<>Did those delegates conduct themselves within the bounds of their commissions?<>
Yes.
On January 10th 2017 I began a seven-part series, “Whatever Happened to the Articles of Confederation” at ArticleVBlog.com. The blog post dealing with the Paterson Plan will interest you.
<>Did those delegates conduct themselves within the bounds of their commissions?
Yes.
Did the Articles of Confederation require that any changes to those Articles be approved by a unanimous vote of the States? Did Article VII of the proposed Constitution change the process of ratification from the Articles by 1) providing for ratification of the Constitution by popularly elected ratifying conventions in each State as opposed to the legislatures of the several States, 2) making it possible that judges, ministers and others ineligible to serve in state legislatures be elected to these ratifying conventions, and 3) allowing the proposed Constitution to be ratified with the approval of only nine of the several States?
Given that all of these are true, I submit that the delegates did not conduct themselves within the bounds of their commissions. I see no reason to believe that modern delegates would conduct themselves within the limited commissions you believe you could bind them with when the only occurrence of such a convention in American history led to a run-away convention.
Also, why do you not address the question of why the illegally/unconstitutionally acting federal government will follow your new Amendments to the Constitution when it blatantly ignores the existing rules within the Constitution? What compels the federal government to obey your proposed Amendments?
James R. McClure Jr.
Jeffersonian Anti-Federalist Democrat