by James Madison
1787


PREFACE TO DEBATES IN THE CONVENTION [1]

A Sketch Never Finished nor Applied [2]

As the weakness and wants of man naturally lead to an association of
individuals, under a common authority whereby each may have the protection of
the whole against danger from without, and enjoy in safety within, the
advantages of social intercourse, and an exchange of the necessaries & comforts
of life: in like manner feeble communities, independent of each other, have
resorted to a Union, less intimate, but with common Councils, for the common
safety agst powerful neighbors, and for the preservation of justice and peace
among themselves. Ancient history furnishes examples of these confederal [3]
associations, tho' with a very imperfect account, of their structure, and of the
attributes and functions of the presiding Authority. There are examples of
modern date also, some of them still existing, the modifications and
transactions of which are sufficiently known.

It remained for the British Colonies, now United States, of North America, to
add to those examples, one of a more interesting character than any of them:
which led to a system without a [4] example ancient or modern, a system founded
on popular rights, and so combing, a federal form with the forms of individual
Republics, as may enable each to supply the defects of the other and obtain the
advantages of both. [5]

Whilst the Colonies enjoyed the protection of the parent Country as it was
called, against foreign danger; and were secured by its superintending controul,
against conflicts among themselves, they continued independent of each other,
under a common, tho' limited dependence, on the parental Authority. When however
the growth of the offspring in strength and in wealth, awakened the jealousy and
tempted the avidity of the parent, into schemes of usurpation & exaction, the
obligation was felt by the former of uniting their counsels and efforts to avert
the impending calamity.

As early as the year 1754, indications having been given of a design in the
British Government to levy contributions on the Colonies, without their consent;
a meeting of Colonial deputies took place at Albany, which attempted to
introduce a compromising substitute, that might at once satisfy the British
requisitions, and save their own rights from violation. The attempt had no other
effect, than by bringing these rights into a more conspicuous view, to
invigorate the attachment to them, on [6] one side; and to nourish the haughty &
encroaching spirit on the other.

In 1774. The progress made by G. B. in the open assertion of her pretensions and
in [7] the apprehended purpose of otherwise maintaining them than by Legislative
enactments and declarations, had been such that the Colonies did not hesitate to
assemble, by their deputies, in a formal Congress, authorized to oppose to the
British innovations whatever measures might be found best adapted to the
occasion; without however losing sight of an eventual reconciliation.
The dissuasive measures of that Congress, being without effect, another Congress
was held in 1775, whose pacific efforts to bring about a change in the views of
the other party, being equally unavailing, and the commencement of actual
hostilities having at length put an end to all hope of reconciliation; the
Congress finding moreover that the popular voice began to call for an entire &
perpetual dissolution of the political ties which had connected them with G. B.,
proceeded on the memorable 4th of July, 1776 to declare the 13 Colonies,
Independent States. [8]

During the discussions of this solemn Act, a Committee consisting of a member
from each colony had been appointed to prepare & digest a form of Confederation,
for the future management of the common interests, which had hitherto been left
to the discretion of Congress, guided by the exigences of the contest, and by
the known intentions or occasional instructions of the Colonial Legislatures.
It appears that as early as the 21st of July 1775, A plan entitled "Articles of
Confederation & perpetual Union of the Colonies" had been sketched by Docr
Franklin, the plan being on that day submitted by him to Congress; and tho' not
copied into their Journals remaining on their files in his handwriting. But
notwithstanding the term "perpetual" observed in the title, the articles
provided expressly for the event of a return of the Colonies to a connection
with G. Britain.

This sketch became a basis for the plan reported by the Come on the 12 of July,
now also remaining on the files of Congress, in the handwriting of Mr Dickinson.
The plan, tho' dated after the Declaration of Independence, was probably drawn
up before that event; since the name of Colonies, not States is used throughout
the draught. The plan reported, was debated and amended from time to time, till
the 17th of November 1777, when it was agreed to by Congress, and proposed to
the Legislatures of the States, with an explanatory and recommendatory letter.
The ratifications of these by their Delegates in Congs duly authorized took
place at successive dates; but were not compleated till March 1. [9] 1781, when
Maryland who had made it a prerequisite that the vacant lands acquired from the
British Crown should be a Common fund, yielded to the persuasion that a final &
formal establishment of the federal Union & Govt would make a favorable
impression not only on other foreign Nations, but on G. B. herself.

The great difficulty experienced in so framing the fedl system as to obtain the
unanimity required for its due sanction, may be inferred from the long interval,
and recurring discussions, between the commencement and completion of the work;
from the changes made during its progress; from the language of Congs when
proposing it to the States, wch dwelt on the impracticability of devising a
system acceptable to all of them; from the reluctant assent given by some; and
the various alterations proposed by others; and by a tardiness in others again
which produced a special address to them from Congs enforcing the duty of
sacrificing local considerations and favorite opinions to to [68] the public
safety, and the necessary harmony: Nor was the assent of some of the States
finally yielded without strong protests against particular articles, and a
reliance on future amendments removing their objections.

It is to be recollected, no doubt, that these delays might be occasioned in some
degree, by an occupation of the public Councils both general & local, with the
deliberations and measures, essential to a Revolutionary struggle; But there
must have been a balance for these causes, in the obvious motives to hasten the
establishment of a regular and efficient Govt; and in the tendency of the crisis
to repress opinions and pretensions, which might be inflexible in another state
of things.

The principal difficulties which embarrassed the progress, and retarded the
completion of the plan of Confederation, may be traced to 1. [10] the natural
repugnance of the parties to a relinquishment of power: 2 [10] a natural
jealousy of its abuse in other hands than their own: 3 [10] the rule of suffrage
among parties unequal in size, but equal in sovereignty. 4 the ratio of
contributions in money and in troops, among parties, [11] whose inequality in
size did not correspond with that of their wealth, or of their military or free
population. 5 [12] the selection and definition of the powers, at once necessary
to the federal head, and safe to the several members.

To these sources of difficulty, incident to the formation of all such
Confederacies, were added two others one of a temporary, the other of a
permanent nature. The first was the case of the Crown lands, so called because
they had been held by the British Crown, and being ungranted to individuals when
its authority ceased, were considered by the States within whose charters or
asserted limits they lay, as devolving on them; whilst it was contended by the
others, that being wrested from the dethroned authority, by the equal exertion
of all, they resulted of right and in equity to the benefit of all. The lands
being of vast extent and of growing value, were the occasion of much discussion
& heart-burning; & proved the most obstinate of the impediments to an earlier
consummation of the plan of federal Govt. The State of Maryland the last that
acceded to it held out as already noticed, till March 1, [13] 1781, and then
yielded only to the hope that by giving a stable & authoritative character to
the Confederation, a successful termination of the Contest might be accelerated.
The dispute was happily compromised by successive surrenders of portions of the
territory by the States having exclusive claims to it, and acceptances of them
by Congress.

The other source of dissatisfaction was the peculiar situation of some of the
States, which having no convenient ports for foreign commerce, were subject to
be taxed by their neighbors, thro whose ports, their commerce was carryed on.
New Jersey, placed between Phila & N. York, was likened to a cask tapped at both
ends; and N. Carolina, between Virga & S. Carolina to a patient bleeding at both
arms. The Articles Of Confederation provided no remedy for the complaint: which
produced a strong protest on the part of N. Jersey: and never ceased to be a
source of dissatisfaction & discord until the new Constitution, superseded the
old.

But the radical infirmity of the "arts Of Confederation" was the dependence of
Congs on the voluntary and simultaneous compliance with its Requisitions, by so
many independant Communities, each consulting more or less its particular
interests & convenience and distrusting the compliance of the others. Whilst the
paper emissions of Congs continued to circulate they were employed as a sinew of
war, like gold & silver. When that ceased to be the case, the fatal defect of
the political System was felt in its alarming force. The war was merely kept
alive and brought to a successful conclusion by such foreign aids and temporary
expedients as could be applied; a hope prevailing with many, and a wish with
all, that a state of peace, and the sources of prosperity opened by it, would
give to the Confederacy in practice, the efficiency which had been inferred from
its theory.

The close of the war however brought no cure for the public embarrassments. The
States relieved from the pressure of foreign danger, and flushed with the
enjoyment of independent and sovereign power; [instead of a diminished
disposition to part with it,] persevered in omissions and in measures
incompatible with thier relations to the Federal Govt and with those among
themselves;

Having served as a member of Cons through the period between Mar. 1780 & the
arrival of peace in 1783, I had become intimately acquainted with the public
distresses and the causes of them. I had observed the successful opposition to
every attempt to procure a remedy by new grants of power to Congs. I had found
moreover that despair of success hung over the compromising provision [14] of
April 1783 for the public necessities which had been so elaborately planned, and
so impressively recommended to the States.[*] Sympathizing, under this aspect of
affairs, in the alarm of the friends of free Govt, at the threatened danger of
an abortive result to the great & perhaps last experiment in its favour, I could
not be insensible to the obligation to co-operate [16] as far as I could in
averting the calamity. With this view I acceded to the desire of my fellow
Citizens of the County that I should be one of its representatives in the
Legislature, hoping that I might there best contribute to inculcate the critical
posture to which the Revolutionary cause was reduced, and the merit of a leading
agency of the State in bringing about a rescue of the Union and the blessings of
liberty a [17] staked on it, from an impending catastrophe.

It required but little time after taking my seat in the House of Delegates in
May 1784 to discover that, however favorable the general disposition of the
State might be towards the Confederacy the Legislature retained the aversion of
its predecessors to transfers of power from the State to the Govt of the Union;
notwithstanding the urgent demands of the Federal Treasury; the glaring
inadequacy of the authorized mode of supplying it, the rapid growth of anarchy
in the Fedl System, and the animosity kindled among the States by their
conflicting regulations.

The temper of the Legislature & the wayward course of its proceedings may be
gathered from the Journals of its Sessions in the years 1784 & 1785.
The failure however of the varied propositions in the Legislature for enlarging
the powers of Congress, the continued failure of the efforts of Cons to obtain
from them the means of providing for the debts of the Revolution; and of
countervailing the commercial laws of G.B., a source of much irritation & agst
which the separate efforts of the States were found worse than abortive; these
Considerations with the lights thrown on the whole subject, by the free & full
discussion it had undergone led to an [18] general acquiescence in the Resoln
passed, on the 21. of Jany 1786, which proposed & invited a meeting of Deputies
from all the States to "insert the Resol (See Journal.) I [19]

The resolution had been brought forward some weeks before on the failure of a
proposed grant of power to Congress to collect a revenue from commerce, which
had been abandoned by its friends in consequence of material alterations made in
the grant by a Committee of the whole. The Resolution tho introduced by Mr Tyler
an influencial member, who having never served in Congress, had more the ear of
the House than those whose services there exposed them to an imputable bias, was
so little acceptable that it was not then persisted in. Being now revived by
him, on the last day of the Session, and being the alternative of adjourning
without any effort for the crisis in the affairs of the Union, it obtained a
general vote; less however with some of its friends from a confidence in the
success of the experiment than from a hope that it might prove a step to a more
comprehensive & adequate provision for the wants of the Confederacy.
It happened also that Commissioners who had been [20] appointed by Virga & Maryd
to settle the jurisdiction on waters dividing the two States had, apart from
their official reports recommended a uniformity in the regulations of the 2
States on several subjects & particularly on those having relation to foreign
trade. It apeared at the same time that Maryd had deemed a concurrence of her
neighbors Pena & Delaware indispensable in such a case, who for like reasons
would require that of their neighbors. So apt and forceable an illustration of
the necessity of a uniformity throughout all the States could not but favour the
passage of a Resolution which proposed a Convention having that for its object.
The commissioners appointed by the Legisl: & who attended the Convention were E.
Randolph the Attorney of the State, St. Geo: Tucker & J. M. [21] The designation
of the time & place for its meeting to be proposed and communicated to the
States having been left to the Comrs they named for the time early [22]
September and for the place the City of Annapolis avoiding the residence of
Congs and large Commercial Cities as liable to suspicions of an extraneous
influence.

Altho the invited Meeting appeared to be generally favored, five States only
assembled; some failing to make appointments, and some of the individuals
appointed not hastening their attendance, the result in both cases being
ascribed mainly, to a belief that the time had not arrived for such a political
reform, as might be expected from a further experience of its necessity.
But in the interval between the proposal of the Convention and the time of its
meeting, such had been the advance of public opinion in the desired direction,
stimulated as it had been by the effect of the contemplated object, of the
meeting, in turning the genal attention to the Critical State of things, and in
calling forth the sentiments and exertions of the most enlightened & influencial
patriots, that the Convention thin as it was did not scruple to decline the
limited task assigned to it and to recommend to the States a Convention with
powers adequate to the occasion. Nor was it [23] unnoticed that the commission
of the N. Jersey Deputation, had extended its object to a general provision for
the exigencies of the Union. A recommendation for this enlarged purpose was
accordingly reported by a Come to whom the subject had been referred. It was
drafted by Col H. [24] and finally agreed to unanimously [25] in the following
form. Insert it. [26]

The recommendation was well recd by the Legislature of Virga which happened to
be the first that acted on it, and the example of her compliance was made as
conciliatory and impressive as possible. The Legislature were unanimous or very
nearly so on the occasion and [27] as a proof of the magnitude & solemnity
attached to it, they placed Genl W. at the head of the Deputation from the
State; and as a proof of the deep interest he felt in the case he overstepped
the obstacles to his acceptance of the appointment.

The law complying with the recommendation from Annapolis was in the terms
following: [28]

A resort to a General Convention to remodel the Confederacy, was not a new idea.
It had entered at an early date into the conversations and speculations of the
most reflecting & foreseeing observers of the inadequacy of the powers allowed
to Congress. In a pamphlet published in May 81 at the seat of Congs Pelatiah
Webster an able tho' not conspicuous Citizen, after discussing the fiscal system
of the U. States, and suggesting among other remedial provisions [29] including
a national Bank remarks that "the Authority of Congs at present is very
inadequate to the performance of their duties; and this indicates the necessity
of their calling a Continental Convention for the express purpose of
ascertaining, defining, enlarging, and limiting, the duties & powers of their
Constitution," [30]

On the 1. day of Apl 1783, Col. Hamilton, in a debate in Congs observed that
[31]

He alluded probably to [see Life of Schuyler in Longacre. [32]

It does not appear however that his expectation had been fulfilled.]

In a letter to J. M. from R. H. Lee then President of Congs dated Novr 26, 1784

He says [33]

The answer of J. M. remarks [34]

[35] In 1785, Noah Webster whose pol. & other valuable writings had made him
known to the public, in one of his publications of American policy brought into
view the same resort for supplying the defects of the Fedl System [see his life
in Longacre].

The proposed & expected Convention at Annapolis the first of a general character
that appears to have been realized, & the state of the public mind awakened by
it had attracted the particular attention of Congs and favored the idea there of
a Convention with fuller powers for amending the Confederacy. [36]
It does not appear that in any of these cases, the reformed system was to be
otherwise sanctioned than by the Legislative authy of the States; nor whether or
how far, a change was to be made in the structure of the Depository of Federal
powers.

The act of Virga providing for the Convention at Philada, was succeeded by
appointments from [37] other States as their Legislatures were assembled, the
appointments being selections from the most experienced & highest standing
Citizens. Rh. I. was the only exception to a compliance with the recommendation
from Annapolis, well known to have been swayed by an obdurate adherence to an
advantage which her position gave her of taxing her neighbors thro' their
consumption of imported supplies, an advantage which it was foreseen would be
taken from her by a revisal of the "Articles of Confederation.

As the pub. mind had been ripened for a salutary Reform of the pol. System, in
the interval between the proposal & the meeting, of Comrs at Annapolis, the
interval between the last event, and the meeting of Deps at Phila had continued
to develop more & more the necessity & the extent of a Systematic provision for
the preservation and Govt of the Union; among the ripening incidents was the
Insurrection of Shays, [38] in Massts against her Govt; which was with
difficulty suppressed, notwithstanding the influence on the insurgents of an
apprehended interposition of the Fedl troops.

At the date of the Convention, the aspect & retrospect of the pol: condition of
the U.S. could not but fill the pub. mind with a gloom which was relieved only
by a hope that so select a Body would devise an adequate remedy for the existing
and prospective evils so impressively demanding it.

It was seen that the public debt rendered so sacred by the cause in which it had
been incurred remained without any provision for its payment. The reiterated and
elaborate efforts of Con. to procure from the States a more adequate power to
raise the means of payment had failed. The effect of the ordinary requisitions
of Congress had only displayed the inefficiency [39] of the authy making them:
none of the States having duly complied with them, some having failed altogether
or nearly so; and [40] in one instance, that of N. Jersey [41] a compliance was
expressly [42] refused; nor was more yielded to the expostulations of members of
Congs deputed to her Legislature, than a mere repeal of the law, without a
compliance. [see letter of Grayson to J. M. [43]

The want of authy in Congs to regulate Commerce had produced in Foreign nations
particularly G. B. a monopolizing policy injurious to the trade of the U. S. and
destructive to their navigation; the imbecilicity and anticipated dissolution of
the Confederacy extinguishg all apprehensions of a Countervailing policy on the
part of the U. States.

The same want of a general power over Commerce, led to an exercise of the power
separately, by the States, wch not only proved abortive, but engendered rival,
conflicting and angry regulations. Besides the vain attempts to supply their
respective treasuries by imposts, which turned their commerce into the
neighbouring ports, and to coerce a relaxation of the British monopoly of the W.
Inds navigation, which was attempted by Virga [see the Journal of ] [44] the
States having ports for foreign commerce, taxed & irritated the adjoining
States, trading thro' them, as N. Y. Pena Virga & S. Carolina. Some of the
States, as Connecticut, taxed imports [45] as from Massts higher than imports
even from G. B. of wch Massts complained to Virga and doubtless to other States.
[See letter of J. M. [46] In sundry instances as of N. Y. N. J. Pa & Maryd [see
] [47] the navigation laws treated the Citizens [48] other States as aliens.
In certain cases the authy of the Confederacy was disregarded, as in violations
not only of the Treaty of peace; but of Treaties with France & Holland, which
were complained of to Congs.

In other cases the Fedl Authy was violated by Treaties & wars with Indians, as
by Geo: by troops raised & kept up witht the consent of Congs as by Massts by
compacts witht the consent of Congs as between Pena and N. Jersey, and between
Virga & Maryd. From the Legisl: Journals of Virga it appears, that a vote
refusing to apply for a sanction of Congs was followed by a vote agst the
communication of the Compact to Congs.

In the internal administration of the States a violation of Contracts had become
familiar in the form of depreciated paper made a legal tender, of property
substituted for money, of Instalment laws, and of the occlusions of the Courts
of Justice; although evident that all such interferences affected the rights of
other States, relatively creditor, [49] as well as Citizens Creditors within the
State.

Among the defects which had been severely felt was that of a uniformity in cases
requiring it, as laws of naturalization, [50] bankruptcy, a Coercive authority
operating on individuals and a guaranty of the internal tranquillity of the
States.

As natural consequences [51] of this distracted and disheartening condition of
the union, the Fedl Authy had ceased to be respected abroad, and dispositions
[52] shown there, particularly in G. B., to take advantage of its imbecility,
and to speculate on its approaching downfall; at home it had lost all confidence
& credit; the unstable and unjust career of the States had also forfeited the
respect & confidence essential to order and good Govt, involving the general
decay and confidence & credit between man & man. It was found moreover, that
those least partial to popular Govt, or most distrustful of its efficacy were
yielding to anticipations, that from an increase of the confusion a Govt might
result more congenial with their taste or their opinions; whilst those most
devoted to the principles and forms of Republics, were alarmed for the cause of
liberty itself, at stake in the American Experiment, and anxious for a system
that wd avoid the inefficacy of a mere confederacy without passing into the
opposite extreme of a consolidated govt it was known that there were individuals
who had betrayed a bias toward Monarchy [see Knox to G W & him to Jay]
(Marshall's life [53] ) and there had always been some not unfavorable to a
partition of the Union into several Confederacies; either from a better chance
of figuring on a Sectional Theatre, or that the Sections would require stronger
Govts, or by their hostile conflicts lead to a monarchical consolidation. The
idea of a [54] dismemberment had recently made its appearance in the Newspapers.
Such were the defects, the deformities, the diseases and the ominous prospects,
for which the Convention were to provide a remedy, and which ought never to be
overlooked in expounding & appreciating the Constitutional Charter the remedy
that was provided.

As a sketch on paper, the earliest perhaps of a Constitutional Govt for the
Union [organized into the regular Departments with physical means operating on
individuals] to be sanctioned by the people of the States, acting in their
original & sovereign character, was contained in [55] a letter of Apl. 8. 1787
from J. M. to Govr Randolph, a copy of the letter is here inserted.

The feature in the letter [56] which vested in the general Authy. a negative on
the laws of the States, was suggested by the negative in the head of the British
Empire, which prevented collisions between the parts & the whole, and between
the parts themselves. It was supposed that the substitution, of an elective and
responsible authority for an hereditary and irresponsible one, would avoid the
appearance even of a departure from the principle of [57] Republicanism. But
altho' the subject was so viewed in the Convention, and the votes on it were
more than once equally divided, it was finally & justly abandoned see note for
___ for this erasure substitute the amendt marked * for this page [58] [as,
apart from other objections, it was not practicable among so many states,
increasing in number, and enacting, each of them, so many laws instead of the
proposed negative, the objects of it were left as finally provided for in the
Constitution.] [59]

On the arrival of the Virginia Deputies at Phila it occurred to them that from
the early and prominent part taken by that State in bringing about the
Convention some initiative step might be expected from them. The Resolutions
introduced by Governor Randolph were the result of a Consultation on the
subject; with an understanding that they left all the Deputies entirely open to
the lights of discussion, and free to concur in any alterations or modifications
which their reflections and judgments might approve. The Resolutions as the
Journals shew became the basis on which the proceedings of the Convention
commenced, and to the developments, variations and modifications of which the
plan of Govt proposed by the Convention may be traced.

The curiosity I had felt during my researches into the History of the most
distinguished Confederacies, particularly those of antiquity, and the deficiency
I found in the means of satisfying it more especially in what related to the
process, the principles, the reasons, & the anticipations, which prevailed in
the formation of them, determined me to preserve as far as I could an exact
account of what might pass in the Convention whilst executing its trust, with
the magnitude of which I was duly impressed, as I was with [60] the
gratification promised to future curiosity by an authentic exhibition of the
objects, the opinions & the reasonings from which the new System of Govt was to
receive its peculiar structure & organization. Nor was I unaware of the value of
such a contribution to the fund of of materials for the History of a
Constitution on which would be staked the happiness of a people great even in
its infancy, and possibly the cause of Liberty throught the world.

In pursuance of the task I had assumed I chose a seat in front of the presiding
member, with the other members on my right & left hands. In this favorable
position for hearing all that passed, I noted in terms legible & in
abbreviations & marks intelligible to myself what was read from the Chair or
spoken by the members; and losing not a moment unnecessarily between the
adjournment & reassembling of the Convention I was enabled to write out my daily
notes [see page 18 - [61] during the session or within a few finishing days
after its close - see pa. 18 [62] in the extent and form preserved in my own
hand on my files.

In the labour & correctness of doing [63] this, I was not a little aided by
practice & by a familiarity with the style and the train of observation &
reasoning which characterized the principal speakers. It happened, also that I
was not absent a single day, nor more than a cassual fraction of an hour in any
day, so that I could not have lost a single speech, unless a very short one.
Insert the Remark on the _____ slip of paper marked A. [64]
[It may be proper to remark, that, with a very few exceptions, the speeches were
neither furnished, nor revised, nor sanctioned, by the speakers, but written out
from my notes, aided by the freshness of my recollections. A further remark may
be proper, that views of the subject might occasionally be presented in the
speeches and proceedings, with a latent reference to a compromise on some middle
ground, by mutual concessions. The exceptions alluded to were, -- first, the
sketch furnished by Mr. Randolph of his speech on the introduction of his
propositions, on the twenty-ninth day of May; secondly, the speech of Mr.
Hamilton, who happened to call on me when putting the last hand to it, and who
acknowledged its fidelity, without suggesting more than a very few verbal
alterations which were made; thirdly, the speech of Gouverneur Morris on the
second day of May, which was communicated to him on a like occasion, and who
acquiesced in it without even a verbal change. The correctness of his language
and the distinctness of his enunciation were particularly favorable to a
reporter. The speeches of Doctor Franklin, excepting a few brief ones, were
copied from the written ones read to the Convention by his colleague, Mr.
Wilson, it being inconvenient to the Doctor to remain long on his feet.] [65]
Of the ability & intelligence of those who composed the Convention, the debates
& proceedings may be a test; as the character of the work which was the
offspring of their deliberations must be tested by the experience of the future,
added to that of the nearly half century which has passed. [66]

But whatever may be the judgment pronounced on the competency of the architects
of the Constitution, or whatever may be the destiny, of the edifice prepared by
them, I feel it a duty to express my profound & solemn conviction, derived from
my intimate opportunity of observing & appreciating the views of the Convention,
collectively & individually, that there never was an assembly of men, charged
with a great & arduous trust, who were more pure in their motives, or more
exclusively or anxiously [devoted to the object committed to them, than were the
members of the Federal Convention of 1787, to the object of devising and
proposing a constitutional system which would best supply the defects of that
which it was to replace, and best secure the permanent liberty and happiness of
their country.] [67]

1. This Preface has been printed from Madison's original manuscript in the
Department of State. There is a transcript of the Preface in an unknown hand in
the Library of Congress which was sent to the printer and from which Henry D.
Gilpin printed The Papers of James Madison, 3 volumes (1840). The text of the
Preface as here printed has been read with the printer's copy thereof and
important differences noted.

In the Preface, Madison referred in passing to documents which he evidently
intended to embody in a finished draft which, unfortunately, he never completed.
The matter referred to has been placed in footnotes or reference has been made
to other pages of the present document.

Footnotes bearing an asterisk before the numbers instead of just numbers, to
indicate their order, are Madison's own notes. The editor's notes and
indications of differences between the Madison manuscript and the transcript of
the Preface are not preceded by an asterisk.

2. These are the words which Madison wrote at the head of this document after he
had scratched out the phrase "Preface to Debates in the Convention of 1787." It
is a very rough and uneven draft, full of insertions and deletions. The last few
pages are in Mrs. Madison's hand, having been written from her husband's
dictation when his hands were crippled with rheumatism. A few words in the draft
were written by John C. Payne (Mrs. Madison's brother) at Madison's direction.
The date of the draft was between 1830 and 1836.
3. The word "confederate" is substituted in the transcript for "confederal".
4. The word "an" is substituted in the transcript for "a".
5. In place of "the advantages of both" the transcript reads "that advantage of
both".
6. The word "the" is here inserted in the transcript.
7. The word "in" is omitted in the transcript.
8. The words "Independent States" are italicized in the transcript.
9. The phrase "the first of March" is substituted in the transcript for "March
1".
10. The figures 1, 2, and 3 are changed to "first," "secondly" and "thirdly" in
the transcript.
11. The phrase "unequal in size, but equal in sovereignty. 4 the ratio of
contributions in money and in troops, among parties" is erroneously omitted in
the transcript.
12. The figure 5 is changed to "fourthly" in the transcript.
13. In the transcript the date reads "the first of March, 1781".
14. The word "principle" is substituted for "provision" in the transcript.
*. See address of Congress. [15]
15. This footnote is omitted in the transcript.
16. The word "aid" is substituted in the transcript for "co-operate".
17. The word "a" is omitted in the transcript.
18. The word "a" is substituted in the transcript for "an."
19. The phrase "to 'insert the Resol. (See Journal.) 1" is omitted in the
transcript which substitutes the words "as follows:" and inserts the resolution
which is printed in the Notes of June 1, 1787.
20. The phrase "who had been" is omitted in the transcript.
21. James Madison.
22. In place of the word "early" the transcript reads "the first Monday in."
23. The words "had it been" are substituted in the transcript for the words "was
it."
24. Alexander Hamilton.
25. The word "unanimously" is omitted in the transcript.
26. Madison's direction "Insert it" is omitted in the transcript, and there is
inserted the text of the proceedings and recommendation of the Annapolis
Convention. The transcript text begins with the words "To the Honorable", and
concludes with the paragraph beginning "Through your Commissioners", etc.
27. The word "and" is omitted in the transcript.
28. The text of this law of October 16, 1786 (printed ante pages 68-69) is
inserted in the transcript beginning with the words "Whereas, the
Commissioners", etc. and ending with the words " ... States in the Union".
29. The word "one" is here inserted in the transcript.
30. Madison was in error. The pamphlet was written by William Barton. See
Gaillard Hunt, "Pelatiah Webster and the Constitution", in The Nation, December
28, 1911.
31. The following is supplied in the transcript: "he wished instead of them
[partial Conventions] to see a general Convention take place; and that he should
soon, in pursuance of instructions, from his constituents, propose to Congress a
plan for that purpose, the object [of which] would be to strengthen the Federal
Constitution." -- See The Writings of James Madison, Hunt, Editor, Vol. I
(1900), pp. 438, 439.
32. The phrase "[See Life of Schuyler in Longacre" is omitted in the transcript
and the following quoted matter is substituted: "the resolutions introduced by
General Schuyler in the Senate, and passed unanimously by the Legislature of New
York in the summer of 1782, declaring, that the Confederation was defective, in
not giving Congress power to provide a revenue for itself, or in not investing
them with funds from established and productive sources; and that it would be
advisable for Congress to recommend to the States to call a general Convention
to revise and amend the Confederation."
The sketch is of Hamilton, not Schuyler, for which see The National Portrait
Gallery of Distinguished Americans, conducted by Longacre and Herring, Vol. II
(1835), p. 7.
33. The following sentence is supplied in the transcript: "It is by many here
suggested as very necessary step for Congress to take, the calling on the States
to form a Convention for the sole purpose of revising the Confederation, so far
as to enable Congress to execute with more energy, effect and vigor the powers
assigned to it, than it appears by experience that they can do under the present
state of things." The letter referred to is among the Madison papers in the
Manuscript Division of the Library of Congress.
34. The transcript here inserts the following: "I hold it for a maxim, that the
Union of the States is essential to their safety against foreign danger and
internal contention and that the perpetuity and efficacy of the present system
cannot be confided in. The question, therefore, is, in what mode, and at what
moment, the experiment for supplying the defects ought to be made." -- See,
also, The Writings of James Madison, Hunt, Editor, Vol II (1901), pp 99, 100.
35. The paragraph beginning "In 1785" reads as follows in the transcript: "In
the winter of 1784-5, Noah Webster, whose political and other valuable writings
had made him known to the public, proposed, in one of his publications, 'a new
system of government which should act, not on the States, but directly on
individuals, and vest in Congress full power to carry its laws into effect.'"
See, also, The National Portrait Gallery of Distinguished Americans, conducted
by Longacre and Herring, Vol II (1835), p 4.
36. In the transcript after the word "Confederacy" the following footnote is
inserted: "The letters of Wm. Grayson, March 22nd, 1786, and of James Monroe, of
April 28th, 1786, both then members, to Mr. Madison, state that a proposition
for such a Convention has been made."
37. The word "the" is inserted in the transcript after "from".
38. The final "s" is crossed off the word "Shays" in the transcript.
39. The transcript substitutes the word "inefficacy" for the word "inefficiency"
but the Gilpin edition prints the word as in the original notes.
40. In the transcript the word "and" is crossed out and the word "which" written
above it.
41. After the word "Jersey," reference is made in the transcript to the
following footnote: "A letter of Mr Grayson to Mr Madison of March 22d, 1786,
relating the conduct of New Jersey states this fact. Editor."
43. The phrase "[see letter of Grayson to J. M." is omitted in the transcript.
An extract from the letter referred to reads as follows: "The Antients were
surely men of more candor than we are; they contended openly for an abolition of
debts in so many words, while we strive as hard for the same thing under the
decent & specious pretense of a circulating medium.... There has been some
serious thoughts in the minds of some of the members of Congress to recommend to
the States the meeting of a general Convention, to consider, of an alteration of
the Confederation, & there is a motion to this effect now under consideration it
is contended that the present Confederation is utterly inefficient, and that if
it remains much longer in it's present state of imbecility we shall be one of
the most contemptible nations on the face of the earth," -- Letter from William
Grayson to James Madison, March 22, 1786. The Madison Papers (manuscript),
Library of Congress.
44. In the transcript the footnote "See the Journal of her Legislature" is
substituted for the phrase in brackets. The allusion is to the act of the
Virginia Assembly passed January 21, 1786, imposing a tonnage tax of 5s. on
vessels of foreigners.
45. After the word "imports" down to the sentence beginning, "In sundry
instances," the transcript reads "from others, as from Mass., which complained
in a letter to the Executive of Virginia, and doubtless to those of other
States.
46. The facts are given in Madison's letter to Jefferson, January 22, 1786. The
Writings of James Madison, Hunt, Editor, Vol. II (1901), p. 218.
47. Madison's direction "[see ]" is omitted in the transcript.
48. The word "of" is inserted in the transcript after "Citizens".
49. The word "creditor" is plural in the transcript.
50. The word "and" is inserted in the transcript after "naturalization".
51. The words "a natural consequence" are substituted in the transcript for
"natural consequences".
52. The word "were" is inserted in the transcript after "dispositions".
53. The direction in Madison's notes is omitted in the transcript. His reference
was to The Life of George Washington, by John Marshall, Vol. V (1807), pp. 91 et
seq. For the text of the correspondence in question, see Appendix to Debates, I,
Nos. 1, 2, and 3, pp. 585-588.
54. The word "a" is omitted in the transcript.
55. The phrase beginning with the words "a letter" down to the end of the
paragraph is changed in the transcript to read as follows: "the letters of James
Madison to Thomas Jefferson of the nineteenth of March; to Governor Randolph of
the eighth of April; and to General Washington of the sixteenth of April, 1787,
for which see these respective dates."
For the material portions of these letters see Appendix to Debates, II, Nos. 1,
2, and 3, pp. 589-595.
56. The words "the letter" have been changed to "these letters" in the
transcript.
57. The words "the principle of" are omitted in the transcript.
58. The words "see note for ___ for this erasure substitute the amendt marked *
for this page" are omitted in the transcript.
59. The passage enclosed in brackets is copied from the transcript. The original
notes appear to have been lost since Gilpin's edition.
60. The word "by" is substituted in the transcript for "with".
61. Madison's direction "[see page 18-" is omitted in the transcript.
62. Madison's direction "see pa. 18" is omitted in the transcript.
63. The word "doing" is omitted in the transcript.
64. Madison's direction "Insert the Remark", etc. is omitted in the transcript.
65. The passage enclosed in brackets is copied from the transcript. The original
notes appear to have been lost since Gilpin's edition.
66. The phrase "of the nearly half century" is changed to "of nearly half a
century" in the transcript.
67. The passage enclosed in brackets is copied from the transcript. The original
notes appear to have been lost since Gilpin's edition.
68. The doubled "to" is not an error.