Constitutional Convention (June 28, 1787) Thursday, was embroiled in a debate over how each state was to be represented in the new government. The hostile feelings created by the smaller states being pitted against the larger states, was so bitter that some delegates threatened to leave the Convention. Benjamin Franklin, being the President (Governor) of Pennsylvania, 1785-1788, hosted the rest of the 55 delegates attending the Convention. As the senior member of the convention at 81 years of age, he commanded the respect of all present and rose to speak at this moment of crisis. James Madison gave an account in Notes Of The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 (published 1840).
<Mr. President
The small progress we have made after 4 or five weeks close attendance & continual reasonings with each other---our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many noes as ays, is methinks a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the Human Understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it.
We have gone back to ancient history for models of Government, and examined the different forms of those Republics which having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution now no longer exist. And we have viewed Modern States all round Europe, but find none of their Constitutions suitable to our circumstances.
In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth, and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our understandings?
In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.-Our prayers, Sir, were heard, & they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor.
To that kind Providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need his assistance?
I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid?
We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that "except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.
I therefore beg leave to move-that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that Service
Mr. SHERMAN seconded the motion.
Mr. HAMILTON & several others expressed their apprehensions that however proper such a resolution might have been at the beginning of the convention, it might at this late day, in the first place bring on it some disagreeable animadversions. & in the second place lead the public to believe that the embarrassments and dissensions within the Convention, had suggested this measure. It was answered by Dr. FRANKLIN, Mr. SHERMAN & others, that the past omission of a duty could not justify a further omission - that the rejection of such a proposition would expose the Convention to more unpleasant animadversions than the adoption of it: and that the alarm out of doors that might be excited for the state of things within, would at least be as likely to do good as ill.
Mr. WILLIAMSON, observed that the true cause of the omission could not be mistaken. The Convention had no funds.
Mr. RANDOLPH proposed in order to give a favorable aspect to ye measure, that a sermon be preached at the request of the convention on the 4th of July, the anniversary of Independence; & thenceforward prayers &c to be read in yr Convention every morning.
Dr. FRANKLIN. 2nd this motion. After several unsuccessful attempts for silently postponing this matter by adjourn; the adjournment was at length carried, without any vote on the motion.> 1787CC002
Another reference to Dr. Franklin's speech was written in a letter from William Steele to his son, Jonathan D. Steele, September 1825, and printed in The National Intelligencer, August 26, 1826, and printed with an introduction from the New York Gazette, in Littell's Living Age, May 25, 1850, pp. 357-359. William Steele related a testimony of New Jersey delegate General Jonathan Dayton, who later served as Speaker of the House of Representatives:
<I...shall relate it as nearly as I can recollect, in the words of General Jonathan Dayton...
I was (said General Dayton) a delegate from New Jersey, in the General Convention which assembled in Philadelphia for the purpose of digesting a constitution for the United States...There was little or no difficulty in determining upon the elementary principles -- such as, for instance, that the government should be a republican-representative government -- that it should be divided into three branches, that is, legislative, executive, and judicial, &c.
But when the organization of the respective branches of the legislature came under consideration, it was easy to be perceived that the eastern and southern states had distinct interests, which it was difficult to reconcile; and that the larger states were disposed to form a constitution, in which the smaller states would be mere appendages and satellites to the larger ones....
As the different parties adhered pertinaciously to their different positions, it was feared that this would prove an insurmountable obstacle...Under these impressions, and with these views, it was agreed at length that each state should be entitled to one delegate in the House of Representatives for every 30,000 of its inhabitants -- in which number should be included three fifths of the whole number of their slaves...
A more knotty point presented itself in the organization of the Senate. The larger states contended that the same ratio, as to states, should be common to both branches of the legislature; or, in other words, that each state should be entitled to a representation in the Senate, (whatever might be the number fixed on,) in proportion to its population, as in the House of Representatives.
The smaller states, on the other hand, contended that the House of Representatives might be considered as the guardian of the liberties of the people, and therefore ought to bear a just proportion to their numbers; but that the Senate represented the sovereignty of the States, and that as each state, whether great or small, was equally an independent and sovereign state, it ought, in this branch of the legislature, to have equal weight and authority; without this, they said, there could be no security for their equal rights -- and they would, by such a distribution of power, be merged and lost in the larger states.
This reasoning, however plain and powerful, had but little influence on the minds of delegates from the larger states -- and as they formed a large majority of the Convention, the question, after passing through the forms of debate, was decided that 'each state should be represented in the Senate in proportion to its population.'
When the Convention had adjourned over to the next day, the delegates of the four smallest states, i.e., Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Delaware, convened to consult what course was to be pursued in the important crisis at which we had arrived. After serious investigation, it was solemnly determined to ask for a reconsideration the next morning and if it was not granted, or if, when granted, that offensive feature of the Constitution could not be expunged, and the smaller states put upon an equal footing with the largest, we would secede from the Convention, and, returning to our constituents, inform them that no compact could be formed with the large states, but one which would sacrifice our sovereignty and independence.
I was deputed to be the organ through which this communication should be made -- I know not why, unless it be that young men are generally chosen to perform rash actions. Accordingly, when the Convention had assembled, and as soon as the minutes of the last sitting were read, I arose and stated the view we had taken of the organization of the Senate -- our desire to obtain a reconsideration and suitable modification of that article; and, in failure thereof, our determination to secede from the Convention, and return to our constituents.
This disclosure, it may readily be supposed, produced an immediate and great excitement in every part of the house! Several members were immediately on the floor to express their surprise, or indignation! They represented that the question had received a full and fair investigation, and had been definitively settled by a very large majority.
That it was altogether unparliamentary and unreasonable, for one of the minority to propose a reconsideration, at the moment their act had become a matter of record, and without pretending that any new light could be thrown on the subject. That if such a precedent should be established, it would in future be impossible to say when any one point was definitively settled; as a small minority might at any moment, again and again, move and obtain a reconsideration. They therefore hoped the Convention would express its decided disapprobation by passing silently to the business before them.
There was much warm and some acrimonious feeling exhibited by a number of the speeches -- a rupture appeared almost inevitable, and the bosom of Washington seemed to labor with the most anxious solicitude for its issue. Happily for the United States, the Convention contained some individuals possessed of talents and virtues of the highest order, whose hearts were deeply interested in the establishment of a new and efficient form of government; and whose penetrating minds had already deplored the evils which would spring up in our newly established republic, should the present attempt to consolidate it prove abortive.
Among those personages, the most prominent was Dr. Franklin. He was esteemed the Mentor of our body. To a mind naturally strong and capacious, enriched by much reading and the experience of many years, he added a manner of communicating his thoughts peculiarly his own -- in which simplicity, beauty, and strength were equally conspicuous. As soon as the angry orators, who preceded him had left him an opening, the doctor rose, evidently impressed with the weight of the subject before them, and the difficulty of managing it successfully.
"We have arrived, Mr. President," said he, "at a very momentous and interesting crisis in our deliberations...I would, therefore, propose, Mr. President, that, without proceeding further in this business at this time, the Convention shall adjourn for three days, in order to let the present ferment pass off, and to afford time for a more full, free, and dispassionate investigation of the subject; and I would earnestly recommend to the members of this Convention, that they spend the time of this recess, not in associating with their own party, and devising new arguments to fortify themselves in their old opinions, but that they mix with members of opposite sentiments, lend a patient ear to their reasonings, and candidly allow them all the weight to which they may be entitled; and when we assemble again, I hope it will be with a determination to form a constitution, if not such an one as we can individually, and in all respects, approve, yet the best, which, under existing circumstances, can be obtained."
(Here the countenance of Washington brightened, and a cheering ray seemed to break in upon the gloom which had recently covered our political horizon.) The doctor continued: "Before I sit down, Mr. President, I will suggest another matter; and I am really surprised that it has not been proposed by some other member at an earlier period of our deliberations. I will suggest, Mr. President, the propriety of nominating and appointing, before we separate, a chaplain to this Convention, whose duty it shall be uniformly to assemble with us, and introduce the business of each day by an address to the Creator of the universe, and the Governor of all nations, beseeching Him to preside in our council, enlighten our minds with a portion of heavenly wisdom, influence our hearts with a love of truth and justice, and crown our labors with complete and abundant success!"
The doctor sat down, and never (said Gen. D.) did I behold a countenance at once so dignified and delighted as was that of Washington, at the close of this address! Nor were the members of the Convention, generally less affected. The words of the venerable Franklin fell upon our ears with a weight and authority, even greater than we may suppose an oracle to have had in a Roman senate! A silent admiration superseded, for a moment, the expression of that assent and approbation which was strongly marked on almost every countenance; I say almost, for one man was found in the Convention, Mr. H - [Hamilton] from --, who rose and said, with regard to the first motion of the honorable gentleman, for an adjournment, he would yield his assent; but he protested against the second motion, for the appointment of a chaplain. He then commenced a high-strained eulogium on the assemblage of wisdom, talent, and experience, which the Convention embraced; declared the high sense he entertained of the honor which his constituents had conferred upon him, in making him a member of that respectable body; said he was confidently of opinion that they were competent to transact the business which had been entrusted to their care -- that they were equal to every exigence which might occur; and concluded by saying, that therefore he did not see the necessity of calling in foreign aid!
Washington fixed his eye upon the speaker, with a mixture of surprise and indignation, while he uttered this impertinent and impious speech, and then looked around to ascertain in what manner it affected others. They did not leave him a moment to doubt; no one deigned to reply, or take the smallest notice of the speaker, but the motion for appointing a chaplain was instantly seconded and carried; whether under the silent disapprobation of Mr. H--, or his solitary negative, I do not recollect. The motion for an adjournment was then put and carried unanimously, and the Convention adjourned accordingly.
The three days of recess were spent in the manner advised by Doctor Franklin; the opposite parties mixed with each other, and a free and frank interchange of sentiments took place. On the fourth day we assembled again, and if great additional light had not been thrown on the subject, every unfriendly feeling had been expelled; and a spirit of conciliation had been cultivated, which promised, at least, a calm and dispassionate reconsideration of the subject...> 1787CC003
According to another account, on July 4, 1787, members of the Convention assembled in the Reformed Calvinistic Lutheran Church, according to the proposal by Edmund Jennings Randolph of Virginia, and heard a sermon by Rev. William Rogers, who prayed:
<We fervently recommend to the fatherly notice...our federal convention...Favor them, from day to day, with thy inspiring presence; be their wisdom and strength; enable them to devise such measures as may prove happy instruments in healing all divisions and prove the good of the great whole;...that the United States of America may form one example of a free and virtuous government...May we...continue, under the influence of republican virtue, to partake of all the blessings of cultivated and Christian society.> 1787CC006
The Reverend James Campbell exhorted delegates to establish a:
<Free and vigorous government.> 1787CC007
On September 19, 1787, after the Constitutional Convention endorsed the final form of the Constitution, Ben Franklin went outside the hall in Philadelphia and was asked by a Mrs. Powell:
<"Well Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" Franklin replied: "A republic, if you can keep it."> 1787CC008
On April 19, 1830, Jared Sparks made note in his Journal of a visit to James Madison (Farrand's Records, CCCLXVII; H.B. Adams, Life and Writings of Jared Sparks, I, 560-564; II, 31-36):
<It was necessary for the old Congress to sit with closed doors, because it was the executive as well as legislative body; names of persons and characters came perpetually before them; and much business was constantly on hand which would have been embarrassed if it had gone to the public before it was finished.
It was likewise best for the convention for forming the Constitution to sit with closed doors, because opinions were so various and at first so crude that it was necessary they should be long debated before any uniform system of opinion could be formed. Meantime the minds of the members were changing, and much was to be gained by a yielding and accommodating spirit.
Had the members committed themselves publicly at first, they would have afterwards supposed consistency required them to maintain their ground, whereas by secret discussion no man felt himself obliged to retain his opinions any longer than he was satisfied of their propriety and truth, and was open to the force of argument. Mr. Madison thinks no Constitution would ever have been adopted by the convention if the debates had been public.
No chaplain was chosen for the convention at any period of its session, although Dr. Franklin proposed one, as has been reported, after the convention had been some time sitting.> 1787CC009
On April 9, 1789, only nine days after the first Constitutional Congress convened with a quorum, the House of Representatives and the Senate approved having chaplains open every session with prayer, paying them a salary of $500 each.
--
American Quotations by William J. Federer, 2024, All Rights Reserved, Permission granted to use with acknowledgement.
Endnotes:
1787CC002. William J. Federer, American Quotations (2014). Constitutional Convention, June 28, 1787, in an address by Benjamin Franklin. James Madison, Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 (NY: W.W. Morton & Co., Original 1787 reprinted 1987), Vol. I, p. 504, 451-21. James Madison, Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 (Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1966, 1985), pp. 209-10. Henry D. Gilpin, editor, The Papers of James Madison (Washington: Langtree & O' Sullivan, 1840), Vol. II, p. 985. George Bancroft, Bancroft's History of the Constitution of the United States vols. I-X (Boston: Charles C. Little & James Brown, 1838), Vol. II, p. 985. Albert Henry Smyth, ed., The Writings of Benjamin Franklin (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1905-7), Vol. IX, pp. 600-601. Gaillard Hunt and James B. Scott, ed., The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 Which Framed the Constitution of the United States of America, reported by James Madison (New York: Oxford University Press, 1920), pp. 181-182. Andrew M. Allison, W. Cleon Skousen, and M. Richard Maxfield, The Real Benjamin Franklin (Salt Lake City, Utah: The Freeman Institute, 1982, pp. 258-259. John Eidsmoe, Christianity and the Constitution-The Faith of Our Founding Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, A Mott Media Book, 1987, 6th printing 1993), pp. 12-13, 208. Tim LaHaye, Faith of Our Founding Fathers (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1987), pp. 122-124. Stephen Abbott Northrop, D.D., A Cloud of Witnesses (Portland, Oregon: American Heritage Ministries, 1987; Mantle Ministries, 228 Still Ridge, Bulverde, Texas), p. 159-160. D.P. Diffine, Ph.D., One Nation Under God-How Close a Separation? (Searcy, Arkansas: Harding University, Belden Center for Private Enterprise Education, 6th edition, 1992), p. 8. Stephen McDowell and Mark Beliles, "The Providential Perspective" (Charlottesville, VA: The Providence Foundation, P.O. Box 6759, Charlottesville, Va. 22906, January 1994), Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 5-6.
1787CC003. William J. Federer, American Quotations (2014). Constitutional Convention. June 28, 1787, General Jonathan Dayton recorded the response to Benjamin Franklin's address. E.C. M'Guire, The Religious Opinions and Character of Washington (NY: Harper & Brothers, 1836), p. 151. William Steele, in a letter to his son Jonathan, September 1825. National Intelligencer. Benjamin Franklin, June 28, 1787, related testimony of General Jonathan Dayton. E.C. M'Guire, The Religious Opinions and Character of Washington (NY: Harper & Brothers, 1836), p. 151.
1787CC004. William J. Federer, American Quotations (2014). Constitutional Convention. June 28, 1787, Roger Sherman seconding a motion following Benjamin Franklin's address. James Madison, Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 (1787; reprinted NY: W. W. Norton & Co., 1987), p. 210. Irving Brant, James Madison, Father of the Constitution, 1787-1800 (New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1950), Vol. III, p. 84. Tim LaHaye, Faith of Our Founding Fathers (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1987), p. 126. Motion by Edmund Jennings Randolph of Virginia following Benjamin Franklin's address. James Madison, Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 (1787; reprinted NY: W.W.Norton & Co., 1987), pp. 210-211.
1787CC005. William J. Federer, American Quotations (2014). Constitutional Convention. July 2, 1787, as recorded in Jonathan Dayton. E.C. M'Guire, The Religious Opinions and Character of Washington (NY: Harper & Brothers, 1836), p. 152.
1787CC006. William J. Federer, American Quotations (2014). Constitutional Convention. July 4, 1787, in a sermon by Rev. William Rogers to the delegates. Benjamin Franklin Morris, The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States (Philadelphia: George W. Childs, 1864), pp. 253-254.
1787CC007. William J. Federer, American Quotations (2014). Constitutional Convention. Benjamin. Billy Suggs, "Franklin's Prayer Request at the Constitutional Convention, 1787" (Aledo, TX: WallBuilders Inc.) 1787CC008. William J. Federer, American Quotations (2014). Benjamin Franklin. September 19, 1787, in a comment to a Mrs. Powell regarding the newly approved Constitution. James McHenry, aide to George Washington, in an entry in his diary, published in the American Historical Review, XI (1906), p. 618. Bartlett's Farmilar Quotations, Sixteenth Edition, at 310:26, referenced under "A republic, if you can keep it."
1787CC009. William J. Federer, American Quotations (2014). James Madison, April 19, 1830, Jared Sparks made note in his Journal of a visit to James Madison (Farrand's Records, CCCLXVII; H.B. Adams, Life and Writings of Jared Sparks, I, 560-564; II, 31-36). Tim LaHaye, Faith of Our Founding Fathers (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc., 1987), p. 57. Billy Suggs, "Franklin's Prayer Request at the Constitutional Convention, 1787" (Aledo, TX: WallBuilders, Inc.).