in 1787). A fifth major element in the population, the up country planters and farmers, displayed little interest in state politics.

One delegate chosen in South Carolina declined to attend the Convention: Henry Laurens of Charleston and Mepkin, in the low country. A retired merchant and a member of the planter aristocracy, Laurens was no longer very active in state politics.

The four members from South Carolina who did attend the Convention were all recruited from the planter aristocracy: John Rutledge, Charles C. Pinckney, Charles Pinckney, and Pierce Butler.

Rutledge, who maintained residences in Charleston and at his low country plantation, was the head of the Rutledge subfaction, which headed the planter aristocracy.

C. C. Pinckney maintained residences in Charleston in the low country and in Orangeburg in the middle country, where his plantations were located. Pinckney ranked high in the aristocracy, but he had business connections with and was friendly to the merchants’ faction.

Charles Pinckney, who maintained residences in Charleston and at his middle country plantation in Orangeburg, headed a rising subfaction of the aristocracy which was soon to challenge and supplant the leadership of the Rutledge faction. He had close political connections with the middle country planters.

Butler maintained a residence in Charleston and one at his low country plantation. His political connections were with the planter aristocracy.

All four delegates who attended the Convention had supported paper money and debtor-relief laws.⁹

It is difficult to generalize about the South Carolina delegation. All five elected delegates were of the low country aristocracy, but the four delegates who attended the Convention also furnished partial representation to the middle country and the South Carolina merchants. Neither the factors nor the up country planters and farmers, however, were represented in any way.

GEORGIA

ONLY three general areas in Georgia had been settled by 1787: the Atlantic Coast-Savannah City area; the Savannah River valley; and Georgia’s “west,” an area extending west and northwest from Augusta for about eighty miles.

The important political factions in the state were the Mcintosh faction, the Walton faction, and a third faction which might be described as the Yankee or Georgia Newcomers faction.

Two of the six delegates chosen in Georgia declined to attend the Convention: George Walton of Augusta in the Savannah valley area, head of the Walton faction, and Nathaniel Pendleton of Glynn County in the Coast-City area, whose connections were with the Mcintosh faction.

The four delegates who did attend the Convention were William Houstoun, William Pierce, William Few, and Abraham Baldwin.

Houstoun, of Savannah, was associated with the Mcintosh faction.

Pierce, also of Savannah, was associated with the Walton faction, although he was personally friendly with Lachlan Mcintosh. Pierce had voted for paper money in the state legislature.¹⁰

William Few, of Augusta in the Savannah valley area, was a leader in the Yankee or Georgia Newcomers faction.

Baldwin, of Wilkes County in the west-piedmont area, was also a leader in that faction. He and Few had both supported a general debtor relief law that was introduced in the state legislature early in 1785.¹¹

The total elected Georgia delegation thus included members from all three major areas and all three major factions.

To summarize, the delegations elected to the Philadelphia Convention included members from thirty-nine of the fifty-five major geographical areas in twelve states; Rhode Island sent no delegates. Four of the sixteen unrepresented areas were in the immediate vicinity of Rhode Island, in Massachusetts and Connecticut. The six major areas in the mountain and transmontane regions of Pennsylvania, Virginia, and South Carolina, and the Berkshire areas in Massachusetts and Connecticut were likewise unrepresented. With these exceptions, delegates were elected from virtually every major geographical area in the United States.

Politically, thirty-one of the thirty-four major factions in twelve states were represented by delegates. Thirteen, or about a fourth, of the delegates who actually attended the Convention had supported and voted for debtor-relief measures in their respective legislatures. This was approximately half the delegates who had served in the legislatures since the end of the war and who consequently had had an opportunity to help pass or defeat such measures. Careful examination of the journals of the several legislatures reveals that only three delegates, all of them from Delaware (Jacob Broom, George Read, and Richard Bassett), had consistently voted against such laws in their state legislatures.

Together, then, the delegations constituted an almost complete cross-section of the geographical areas and shades of political opinion existing in the United States in 1787. In a clear majority, however, were the advocates of a stronger union than that existing under the Articles of Confederation, as the first vote taken in the Convention was to demonstrate. Only one state’s delegation, that of New York, was clearly dominated by members of a state particularist faction, though the delegations from North Carolina and Virginia included strong state particularist elements, as did that of Maryland. The dominant state particularist faction in Rhode Island refused to send delegates.

NOTES

¹ In this section on the areas and factions represented in the Convention, no documentation will be offered except for specific votes cited. The affiliations of the delegates and the areas they represented are derived from a multitude of sources, all of which are cited in the more individualized sketches in Chapter 3. The analysis of the areas and factions that existed in the several states is drawn from an even greater variety of sources. This analysis is elaborated and thoroughly documented in Chapters 5, 6, and 7.

² “Journal of the House of Representatives,” September 14, December 25, 1786, in Albert Stillman Batchellor, ed., Early State Papers of New Hampshire, 20:696, 759 (Manchester, 1891),

³ Two debtor-relief bills came before the legislature while Hamilton was a member: a measure staying executions on debts owed British merchants and a measure virtually abolishing imprisonment for debts. Hamilton voted for both. Votes and Proceedings of the Assembly of the State of New York, January, 1787, Session (New York, 1787), March 8, 14, 1787.

⁴ Lansing voted for the stay law on March 14, 1787. Ibid.

⁵ Votes and Proceedings of the General Assembly of the State of New Jersey, 12th Assembly, 1st Session (Trenton, 1786), October 31, 1786,

⁶ The terms “Lower James” and “Upper James” as used here refer respectively to the upper and lower forks of the river. This was the eighteenth-century usage. Trans-Alleghany was what became West Virginia.

⁷ Digest of the proceedings of the House of Commons of North Carolina, printed in the Maryland Journal and Baltimore Advertiser, August 6, 1784.

⁸ lbid.

⁹ See the analysis of individual economic interests in Chapter 3 and the discussion of South Carolina in Chapter 6.

¹⁰ Journal of the General Assembly of the State of Georgia, August 10, 1786, MS in the Georgia Department of Archives and History, Atlanta.

¹¹ Ibid., February 9, 1785.