{"id":13132,"date":"2022-02-26T14:47:17","date_gmt":"2022-02-26T19:47:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/?p=13132"},"modified":"2022-03-02T11:02:35","modified_gmt":"2022-03-02T16:02:35","slug":"virginia-delegate-compensation-supplement","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.statutesandstories.com\/blog_html\/virginia-delegate-compensation-supplement\/","title":{"rendered":"Virginia Delegate Compensation – Journals and Ledgers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Virginia Delegate Compensation – Journals & Ledgers <\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

The state of Virginia played a central role in the creation of the United States Constitution. In fact, it can be argued that Virginia was the most supportive, pro-reform state when the Constitutional Convention began its deliberations in May of 1787. This supplemental post continues the discussion of the compensation paid to Virginia’s delegates to the Constitutional Convention. In addition to sharing dozens of images, this supplemental post discusses insights – and as yet unanswered questions – that arise from the primary sources collected below.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

At the outset, it is important to recognize that this work would not have been possible without the invaluable assistance of Kevin D. Shupe, Reference Archivist at the Library of Virginia, and Ben Steck, Digital Collections Specialist. Thanks to their efforts StatutesandStories.com is pleased to provide online access to the these records.<\/p>\n

It is hoped that these materials will be of assistance to future researchers and scholars who may be able to dive deeper into these archival records to answer remaining questions posed below. In addition to the images provided by Kevin and Ben, other images were copied from microfilm obtained by interlibrary loan from the Library of Virginia (“Auditor of Public Accounts, Receipts and Disbursement Journals,” Reels 6257-6259). The availability of interlibrary loans (in this case delicate microfilm) during a pandemic is much appreciated, which justifies a special thanks to Amy Miller, the Interlibrary Loan Manager for Broward County’s Main Library.<\/p>\n

Background about Virginia’s key role<\/em><\/p>\n

As described in the preceding post about Virginia Delegate Compensation (Part I)<\/strong><\/a><\/span>, Virginia helped blaze a path by calling on the states to send delegates to Philadelphia. Virginia\u2019s \u201cAct for appointing Deputies\u201d to Philadelphia provided a template for other states to follow. Moreover, the reputation of the Virginia delegation, including George Washington, signaled to the nation that the Convention should be taken seriously. In turn, Virginia compensated its delegates commensurate with their station.<\/p>\n

Virginia\u2019s generous financial support for its delegation facilitated their early arrival in Philadelphia, which contributed to the formulation of the Virginia Plan. In December of 1786, well in advance of the Philadelphia Convention, the Virginia legislature approved meaningful compensation of $6 per day for its delegates. Virginia then paid \u00a3 100 advances to each of its delegates prior<\/em> to their departure for Philadelphia.<\/p>\n

Part I<\/a><\/strong><\/span> further suggests that the compensation package offered by Virginia encouraged its delegates to remain in Philadelphia. For example, Governor Randolph and George Mason are rare examples of holdout delegates, who remained in Philadelphia despite their misgivings. Randolph and Mason contrast with Robert Yates and John Lansing (of New York), Luther Martin and John Francis Mercer (of Maryland), and other “proto-Anti-Federalists” who simply left town when they disagreed with the direction that the Convention was taking. Delegate compensation paid by the other twelve states is discussed here<\/a><\/strong><\/span>.<\/p>\n

There were obvious advantages to having a sitting governor lead a state delegation. For example, Governor Randolph was able to secure additional advances of \u00a3100 per delegate in August, as the Convention continued its deliberations in the late summer. Other state delegations struggled financially as the Convention continued into September.<\/p>\n

Pictured below is a request by James Madison for an advance of $550 for one quarter of his annual Congressional salary. Because Governor Randolph was attending the Convention, he was able to personally sign the expedited request in Philadelphia on 2 August 1787, writing that “[t]his bill will certainly be paid on sight.” The $550 corresponds to approximately 90 days of pay to Madison, at the rate of $6 per day.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

A future blog post will explore the implications of a curious “revision” to this document. It appears that it was important for Madison and\/or Randolph to distinguish between Madison’s work as a delegate to Congress versus his work as a member of the Federal Convention.<\/p>\n

The journals and ledgers pictured below are particularly useful when viewed in their totality and contrasted with similar financial records from other states. The difficulty of gaining access to this material in twelve separate state archives may help explain why the observations\/questions below may have been overlooked by prior generations of historians. StatutesandStories invites other researchers and scholars to follow this research trail.<\/p>\n

Images and Research Questions:<\/em><\/p>\n

The materials pictured below support the following observations and prompt the following unresolved questions:<\/p>\n