Absenteeism
in
Congress
On
November 15,
1781, John Hanson, the President of Congress, wrote a letter to six
state governors complaining that none of their delegates had shown up
in
Congress. “The
most important
powers vested in Congress by the Confederation,” wrote Hanson, “lie
dormant at
this time by reason of the impunctuality of the Delegates of six States
in point of attendance . . . Permit me, Sir, . . . to hope that your
Excellency's
influence will be exerted to prevail upon your State to send forward
and keep
up a full Representation in future.”
Later presidents
would ring the changes on Hanson’s theme,
over and over, during the eight years of the Confederation’s life. No matter where Congress
sat, not enough
delegates showed up. In
1787, Congress
failed to muster a quorum until two months into its term, and then had
to shut
down for six weeks in spring due to insufficient attendance.
Most embarrassing
of all, in early 1784, Congress had
difficulty assembling nine states to ratify the Treaty of Paris which
ended the
Revolutionary War. The
Treaty arrived in
Congress on November 22, 1783. It
was
entirely uncontroversial, being very favorable to the United States.
But, Article IX of
the Articles of Confederation provided
that “The United States, in Congress assembled, shall never . . . enter
into
any treaties or alliances . . . unless nine states assent to the same.” Two
delegates (the minimum to cast a valid vote) from each of nine
states didn’t attend Congress until January 14, 1784.
The delay caused Congress to miss a six-month
deadline for ratification, but Britain chose not to protest.
It isn’t obvious
why nobody wanted to serve. Americans
have always been inveterate office
seekers. General
Philip Schuyler, in
1784, complained of incessant “scramblers for the honors and the
emoluments of
the States”.
Nor can there be
any doubt that Americans cared
about what Congress was
doing. Letters and
debates of the time
drip with passion. New
Yorkers became so
exercised over the instructions to be given by Congress to John Jay,
then
negotiating a treaty with Spain (see The
Treaty That Wasn't), that they threatened to secede from
the Union.
Why, then, such
poor attendance? Part
of the problem was the difficulty of
travel. The
following table shows the
percentage of delegates elected, by state, who showed up for at least
one day:
New Hampshire |
55% |
Massachusetts |
71% |
Rhode Island |
60% |
Connecticut |
54% |
New York |
85% |
Pennsylvania |
89% |
New Jersey |
86% |
Maryland |
77% |
Delaware |
67% |
Virginia |
90% |
North Carolina |
63% |
South Carolina |
83% |
Georgia |
50% |
New Hampshire and Georgia, whose delegates had the
furthest
to travel, had among the lowest attendance rates.
The middle colonies, near the rotating
capital, were higher. The
poor
attendance for Connecticut appears to be due to that state’s practice
of
electing seven delegates every year in a popular election; seven
delegates may
have been too many.
Examining
attendance by year of member election, dating back
to the Continental Congress, we see how attendance tailed off over time:

The
earliest elections, in 1774 and 1775,
were held amidst
the fervor of revolution and the drive for independence. Almost every person
elected made it a point
to attend. This
fervor could not be
sustained. The
sharp drop in 1783
reflects either the coming of peace, which lessened the urgency of
political
participation, or the exodus from Philadelphia (see The Wandering Congress).
The nadir in participation was reached in 1784, when
Congress rotated
between Annapolis and Trenton.
Beyond poor roads
and a rotating capital, however, lay a
deeper problem. Even
members who
attended often arrived late and left early.
The reasons why lay in one fateful sentence of
Article V
of the Articles
of Confederation: “Each state shall maintain its own delegates in
(Congress)”. Members
received no federal
salary. Their
salary, and any associated
travel or expense allowance, was at the discretion of their home state. States had other
priorities.
Again and again, in
letters home, delegates complain about
the expense of living in the capital (wherever it was), and beseech
their
legislatures for support. David
Howell
(RI) from Annapolis: “I
was in great
want of money having spent all I had received of the State &
run largely in
debt . . . I assure you that a great deal of money will carry you but a
little
ways here.” William
Houstoun (GA) from
New York: “I was
seduced to remain in
Congress, thinking there could not be a doubt but that I should at
least have
my Expenses Remitted to me . . . I have never received any thing from
the state
except a bill for a hundred & odd pounds before I left
Savannah.”
The Constitution of the United States (COTUS) of 1787
paid members of Congress a federal salary
backed by federal taxes, and did not have attendance problems. The problems of the
Confederation, in the
end, all came down to money.
Sources: Letters of
Delegates to Congress, Volumes 18, 21, 24, Dates
of Service in Volume 26; Edmund
Cody Burnett, The
Continental Congress, 1941.
Statistics
compiled by the author.
©
2018 Clionic Enterprises | Back
to Home Page | Back
to Interesting Things |