A Second Constitutional Convention... in 1788

Deleted member 139407

Hi all,

I've been visiting this site for quite some time and have always been interested in alternate history. One of my favorite periods to think about is the early United States, specifically, when the Articles of Confederation were falling to pieces. I firmly believe that there are numerous ways in which the United States could've gone if the right people WEREN'T there at the right time.

Lately, I've been pondering if George Washington sustained a severe injury and wasn't able to make the Philadelphia Convention and if, say, Roger Sherman were to die before he'd make the Convention to propose the Connecticut Compromise, what are some possible avenues the constitutional question could go? Maybe we see a United States with some government akin to the Virginia Plan? Maybe a rump United States?

Best,
Mr. Havana
 

Mikestone8

The Virginia Plan was impossible, as the smaller states would never have ratified it. So it would almost certainly just have ended with the Connecticut Compromise under another name.

Is Washington's injury serious enough to eliminate him for the Presidency? If so you could end up with a multi-member executive (or one with far more limited powers) rather than the Presidency as we know it.
 

Deleted member 139407

Mikestone8 said:
snip
Click to expand...

To your points,

Is there anyone who could've picked up the mantle - for lack of a better phrase? Someone besides Sherman who could propose a similar compromise? Tbh, I was using the Virginia Plan as a jumping point. The Virginia plan certainly wouldn't have passed in its totality, you're right on that.

As for Washington's injury, I was thinking something along the line of a leg injury. A peg-legged Washington came to my mind, but I think an injury like that would at least prevent him from making the convention in May if it's serious enough. Thoughts?

Best,
Mr. Havana
 

Mikestone8

Mr. Havana said:
Is there anyone who could've picked up the mantle - for lack of a better phrase? Someone besides Sherman who could propose a similar compromise?
Click to expand...

I'd have thought almost anyone from any of the smaller states. After all they already had "one state, one vote" under the AoC, so it was more a question of what they would concede to the larger states. They could give up equality in one chamber of a bicameral legislature, but both - it couldn't happen.

If you want a name, maybe Paterson of New Jersey. But there'd be someone. As Rossiter puts it in The Grand Convention, Madison just couldn't get it through his head that when the small state men said "never", they meant "never", and that w/o this concession, the Constitution just wasn't going to happen. Fortunately other large-staters were more realistic, and Madison was overridden.
 

Deleted member 139407

Mikestone8 said:
...Paterson of New Jersey...
Click to expand...
The guy behind the New Jersey Plan? I can see it under the circumstances. Thanks for the suggestion!

Now, do you think an Executive Committee could be added - and passed - with this new compromise? In terms of the NJ Plan and this Paterson-led compromise, it seems like the Congress - now with the added proportional HoR and two-member per state Senate - would meet as a single body to elect the Committee... Also, and this is about the process of electing the committee under this hypothetical Paterson Constitution, would it be similar to how modern US Presidents pick someone, then have the Senate confirm or deny them just administered to the whole Congress? Or would it be more so like a congressperson nominating a person to the office and then having the confirmation vote?
 
Red Wolfe

Red Wolfe

If William Paterson was the one to form the compromise constution then I find it entirely reasonable to think that maybe the senate ends up more like the old congress of the confederation. As for the exeutive branch maybe a simi presidential system could work?
 

Deleted member 139407

SlyDessertFox said:
...basically devoid of anything but ceremonial power...
Click to expand...
It could be possible... but even in both situations, Congress gets the majority of power. Good catch, nonetheless!

brickhouse said:
...I find it entirely reasonable to think that maybe the senate ends up more like the old congress of the confederation...
Click to expand...
I'm interested in what you mean by the above quote. In what ways do you think? Do you mean by passing a law unanimously or just by the general set up of ye olde Congress?
 
Red Wolfe

Red Wolfe

Mr. Havana said:
I'm interested in what you mean by the above quote. In what ways do you think? Do you mean by passing a law unanimously or just by the general set up of ye olde Congress?
Click to expand...
The general set up, as in the states get a certain amount of senaters based on the population but each state gets only one vote.
 

Deleted member 139407

brickhouse said:
...the states get a certain amount of senators based on the population but each state gets only one vote...
Click to expand...
Ah, I see! So, to my next question(s). What happens to Presidential power? I know that @SlyDessertFox mentioned the possibility of a ceremonial President being elected by electors, and the NJ Plan called for a Congressionally elected Executive Committee. What's the more plausible outcome? I, personally, am tossing my hat behind a Congressionally elected President and Committee. However, I'm still unsure of how Congress would go about electing the Committee. How would Paterson and this new constitution handle this?
 
Red Wolfe

Red Wolfe

Mr. Havana said:
Ah, I see! So, to my next question(s). What happens to Presidential power? I know that @SlyDessertFox mentioned the possibility of a ceremonial President being elected by electors, and the NJ Plan called for a Congressionally elected Executive Committee. What's the more plausible outcome? I, personally, am tossing my hat behind a Congressionally elected President and Committee. However, I'm still unsure of how Congress would go about electing the Committee. How would Paterson and this new constitution handle this?
Click to expand...
In my opionion its likely that they would split the otl powers of the president among 2 ( a simi presidental system) or more people ( something like what the swiss confederation has otl). With out washington its unlikely the founding fathers would be willing to give so much power to one person like they did with the otl presidency. For the 2 person option its likely one would be chosen like the otl president and the other by the senate. Any more then 2 and it gets hard to say how they would be elected but it would more then likly not be by congress but under something resembling the electoral collage.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 139407

brickhouse said:
snip
Click to expand...
So, to my previous point, let's say Washington either retires from politics and the military altogether because of a leg injury sustained during the Whiskey Rebellion and/or dies because of it. Would the President in this Paterson constitution purely have ceremonial powers? Could we see a separate "President of the Congress Assembled" come into play as a Prime Minister-like executive?
 
Red Wolfe

Red Wolfe

Mr. Havana said:
So, to my previous point, let's say Washington either retires from politics and the military altogether because of a leg injury sustained during the Whiskey Rebellion and/or dies because of it. Would the President in this Paterson constitution purely have ceremonial powers? Could we see a separate "President of the Congress Assembled" come into play as a Prime Minister-like executive?
Click to expand...
The founding fathers would try to avoid a weak exacutive thanks to the articals of confederation and its still likely that they would want as much seperation of powers as possable. So while it is possable that there is a president of the congress assembled acting like a prime minister, this president would only hold some powers as a head of goverment while a sperate head of state with some other seperate powers also emerges.
 

Deleted member 139407

brickhouse said:
So while it is possible that there is a president of the congress assembled acting like a prime minister, this president would only hold some powers as a head of government while a separate head of state with some other separate powers also emerges.
Click to expand...
Could we see something akin, but not the same, to the modern day Fifth French Republican semi-presidential government or maybe that of Portugal? I'm asking this because Paterson's NJ Plan - this is still based off of @Mikestone8 's suggestion of Paterson forming the compromise - seemed to have an Executive Committee and a President of Congress - the original plan was still a unicameral legislature, but it seems a semi-Presidential system wasn't totally out of play to begin with...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Red Wolfe

Red Wolfe

Mr. Havana said:
Could we see something akin, but not the same, to the modern day Fifth French Republican semi-presidential government or maybe that of Portugal? I'm asking this because Paterson's NJ Plan - this is still based off of @Mikestone8 's suggestion of Paterson forming the compromise - seemed to have an Executive Committee and a President of Congress - the original plan was still a unicameral legislature, but it seems a semi-Presidential system wasn't totally out of play to begin with...
Click to expand...
It seems to me that both Portugal and Franch have a similer goverment structure ( if any would like to inform both me and havana on the diffrences please do so). Regarding the Executive Committee while possable I still think simi presidental is the most likely. Assuming the Virginia and New Jersey plans are the same as otl ( if the pod is washington dies early this is likely) then those on the side of the Virginia plan will deride the executive committee idea as (depending on the amount of people in it) slow and imefficient requiring both sides to compromise on even how many people run the country
 

Deleted member 139407

brickhouse said:
( if the pod is washington dies early this is likely)
Click to expand...
The main POD is that George Washington sustains a leg injury during the Whiskey Rebellion. The Convention convenes as per the original timeline, but Washington is unable to go. Washington succumbs to his injuries, and, to add fuel to the fire, Roger Sherman catches pneumonia and passes away before he can go to the convention, as well. I'm still working on the butterflies to reach to a second convention in the spring of 1788.
 

Anarch King of Dipsodes

Mr. Havana said:
:/ shucks... I must’ve meant Shays’ Rebellion. **Realises Washington wasn’t at Shays’ Rebellion thus preventing his POD injury** D’aw phooey... Good catch, by the way @Anarch King of Dipsodes !
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, since the WR was against collection of Federal excise tax on whiskey, it couldn't have been before the Constitution was ratified. But it's not important - Washington could trip and fall down the stairs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top