In June 1787, the Committee of the Whole made its second report and recommended the revised Virginia Plan again. Immediately after that, the meeting discussed the resolution in more detail. After the main purpose is achieved, representatives of big countries are willing to make some concessions in order to achieve harmony. For example, the word "country" that caused the objection was deleted unanimously in the first resolution, and then it was deleted "naturally" in every subsequent resolution. As some deputies agreed to elect members of the House of Representatives every year, and finally reached a compromise within the previously set three-year period, they voted unanimously for two years. Although it did not get the same unanimous approval, other amendments made the plan less opposed: the term of office of senators was set at "six years, and one-third was changed every two years", but it did not insist that the salary of members of the legislature "came from the US Treasury"; Senators and representatives can hold state posts, although they are declared not to hold public office in the United States. All these are secondary, and most people will never give in on more important issues. On the other hand, representatives of small countries formed a more United and determined opposition. This fact is obvious. In the Committee of the whole, the legislature is divided into two chambers and voted unanimously. But at present, there are three States that oppose this issue, and the fourth state has both opposition and approval. Earlier, Charles Pinckney suggested that the state legislature elect the House of Representatives, but only three states supported it. At present, there are four States in favor, and the fifth state has mixed advantages and disadvantages. However, the discussion is still going on quite calmly, although everyone feels that the test is coming. When the issue of proportional representation was raised in the Committee of the Whole, Franklin pointed out that "before this issue appeared, our debate was conducted with great calm and patience". It still is. In the past few days, everything has gone relatively smoothly. But this is just the calm before the storm that everyone can feel. This unresolved state is unbearable. If we can't overcome this storm, we'd better end it quickly. Therefore, when rutledge put forward a proposal on June 27th, the meeting unanimously voted to immediately discuss those resolutions containing "the most fundamental thing, that is, the voting rules of the two houses". When the plenary session was eager to discuss this issue, Luther Martin chose this most inappropriate time and made a long speech at the hottest weather. He talked for more than three hours, and he was exhausted, not to mention the endurance of the audience. At this time, he announced that he would continue to talk the next day, which made everyone very depressed. A few months later, when they were arguing about the passage of the Constitution in the newspaper, ellsworth wrote to Martin painfully, saying, "You opened the door to opposition with a speech. This speech lasted for two days. If you didn't glance at either side of the meeting with humiliating eyes and see strong fatigue and disgust, you might speak for two months. " Madison and Yates both complained that it was difficult to hear Martin clearly because he was "very wordy and quite excited" when he spoke. His main argument seems to be that a unified government should be formed for the states, not for individuals, but it would be more effective if his argument were more precise and put forward at a more appropriate time. Hamilton was very disappointed with his poor performance in the meeting. His idea is too radical to be approved, and his vote doesn't work, because it is always overwhelmed by his two colleagues. He is very concerned about the outcome of the meeting, but he feels that he is wasting his time. This feeling may be strengthened by Martin's sweet words, because Hamilton left the meeting for new york the next day. But he wrote to Washington that he would come back at any time if he could make a difference. Then he appeared in Philadelphia two or three times from time to time. At the end of the meeting, it took more than three weeks to discuss the issue of sending representatives in proportion to size. Any satisfactory solution to this difficult problem seems to have been rejected and the meeting is on the verge of collapse. Gouverna Morris said afterwards, "The fate of America hangs on a hair at the moment." As soon as this question came out, the participants were in high spirits, so Franklin stepped in and suggested that "a prayer for help from heaven should be held at the conference every morning" It seems surprising that such a commendable proposal is opposed, especially considering its origin. However, some people worry that the meeting has been going on for so long, which may make the public suspect that there are differences of opinion during the meeting. There is also a legend that Hamilton opposed the proposal because the meeting didn't need "foreign aid". The real reason for any difficulty in this matter is undoubtedly what Williamson said: "The meeting has no funds." This incident became a difficult problem, and at this time, the General Assembly avoided this problem by adjourning. On June 29th, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey and Delaware voted against it, and Maryland also voted against it. The meeting decided that "the voting method of the House of Representatives should not be in accordance with the provisions of the Confederacy". Then the question of the Senate came. It was suggested that each state should have equal voting rights in the Senate. This proposal was put forward by the representative of Connecticut, but it is doubtful whether this should be largely attributed to them and whether this proposal came from them, because this idea was often put forward in earlier discussions. The debate that followed was vivid and convincing. The representatives of Connecticut supported their proposal humbly and brilliantly. Others on their side, such as Bedford and Dayton, are not so gentle. Wilson, Madison and Rufus king expressed their opposition in strong and sometimes sharp language. Franklin proposed a compromise as usual. At the beginning of the debate, the representative of New Jersey suggested that the president of the conference should write a letter to New Hampshire, stating that "the nature of the problems facing the conference requires the gentlemen appointed by the state to attend immediately". It is estimated that New Hampshire will be in line with small States, so the intention of this proposal is extremely obvious. But obviously, everyone thought this method was too vicious, so it was quickly rejected. Then on Sunday, and then on the morning of Monday, July 2, the first thing to do is to ask a question, that is, every state has equal voting rights in the Senate. The vote is tied. Five states are in favor, five states are against, 1 states are equally divided. This unexpected result was caused by a combination of two situations: the absence of Jennifer from Maryland made Luther Martin vote for the state, and abraham baldwin changed his mind and voted for it, making the votes in Georgia equally divided. Luther Martin declared that he believed Baldwin didn't change his mind and voted for it, but because he was sure that these small States would withdraw from the meeting before making concessions on this point. There is no evidence to the contrary, and all the circumstances confirm what Martin said. Although Georgia is a small state in number, it has a vast territory in the west, so it is eager to become one of the big States. At the Constitutional Convention, state representatives often vote for big states. On this issue, it is important that Baldwin was from Connecticut, so he undoubtedly has a friendly understanding of the attitude of state representatives. In other words, it is also very appropriate for him to temporarily sacrifice his personal opinions in order to maintain coordination. If his actions lead to compromise, which seems likely, then his merits and demerits will be judged by anyone. The meeting is currently deadlocked. After someone put forward one or two suggestions that were not particularly recognized, General Pinckney suggested that each state set up a committee to try to design a compromise. Wilson and Madison strongly opposed it, and several people thought it would not have much effect, but the meeting generally agreed and passed the proposal by a majority. Members of the Committee are elected by ballot. It is hard to say whether the Committee was adopted because of the concerted efforts of the representatives of small countries or because of the strong atmosphere of compromise in the meeting. However, as long as we look at the list of committees, we can see that the representatives of small countries have won. The Committee consists of Gerry, ellsworth, Yates, Patterson, Franklin, Bedford, Martin, Mei Sen, David, rutledge and Baldwin. "The meeting is adjourned until Thursday so that the Committee and those who want to participate in the celebration of Independence Day have enough time." Few people know what happened in the Committee. Yates's record said that the discussion in the Committee was mostly a repetition of the debates that had occurred in the meeting. Because he didn't explain his position in advance, he took the opportunity to do it. He added, "These words led to Dr. Franklin's suggestion, which was approved after some amendments and used as the basis of the Committee's report." Madison also recorded that the report was based on Franklin's suggestion, and said that Sherman put forward a proposal that was not passed, that is, "each state should have an equal number of 1 votes in the Senate, and the Senate cannot make any resolution unless most States agree to the resolution, including most residents in the United States." On July 5th, the Compromise Committee submitted its report and recommended two plans, "provided that both plans are unanimously adopted". The essence of these two suggestions is: (1) In the House of Representatives, each state should have 1 representative among 40,000 residents, and five slaves count as three. Paper money should be issued by the House of Representatives without amendment by the Senate. (2) In the Senate, each state should have an equal number of 1 votes. The argument broke out again at once, and they blamed each other. Madison, for example, said that he restrained his opinions on the report only because he respected the members of the Committee. He added that he was willing to accept any consequences of rejecting the report. Ancient werner Morris strongly opposed this report. It is understood that he said that the whole country should be unified on a fair and reasonable basis. "If reunification cannot be achieved by persuasion, then reunification should be achieved by force". Bedford apologized for being too violent. What he said is that if small countries are cornered, they may seek the support of foreign forces. But he thinks what Morris or Goeheim said is excusable. They said Delaware should be incorporated into Pennsylvania and New Jersey should be divided equally between Pennsylvania and New York. Williamson is willing to listen to and discuss the report, but he thinks the suggestions in the report are the most disgusting he has ever heard. Representatives of small States supported the proposal, although some people, such as Patterson, suggested making excessive concessions and expressed their opposition. But it is worth noting that the spirit of compromise has become stronger. Since it seems impossible or inappropriate to vote on the whole report at once, different parts are dealt with separately. The first part of determining the proportion of representatives is given to a special committee of five people, which will first determine the absolute number of representatives of each state, and then stipulate future changes. As for other items, they are treated as different parts of the report. Surprisingly, the Senate rarely discussed the issue of equal voting among States, but the voting on the whole report was postponed until the report of the special Committee was submitted. On July 9, the Special Committee recommended that the House of Representatives be composed of 56 representatives, including two from New Hampshire and seven from Massachusetts. The legislature should be authorized to decide the number of future representatives according to the principle of wealth and the number of residents. The second half of the report was passed quickly without debate and by a majority vote. However, the first half is not satisfactory because it only concerns the number of representatives of each country. Therefore, after a brief discussion, it was submitted to a Committee composed of one person from each state. Then adjourn. The next morning, this committee composed of 1 1 members reported that the number of deputies in the House of Representatives had increased to 65. It may be true that "the population of big States has been subtly reduced" ... to prevent big countries from playing an inappropriate role in the government. However, the number of people allocated to each state is undoubtedly a compromise in the Committee. Several proposals at the meeting tried to change this situation, but they were rejected by most people. It is not clear whether the provisions of the clause will change in the future. At this time, Randolph proposed that in order to determine the population and wealth of each state, a population survey should be conducted at a fixed stage, and then the number of representatives should be arranged accordingly. Williamson suggested a slight modification, which Randolph immediately accepted, that is, the census should be aimed at free white residents, and "for all others", five people count as three. Representatives of South Carolina and Georgia suggested that blacks should be treated equally with whites, which caused a short debate. However, this proposal was rejected by 7 States to 3 States, and only Delaware supported the above two southern States. At this time, some people raised objections that this proposal was not in line with the previously adopted resolution. The resolution stipulates that the number of future delegates should be determined according to wealth and population. The present proposal abandons wealth, except slaves, which is property. Several people commented that population is the best way to calculate wealth, and in any case, proportional representation is the only feasible method. The meeting decided to adopt the alternative method proposed by Randolph and Williamson, but we should talk about this problem separately. Everyone agrees that the number of delegates should be allocated according to the census. Six States voted for four States, agreeing to conduct a census of "free residents", but the bill including "three fifths of all others" was rejected by the same number of votes. On this issue, there is no obvious difference between States with slaves and States without slaves. When voting on the first question, Delaware and Maryland joined South Carolina and Georgia and voted against it. The second question includes three-fifths of the number of slaves, and Connecticut, Virginia, North Carolina and Georgia voted in favor. Obviously, there are some seemingly unobservable motives at work, because the meeting obviously doesn't like voting on the second question. Almost immediately, the whole resolution so decided was overturned unanimously, and the result of the meeting did not go any further. The discussion of this issue occupied the whole day of the meeting in July 1 1. 12 The first thing in the morning of July was that Guvina Morris suggested adding a sentence to authorize the legislature to change the number of deputies according to the principle of wealth and the number of residents, with the additional condition that taxes should also be proportional to the number of deputies. There was a brief discussion at the meeting, and the wording was changed to direct tax only, which was subsequently adopted by all participants. The main problem is solved in this way, and it is easy to reach an agreement on further details. It is worth noting that Gouverner Morris later hoped to cancel this clause, although he suggested it himself, because it was inconsistent with his own opinion, and "he just wanted to use this clause as a bridge to help us cross a gap." Before the end of the day, it was decided that the number of delegates should be in proportion to direct taxes. In order to determine this change ... this is often needed ... The census should be conducted within six years ... Then, every 10 years, a census should be conducted for all residents of the United States in the manner and proportion suggested by the Confederate Congress Resolution 1783. " 1783 recommended ratio, of course, is the ratio of five to three. The amendment proposing equal voting for blacks and whites was rejected by eight States to two. The meeting seems to be in a good state of mind at present. This may have nothing to do with the outcome of the meeting, but the climate has become hot for more than a week, that is, since the appointment of the compromise Committee, but it has become cool on the night of 12. In any case, the next two days will be used to discuss and revise this and other details in the revised report. On the morning of July 16 1, the whole compromise plan was quickly passed. Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and North Carolina voted for it, Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia voted against it, and Massachusetts was mixed. New york's vote was not included, because Yates and Lansing left the meeting a few days ago, because they were dissatisfied with the direction of things, because they thought they were not authorized to support proposals beyond their instructions. This is a great compromise between this meeting and the Constitution. No other event can be completely compared with it. There have been many misunderstandings about this matter, and many people have made many wrong explanations about it, but after reading the development details mentioned above, the main points should have been clarified. One of the main features of the compromise is that each state should have equal voting rights in the Senate of the legislature, and the principle of proportional representation in the House of Representatives is not part of the compromise, although the details of implementing this principle have been compromised. The absolute number of representatives from several states in the House of Representatives has been approved. In the future, the proportional appointment of representatives shall be made by the legislature on its own according to the population, and the number of slaves shall be counted as three fifths. Direct taxes will be proportional to the number of deputies. The additional condition is that paper money should be issued by the House of Representatives and cannot be amended by the Senate. Some representatives think this additional condition is extremely important, but others think it is not important. Many people claimed that they had made a big compromise, but others attributed the credit to others. In recent years, due to the constitutional history of Bancroft (188 1), Volume 1, Chapter 9. The decisive influence of the Connecticut delegation is generally attributed to the Connecticut delegation, so this compromise is called the "Connecticut compromise."