1787

__________ 

“There are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men.  These are ambition and avarice; the love of power and the love of money.” 

Benjamin Franklin

__________ 

Franklin speaks during the Constitutional Convention.

 

NOTE TO TEACHERS: This is a description of how we addressed the topic of “The American Dream” in my history class. Sometimes I covered it here. Sometimes I waited until we got to the post-Civil War era. I thought it was an important topic to cover – and were I teaching today, I might focus on the death of the dream. 

 

    First, a couple of quotes on the topic that I like: 

    In the original American community of farmers 200 years ago, when rich and fertile lands spread unplowed beyond the Alleghenies, it was considered a matter of gumption and go, of thrift and diligence and planning, whether a man made it or did not. (Breach of Faith, p. 329.)

 

     In 1787 was enacted the famous ordinance for the government of the territory northwest of the Ohio. This provided for the organization of government. The first officials were to be a governor, secretary, and three judges appointed by Congress; but as the population increased, the people were to be allowed a representation in the Government. Not less than three nor more than five States might be formed from the Territory and admitted to “a share in the Federal councils.” Sound doctrines of civil liberty were announced. No person was to be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments. Each citizen was entitled to the writ of habeas corpus and trial by jury. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime, was permitted; and the Territory and the Sates which might be formed from it were to remain forever “a part of this Confederacy of the United States of America.” It announced in telling phrase that “religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.” This is one of the wisest documents ever issued by a deliberative assembly. It had great weight in shaping later territorial organization. It kept the dark tide of slavery from inundating the Northwest… “‘I doubt,” said Webster, “whether one single law of any lawgiver, ancient or modern, has produced effects of more distinct, marked, and lasting character than the ordinance of 1787.” (56/222)

* 

July 13: The Northwest Ordinance is passed. “The [Ohio] Company, composed mostly of Massachusetts men, strongly desired their future home to be upon free soil.” 

    Even Southern members of Congress agreed to the idea. (2/162-173)

It is agreed that land shall be divided into townships.
Sections equal to one square mile shall be sold.

 

* 

VANESSA FRIEDMAN, in the NYT of 7-2-17, refers to the “bedtime story of the American dream.”

 

* 

IN THE DAYS before standardized tests I used my best professional judgment and covered some topics in a perfunctory manner. I never spent much time on the Articles of Confederation. I did want students to know that the first U.S. government failed because it was weak. 

    Other than that, I used to tell my classes, “I’ve never heard a single adult in my life, outside of college classes, talk about the U.S. government under the Articles of Confederation. I don’t think you’ll ever need to know much about it.” 

    Instead, I wrote up general information on the Confederation and mixed it with readings from the textbook:  

    The United States army was puny. Congress was unwilling to spend money for defense. So, in 1787 (under the Articles of Confederation), the army included only 762 officers and men. 

 

    Our navy was no better. Pirates operating out of North African ports attacked our merchant ships. Those that fought back were blasted. Those that surrendered were robbed. Officers and crew were often sold into slavery. Neither the flag nor name of the United States was respected.

 

    Clearly at some point every year it seemed worth discussing: How much military strength does our nation need today?  What does it cost to defend the United States? Are we willing to pay the higher taxes that result?  

    If you’ve never asked students this question, I know my kids were always way off: “How much do you think the United States spends on defense every year?” The young people I taught rarely had any idea. 

    In March 2018 the U.S. Senate agreed to spend $700 billion in 2018 and increase that figure to $716 billion in 2019. 

    You can “amaze” your students by noting these figures: In 2018 we spent almost two billion dollars every day ($1,917,808,219) to defend our interests round the world. That would break down to $79,908, 676 per hour. 

    Or, if you like: it means we spend $1,331,811 per minute. 

    More generally, in any discussion involving the Articles of Confederation—if you discuss the topic at all—the real question is:  “Do we want a weaker or stronger government today?  It’s the same question that divided Hamilton and Jefferson more than two hundred years ago.

 

* 

    In the 90s, the State of Ohio instituted its Ninth Grade Proficiency Test, including the first standardized test in social studies our students would ever take. We were expected to focus on the Northwest Ordinance. First, we were told to make sure students knew that new states would be equal to old. Second, we were expected to teach that all new states would have republican forms of government. Third, students were to know that freedom of religion and trial by jury were guaranteed. Finally, we were expected to teach that slavery was banned north of the Ohio River.  

    I had no problem with any of that: protection of our rights being one of the central tenets of American thought. I felt it was only right, however, to go a bit farther and include these details: 

Ohio law required free blacks to post a high bond if they wanted to live in the state.

 

Ohio law taxed free blacks – but the state provided no schools for black chiLdren.

 

Ohio did not allow free blacks to vote (and only registered voters served on juries).

 

Ohio did not allow free blacks to own property.

 

    I thought we needed to look at the whole picture, the freedoms we cherish and must protect in America, and the denial of such freedom to various subgroups of the American people. 

    For years, my classes seemed interested when we talked about the price of land in Ohio, under the Northwest Ordinance. My focus was on how the availability of cheap land shaped American thought. This allowed us to look at several important ideas and concepts. First, students had to know the terms “pioneer” and “frontier,” which they would hear again and again in life. I wrote on the board: 

PIONEER:  A PERSON WHO GOES WHERE NO ONE HAS GONE BEFORE. 

FRONTIER:  THE EDGE OF SETTLEMENT, THE EDGE OF THE UNKNOWN.

 

    In the early part of my career, there was always some student who quoted the opening lines of Star Trek: “Space: the final frontier.” It was no trouble getting a discussion going. We had pioneers in sports. Baseball fans mentioned Jackie Robinson. One of the girls said that there were frontiers for women still to be crossed. Another wondered if there weren’t “frontiers” in medicine. 

    Eventually, I developed my own comically bad drawing to illustrate the point.

  

    I asked students to tell me where the fellow in the hat would have to go to be a pioneer, and where the frontier would be, and they told me. Sometimes, I drew little arrows sticking in the pioneer and said the Indian didn’t like him. 

    It was all very sad. 

    I liked to ask students to name the most famous pioneer in American history. You always got the same names: Daniel Boone or Davy Crockett. Which man died at the Alamo, I asked next. Most students (and frankly my own wife when I asked) weren’t sure. 

    Still, most adults hear about these men. They hear about the Alamo, usually as an example (as when soldiers in the movie Black Hawk Down, surrounded and badly outnumbered in Mogadishu, compare their situation to the Alamo). Other students, for several years running, pointed out that the Alamo appeared as backdrop in Peewee Herman’s Big Adventure. So we spent time on discussion. After I read more about the lives of Boone and Crockett, I turned their stories into special readings.  

    You want to interest students in history, not kill brain cells with facts of little value. Call to Freedom, the last textbook I ever used (I retired in 2008), included the following descriptions of Boone and Crockett:  

    “As explorers like Daniel Boone led people west of the Appalachians, colonial settlement expanded.”  One sentence. 

    Davy fared no better: “Volunteers like Juan Seguin and frontiersman Davy Crockett joined the Alamo defenders.”  

    That’s it: these men got the same space as Andre-Marie Ampere: “About twenty years later Andre-Marie Ampere of France determined some of the rules governing the relationship between electricity and magnetism.” 

    On my part, when I taught in the years before standardized tests, I tried to capture the humanity of Boone and Crockett and those who settled Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, and later Texas and the West. 

    Certainly, education was lacking on the frontier. So I liked to point out that Dan’s spelling was never as steady as his aim. Indians he called “Indans.” A good hunt was “awl wright.”  

    As for the natives, I liked students to try to see their point of view. I included this in one of our readings: 

    A native once told Dan that when whites set foot on native lands and shot deer and buffalo it was the same as trespassing. It was, he said, no different than if he and his friends came onto a white man’s farm and shot cows.      

 

    There were several good stories about female pioneers. I included those in the readings, as well. One involved Dan’s wife Rebecca: 

    One old tale has her climbing a tree near their cabin to hunt deer. She shoots seven. Then she fires one shot too many. She mistakes her horse for a buck – and brings it down too. The story may or may not be true. But Rebecca was a sturdy woman. 

    Another time natives raid the settlements and capture Jemima Boone, Dan and Rebecca’s daughter, and two of her friends, Betsy and Frances Callaway. The girls proved plenty tough themselves: 

    The Indians made a lightning getaway with their prisoners. But the settlers were just as fast to react. Samuel Henderson, engaged to 16-year-old Betsy, was half-shaved when the alarm was given. Sparing not one moment to finish, he grabbed his rifle and set out. Boone was barefoot and undressed when he heard the news. Hopping into a pair of pants, he quickly gathered his men. The natives had a sizable head start – and probably no man but Dan could catch them.

 

    While the rescue party was forming the girls did what they could to make their trail clear. The captives ripped bits of cloth from dresses and broke branches to mark their path. Placed on an Indian pony, they fell off at every chance. They pinched the animal so often (to make it act up) it finally bit Betsy. During one stop, a warrior admired Jemima’s hair. So she let him comb it for a long time. 

 

    Another Shawnee took an interest in Betsy and playfully tugged at her hair as she knelt beside a campfire. The young girl reacted with fury. Scooping up a load of hot coals on a piece of bark, she poured them over his moccasins! His friends whooped to see him hopping about in pain. 

 

    In every year except my last, when we reached this point in the curriculum, I did a lesson on the “American Dream.”  

    I believed the “American Dream” was of paramount importance – a topic that would come up again and again in students’ lives. One might say today, for example, that the “Dream” is dying.  

    That idea, alone, would merit discussion. 

    In my class, we began by looking at the rules for land sales under provisions of the Northwest Ordinance. Land, I told the kids, was surveyed into townships, laid out in a grid pattern, sold in sections, each section equal to one square mile, 640 acres, at a price of $1 per acre. 

    Rules for land sales changed over time. Here, I gave notes, not “for test” notes, but to help kids see the progression. I explained that in 1787 you had to buy at least 640 acres and had to pay the total cost up front. You had to be sure to ask someone in class to explain what a “down payment” was. Then I pointed out that few pioneers ever had that much cash, when $1 per day was good pay. 

    We talked about how Congress kept making the deal better, giving more Americans a chance to buy land. 

    I put this on the board next: 

1800: You could purchase 320 acres, and needed only $160 down, the rest to be paid on credit.  

1820: The government allowed you to buy 80 acres; but the price went up. (I always used an ominous tone.) “Yes. The price was raised to….…$1.25!”  

    A student once gasped, “Oh no, not a dollar…and TWENTY-FIVE CENTS!”  

    “Shocking, I know,” I replied. You had to pay it all as a down payment but now a pioneer could have a farm for $100. 

1862: The Homestead Act is passed. I would tell my classes that this was one of the great laws in American history. The government went back to 160 acres. What did students think it cost? 

    Someone always guessed $1 per acre. No. Fifty cents? Too high. Twenty-five cents? Too high. Surprise in the classroom. I smile. This part of the lesson never failed to spark real interest.  

    A penny? “Too high,” I repeated. 

    “Free!” a boy finally blurts out. I ignore the fact the answer is obvious.  I smile and say yes. “Land was given away free.”  

    One year, when I noted that the “American Dream” was rooted in land, a student piped up, “The Indians got a piece of land – the cemetery!” Other times, I threw in the Irish, who, back home, had an average of three acres to plant in the years before the potato famine. Or you could ask, what about African Americans? What about Langston Hughes and the poem “A Dream Deferred.” What happens, Hughes asked, when a dream dries up “like a raisin in the sun?”

 

    Next, we talked about how the existence of the frontier and the chance to get land shaped American thought. It meant if you failed in one place, you could head west and start over. I liked to point out that the natives got run over by “a red, white and blue bus.” But this was not our focus for the day. This frontier, this chance to start anew, made Americans optimistic.  

    I found early on that my students were not always sure what that term meant. Even fewer could define “pessimism.” 

    We put both words on the board and included them on our next test. 

    We talked about the idea that in this country you always had a chance. It used to be said, for example, that a “boy born in a log cabin” could become president. Someone always threw out Abraham Lincoln’s name. You might ask students today if the feel that’s still true. You could ask if there were parallels in the life of Barack Obama. 

    I let the log cabin concept sink in and turned to the story, The Big Bear of Arkansas, written in 1841. I summarized as follows: We meet a fellow nicknamed the “Big Bear” on a riverboat headed down the Mississippi. Other passengers have crowded round. He is bragging about a new farm he has purchased.  

    The Big Bear goes on and on. At least one member of a captive audience finds himself hoping that the boiler on the vessel will explode and put them all out of their misery. 

    The Bear claims to have the best rifle, best dog, best wife, and best land in the world. He explains that he was mad, at first, when he finally saw the land he’d purchased. He bought it, sight unseen, on the word of the seller. The seller claimed it was cleared and ready to farm. He got there and found it full of Indian burial mounds. Or so he thought. Turned out they were “tater” hills. 

    In fact, the Bear tells his audience, the soil was so rich corn planted in the ground exploded out of the earth so suddenly it killed one of his pigs.  

    On another occasion, I explained, a pioneer farmer claimed his soil was so rich he could plant ten-penny nails in the morning and have railroad spikes by nightfall. That was American optimism. 

(I always brought in nails and spikes.) 

    I passed around various examples to make the point. These are badly dated; but you can easily find examples of your own. I had a newspaper article headlined: VANNA’S AMERICAN DREAM, the story of Vanna White’s rise to fame and fortune, via the television show, Wheel of Fortune. A 1992 cover of Sports Illustrated showed Kristi Yamaguchi with her Olympic gold medal in figure skating, under the banner AMERICAN DREAM. A Jump Start cartoon used the phrase. So did an insurance ad: INSURING THE AMERICAN DREAM.

 

Article saved and scanned by blogger.

The "Dream" attracted millions of immigrants.

Students could discuss factors that are killing the dream today.
Bottom two pictures from internet.

    On one occasion, a few days after we covered this lesson, a young man came to class with one of those fliers that appear under windshield wipers at the mall. This was in the days when we still had malls. It read: “Only $50.00 for 500 names and addresses – get started on your own mail-order business: THE AMERICAN DREAM MAILING LIST!” 

    Now we turned to the “American Dream,” itself. What were its elements? Most kids had heard the term and were happy to fill in details: 

1. If you work hard you will be a success.

 

(In the 80s students brought up movies like Rocky and Flashdance which they realized were based on the “American Dream.”) 

2. You will have a nice home.  

3. Your family will be happy. 

4. Life in America gets better and better.

 

    We would then describe the “Dream” in more detail: nice car, perfect house, perfect family, two kids, boy and girl. (One of my students added one year, “Don’t forget the perfect dog.”  We added it to the list.)  

    “What kind of fence?” I would ask. Someone always piped up, “a white picket fence.” Two or three responded, “Oh, I’ve heard that before.” 

    In my final years I noted that experts were warning the next generation – my listeners – might have it worse than preceding generations, something that had never happened in America before. 

    Perhaps the American Dream was dying. This could lead to discussion of causes: rising college costs, widespread divorce, children on drugs, no health insurance and foreign competition. More than once, a student said, “Come on, Mr. Viall, now you’re scaring us.”  

(I assume they’d be even more worried if you discussed this topic today.)

 

    Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young put out a good album in 1988, titled: American Dream. One song, This Old House, captures the dying of the dream: 

Midnight, that old clock keeps ticking
The kids are all asleep and I’m walking the floor
Darlin’ I can see that you’re dreaming
And I don’t wanna wake you up when I close the door

This old house of ours is built on dreams
And a businessman don’t know what that means
There’s a garden outside she works in every day
And tomorrow morning a man from the bank’s
Gonna come and take it all away

Lately, I’ve been thinking ‘bout daddy
And how he always made things work
When the chips were down
And I know I’ve got something inside me
There’s always a light there to guide me
To what can’t be found

This old house of ours is built on dreams
And a businessman don’t know what that means
There’s a swing outside the kids play on every day
And tomorrow morning a man from the bank’s
Gonna come and take it all away

Take it all away, take it all away, take it all away
Take it all away, take it all away, take it all away

(There’s a little more to the song; but one line is not fit for young people. Not that a parent would ever complain! Ha, ha. Teacher sarcasm.)

 

    I finished our discussion of the American Dream by asking students to draw their own versions. I didn’t care exactly what they included. I wanted them to focus on their future and their own dreams. I wanted them to think about what it was going to take to get them where they wanted to go. I had students who drew mansions with swimming pools in the shape of dollar signs. Theresa drew a graduate in cap and gown, college degree in one hand, fistfuls of cash in the other. One student drew himself sitting in his office. He was a psychiatrist and had the pipe and beard. Another boy showed himself sitting atop a huge pile of money, lighting a cigar with a hundred dollar bill. There were baseball fields and ballet slippers and horse farms, all representing individual aspirations. Boys who loved cars and could draw put Porsches and Corvettes in their driveways. A girl showed herself draped with Olympic medals. 

    Another drew a smiling family in front of a big white house, yard enclosed by the white picket fence. In front of the fence you had the smiling parents and the smiling children, one girl and one boy.  

    Even the family dog wore a sappy grin. 

 

POSTSCRIPT: I grew up in the country myself and my suburban students always thought it would have been fun to have as much land as my family did. I would regale them with tales of my childhood, and all the interesting activities we were able to pursue with wide open spaces. 

    You could get a discussion going about whether or not kids would be better off today if they got outside more and did some of the silly crap we did in the “good old days.” Gathering apples in an orchard – and then drilling your buddies during an apple fight – great fun! That included the joys of cutting holes in apples with a pocket knife, inserting a fire cracker, and hurling those too. 

    Don’t try this at home, kids.

 

* 

LIFE on the frontier shaped a different kind of society:  

    Such a society was in theory and often in practice a leveling one, denying the existence of “the squire in the big house on the hill” with humbler folk touching a respectful forelock to him. It a premium on labor, for who would hire out when he could stand his own master on his own land? It also made it almost impossible to create a labor pool of any size or stability. (48/45)

 

* 

ROBERT FULTON goes to England to study portrait painting under Benjamin West, but according to Van Loon, he still turns out to be “a pretty bad one.” A poor Irishman, he had previously tried his hand as a jewelry salesman. (124-343)

* 

VAN LOON notes of the Founding Fathers: “At present they lie buried underneath tons and tons of sentimental nonsense.” (124-213) 

    He is hesitant even to tackle the subject of the U.S. Constitution, 

    Since that memorable day so much has been written and spoken upon this subject by such very learned people that I feel like a little boy who is going to tell Fritz Kreisler how to play the violin. And yet one cannot undertake to print a book about America without devoting a few words to the subject.

 

    The Constitution, as I see it, is one of those documents (like Goethe’s Faust or Dante’s Divine Comedy or Milton’s Paradise Lost) which are praised in proportion to the amount that they are not read. (124-243)

 

    And yet, Van Loon had no doubt the Founding Fathers had done great work: 

    Just when it seemed that this recently launched Ship of State was bound to be thrown up on the rocks of partisanship and was going to perish miserably amidst the turbulent waves of anarchy, Madison and his colleagues came to the rescue, corrected the compass and presented the crew with such an excellent set of charts and sailing instructions that the little vessel was saved from destruction and it was able to continue its voyage towards the limitless sea of the future with every assurance of a successful voyage. (124-244)

 

    He also notes that, “In several states it seems that not less than half of all available real estate changed hands during the period between 1775 and 1787.” Generally, he believes, the ordinary farmer gained most. (124-233) 

    Ben Franklin explained the two forces that most shaped human affairs, and government: “There are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power and the love of money.”   

    Alexander Hamilton said, “Aristocracy means a government by the wise, the wealthy and the good.” (124-246) 

    As for the Founding Fathers, he writes, “Furthermore they had been careful lest the people whom they loved in theory but whom they distrusted and hated in practice should be able to exercise any direct influence upon the choice of the executive.” (124-248)

 

* 

Constitutional Convention

(May 25-September 17)

 

    Andrews says Madison earned the title of “Father of the Constitution.” (2/180) 

    Andrews notes that from July 5 to August 13, New York was not represented at the convention in Philadelphia. The youngest member, Gillman of New Hampshire was 25. Eight members of the Constitutional Convention signed the Declaration of Independence. Six signed the Articles of Confederation.

 

*

 

THE NEW YORK TIMES notes in an article (9/19/05) that the Lycian League served as a model of sorts for the Founding Fathers. Both Hamilton and Madison mentioned the League in the Federalist Papers. The actual parliament building where representatives met was in the process of being excavated. The “throne-like perch” where they Lyciarch sat had been revealed. The league had 23 members and cities sent one, two or three representatives, depending on population. Inscriptions show the names of various Lyciarchs. The site is on the southern coast of modern Turkey.

 

*

 

“THE NEW-BORN republic narrowly missed dying in its cradle.” McLauglin quoting someone; loose page.

 

    “We are one today and thirteen to-morrow.” George Washington. He had also predicted “the worst consequences from a half-starved, limping government, always moving upon crutches and tottering at every step.” (56/217)

 

    John Adams believed “the rich, the well-born and the able” were qualified to rule. (56/loose page)

 

    “The country, to use Hamilton’s words, presented an ‘awful spectacle;’ there was a ‘nation without a national government.’” (56/223)

 

    Religious freedom was enshrined in the U.S. Constitution mainly to protect members of one religion against members of another. 

    These are notes from Madison: 

May 14: only a few assemble; business delayed 

Del. Reps have credentials that tell them NOT to change 1 vote per state rule under Articles. 

Randolph states one purpose, to create a new system to act, “against dissentions between members of the Union, or seditions in particular states.” (Check…25) 

Members of Senate to be elected by HR (out of a list from state leg’s) Congress “to negative all laws passed by the seversl States, contravening in the opinion of the National Legislature the articles of the Union; and to call forth the force of the Union ag^st any member of the Union failing to fulfill its duty under the articles thereof…” (87/31) 

Republican government “ought to be guaranteed by the United States to each State.” (87/32) 

Charles Pinckney laid a plan before the house; apparently it was little used. 

May 30: Madison proposes straight voting representation in Congress, by population, motion seconded, “and being generally relished, would have been agree to, when” Mr. Reed pointed out Delaware’s instructions. 

Gov. Morris had no desire to lose Delaware, but “the change proposed was however so fundamental an article in a national Gov^t that it could not be dispensed with.” (87/37) 

Sherman opposed election of HR by the people. “They want information and are constantly liable to be misled.” 

Gerry immediately adds: “The evils we experience flow from an excess of democracy. The people do not want virtue, but are the dupes of pretended patriots.” (87/39) 

Mason, strongest for people to elect HR; “He was for raising the federal pyramid to a considerable altitude, and for that reason wished to give it as broad a basis as possible.” (87/40) Vote 6-2-1 for election by people (NC/SC no) 

Randolph—need to cure ills “that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.” (87/42) 

Madison: “What his opinion might ultimately be he could not yet tell,” but he would work for the “safety, liberty and happiness of the community.” (87/44)

 

Sherman wanted executive “to be appointed by and accountable to the Legislature only, which was the depository of the supreme will of Society.” (87/46) 

Randolph wanted to elect three executives, not one. 

Wilson was for electing the executive by popular vote—it had worked in NY and Mass. 

Sherman said no, elect the executive by the legislature, “and for making him depend on on that body…independence of executive was “the very essence of tyranny in there was such a thing.” (87/48) 

Wilson wanted the president elected every three years, and eligible to run again. Pinckney said elect one for seven. Bedford (rarely heard) said elect for three, three times max. On June 1, by a 5-4-1 vote, “seven” passes. 

Mr. Rutledge then “suggests an election of the Executive by the second branch only of the national Legislature.” 

Gerry opposes Rutledge, saying “there would be constant intrigue kept up for the appointment,” legislature and candidates would bargain and cut deals. The Founding Fathers knew man was fallible under any system. On June 2, the FF agree to elect the president by the legislature, for seven years, vote 8-2, Pa. and NY, no.

 

Franklin: “Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power, and the love of money. Separately each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but when united in view of the same object, they have in many minds the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men, a post of honour that shall be at the same time a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it.” (87/52) 

Dickenson wanted the executive to be made removable by the National Legislature on the request of a majority of the legislatures of the individual states. “The happiness of this Country in his opinion required considerable powers to be left in the hands of the states.” (87/55) 

Ben Franklin argued that the president should not be paid.

 

Dickenson: “A limited Monarchy he considered as one of the best Governments in the world.” It was not suited to “the spirit of the times.” (87/57) 

Randolph was set against a single executive: “He felt an opposition to it which he believed he should continue to feel as long as he live.” (87/58) He preferred three, all from different parts of the country. Wilson pointed out that all the states had a single executive. Gerry: “It would be a general with three heads.” 

Wilson and Hamilton favor an executive given “an absolute negative on the laws.” (87/61) 

Butler: “It had been observed that in all countries the Executive power is in a constant course of increase.” (87/63) 

Franklin speaks of “experience, the best of all tests…” (87/64) 

Also BF: “Notwithstanding the oppressions and injustices experienced among us from democracy; the genius of the people is for it, and the genius of the people must be consulted.” (87/64) 

June 4: It was agreed the veto of the executive could be overridden by 2/3rds of both houses. 

Rutlidge wanted only one federal court, the Supreme. 

Madison: a government without an executive or judicial branch would be like a body without arms or legs “to act or move.” 

Gerry fears widespread franchise – ignorant rule superior men – but also fears aristocracy; in 2016 we have an aristocracy of wealth. 

Sherman listed four purposes of a national government: 

Defense

To stand against internal disputes and resorts to force

Treaties

Regulating trade – revenue from (87/74) 

Madison adds: “providing for the security of private rights and the steady dispensation of Justice.” (87/76) 

“In all cases where a majority are united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger…Besides, Religion itself may become a motive to persecution & oppression.—These observations are verified by the Histories of every country antient [sic] and modern.” (87/76) “We have seen the mere distinction of colour made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man.” (87/78) 

Read is not for fixing the Articles. 

Mason: “The purse & the sword ought never to get into the same hands whether Legislative or Executive.” (87/81)

(I need to finish taking notes on the Convention.)

An important figure at the Convention,
Wilson is forgotten today.

* 

A few of the obvious terms and concepts I wanted students to learn: 

Early U.S. government – an experiment; based on fear of government power. 

Daniel Shays and his followers were trying to keep their farms (and avoid going to debtors’ prison). Noah Webster said he was ready for a king; George Washington truly hoped to retire. 

Va. Plan, states get more votes, pop. NJ Plan, each state 1 vote

       Compromise: each side gives a little to get a little.

       Great Compromise

       3/5th’s Compromise

 

The U.S. Constitution is “the supreme law of the land.” The hierarchy is: 

U.S. Constitution

U.S. law

State constitution

State law

Local law

 

The Federalists preferred a republican form of government vs. a democracy. They did not trust the people to pick the president. So, we have the Electoral College, which no longer serves any purpose, since the Electors simply reflect the will of the people. 

Federal system: powers are divided, some left to the states, others assigned to the U.S. or “federal” government. (Students seemed not to remember that the U.S. government is the “federal government.) 

Congress, “necessary and proper” clause, also called the “elastic clause.”

Vice President Mike Pence.
A thankless job.
(Also dangerous?)
Official photograph; not in the blogger's possession.

 

The office of the vice president serves mainly as a safety device, a sort of “Break Glass in Case of Fire” box, in case the president is lost to natural causes, assassination or the rare impeachment. 

NOTE TO TEACHERS: This example always worked with my students: John Nance Garner called it, “…a _____.” (“pitcher of warm spit;” some say he used a more earthy liquid to make his point). I compared the VP to the ___ on the automobile of government…” (spare tire)

Not the best job: Vice President. 

    A few comments on the office and some of the men: Lincoln once referred to Schulyer Colfax as “a friendly rascal” (he was convicted near end of his term, under Grant, in the Credit Mobilier scandal). 

    Truman was a veritable unknown in 1944, favored for the job by only 2% of the people in a Gallup poll. He was “just dropped into the slot.” 

    John Adams referred to the post as “…the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived…” 

    “The vice presidency is not a stepping-stone to anything but oblivion,” said Teddy Roosevelt. 

    Thomas R. Marshall described the vice president as “a man in a cataleptic state; he cannot speak, he cannot move, he suffers no pain; and yet he is perfectly conscious of everything that is going on about him.” He served in his post for eight years under Woodrow Wilson. Marshall once joked that he didn’t need a guard. No one was interested enough to shoot him. He liked to sum up his position this way: “Once there were two brothers. One ran away to sea, the other was elected Vice President, and nothing was ever heard of either of them again.” 

    Charles Curtis was Herbert Hoover’s second-in-command (of very little). A Kansan by birth, he was once described as, “1/8th Kaw Indian and 7/8th’s incompetent.” He was five years old when the Civil War ended, and his life spanned almost to World War II. He died in 1936, having lived long enough to see the rise of Adolf Hitler. Typically, I had to look him up to see when he served. 

    In the 1931 musical, Of Thee I Sing, Alexander Throttlebottom is the vice president, but no one even remembers his name. He admits he didn’t want the nomination because his mother might find out. He spends time in office feeding pigeons and trying to find two references to get a library card.

 

*

ANOTHER TIME I tried to capture student interest by writing a selection called “Congress:  The Soap Opera.”  It worked well for several years – but then lost some of its punch when the cultural references started going out of date.  The ideas that really mattered were in bold.  The rest was stupid humor.  

    First, I included the definition of a constitution – a written plan of government.  (It was then necessary to make it clear to students that a constitution tells the government what it can and cannot do.  It DID NOT tell them what they could or could not do.) 

    I also made it clear that James Madison was “Father of the Constitution.”  Then I introduced the romance.  Madison is in love with Pamela Anderson.  We pick the story up there:

 

... As you also recall, the romance was doomed. 

 

Madison was from a.....big state. 

 

Pamela was from a small state.

 

We last saw Pamela Lee weeping and blowing her nose on a copy of the Virginia Plan. This conversation had touched off the trouble:

 

Madison: “Oh, Pamela, how can I be known as ‘Father of the Constitution’ if the small states and big states cannot get along?”

 

Pamela (who has the acting ability of a can of Crisco): “Duh. How do I look in this bathing suit?”

 

James: “Pamela, Pamela, is there no hope for compromise?”

 

Suddenly, Britney Spears and Darth Vader walked in. Madison was amazed.  What were they doing in this story?

 

Darth Vader spoke: “James, I am your father!”

 

Pamela stared blankly at Darth. “Duh!” was all she said.  

 

Madison was amazed. Suddenly, he realized it was time to dump his stupid, yet stunning, girlfriend. “Pamela,” he explained, “you are history!!!”

 

It was a cheap joke and even the Father of the Constitution was embarrassed. “Duh,” said poor Pamela.

 

*

 

James Madison was broken-hearted, but forced himself to sit down with his friend, Roger Sherman. They began working on the “Great Compromise.” Under this agreement the new government would have a Congress which included two houses. One would be the Senate. The other would be called the House of Pancakes.  Whenever one member wanted to raise taxes another would pour syrup over the first man’s head.

 

Madison and Sherman realized that was stupid. Maybe it would be better to call the second house the House of Representatives. 

 

It was a good idea. Even Pamela would have approved.

 

So it was done. Members of the House of Representatives would be elected every two years. These men would have the power to raise taxes--which would also be called the “power of the purse.” “This is a really cool idea,” said Roger. “No one else in government will be able to control a dime unless the representatives of the people give them money.”

 

Britney Spears takes offense when Madison insults her singing and her wig (this was in the days of the shaved head). So she beat him up. The second scene is in the hospital. 

The nurse placed ice over the swollen lump on Madison’s head. The battered Founding Father groaned. He began to mumble. “Pamela....Pamela...the Senate...oh… Pamela.” 

 

Suddenly, he shot up straight in bed. “Nurse! Nurse! You must help me. We have to make sure everyone understands! In the Senate each state will have two votes! The littlest state would have two votes – even if only two people lived there!!! And the biggest states would have only two!”

 

“You mean power will be balanced between the states?” gasped the nurse.

 

“Yes,” said James Madison. Then he passed out and was in a coma for the rest of 1787. (He forgot to mention that Senators would be elected for six years and would have no power to raise taxes. But it is too late now.)

 

*

 

On New Year’s Eve, 1787 Dr. George Clooney (played by George Clooney) was standing by Madison’s bed. Suddenly, Pamela Lee Anderson entered the room in a bathing suit. She had finally realized she loved James Madison. She looked sadly at her lost love, lying in a coma. 

 

“Duh,” she said with deep emotion.

 

The sound of her stupid acting snapped Madison out of his coma. He began to explain how the new Congress would work. Pamela quickly remembered why she broke up with him – and began wondering if George was dating anyone.

 

Madison could not stop talking. “Congress will make laws for the United States. But the lawmakers will have power only in matters where people in two or more states are involved. That will be their job. Ha! George Washington won’t make any laws as long as he lives! Neither will President Fillmore or President Clinton. And Clinton will get dizzy, chasing young women round his desk!”

 

“Both the House and Senate will vote on all bills. They will vote separately,” added Madison. “If one house votes a bill down, the other house won’t be able to pass it. It will require both houses – so that the interests of big states and little states will be protected.”

 

Pamela could not resist joining in: “This will also be known as a bicameral legislature.” 

 

Everyone else in the room stared at her in amazement. Anderson had said something that made sense!

 

    Eventually the Titanic sailed into the story and sank suddenly – with George Washington aboard; but the soggy first president was saved. Leonardo, however, was not so fortunate.

    I included several questions, some because I felt they were important, some because I believed they could be on the Ohio citizenship test. Notice that all the answers are in bold! 

1. Who is known today as the “Father of the Constitution?”

2. What is a constitution?

3. The ____ set up a Congress with two separate houses.

 

4. What is the “power of the purse?”

5. States with ____ have more votes in the House of Representatives.

 

6. Each state has ___ votes in the U. S. Senate, and members are elected every ___          years.

7. Congress can make new laws only if the ___ and ___ both pass them.

8. How many laws can a president make?

 

    I still had the same problems any teacher had. Sometimes we read the selection in class. Other years I had the kids start it in class and told them to finish it for homework. (The whole thing was only five pages.) But if we did it as homework I still had a significant number come in next day and say they couldn’t FIND some of the answers.  

    Occasionally, I would hold a blindness test. How many fingers am I holding up? I would raise two or three or four. Someone in class would say there were two or three or four. 

    “Well, unless you can’t SEE, I think you could find the answers,” I would explain. 

    Generally speaking, students enjoyed the humor. And I think they tended to learn the basics. Then again, on the test ten or twenty percent couldn’t tell you who the Father of the U. S. Constitution was.

 NOTE TO TEACHERS: The last two or three years I taught, almost all our meetings focused on raising eighth grade standardized test scores. We gave the social studies test in 2008, the year I retired. 

The next year, the State of Ohio folks decided the social studies test was flawed; and it was tossed. 

There is today still no social studies test for eighth graders. 

It’s almost as if the “school reformers” don’t know what they’re doing. But that couldn’t be, could it?

* 

ON A MORE serious note, in The Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton discussed the powers of the three branches, as he saw them, if the new constitution drafted in Philadelphia were adopted. 

    The New York Times summed up his thinking: “While the executive ‘holds the sword’ and the legislature ‘commands the purse,’ the judiciary ‘will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them.’”

 

* 

December 20: In a letter to Madison, Thomas Jefferson mentions some of his concerns regarding the structure of the proposed new government. He does not like, for example, the fact that the president can be reelected. 

    If once elected, and at a second or third election outvoted by one or two votes, he will pretend false votes, foul play, hold possession of the reins of government, be supported by the states voting for him, especially if they are the central ones lying in a compact body themselves and separating their opponents: and they will be aided by one nation of Europe, while the majority are aided by another. The election of a President of America some years hence will be much more interesting to certain nations of Europe than ever the election of a king of Poland was.