Because technically, it wasn't what they were supposed to be doing. They were on orders to fix the Articles of the Confederation but were not given the authority to draft a whole new Constitution. In a manner of speaking, they overthrew the government.
Remember, this is post-Revolution so Britain has already let the colonies secede. However, in light of Shaw's Rebellion, the federal government was clearly too weak to do anything and the states were unable to work together because of the varying governments and currencies. At the time they were 13 nations loosely allied together, rather than the 13 parts of a greater nation they became after the Constitution.
2006-09-17 15:10:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by azrael505 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
No - the proceedings weren't kept secret because of fear of the British finding out.
One of the common misconceptions about the Constitution is thinking that it happened during, or right after the Revolutionary War - it didn't.
The Constitutional Convention took place in 1787, seven years after the end of the Revolutionary War, and 11 years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
There are probably a couple of different reasons why the proceedings of the convention were kept secret. I, personally, don't believe that it was because "they weren't supposed to be" changing the Aritlces of Confederation into a Constitution as another poster said.
Each person was sent by their state government, to act on behalf of, and protect the interests of their respective states. The majority of those attending the Convention believed that the Articles of Confederation weren't working and needed to be fixed.
I believe that the reason why the proceedings were kept secret is so that people could honestly speak their mind - without worrying about reprisals. Also, it would do away with the tendency to grandstand, or make a big fuss about this or that.
It also had the benefit of trying to work out what was best - without worrying about the public trying to influence or sway things this way or that.
The Constitution was considered by some a "bundle of compromises" - meaning that nobody got everything that they wanted. And typically, if you have to try and negotiate in a public setting - you're not going to come to a compromise, because somebody is worried about loosing face, looking weak, giving in on something you think they should have, etc.
2006-09-17 17:42:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Flint 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Flint gave a great answer and is pretty much right on target. Already in our young history the 13 states were at odds over a number of issues, including slavery in all of it's aspects. And the slave issues provoked a lot of emotion from all of the delegates. No one could be nuetral on it, so that, among many other issues required compromise. And as other respondents have said you could not have had a clear concensus in an open meeting.
2006-09-21 13:23:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tom 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
They were not allowed to have any types of assemblies. Remember, England had forbade governmental assemblies after their rejections of the many acts passed by the crown.
2006-09-17 15:10:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bridget 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Is this when they looked themselves in that building?? I know that was because they agreed that no one ould leave until they all decieded in something. Too bad our congress doesn't have that kind of dedication today.......
2006-09-17 17:12:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because they didn't want their wives to screw it up.
2006-09-21 06:36:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by AL 6
·
0⤊
0⤋