NEW YORK INTRODUCTION

Yates and Hamilton first attended the Convention in Philadelphia on
25 May, the first day of a quorum. Lansing came a week later on 2 June.
From the beginning the Clintonian delegates had "forebodings" about
the Convention. On 30 May, Yates voted in the minority against Ham-
ilton on a motion that called for the Convention to create a "national
Governt." Two days later, Robert Yates wrote a confidential letter to his
uncle, Abraham Yates, Jr., then serving in Congress in New York City,
in which he indicated that his "forebodings ... are too much realized."
Because of the Convention's secrecy rule, Yates could not relate any of
"its business until the final close of it. While I remain a sitting member
these rules must be obligatory." He was uncertain how long he would
remain in Philadelphia, but "in the mean while," he was keeping "an
Exact journal of all its proceedings." With this letter Yates communi-
cated important and sensitive information back to New York. Because
of the dominance of nationalist sentiment in the Convention, Yates and
Lansing might abandon the Convention. This would leave New York
unrepresented in the Convention because a minimum of two delegates
had to be present for a state's vote to count. Realizing the explosiveness
of his letter, Yates warned his uncle that "This Communication is in
the most perfect confidence, in which only one person [i.e., George
Clinton] beside yourself can participate." 78
Throughout their stay in the Convention, Yates and Lansing voted
with a minority of delegates who favored amending the Articles of Con-
federation in order to invest Congress with limited additional powers
that would not unduly shift sovereignty away from the states. They usu-
ally voted together against Hamilton. During the climactic debate over
the choice of the Virginia Plan (29 May) which called for the aban-
donment of the Articles of Confederation in favor of a national gov-
ernment, or the New Jersey Plan (15 June) which proposed amend-
ments to the Articles of Confederation, Lansing argued on 16 June that
the mere consideration of a national government violated the resolu-
tion of Congress calling the Convention as well as the delegates' com-
missions from their state legislatures. New York, he told the Conven-
tion, "would never have concurred in sending deputies to the
convention, if she had supposed the deliberations were to turn on a
consolidation of the States, and a National Government." Furthermore,
he asked "was it probable that the States would adopt & ratify a scheme,
which they had never authorized us to propose? and which so far ex-
ceeded what they regarded as sufficient?" The states, according to Lan-
sing, would "never sacrifice their essential rights to a national govern-
ment." Both the states and the people wanted Congress strengthened,
not a new government.79

xlviii