The Arugment

In the book American Creation, more specifically, chapter three The Argument, Joseph Ellis describes the creation of our constitution.  In 1783, the war for Independence was finally over, but in a sense, a new battle was just beginning. To say it simply it was an argument over how much power should be in-trusted to the central government. Washington believed the central government should be fully empowered, this however, contradicted political values of the day. The gap created by this dispute was really over the personal definition of American Revolution. The vision that won over was federalism, and this was reached with not one, single mind, but through a process with many different minds and thoughts. In a sense the argument that was taking place WAS the solution. It was going to be a nonstop negotiation for supremacy, and it would never finish. 
James Madison was a main influence and top leader in the argument. The tension was high as the Shays rebellion, many protests in 1786 to 1787 that was started by American farmers against tax collections, had just taken place. Madison began to exposed the failures of a weak government and things began to fall apart. Washington, who swore he would not return as a leader after he left office, broke his own promise to come back and try to hold things together. Madison, Washington, and Adams spread out and went to countless different conventions. They went as sort of a 'trial and error' to find the perfect mix of decentralized and central government. Madison's main proposal, which was unheard of at the time, was republic actually works better in larger geographic areas. He introduced the Virginia Plan at the Philadelphia convention. The plan proposed a legislative branch with two chambers the bicameral legislature. The states would be represented in proportion to the number of inhabitant. Larger states would obviously have more say, so of course they were in favor while smaller ones were not as thrilled at the idea. Thus came a retaliation from the smaller states as they proposed, The New Jersey Plan. It states that each state regardless of size would receive one vote. Neither plan was appreciated by the other side so a compromise was in action. The Connecticut Compromise created a House of Representatives shared by population and the Senate where each state was represented equally. 

There was one "wild card" that upset any outcome perceived of this whole ordeal. Patrick Henry, the same Patrick Henry that made the profound statement, "GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH", was back and ready to stir the water some more. Only this time he was the opposing view. Henry was prepared to oppose the ratification and his only regret? "That he found himself on the other side of the one man for whom he had 'the greatest Reverence." Henry was one of the most popular figures in Virginia and an opponent to be weary of. Madison and Jefferson were irritated at his entry into the argument and Jefferson said that the only thing to do when confronted by Henry was, "devoutly pray for his imminent death". Henry planted thoughts into the peoples head about what Washington and others were proposing. He asked where the idea that America was on the brink of anarchy and that the Articles were outdated come from? He used Jefferson's phrase against him saying that Virginia, from what he could tell, was getting along nicely and that it was practically an example of, "pursuit of happiness". Henry stated,
 "The Confederation... carried us through a long and dangerous war. Rendered us a territory greater than any European monarch possesses. And shall a Government this strong and vigorous be accused of imbecility for want of energy?" Madison "unfurled" his own argument making known all of the weaknesses of all the confederacies previously. He did his research and was not afraid to unload it onto Henry. He touched on the Achaean League, the German system, the Swiss and Dutch. Then asked
"Does not history of these confederacies coincide with the lessons drawn from our own experience?" 
Answering his own question he stated, "a government which relies on thirteen independent sovereignties for the means of its existence is a solecism is theory, and a mere nullity in practice."
The amazing thing about Madison's debate, apart from the way he beautifully argued, was that despite all of the conflicting interests in the Virginia Convention represent the 'Madionian' theory. Patrick Henry eventually stepped down from the argument, saying that, "they had lost, and now 'they had all better go home" Even though the Constitution may not be perfect and may indeed be faulty to some degree, it seemed that it was destined to become infused into our country. The whole point to Madison's Constitution, now our Constitution, was that it encased a never ending argument. So in a way the "final word" will never be spoken, and progress will never cease.