NEW YORK INTRODUCTION

wished an opportunity to make some atonement." Seizing this oppor-
tunity, Hamilton and Schuyler's forces introduced the call of a conven-
tion in the Assembly, which was "violently opposed" by the governor's
friends, "but as many of those, who are at his beck, had committed
themselves too far in private conversation, they voted (tho perhaps)
reluctantly, for It."73
Despite the legislature's call for a convention, Schuyler was pessimis-
tic about New York's and the Union's political future. The Clintoni-
ans-whose principles, stated Schuyler, included "a state impost, no
direct taxation, keep all power in the hands of the legislature, give none
to Congress which may destroy our influence, and cast a shade over
that plenitude of power which we now enjoy"-were willing that a con-
stitutional convention meet and propose alterations "confering addi-
tional powers on Congress." Clintonians, however, according to Schuy-
ler, would oppose these amendments as "destructive of Liberty, may
[induce?] a King, an Aristocracy, or a despot."74
When Congress considered the Annapolis Convention report on 21
February, New York congressmen Melancton Smith and Egbert Benson
submitted their legislature's call for a convention. Unaware that na-
tionalists in both the New York Assembly and Senate had pushed this
resolution through to adoption, congressmen looked upon the pro-
posal with considerable skepticism. A state that less than a week earlier
had killed the federal impost now seemed to advocate strengthening
Congress. To some congressmen, it appeared as if New York was at-
tempting to scuttle the convention called by the Annapolis commis-
sioners by proposing an alternative to it. (By ignoring any reference to
the convention called by the Annapolis commissioners, New York's res-
olutions seemed to invalidate the appointment of convention delegates
that had already taken place in six states.)75 Therefore, Congress re-
fused to consider New York's resolution. Instead, it considered a pro-
posal for a general convention submitted by the Massachusetts dele-
gates even though this proposal did not refer either to the Annapolis
Convention report or to the state appointments of delegates that had
already occurred. Congress amended the Massachusetts proposal and
acknowledged the validity of these appointments as well as any future
appointments to the convention called to meet in Philadelphia.
On 23 February 1787, Governor Clinton sent the legislature the con-
gressional resolution calling the Constitutional Convention. Three days
later, the Assembly resolved that five delegates be appointed to the
Convention by ajoint ballot of both houses. On 27 February, the Senate
disagreed, objecting to its inferior status in ajoint ballot. The following

xlvi