Compromisers, Including John Dickinson

This is, in many ways, the critical group, the ones who supported the Virginia Plan but favored giving each state equal representation in the Senate.  If the moderate nationalists were the most creative members of the Convention, the compromisers were the most statesmenlike.    The moderate nationalists made the original proposal that became the Constitution; the compromisers saved the convention from breaking down and made its success possible.   Overall, compromisers varied greatly in the amount of centralization they favored, ranging from ones who accepted the Virginia Plan only reluctantly, preferring the New Jersey Plan, to ones who only reluctantly agreed to equality in the Senate.  The one issue of centralization all but Benjamin Franklin agreed on was that they opposed states giving up control of their militias.

John Dickinson (Delaware).  The Great Compromise is also called the Connecticut Compromise because it was supported by the Connecticut delegation, but the honor of being first to propose it goes to John Dickinson of Delaware, and he proposed it, no less, on June 2, the end of the very first week of the Convention.  He argued on that date that it was essential to the stability of the country to preserve the states.  Furthermore, “He hoped each State would retain an equal voice in at least one branch of the National Legislature, and supposed the sums paid within each State would be a better ratio for the other branch than either the number of inhabitants or the quantum of property.”  No one at the time paid much attention to the proposal.

Dickinson showed another extraordinary piece of insight very early in the convention when he proposed that the lower house be elected by the people directly and the upper house by the state legislature, the system ultimately adopted.  Nonetheless, Dickinson’s proposals went largely unheeded, as large state delegates resisted equality in the Senate and small states resisted the entire system.  When the small states proposed the New Jersey Plan, Dickinson told Madison, “You see the consequences of pushing things too far.  Some members from the small states whish for two branches in the General Legislature, and are friends to a good National Government; be we would sooner submit to a foreign power than submit to be deprived of an equality of suffrage in both branches of the legislature, and thereby thrown under the domination of the large States.”  (?).

Dickinson showed himself to be a nationalist in general, other than his support for equality in the Senate.  He firmly supported having the national legislature paid from the national treasury to keep it independent of the “prejudices, passions, and improper views” of state legislatures.  He even favored a Congressional veto of state laws, saying that it was impossible to draw a line between proper and improper use of the veto and either the national or state governments must be exposed to the risk of being injured by the other.  Like Madison, he thought there was greater danger of encroachment by the states.  He also favored establishing federal courts and opposed any guaranty of existing state borders.  Finally, he favored allowing the federal government to intervene in case of a rebellion in a state without the state’s request, or at least with only the request of the executive, rather than the legislature.