This chapter focuses on a deceptive fallacy in the first debate on a proposal for discussing a bill of rights without delay on June 8, 1789. The significance of the debate arises from the fact that the proposal, made by James Madison, came close to being rejected in that debate. James Jackson, a prominent opponent, proposed that any discussion of amendments should be postponed by some nine months. This study suggests that Jackson’s argument involved a deceptive fallacy in that he had a covert intention when he proposed that Madison’s proposal should be rejected, and that the covert intention was to ensure that no bill of rights would be enacted. The overt objective should be seen only as a subgoal, as a step to achieving the covert goal, and the fallacy consists in the speaker hiding or obscuring the main objective. The fallacy in question is ad socordiam. It was recognized as an important technique in political argumentation by Jeremy Bentham about two centuries ago, but in recent work it has been neglected. The central research task addressed is then to examine the evidence for why it is reasonable to postulate a covert intention for a political speaker.