 and that Patrick Henry was responsible for placing this in the Virginia Gazette of 10 May (Henry, Henry, I, 418–20), though there is evidence, noted below, that Mason used it and may indeed have been responsible for it. No copy of the handbill enclosed in Lee’s letter of 20 Apr. has been found. It is important to note that Lee left Philadelphia on 13 June with Wythe in order to take part in the framing of the Constitution. “The desire of being here at the formation of our new Government brought me from Philadelphia. … I have been in this City a week [he presumably arrived, as did Wythe, June 23] where I had the pleasure to see our new plan of Government go on well. This day will put a finishing hand to it. Tis very much of the democratic kind” (R. H. Lee, Letters, I, 203, 207). The last statement may throw some light on Lee’s preference for the Adams Plan to that of Jefferson, since the Adams Plan was essentially what the colony had been used to and Jefferson’s was a radical departure. It suggests also that Lee may have been responsible for the inclusion of some features of the Adams Plan (see below) among amendments offered after the Committee Plan was submitted to the Convention. At any rate, though not a member of the Convention, Lee unquestionably had influence in and out of doors: “A fortnights stay here,” he wrote Samuel Adams on 6 July, “has enabled me to assist my Countrymen in finishing our form of Government” (R. H. Lee, Letters, I, 207).
The Braxton plan. In the spring of 1776 there appeared in Philadelphia, written in answer to Adams’ Thoughts on Government, a pamphlet entitled Address to the Convention of the Colony and Ancient Dominion of Virginia, on the Subject of Government in General, and Recommending a Particular Form to Their Consideration. By a Native of the Colony (Philadelphia: Dunlap, 1776; Force, Archives, 4th ser., vi, 748–54). This has been generally attributed to Carter Braxton. Its point of view was so aristocratic that Patrick Henry declared it “a silly thing … an affront and disgrace to this country” (Adams, Works, iv, 201–2). Braxton’s position is opposed to the republicanism of the Adams Plan and is reflected by the query as to whether, “if the [British] Constitution was brought back to its original state, and its present imperfections remedied, it would not afford more happiness than any other.” The Address to the Convention was printed in Dixon & Hunter’s Virginia Gazette of 8 and 15 June. Aside from the fact that it arrived late, its extreme conservatism was enough to prevent its having any influence on the Convention. The Braxton Plan arrived in Williamsburg around 20 May (Adams, Works, iv, 201–2; Henry, Henry, I, 411, 413). John Adams reported to Patrick Henry that it was “whispered to have been the joint production of one native of Virginia, and two natives of New York” and was “too absurd to be considered twice” (Henry, Henry, I, 415). Richard Henry Lee, agreeing with Patrick Henry’s appraisal, said: “This Contemptible little Tract, betrays the little Knot or Junto from whence it proceeded” (R. H. Lee, Letters, I, 190).
The Mason plan (Document IV below). William Fleming’s letter of 22 June to Jefferson sets at rest the question of the extent of George Mason’s authorship of the Constitution: “The inclosed printed plan was drawn by Colo. G. Mason and by him laid before the committee.” Fleming’s letter also seems to establish the fact that this plan was laid before the committee about 8–10 June. Mason, delayed by illness, arrived in Williamsburg on 18 May and was immediately appointed to the committee charged with the duty of drawing up a constitution. It is probable, therefore, that his MS draft (not now known to be extant) was drawn up late in May or early in June. As the notes indicate, he almost certainly made use of the Adams and Gazette Plans, but the provisions for a senatorial electoral college and for suffrage qualifications bear strong evidence of being original and the product of Mason’s distinguished mind.
The Mason plan as revised by the committee (Document v below). Th