Constitutional Journal

Utterly absorbing!! Someone actually DISCARDED this book!! I was the lucky person who found it on the discards pile. Written from the point of view of a "You Were There" journalist, the author keeps the subject matter and the tone of writing IN the 18th century and draws the reader in. I was utterly amazed at the way the in-fighting, bickering, arguing and rhetoric that tended to demolish all efforts to reach a reasonable meeting of the minds in constructing the Constitution finally came together to (almost) everyone's satisfaction.Jeffrey St John's style of writing is de-personalized in the BEST sense-- the actions come through loud and clear as though the reader was actually watching a live broadcast of events. The book kept me on the edge of my seat in some places. WELL DONE!!!!

Each year in September is a little known holiday known as Constitution Day - timed to be around the close of the Constitutional Convention in September 1787, this day is honoured at the college where I teach by speakers in a special forum, and the gift of pocket versions of the Constitution for all interested students. However, the Constitution is heavily in the news, more than we often realise. When the election of 2000 was contested, the Constitution became primarily important; it is always in the background of Presidential elections, but this time it came to the forefront. In the current situation between Chief Justices (a relatively rare occurrence in American history), once again the Constitution is big news. We the people are interested, and we the people should be interested. However, we the people often have little concept of how this formative and foundational document came into being. Jeffrey St. John provides an answer to this situation, in very engaging and accessible style. This is a journal, a day-by-day account, done in a sort of combination of journalistic and court-reporting styles. Of course, we have no direct journal of this sort, as the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention were strictly secret (not the kind of thing that would play out well in our media-saturated world - CSPAN and CNN among others would certainly expect to be there!). Indeed, those who went to the Constitutional Convention in May 1787 were charged with a reformation of the Articles of Confederation, not the drafting of a new Constitution. History had a surprise in store. This is not the only area of interest. St. John's documentation shows the different influences into the formation of the Constitution - while it is common to look to classical times and contemporary European governments for influences and inspiration, in fact the most memorable words of the Constitution come from the constitution of the Iroquois League, drawn up in 1520, which began with the words 'We the people, in order to form a union...'. The various federal structures, the separation of state and federal powers and responsibilities, the debates over how representation is carried out (and who gets represented; the issue of slavery was contentious from the start, and one can clearly see the seeds of the Civil War being planted even at the Constitutional Convention) - these are all portrayed with clarity and candour. The Constitution was not a document that was intended to be from the outset, nor was it passed unanimously (indeed, not all states were represented at all times of the Convention, not all delegates appointed attended, and one state never participated at all). Some of the founding fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, made references to divine intervention being key in the process; Franklin at the end made the warning about the government being a Republic, 'if you can keep it' - no doubt recalling the fall of othe

The 200th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution resulted in a series of columns by J St. John. These 1787 meetings were secret, no official records were kept. But the notes of James Madison and others survived to reconstruct daily events. The original intent of this meeting was to revise the Articles of Confederation (Appendix 1), but a new Constitution resulted (Appendix 2). There is no index. Many of the basics were the subject of debate and controversy. Some called the result a "miracle" (p.x), but it shows the power of a committee whose members work to the same ends. This book attempts to portray the meetings as an evolving news story, as it was happening. Most Americans do not understand the Constitution, because it is poorly taught in schools from unclear text books (p.xiv). Deliberate obfuscation? These 230 pages are a remedy. This book will give a short introduction into the daily operations of this historically important event. The Constitution has endured for over 200 years because it is a framework (p.131), not a detailed plan that can't be adapted to changing situations. The Constitution has endured as long as it is in the interest of "We the People" to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity. The hidden agenda of the convention was to create a strong national government that had veto power over all state laws (5-20-1787). The most important reason was the question of domestic and foreign commerce. Rivalries between the bankers and merchants of the North against the planters of the South prevented Congress from regulating trade (5-23-1787). Both forces would unite against farmers and the common people, and the danger of too much democracy (5-29-1787). The Convention wanted to avoid the failures of the Articles of Confederation. The Confederacy owed [money amount]in debt and needed to find a way to pay off their debts (p.139). The unlimited powers of the Royal Governors made the delegates fearful of a single executive. The consequences of consolidating power was fatal to ancient republics (6-2-1787). Experience rather than abstract arguments shaped the Convention (6-4-1787). Neither the executive nor the legislature should have absolute power. The big problem was to create a national government that would provide balance between the large and the small states. States would be equally represented in the Senate, the lower House would be directly elected by the people, based on proportion to population. This was the key to creating a new national government (p.110). The Southern states were more numerous and wealthy than the Northern states; their method of computing political representatives won (7-12-1787). The Convention unanimously rejected "wealth" as the basis for representation; they should not fear the growth of population (7-13-1787). The new government wou

I'm a nerd. 95% of my books are computer-related. This book will gave me an appreciation of what an extraordinary event the convention was. Several times it shows how it could have so easily fallen apart or gone off in a different direction (and Lord knows what kind of land this would be if it had). This book and another great book called 'Voices of 1776' will give you an awesome sense of how lucky we are to be what we are today. I cannot recommend this book more highly. (BTW, did you know that the only two signers of the Declaration of Independence who went on to become presidents, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, died within two hours of each other on July 4, 1826 - 50 years to the day the Declaration was signed?)

Fantastic series! Read all three.