James Wilson, Founding Father: What the History Books Do Not Tell Us

102 JOURNAL

By Morton M. Rosenberg, Ph.D.

For almost a quarter of a century, beginning in 1774 and ending with his death in 1798, James Wilson was among the leaders of the Revolu- tionary Generation, operating along the cutting edge of almost all that transpired during this immensely significant period of American national development. His own peers held him in high respect for his legal talents, political philosophy, scholarly knowledge. Yet, for the most part, he remains largely unknown to most historians and completely unknown even to the educated general American public. James Wilson was a well-educated Scottish immigrant who arrived in the American colonies in 1765, the year of the furor over the Stamp Act. The Scottish Common Sense philosophers were just beginning to be per- vasive and persuasive in the major universities of Scotland, chiefly Edinbergh to be sure, but including Wilson"s own St. Andrews. Even after reaching American shores Wilson continued to read, and be influenced by, these leaders of the Scottish intellectual Renaissance.1 While avenues to advancement in Scotland were severely limited to persons from the lower strata of society, even if superbly educated, such was 90/2, 1986 103

James Wilson not true in the British Colonies, especially for bright young men of promising intellect. Here Wilson"s career could only advance, primarily as a result of his legal apprenticeship to one of the leading lights of the American colonies, John Dickinson, author of the famous and widely read Letters of a Pennsylvania Farmer. Upon completion of his legal studies and following his eventual marriage to the daughter of a prominent business and industrial leader from Carlisle, Pennsylvania, Wilson"s private legal practice began to blossom and the young man who attended university on a special scholarship was fast on his way to becoming a man of wealth.' During the period of Wilson"s early private legal successes, much was happening in the American Colonies. The respite afforded by the repeal of the Stamp Act was short-lived as other developments seemed to conspire to force a confrontation between England and her American colonies: Revolu- tionary committees of Correspondence, Boston Massacre, Boston Tea Par- ty, Intolerable Acts, Continental Congress. At this point Wilson attained almost instant national recognition with the publication of his pamphlet, Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authority of the British Parliament. This pamphlet propelled him to the front ranks of the 104 JOURNAL revolutionary pamphleteers, including Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, and, later, Thomas Paine. Indeed, one of his contemporaries suggested that Paine would act wisely if he were to seek out suggestions from Wilson for what later appeared as Common Sense.' Wilson"s pamphlet examined the relations between Britain and her American colonies. Dissecting Parliamentary pretensions to legislative authority over the Americans, he concluded that "the American colonies are not bound by the acts of the British Parliament because they are not represented in it"4 Parliamentary authority, Wilson wrote, is derived solely from the people and wholly by representation which the American colonies do not possess or even share with their English counterparts. While the Americans were bound by loyalty to the British Crown, they owed no such obedience to the Parliament. Wilson"s solution to a confrontation between the English and Americans was a dominion relationship, such as would ultimately come into being during the second half of the Nineteenth Cen- tury between England and certain of her colonies: Canada, Australia, New Zealand. Wilson"s selection to be one of Pennsylvania"s representatives to the Second Continental Congress was partially a result of the impact of his pamphlet. It was the Second Continental Congress which had to confront the question of the independence of the American colonies from Britain, particularly in view of the fact that actual fighting had occurred at Lex- ington and Concord in April, 1775, between the Minutemen and the Red- coated English troops. In connection with the possible independence Wilson and the Pennsylvania delegation were in somewhat of a quandary. Not only were some Keystone delegates reluctant to accept and support independence, but the Pennsylvania Assembly had instructed the delegation not to support any such result. Wilson believed that he was obligated to obey his instructions, but he also sensed that Americans from other colonies were also reluctant to commit themselves to such a consummate goal. Pro- crastination and delay became favorite tactics of the Pennsylvania delegates and earned for them a number of uncomplimentary sobriquets. Wilson had to accept in silence being referred to as a 'Tory", while others of the Penn- sylvania delegation, such as John Dickinson, were simply labeled as conser- vatives.' In the end, as John Adams mentioned to his wife Abigail, the Penn- sylvania position of caution provided the time needed for other Americans to come around to the notion of independence:

. . . the delay of this Declaration to this time has many great advantages attending it. The hopes of reconciliation which were fondly entertained by multitudes of honest and well-meaning, though weak and mistaken people have been gradually, and at last totally extinguished! Time has been given for the whole people to consider the great question of independence and to ripen their judgment . . . so that the whole people, in every colony of the thirteen, have now adopted it as their own act.6 90/2, 1986 105

That Wilson personally favored and supported the move to independence may be substantiated both by his words and by his actions. On May 31, 1775, he was appointed Colonel of the Fourth Battalion of Associators from Cumberland County. This unit would be numbered among the revolutionary militia from Pennsylvania, though its colonel was too encumbered by duties in Congress personally to lead his men in actual battle.' Also in 1775, in one of his speeches Wilson had unequivocably stated his position for his fellow citizens:

We wish for peace. We wish for safety. But we will not, to obtain either or both of them, part with our liberty.'

Wilson was far from a reluctant signer of the Declaration of In- dependence, even though his mentor and friend, John Dickinson, could not bring himself to do so. Wilson had the satisfaction of knowing that Thomas Jefferson"s final version of this historic document embraced some of Wilson"s own words and thoughts enunciated in his pamphlet of 1774: "All men are by nature equal and free" and "the happiness of the society is the first law of every government."9 Following his participation in the discussions leading to the signing and promulgation of the Declaration of Independence, Wilson"s time was encumbered by a number of activities, both public and private, which would ultimately set the stage for his most important service to his adopted country. During the period 1776-1787 Wilson was involved in national affairs through service in several sessions of the Continental Congress and the Con- gress under the Articles of Confederation, lucrative and at times unpopular law practice — he defended a number of alleged Tories in Philadelphia against charges of treason — state-level politics as a leading opponent of the Pennsylvania state government with its unicameral legislature, and support of the Bank of North America." He was also involved in complicated and widespread land investments that would, in the end, cause him no little anguish and permanently damaged his reputation. In this latter regard, however, he was by no means alone, for speculation in western lands was something of a popular pastime in certain circles and included such well- known persons as Robert Morris and George Washington. The former, like Wilson, would experience total economic collapse, while the latter would emerge unscathed." Aside from Wilson"s important service in the Congress of the Articles of Confederation where he discharged a multitude of duties as a member of numerous committees, his most important intellectual contribution prior to 1787 took the form of another pamphlet, this one appearing in 1785. 12 Con- siderations on the Bank of North America, for which Wilson received a fee of $400, was a defense of the Bank of North America." The brain-child of Robert Morris, the Bank had received a national charter from Congress in 106 JOURNAL

1781 and a state charter from Pennsylvania the following year. Subsequent- ly, the complexion and composition of the membership of Pennsylvania"s unicameral legislature altered sufficiently for the leadership to punish those who had been the most vociferous opponents of the Pennsylvania Constitu- tion of 1776 and of the unicameral legislature which the state frame of government established. Among the major political critics of the state government were the friends and supporters of the Bank of North America, including its Board of Directors, of whom Wilson was one. The supporters of the Pennsylvania state government, called Constitutionalists, saw in the repeal of the Bank"s charter a marvelous means of wounding their political critics, dubbed Republicans. That a repeal of the charter might well have in- jured further the already ailing state economy was secondary to the primary objective. Wilson and other leading Republicans would engage in political confrontation with the leading Constitutionalists throughout the 1770"s and 1780"s and into the early 1790"s.14 Wilson"s pamphlet in behalf of the Bank examined the constitutionali- ty of both its national and state charters as well as the question of sovereignty, its divisibility or indivisability. He concluded his discussion by pro- mulgating the doctrines of dual sovereignty, implied powers of government, and obligation of contracts. The Pennsylvania State Assembly, however, was unimpressed and revoked the Bank"s charter." The lasting significance of Wilson"s pro-Bank pamphlet would be demonstrated by John Marshall"s Supreme Court decisions during the first quarter of the Nineteenth Century in such landmark cases as McCulloch v. Maryland, Dartmouth College v. Woodward, Fletcher v. Peck, and Cohens v. Virginia." Moreover, a clause guaranteeing the obligation of contracts would find its way into the Con- stitution of the United States, Wilson"s greatest and most outstanding achievement. All that Wilson had accomplished in his endeavors on the national and state levels merely served as preamble to his really most important and most enduring achievement, the Federal Constitution. Scholars generally have concurred that Wilson"s activities in the Philadelphia Federal Convention were almost unmatched. According to Andrew C. McLaughlin"s evaluation of Wilson"s service in the Constitutional Convention: "Perhaps Madison alone can be called his equal in judgment and far-sighted wisdom.' Max Farrand, whose work on the era of the Constitution has never really been surpassed by more recent scholarship, agreed that Wilson "was second to Madison and almost on a par with him."18 Lucien Alexander was unreserv- ed in his assessment of Wilson"s work on the Constitution when he wrote that "it is no undue praise to record that without the force, power and tact of Wilson in the Federal Convention, without his persuasive arguments and profound learning, no agreement could have been reached upon a federal Constitution."' These assessments have come from older scholars. 90/2,1986 107

Recent scholarship, however, not only specialists in the field of history, but from the fields of law and political science as well, believe that the older historians were right on the mark. Clinton Rossiter"s view was that Wilson was "second only to Madison — and an honorable second."20 Adrienne Koch wrote that Wilson "played a role second only to Madison in the Convention."21 Ralph Ketcham insisted that Wilson "carried the day for the Constitution."' He was referring to Wilson"s labors to secure its ratification by the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention. In this connection, John B. McMaster and Frederick D. Stone long ago simply asserted that "Wilson must be regarded as the father of the Constitution in Pennsylvania."" Thus the prevailing scholarship seems to concur with Conyers Read who stated that Wilson and Madison "were among the few men chiefly responsible for the form the Constitution finally took."" Indeed, the federal Constitution which emerged from the deliberations in Philadelphia — without a Bill of Rights — adhered to the broad, general concepts which Wilson consistently espoused. On a number of specific points as well, the Constitution echoed Wilson"s well-known views. Wilson sought to create the framework for a nation. The weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation together with the ineffectiveness of unicameral legislatures, exemplified by the national Congress and the Pennsylvania Assembly, motivated Wilson to campaign for a strong, central, national government with separation and balance of powers, based, a much as possible, directly upon the consent of the governed. He promoted a two-branch national legislature, a strong executive, and an independent federal judiciary. He sought, but failed to secure, the election of both houses of Congress and of the president by direct popular vote." The enactment of the Seventeenth Amendment attests to Wilson"s perspicacity and the adoption of the Electoral College is based upon a suggestion he had made." With respect to popular voting, a position from which he never deviated throughout his career and which ran counter to the prevailing view of the revolutionary era, Wilson declared, "The government ought to possess not only the force, but also the mind or sense of the people at large. The legislature ought to be the most exact transcript of the whole society.72' Wilson"s favorite metaphor was a comparison of the broad basis of government with the broad base of a pyramid. The broader the basis of each, the higher and sounder was the resultant edifice." Though the Constitution did not follow Wilson"s views throughout, it certainly conformed in principle and actuality to much of what he espoused. The reconciliation of opposing philosophies and perspectives, the practical compromises which emerged, the synthesis between conflicting thesis and antithesis — all comport with what one scholar recently wrote of Wilson. He was at his best as a polite reconciler of contradictory views and posi- tions. 29 The Constitution of the United States stands out as testament to this 108 JOURNAL evaluation. Wilson"s contemporaries on the one hand and modern scholars on the other all agree that Wilson took the lead in securing the ratification of the constitution by his own state. Hampton L. Carson, writing about Wilson"s speeches to the delegates in the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention, asserted that Wilson"s remarks "are regarded by students as among the most illuminating expositions of the work of that day, ranking with the papers of Madison, Hamilton and Jay, collected under the title of "The Federalist."" More recently, Broadus and Louise Mitchell accepted the view that Wilson"s "addresses were quite equal to the Federalist papers of Hamilton and Madison."31 Ralph Ketcham observed that Wilson"s "printed speeches . . . [were] . . . more widely known in 1787-1788 than The Federalist Papers."" Wilson"s contemporary peers and colleagues could not praise him enough. One asserted that "he never failed to throw the strongest lights on his subjects."" Another insisted that Wilson"s "eloquence was of the most commanding kind . . . His mind, while he spoke, was one blaze of light."" A third recalled that "all the political institutions of the world he knows in detail."" Of course his detractors disagreed. One hostile critic disgustingly noted of his work at the Ratifying Convention that "James the Caledonian, lieutenant general of the myrmidons of power,"" succeeded in securing the ratification of the Constitution by Pennsylvania. Indeed, Wilson played the leading role in the ratification process in Pennsylvania where he confronted and confounded his long-standing political foes and currently the enemies of the proposed Constitution. Led by John Smiley, William Findley, and John Whitehill, these Wilson an- taganists had championed the Pennsylvania State Constitution, its unicameral legislature, the repeal of the bank charter, and the existing Ar- ticles of Confederation." Fortunately for Wilson and other friends of the federal constitution, the anti-Federalists, as the opponents of that document came to be called, were out-voted on every occasion by a count of 46 to 23. Wilson was the lone member of the Pennsylvania Ratifying Conven- tion, which ran from November 21 to December 15 of 1787, to have also served in the Federal Convention. To him fell the full task, though ably assisted by Thomas McKean, Anthony Wayne, and Benjamin Rush, of ex- plaining and defending the product of the Federal Convention against the slurs of Smiley, Findley, Whitehill and their confederates." During the course of the discussions — the Constitution was subjected to a detailed examination — Wilson admitted: "I am not a blind admirer of this plan of government," but he, nevertheless, intended to give it his complete support." Only over the matter of trying to explain the failure of the Con- stitution to contain a Bill of Rights did Wilson"s arguments falter. Similar concerns, of course, were raised in the other states, but the vow to secure 90/2,1986 109 the passage of a Bill of Rights, as amendments to the Constitution, pacified reluctant supporters and opponents in Pennsylvania and elsewhere." Penn- sylvania could take pride in becoming the second state to ratify the Con- stitution as, indeed, could also Wilson himself. Having attained the pinnacle of his career with the formulation of the Constitution and having secured its acceptance by the Keystone State, Wilson turned his attention to three additional goals: replacement of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, delivery of lectures in Law as the first Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania, appointment to the United States Supreme Court, preferably in the position of Chief Justice. Contemporary opinion generally concurred that Wilson had one of the finest legal minds in the new nation. His previous labors, his earlier pamphlets, his known political theory and philosophy all combined to motivate Wilson to seek the Chief Justiceship of the new High Court from President Washington. The latter, however, deemed it politic to offer the foremost position on the Court to John Jay, but Wilson did receive the President"s approval for one of the Associateships." Wilson may well have swallowed his pride by accepting the lesser appointment, but accept he did. As an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Wilson was well-placed to pursue his theory about the role of the Court under the new framework of government. The only significant case, however, to reach the Court during his tenure was Chisholm v. Georgia, a case which concerned the con- stitutionality of a state being liable to a suit by a citizen from another state. The opportunity to strike another blow against the sovereignty of a state was too good for Wilson to resist and he led the court into striking a blow against Georgia and states rights. Alarmed at the implications of this deci- sion, the states rather quickly ratified the Eleventh Amendment and thereby administered a rebuke to Wilson and his point of view regarding State powers." On the question of constructing and implementing a new state constitution for Pennsylvania, Wilson had already cherished the pleasant aroma of success. He and his Republican cohorts had fought the Constitution of 1776, with its unicameral legislature, its test oath of loyalty, its disenfran- chisement of many potential voters, since the inception of that document. Having beaten back his foes, who had supported the older Constitution of Pennsylvania, at the Ratifying convention, Wilson looked forward to repeating his triumph at the Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention of 1790. Wilson, of course, was the principal architect of Pennsylvania"s new frame of government." For more than two decades, beginning in 1774, James Wilson was in the forefront among the Founding Fathers of the Revolutionary Genera- tion. His peers accorded him high marks for achievement for his service to his nation and his state. His speeches and writings were known throughout 110 JOURNAL the states, even on a par with, or superior to, The Federalist Papers. He associated, at one time or another, with all of the major figures among the Founders as an equal and respected colleague. Yet despite the importance of his contributions and the signficance of his achievements, James Wilson remains largely unknown to all except specialists of the Founding Era. Recent scholars have all lamented that most historians and general public, however well-educated, have only a vague or no idea of who Wilson was or what he accomplished. Wilson"s sole biographer, writing in 1956, expected to eliminate Clio"s covering mantle blocking Wilson from public sight, but apparently, such would not be the case." Writing more than a decade later, Robert G. McCloskey asserted that Wilson was known "only to a few constitutional historians." But, he insisted, "To most other historians he is not more than a name . . . and to educated Americans in general he is not even a name." 45 Writing more recently, in the 1980"s, other scholars concur. "[Wilson] is little known by the general public," 46 stated one, while another noted that Wilson has "remained a relatively obscure Founder despite his many contributions to the Founding."" That Wilson will become better known to Americans in the immediate future is not very promising. American History Textbooks, written for adoption in secondary and post-secondary history courses, continue largely to ignore Wilson and his important role during the Founding Era. An examination of ten randomly selected American History textbooks, adopted for use in High School American History courses, reveal a paucity of information about Wilson and his achievements. Three of these high school texts are among the most widely used texts in the United States." One contains no mention whatever of Wilson, 49 a second simply lists him as a signer of the Constitution from Pennsylvania," while the third merely states that he was 45 years of age at the time of the Federal Convention and cites a brief quotation of his referring to the large state, small state confrontation there." The other seven American History high school textbooks are also consistently unsatisfactory, though not as widely adopted as the three texts cited above. Four fail entirely to contain any references to Wilson," while the remaining three mention him just once each: The first stated that Wilson sought popular election of the president for reasons of nationalism. He, like Madison, noted the authors, desired the President to represent all the people." The second textbook called attention to the basic weakness of the government under the Articles of Confederation by citing Wilson"s criticism of the excessive power of the States under the Articles." The third made the same reference as the second, but provided a lengthier quotation from Wilson"s remarks of 1787.55 High school students in American History classes which employed any of the ten textbooks cited would learn little or nothing about the broad 90/2,1986 111

scope and significance of Wilson"s service in behalf of his country and his state. Some would learn, if they were fortunate enough to use textbooks which took at least minimal notice of Wilson, that he was forty-five years old at the time of the Federal Convention, that he was a nationalist, that he was chary of the power of the individual States under the Articles of Con- federation, and that he signed the Constitution. No student would learn anything about his activities in the Continental or Confederation Con- gresses, his two significant pamphlets, his role in the proceedings which led to the Declaration of Independence, or that he signed that document, the many contributions he made during the Federal Convention, his leadership in the ratification process in Pennsylvania and in creating a new frame of government for his state, his service on the original Supreme Court, or, indeed, that he was even a Founding Father in any sense of the term. High school American History teachers cannot normally be expected to bridge the gap created by the general neglect of Wilson in the textbooks their classes use, for their own subject-matter American History education also suffered from similar neglect. Textbooks adopted for use in American History classes on the collegiate and university levels are almost as inade- quate as their high school counterparts. Of fourteen textbooks widely promoted by publishers for adoption by post-secondary level instructors, three are silent on Wilson," while four others manage to make reference to him merely once," and two more cited him twice each." Students in American History classes in colleges or universities using any one of these last six textbooks can learn that Wilson was a lawyer and a pamphleteer in the same league with Adams and Jefferson, indeed, that he wrote Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authority of the British Parlia- ment, that he was in the Federal Convention as a delegate from Penn- sylvania, that he experienced some difficulty trying to explain the lack of a Bill of Rights to the members of the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention, or that he opposed the Three-fifths Compromise in the Federal Convention. These students, like their younger counterparts in high school, would learn nothing else about full extent of Wilson"s service to state and nation. Five post-secondary level American History textbooks refer to Wilson from three to seven times: one cited him thrice, three more mentioned him four times, and another as many as seven separate times. Students using the textbook which cited Wilson three times would learn about a minute slice of his work in Philadelphia in 1787: Wilson was among the top dozen men who brought forth the Constitution, opposed the idea of granting each state an Franklin.59 equal vote in Congress, and read a speech for the enfeebled Benjamin

College or university American History students who read any of the textbooks which contained as many as four references to Wilson would merely learn that he was a land speculator, a nationalist, a supporter of 112 JOURNAL

popular election of senators, a supporter of the large state proposal of Virginia, an able lawyer second only to Madison and Washington in the Federal Convention, an early proponent of the idea of selecting the president through a system of electors, an opponent of extreme states rights, a critic of the government of the Articles of Confederation and the author of the pamphlet of 1774 proposing the dominion system of government." Students would not learn all of the foregoing, merely a select portion, depending upon which textbook his instructor determined to adopt. The textbook written by Morrison, Commager, and Leuchtenburg of- fers students the grandest coverage of Wilson and the broadest, though still far from adequate. They make reference to his pamphlet of 1774, a mob incident involving his house in 1779, the caliber of his service at the Federal Convention, his expansive vision of westward expansion, and his support of judicial review. In addition, they note his general age and foreign origins.' Again, however, Wilson comes across to the reader without any thorough delineation of the full scope of his services as a leading member of the founding generation. Unless students in post-secondary American History classes attended courses taught by specialists of the Revolutionary Era, they would never learn of Wilson"s role as one of the leading Founders. Non-specialists only have a minimal knowledge of Wilson"s achievements. As a result, teachers and textbooks in American History on the secondary and post-secondary levels continue to perpetuate the lack of information which surrounds Wilson. Wilson apparently will continue to languish generally forgotten by most Americans, known vaguely to most historians, and appreciated only by specialists of the Founding Generation. The textbooks tell us as much or as little.

Notes

1. Though it should be employed with caution, C. Page Smith. James Wilson: Foun- ding Father, 1742-1798 (Chapel Hill, 1956) still remains the only full length biography available. See especially chapter I. Cf. Leavelle, Arnaud B., "James Wilson and the Relation of the Scottish Metaphysics to American Political Thought," Political Science Quarterly LVII (1942), 394-410. 2. McCloskey, Robert G. ed. The Works of James Wilson (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1967), I, 11-12. 3. Butterfield, L.H., ed. Letters of Benjamin Rush (Princeton, 1951), II, 1008. See, also, Corner, George W., ed. The Autobiography of Benjamin Rush (Princeton, 1948), 110, 112; and Rossiter, Clinton. 1787: The Grand Convention (New York, 1966), 105. 4. Wilson, James Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authority of the British Parliament (Philadelphia, 1774), 24. 5. Brunhouse, Robert L. The Counter-Revolution in Pennsylvania, 1776-1790 (New York, 1971), 10, 12. 6. Quoted by Smith, C. Page. James Wilson, 88-89. 7. Papers of James Wilson, III, 4. Pennsylvania Historical Society, Philadelphia. 8. Quoted Black, Henry C., "The Continental Congress and the Articles of Confedera- tion" in Chandler, J.A.C., ed. Genesis and Birth of the Federal Constitution (New York, 90/2,1986 113

1924), 245. 9. Wilson, James. Considerations on the Nature and Extent of the Legislative Authori- ty of the British Parliament. 3. 10. See Young, George L. "The Services of James Wilson in the Continental Congress," Ph.D. Dissertation (Lehigh University, 1954); McCloskey, Robert G., "James Wilson" in Friedman, Leon, and Israel, Fred L. eds. The Justices of the United States Supreme Court, 1789-1969; Their Lives and Major Opinions (New York, 1969), I, 86. 11. Butterfield, L.H., ed. Letters of Benjamin Rush, I, 350, 449; McCloskey, Robert G., "James Wilson," 85-86; Rossiter, Clinton. The Grand Convention, 105, 319. 12. Wilson, James. Considerations on the Bank of North American (Philadelphia, 1785). 13. Wilson, Janet, "The Bank of North America and Pennsylvania Politics, 1781-1787," The Pennsylvania Magazine to History and Biography, 66 (1942), 3, 4, 10, 11. 14. Ibid, 3, 8, 16, 17; Brunhouse, Robert L. The Counter-Revolution in Pennsylvania, 124; Bradbury, M.L., "Legal Privilege and the Bank of North America," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, XCVI (April, 1972), 144-145, 156-157; Alexander, John K., "The Fort Wilson Incident of 1779: A Case Study of the Revolutionary Crowd," William and Mary Quarterly. Third Series, XXXI (October, 1974), 590. 15. Wilson, James. Considerations on the Bank of North America, 19ff.; Wilson, Janet, "The Bank of North America," 11-12; Bradbury, M.L., "Legal Privilege and the Bank of North America," 154; Smith, C. Page. James Wilson, 152; McCloskey, Robert G., ed. The Works of James Wilson, I, 23; See, also, Mason, Alpheus T., ed. The States Rights Debate: Anti-Federalism and the Constitution (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1964). 16. Carson, Hampton L., "James Wilson and James Iredell: A Parallel and a Contrast," The Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, XLV (1921), 12; Mc- Closkey, Robert G., "James Wilson," 86-87. 17. McLaughlin, Andrew C., "James Wilson in the Philadelphia Convention," Political Science Quarterly, XII (March, 1897), 1-2. 18. Farrand, Max. The Framing of the Constitution (New Haven, 1913), 198. 19. Alexander, Lucien H., "James Wilson, Patriot, and the Wilson Doctrine," The North American Review, CLXXXIII (1906), 973. 20. Rossiter, Clinton, The Grand Convention, 247-248. 21. Koch, Adrienne, ed. Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 (Athens, Ohio, 1966), XII. 22. Ketcham, Ralph, review of Seed, Geoffrey. James Wilson in The American Historical Review, 84 October, 1979), 1146-1147. 23. McMaster, John B., and Stone, Frederick D., eds. Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, 1787-1788. (Philadelphia, 1888), II, 699. 24. Read, Conyers, ed. The Constitution Reconsidered (New York, 1938), 80. 25. For Wilson's democratic views see Seed, Geoffrey, "The Democratic Ideas of James Wilson," Bulletin, The British Association for American Studies, 10 (1965), 3ff.; and Seed, Geoffrey: James Wilson (New York, 1978). 26. The most recent discussion of the establishment of the Electoral College is by Slonim, Slomo, "The Electoral College at Philadelphia: The Evolution of an Ad Hoc Congress for the Selection of a President," The Journal of American History, 73 (June, 1986), 35-58. 27. Farrand, Max. The Records of the Federal Convention (New Haven, 1937), 1, 133, 28. Ibid., 375. 29. Conrad, Stephen A., "Polite Foundation: Citizenship and Common Sense in James Wilson's Republican Theory," in Kerland, Philip B., Casper, Gerhard, and Hutchinson, Den- nis J., eds. The Supreme Court Review: /984 (Chicago, 1984), 383, 387-388; Cf. Leavelle, Ar- naud B., "James Wilson and the Relation of the Scottish Metaphysics to American Political Thought," 384, 404ff. 30. Carson, Hampton L., "James Wilson and James Iredell," 6-7. 31. Mitchell, Broadus, and Mitchell, Louise Pearson. A Biography of the Constitution of the United States: Its Origin, Formation, Adoption, Interpretation (New York, 1975), 33. See, also, Read, Conyers, ed. The Constitution Reconsidered, lx-x. 32. Review of Seed, Geoffrey. James Wilson, 1146. 114 JOURNAL

33. Quoted by McMaster, John B., and Stone, Frederick D., eds. Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, II, 758-759. 34. Corner, George W., ed. The Autobiography of Benjamin Rush, 150. 35. Quoted by Rossiter, Clinton. The Grand Convention, 106. 36. Independent Gazeteer, January 12, 1788. 37. For a good discussion of the opponents of Ratification in Pennsylvania see Ireland, Owen S., "The Ratification of the Federal Constitution in Pennsylvania," Ph.D. Dissertation (University of Pittsburgh, 1966); Cf. Main, Jackson T. The Antifederalists: Critics of the Con- stitution 1 78 1-1 7888 (Chapel Hill, 1961) and Rutland, Robert A. The Ordeal of the Constitu- tion: The Anti-Federalists and the Ratification Struggle of 1787-1788 (Norman, Oklahoma 1966). 38. Brunhouse, Robert L. The Counter-Revolution in Pennsylvania, 208; Rutland, Robert A. The Ordeal of the Constitution, 26; McMaster, John B., and Stone, Frederick D., eds. Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, I, 208; Rossiter, Clinton. The Grand Conven- tion, 286-287; McCloskey, Robert G., "James Wilson," 89-90. 39. Quoted by McMaster, John B., and Stone, Frederick D., eds. Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, I, 149. 40. Mason, Alpheus T., ed. The States Rights Debate, 80; Ireland, Owen S., "Partisan- ship and the Constitution: Pennsylvania 1787," Pennsylvania History, XLV (October, 1978), 330-331; Read, Conyers, ed. The Constitution Reconsidered, 127. 41. James Wilson to George Washington, April 21, 1789. Society Collection. Penn- sylvania Historical Society, Philadelphia. 42. McCloskey, Robert G. The Works of James Wilson, I, 30, 35-36. For a critical view of Wilson's role on the Court see Bradford, M.E. A Worthy Company: Brief Lives of the Framers of the United States Constitution (Marlborough, New Hampshire, 1982), 87. 43. Corner, George W., ed. The Autobiography of Benjamin Rush, 130; McCloskey, Robert G., "James Wilson," 84, 85, 90; Tinkcom, Harry M. The Republicans and Federalists in Pennsylvania 1790-1801 (Harrisburg, 1950), 8, 14, 15; for Wilson's long struggle against his political foes in Pennsylvania see Ireland, Owen S., "The Ratification of the Federal Constitu- tion in Pennsylvania," which is badly mis-titled. 44. Smith, C. Page, James Wilson, x. 45. McCloskey, Robert G., ed. The Works of James Wilson, I, 6-7; McCloskey, Robert G., "James Wilson," I, 80. 46. Hyneman, Charles S., and Lutz, Donald S., eds. American Political Writing During the Founding Era, 1760-1805 (Indianapolis, 1983), II, 1264. 47. Conrad, Stephen A. "Polite Foundations," 386-387. 48. See Siler, Carl R., "A Content Analysis of Selected United States History Textbooks Concerning World War II," Ed.D. Dissertation (Ball State University, 1985) for the names of the five most widely adopted United States history textbooks by secondary school districts in the nation. 49. Madgic, Robert F., Seaberg, Stanley S., et. a!. The American Experience: A Study of Themes and Issues in American History (Menlo Park, California, 1979). 50. Risjord, Norman D., and Haywoode, Terry L. People and Our Country (New York, 1978), 159. 51. Todd, Lewis P., and Curti, Merle. Rise of the American Nation (New York, 1982), 151, 153. 52. Bailey, Thomas A., and Kennedy, David M. The American Pageant: A History of the Republic (Lexington, Massachusetts, 1983); Davidson, James W., and Lytle, Mark H. The United States: A History of the Republic (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1984); Peck, Ira, Jantzen, Steven, and Rosen, Daniel. American Adventures (Austin, Texas, 1983); Schwartz, Sidney, and O'Connor, John R. Exploring Our Nation's History (New York, 1984). 53. Conlin, Joseph R. Our Land, Our Times: A History of the United States (San Diego, 1985), 162. 54. Boorstin, Daniel J., and Kelly, Brooks M. A History of the United States (Lex- ington, Massachusetts, 1983), 104. 55. Green, Robert P, Becker, Laura L., and Coviello, Robert E. The American Tradi- tion: A History of the United States (Columbus, Ohio, 1984), 86. 90/2,1986 115

56. Griggs, Grey P. and McCandless, Perry. The Course of American History (New York, 1983); Kelley, Robert. The Shaping of the American Past (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1982); Wilson, R. Jackson, Gilbert, James, et.al. The Pursuit of Liberty: A History of the American People (New York, 1984). 57. Blum, John M., McFeely, William S., et.al. The National Experience (New York, 1985), 102; Garraty, John A. The American Nation: A History of the United States (New York, 1983), 84; Gruver, Rebecca B. An American History (New York, 1985), 172; Link, Ar- thur S., Coben, Stanley, et.al. The American People: A History (Arlington Heights, Illinois, 1981), 224. 58. Jordan, Winthrop D., Litwack, Leon F., et.al. The United States (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1982), 141, 144; Nash, Garry B., Jeffrey, Julie R., et.al. The American People: Creating a Nation and a Society (New York, 1986), 152, 233. 59. Norton, Mary Beth, Katzman, David M., et.al. A People and a Nation: A History of the United States (Boston, 1986), 173, 175, 176. 60. Bailyn, Bernard, Dallek, Robert et.al. The Great Republic: A History of the United States (Lexington, Massachusetts, 1985), 234-236, 262; Divine, Robert A., Breen, T.H., et.al. America: Past and Present (Glenview, Illinois, 1984), 164, 169-171; Tindall, George B. America: A Narrative History (New York, 1984), 193, 264, 268, 269, 61. Morrison, Samuel E., Commager, Henry S., and Leuchtenburg, William E. The Growth of the American Republic (New York, 1969), 163, 213, 244, 245, 249, 256, 257.

About The Author Morton M. Rosenberg, a native of New York, was reared and educated in Hartford, Connecticut, where he attended Trinity College from which he received his B.A. and M.A. degrees. In 1957 he was awarded the Ph.D. from University of Iowa. He taught for a time at Danbury State College, and for the past 26 years has been professor of history at Ball State Univer- sity, Muncie, Indiana, and has served as department chairman. He has specialized in studies of state and local history as reflective of certain national issues of importance. He has been published in many scholarly jour- nals. Dr. Rosenberg serves on the Editorial Board of the Indiana Magazine of History.