Persuasive Speech At The Constitutional Convention 1787

794 Words2 Pages

It is 1787, a little over ten years have passed since our nation gained its independence. We desperately needed a Constitution, even with James Madison’s efforts to organize something to get us started, nothing worked until the plan for the Constitutional Convention came into action. The Constitutional Convention, also known as the Philadelphia Convention, was set to begin on May 13th, 1787. It took longer than expected for all the invited delegates to arrive, so the date was pushed back. On May 25th, 1787 there were twenty-nine delegates present. Some wanted to wait for the others to show up, but Madison urged them to begin the meeting. Over the course of the four month long convention, fifty-five delegates had made an appearance for at least …show more content…

"The fifty-five delegates who came to the Philadelphia Convention between May 25th and September 17th, 1787 represented a political elite with years of experience in the affairs of their states and nation." Over this course of time, our nation’s Constitution was drafted, the men in attendance had many important orders of business to discuss, the first thing they did was issue a “gag order.” This decreed that nothing spoken at the convention would be published or discussed outside of the House. Madison later justified the order saying, “No Constitution would ever have been adopted by the Convention if the debates had been made public.” At the Convention, members in attendance were able to freely express their views, listen to one another’s arguments, and even change their minds without fear of immediate public scrutiny of their work. They started off with less pressing issues, but everyone knew that it was only a matter of time before they would need to discuss some incredibly important things. For instance, how the process for electing a president would …show more content…

Amidst all the discussions, delegates began to listen to the idea of creating presidential electors. Some were still hung up on the popular vote, many worried that the position of an elector was not very significant, and no respectable man would want the job. When someone suggested that the electors be appointed by the members of congress, it passed with substantial support. Although this idea did not escape without lots of criticism, once everyone realized it was the only option they had that would not only work, but still allow the people to have a say in the election, the framers began working out all the details. On July 19th, Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut proposed that electors be appointed based on the population of a state. Any population with less than one hundred thousand people would only receive one elector. If the state had between one hundred thousand and three hundred thousand, they would be awarded two

Open Document