Log In Register

Source & Citation Info

title:“The Congressional Register”
date written:1789-6-8

permanent link
to this version:
last updated:Jan. 22, 2013, 8:01 a.m. UTC
retrieved:Dec. 1, 2023, 3:38 p.m. UTC

"The Congressional Register." The Congressional Register 1789-06-08 : . Rpt. in Creating the Bill of Rights. Ed. Kenneth R. Bowling and Helen E. Veit. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991. 69-95. Print.

The Congressional Register (June 8, 1789)

This day Mr. Speaker, is the day assigned for taking into consideration the subject of amendments to the constitution. As I considered myself bound in honor and in duty to do what I have done on this subject. I shall proceed to bring the amendments before you as soon as possible, and advocate them until they shall be finally adopted or rejected by a constitutional majority of this house. With a view of drawing your attention to this important object, I shall move, that this house do now resolve itself into a committee of the whole, on the state of the union, by which an opportunity will be given, to bring forward some propositions which I have strong hopes, will meet the unanimous approbation of this house, after the fullest discussion and most serious regard. I therefore move you, that the house now go into a committee on this business.
Mr. SMITH [S. C.?]
Was not inclined to interrupt the measures which the public were so anxiously expecting, by going into a committee of the whole at this time. He observed there were two modes of introducing this business to the house: One by appointing a select committee to take into consideration the several amendments proposed by the state conventions; this he thought the most likely way to shorten the business. The other was, that the gentleman should lay his propositions on the table, for the consideration of the members; that they should be printed, and taken up for discussion at a future day. Either of these modes would enable the house to enter upon the business better prepared than could be the case by a sudden transition from other important concerns to which their minds were strongly bent. He therefore hoped the honorable gentleman would consent to bring the subject forward in one of those ways, in preference to going into a committee of the whole. For, said he, it must appear extremely impolitic to go into the consideration of amending the government, before it is organized, before it has begun to operate; certainly upon reflection it must appear to be premature.1 I wish, therefore, gentlemen will consent to the delay: for the business which lies in an unfinished state-I mean particularly the collection bill-is necessary to be passed; l else all we have hitherto done is of no effect. If we go into the discussion of this subject, it will take us three weeks or a month; and during all this time every other business must be suspended, because we cannot proceed with either accuracy or dispatch when the mind is perpetually shifted from one subject to another Mr JACKSON.
I am of opinion we ought not to be in a hurry with respect to altering the constitution.2 For my part I have no idea of speculating in this serious manner on theory; if I agree to alterations in the mode administering this government, I shall like to stand on the sure ground of experience, and not be treading air. What experience have we had of the good or bad qualities of this constitution? Can any gentleman affirm to me one proposition that is a certain and absolute amendment? I deny that he can. Our constitution, sir, is like a vessel just launched, and lying at the wharf she is untried, you can hardly discover any one of her properties; it is not known how she will answer her helm, or lay her course; whether she will bear in safety the precious freight to be deposited in her hold. But, in this state, will the prudent merchant attempt alterations? Will he employ two thousand workmen to tear off the planking and take asunder the frame? He certainly will not. Let us gentlemen, fit out our vessel, set up her masts, and expand her sails, and be guided by the experiment in our alterations. If she sails upon an uneven keel, let us right her by adding weight where it is wanting. In this way we may remedy her defects to the satisfaction of all concerned; but if we proceed now to make alterations, we may deface a beauty or deform a well proportioned piece of workmanship; in short, Mr. Speaker, I am not for amendments at this time, but if gentlemen should think it a subject deserving of attention, they will surely not neglect the more important business, which is now unfinished before them. Without we pass the collection bill, we can get no revenue, and without revenue the wheels of government cannot move. I am against taking up the subject at present, and shall therefore be totally against the amendments, if the government is not organized, that I may see whether it is grievous or not.
When the propriety of making amendments shall be obvious from experience, I trust there will be virtue enough in my country to make them. Much has been said by the opponents to this constitution, respecting the insecurity of jury trials, that great bulwark of personal safety; all their objections may be done away by proper regulations on this point, and I do not fear but such regulations will take place. The bill is now before the senate, and a proper attention is shewn to this business. Indeed I cannot conceive how it could be opposed; I think an almost omnipotent emperor would not be hardy enough to set himself against it. Then why should we fear a power which cannot be improperly exercised.
We have proceeded to make some regulations under the constitution, but have met with no inaccuracy unless it may be said, that the clause respecting "vessels bound to or from one state be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another," is somewhat obscure, yet there is not sufficient, I trust, in any gentleman's opinion to induce an amendment. But let me ask what will be the consequence of taking up this subject? are we going to finish it in an hour? I believe not; it will take us more than a day a week, a month-it will take a year to complete it! and will it be doing . our duty to our country to neglect or delay putting the government in motion, when every thing depends upon its being speedily done?
Let the constitution have a fair trial, let it be examined by experience, discover by that test what its errors are, and then talk of amending; but to attempt it now is doing it at risk, which is certainly imprudent.3 I have the honor of coming from a state that ratified the constitution by the unanimous vote of a numerous convention: the people of Georgia have manifested their attachment to it, by adopting a state constitution framed , upon the same plan as this. But although they are thus satisfied, I shall not be against such amendments as will gratify the inhabitants of other states, provided they are judged of by experience and not theory. For this reason I wish the consideration of the subject postponed until the first of March, 1790.
I believe it would be perfectly right in the gentleman who spoke last, to move a postponement to the time he has mentioned; because he is opposed to the consideration amendments altogether. But I believe it will be proper to attend to the subject earlier; because it is the wish of many of our constituents that something should be added to the constitution to secure in a stronger manner their liberties from the inroads of power. Yet I think the present time premature;4 inasmuch as we have other business before us, which is incomplete, but essential to the public interest; when that is finished, I shall concur in taking up the subject of amendments.
Thought amendments to the constitution necessary but this was not the proper time to bring them forward;5 he wished the government completely organized before they entered upon this ground: The law for collecting the revenue was immediately necessary the treasury department must be established; till these, and other important subjects were determined, he was against taking this up. He said it might interrupt the harmony of the house, which was necessary to be preserved to dispatch the great objects of legislation. He hoped it would be postponed for the present, and pledged himself to bring it forward again, if nobody else would.
The gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Jackson) is certainly right in his opposition to my motion for going into a committee of the whole, because he is unfriendly to the object I have in contemplation; but I cannot see that the gentlemen, who wish for amendments being proposed at the present session, stand on good ground when they object to the house going into committee on this business.
When I first hinted to the house my intention of calling their deliberations to this object, mentioned the pressure of other important subjects, and submitted the propriety of postponing this till the more urgent business was dispatched; but finding that business not dispatched, when the order of the day for considering amendments arrived, I thought it a good reason for a farther delay I moved the postponement accordingly. I am sorry the same reason still exists in some degree; but operates with less force when it is considered, that it is not now proposed to enter into a full and minute discussion of every part of the subject, but merely to bring it before the house, that our constituents may see we pay a proper attention to a subject they have much at heart; and if it does not give that full gratification which is to be wished, they will discover that it proceeds from the urgency of business of a very important nature. But if we continue to postpone from time to time, and refuse to let the subject come into view it may occasion suspicions, which, though not well founded, may tend to inflame or prejudice the public mind, against our decisions: they may think we are not sincere in our desire to incorporate such amendments in the constitution as will secure those rights, which they consider as not sufficiently guarded. The applications for amendments come from a very respectable number of our constituents, and it is certainly proper for congress to consider the subject, in order to quiet that anxiety which prevails in the public mind: Indeed I think it would have been of advantage to the government, if it had been practicable to have made some propositions for amendments the first business we entered upon; it would stifle the voice of complaint, and make friends of many who doubted its merits.6 Our future measures would then have been more universally agreeable and better supported; but the justifiable anxiety to put the government in operation prevented that; it therefore remains for us to take it up as soon as possible. I wish then to commence the consideration at the present moment; I hold it to be my duty to unfold my ideas, and explain myself to the house in some form or other without delay I only wish to introduce the great work, and as I said before I do not expect it will be decided immediately; but if some step is taken in the business it will give reason to believe that we may come at a final result. This will inspire a reasonable hope in the advocates for amendments, that full justice will be done to the important subject; and I have reason to believe their expectation will not be defeated. I hope the house will not decline my motion for going into a committee.
I am willing that this matter should be brought before the house at a proper time. I suppose a number of gentlemen think it their duty to bring it forward; so that there is no apprehension it will be passed over in silence: Other gentlemen may be disposed to let the subject rest until the more important objects government are attended to; and I should conclude from the nature of the case, that the people expect the latter of us, in preference of altering the constitution; because they have ratified that instrument, in order that the government may begin to operate. If this was not their wish, they might as well have rejected the constitution, as North-Carolina has done, until the amendments took place. The state I have the honor to come from, adopted this system by a very great majority because they wished for the government; but they desired no amendments. I suppose this was the case in other states; it will therefore be imprudent to neglect much more important concerns for this.7 The executive part of the government wants organization; the business of the revenue is incomplete, to say nothing of the judiciary business. Now will gentlemen give up these points to go into a discussion amendments when no advantage can arise from them? For my part, I question if any alteration which can be now proposed would be an amendment in the true sense of the word; but nevertheless I am willing to let the subject be introduced; if the gentleman only desires to go into committee for the purpose of receiving his propositions, I shall consent; but I have strong objections to being interrupted in completing the more important business; because I am well satisfied it will alarm the fears of twenty of our constituents where it will please one.
I hope the house will not spend much time on this subject till the more pressing business is dispatched, but, at the same time, I hope we shall not dismiss it altogether; because I think a majority of the people, who have ratified the constitution, did it under an expectation that congress would, at some convenient time, examine its texture, and point out where it was defective, in order that it might be judiciously amended. Whether while we are without experience, amendments can be digested in such a manner as to give satisfaction to a constitutional majority of this house, I will not pretend to say but I hope the subject may be considered with all convenient speed, I think it would tend to tranquilize the public mind; therefore I shall vote in favor of going into a committee of the whole, and after receiving the subject shall be content to refer it to a special committee to arrange and report. I fear if we refuse to take up the subject it will irritate many of our constituents, which I do not wish to do: If we cannot, after mature consideration, gratify their wishes, the cause of complaint will be lessened if not removed; but a doubt on this head will not be a good reason why we should refuse to enquire. I do not say this as it affects my immediate constituents, because I believe a majority of the district which elected me do not require alterations; but I know there are people in other parts who will not be satisfied unless some amendments are proposed.
Mr SMITH (of South-Carolina)
Thought the gentleman who brought forward the subject had done his duty: He had supported his motion with ability and candor, and if he did not succeed he was not to blame. On considering what had been urged for going into a committee, he was induced to join the gentleman; but it would be merely to receive his propositions; after which he would move something to this effect: That however desirous this house may be to go into the consideration of amendments to the constitution, in order to establish the liberties of the people of America on the securest foundation; yet the important and pressing business of the government, prevents their entering upon that subject at present.
My colleague tells you, he is ready to submit to the committee of the whole, his ideas on this subject; if no objection had been made to his motion, the whole business might have been finished before this. He has done me the honor of shewing me certain propositions which he has drawn up, they are very important, and I sincerely wish the house may receive them. After they are published, I think the people will wait with patience till we are at leisure to resume them: but it must be very disagreeable to them to have it postponed from time to time, in the manner it has been, for six weeks past, they will be tired out by a fruitless expectation. Putting myself into the place of those who favor amendments, I should suspect Congress did not mean seriously to enter upon the subject; that it was vain to expect redress from them; I should begin to turn my attention to the alternative contained in the fifth article, and think of joining the legislatures of those states which have applied for calling a new convention.8 How dangerous such an expedient would be, I need not mention, but I venture to affirm, that unless you take early notice of this subject, you will not have power to deliberate. The people will clamor for a new convention, they will not trust the house any longer; those therefore, who dread the assembling of a convention, will do well to acquiesce in the present motion, and lay the foundation of a most important work. I do not think we need consume more than half an hour in the committee of the whole; this is not so much time but we may conveniently spare it, considering the nature of the business. I do not wish to divert the attention of congress from the organization of the government, nor do I think it need be done, if we comply with the present motion.
I hope the house will not go into a committee of the whole. It strikes me that the great amendment which the government wants, is expedition, in the dispatch of business. The wheels of the national machine cannot turn, until the impost and collection bill are perfected; these are the desiderata, which the public mind is anxiously expecting. It is well known, that all we have hitherto done, is tantamount to nothing, if we leave the business in its present state-true-but say gentlemen, let us go into committee, it will take up but a short time, yet may it not take a considerable proportion of our time? May it not be procrastinated into days, weeks, nay months itself? It is not the most facile subject that can come before the legislature of the union. Gentlemen's opinions do not run in a parallel on this topic; it may take up more time to unite or concenter them, than is now imagined; and what object is to be attained by going into a committee? If information is what we seek after, cannot that be obtained by the gentleman's laying his propositions on the table; they can be read, or they can be printed. But I have two other reasons for opposing this motion; the first is, the uncertainty with which we must decide on questions of amendment, founded merely on speculative theory; the second is a previous question-how far it is proper to take the subject of amendments into consideration, without the consent of two-thirds of both houses.9 I will submit it to gentlemen, whether the words of the constitution, "the congress whenever two-thirds of both houses shall deem necessary shall propose amendments," do not bear my construction, that it is as requisite for two-thirds, to sanction the expediency of going into the measure at present, as it will be to determine the necessity of amending at all I take it, that the fifth article admits of this construction, and think that two-thirds of the senate and house of representatives must concur in the expediency as to the time and manner of amendments, before we can proceed to the consideration of the amendments themselves; for my part, I do not see the expediency of proposing amendments. I think, sir, the most likely way to quiet the perturbation of the public mind, will be to pass salutary laws; to give permanency and stability to constitutional regulations, founded on principles of equity and adjusted by wisdom. Altho' hitherto we have done nothing to tranquilize that agitation which the adoption of the constitution threw some people into, yet, the storm has abated, and a calm succeeds. The people are not afraid of leaving the question amendments, to the discussion of their representatives; but is this the juncture, for discussing it? What have congress , done toward completing the business of their appointment? They have passed a law regulating certain oaths; they have passed the impost bill; but are not vessels daily arriving, and the revenue slipping thro' our fingers? is it better than madness in us to neglect the completion of the revenue system? Is the system of jurisprudence unnecessary? And here let me ask gentlemen, how they propose to amend that part of the constitution which embraces the judicial branch of government, when they do not know the regulations proposed by the senate, who are forming a bill on this subject.
If the honorable mover of the question before the house, does not think he discharges his duty without bringing his propositions before the house, let him take the mode I have mentioned, by which there will be little loss of time. He knows as well as any gentleman, the importance of completing the business on your table, and that it is best to finish one subject before the introduction of another; he will not, therefore, persist in a motion which tends to distract our minds, and incapacitates us from making a proper decision on any subject. Suppose every gentleman who desired alterations to be made in the constitution, was to submit his propositions also to a committee of the whole, what would be the consequence? We should have strings of them contradictory to each other, and necessarily engaged in a discussion that would consume too much of our precious time.
Though the state I represent had the honor of taking the lead in the adoption of this constitution, and did it by an unanimous vote; and although I have the strongest predilection for the present form of government; yet I am open to information, and willing to be convinced of its imperfections; if this is done, I shall chearfully assist in correcting them. But I cannot think this a proper time to enter upon the subject; because more important business is suspended; and for want of experience we are as likely to do injury by our prescriptions as good. I wish to see every proposition which comes from that worthy gentleman on the science of government; but I think it can be presented better by staying where we are than by going into committee, and therefore shall vote against his motion.
I am sorry to be accessory to the loss of a single moment of time by the house. If I had been indulged in my motion, and we had gone into a committee of the whole, I think we might have rose, and resumed the consideration of other business before this time; that is, so far as it depended on what I proposed to bring forward. As that mode seems not to give satisfaction, I will withdraw the motion, and move you, sir, that a select committee be appointed to consider and report such amendments : as are proper for Congress to propose to the legislatures of the several States, conformably to the 5th article of the constitution. I will state my reasons why I think it proper to propose amendments; and state the amendments themselves, so far as I think they ought to be proposed. If I thought I could fulfill the duty which I owe to myself and my constituents, to let the subject pass over in silence, I most certainly should not trespass upon the indulgence of this house. But I cannot do this; and am therefore compelled to beg a patient hearing to what I have to lay before you. And I do most sincerely believe that if congress will devote but one day to this subject, so far as to satisfy the public that we do not disregard their wishes, it will have a salutary influence on the public councils, and prepare the way for a favorable reception of our future measures. It10 appears to me that this house is bound by every motive of prudence, not to let the first session pass over without proposing to the state legislatures some things to be incorporated into the constitution, as will render it as acceptable to the whole people of the United States, as it has been found acceptable to a majority of them. I wish, among other reasons why something should be done, that those who have been friendly to the adoption of this constitution, may have the opportunity of proving to those who were opposed to it, that they were as sincerely devoted to liberty and a republican government, as those who charged them with wishing the adoption of this constitution in order to lay the foundation of an aristocracy or despotism. It will be a desirable thing to extinguish from the bosom of every member of the community any apprehensions, that there are those among his countrymen who wish to deprive them of the liberty for which they valiantly fought and honorably bled. And if there are amendments desired, of such a nature as will not injure the constitution, and they can be ingrafted so as to give satisfaction to the doubting part of our fellow citizens; the friends of the federal government will evince that spirit of deference and concession for which they have hitherto been distinguished.
It cannot be a secret to the gentlemen in this house, that, notwithstanding the ratification of this system of government by eleven of the thirteen United States, in some cases unanimously in others by large majorities; yet still there is a great number of our constituents who are dissatisfied with it;11 among whom are many respectable for their talents, their patriotism, and respectable for the jealousy they have for their liberty which, though mistaken in its object, is laudable in its motive. There is a great body of the people falling under this description, who at present feel much inclined to join their support to the cause of federalism, if they were satisfied in this one point: We ought not to disregard their inclination, but, on principles of amity and moderation, conform to their wishes, and expressly declare the great rights of mankind secured under this constitution. The acquiescence which our fellow citizens shew under the government, calls upon us for a like return of moderation. But perhaps there is a stronger motive than this for our going into a consideration of the subject; it is to provide those securities for liberty which are required by a part of the community I allude in a particular manner to those two states who have not thought fit to throw themselves into the bosom of the confederacy: it is a desirable thing, on our part as well as theirs, that a re-union should take place as soon as possible. I have no doubt, if we proceed to take those steps which would be prudent and requisite at this juncture, that in a short time we should see that disposition prevailing in those states that are not come in, that we have seen prevailing in those states which are. But I will candidly acknowledge, that, over and above all these considerations, I do conceive that the constitution may be amended; that is to say if all power is subject to abuse, that then it is possible the abuse of the powers of the general government may be guarded against in a more secure manner than is now done, while no one advantage, arising from the exercise of that power, shall be damaged or endangered by it. We have in this way something to gain, and, if we proceed with caution, nothing to lose; and in this case it is necessary to proceed with caution; for while we feel all these inducements to go into a revisal of the constitution, we must feel for the constitution itself and make that revisal a moderate one. I should be unwilling to see a door opened for a re-consideration of the whole structure of the government, for a re-consideration of the principles and the substance of the powers given; because I doubt, if such a door was opened, if we should be very likely to stop at that point which would be safe to the government itself But I do wish to see a door opened to consider, so far as to incorporate those provisions for the security of rights, against which I believe no serious objection has been made by any class of our constituents. Such as would be likely to meet with the concurrence of two-thirds of both houses, and the approbation of three- fourths of the state legislatures. I will not propose a single alteration which I do not wish to see take place, as intrinsically proper in itself or proper because it is wished for by a respectable number of my fellow citizens; and therefore I shall not propose a single alteration but is likely to meet the concurrence required by the constitution.
There have been objections of various kinds made against the constitution: Some were levelled against its structure, because the president was without a council; because the senate, which is a legislative body had judicial powers in trials on impeachments;12 and because the powers of that body were compounded in other respects, in a manner that did not correspond with a particular theory; because it grants more power than is supposed to be necessary for every good purpose; and controuls the ordinary powers of the state governments. I know some respectable characters who opposed this government on these grounds; but I believe that the great mass of the people who opposed it, disliked it because it did not contain effectual provision against encroachments on particular rights, and those safeguards which they have been long accustomed to have interposed between them and the magistrate who exercised the sovereign power: nor ought we to consider them safe, while a great number of our fellow citizens think these securities necessary.
It has been a fortunate thing that the objection to the government has been made on the ground I stated; because it will be practicable on that ground to obviate the objection, so far as to satisfy the public mind that their liberties will be perpetual, and this without endangering any part of the constitution, which is considered as essential to the existence of the government by those who promoted its adoption.
The amendments which have occurred to me, proper to be recommended by congress to the state legislatures, are these:
The first of these amendments, relates to what may be called a bill of rights; I will own that I never considered this provision so essential to the federal constitution, as to make it improper to ratify it, until such an amendment was added; at the same time, I always conceived, that in a certain form and to a certain extent, such a provision was neither improper nor altogether useless. I am aware, that a great number of the most respectable friends to the government and champions for republican liberty have thought such a provision, not only unnecessary but even improper, nay I believe some have gone so far as to think it even dangerous. Some policy has been made use of perhaps by gentlemen on both sides of the question: I acknowledge the ingenuity of those arguments which were drawn against the constitution, by a comparison with the policy of Great-Britain, in establishing a declaration of rights, but there is too great a difference in the case to warrant the comparison: therefore the arguments drawn from that source, were in a great measure inapplicable. In the declaration of rights which that country has established, the truth is, they have gone no farther, than to raise a barrier against the power of the crown, the power of the legislature is left altogether indefinite. Altho' I know whenever the great rights, the trial by jury freedom of the press, or liberty of conscience, came in question in that body the invasion of them is resisted by able advocates, yet their Magna Charta does not contain any one provision for the security of those rights, respecting which, the people of America are most alarmed. The freedom of the press and rights of conscience, those choicest privileges of the people, are unguarded in the British constitution.13
But altho' the case may be widely different, and it may not be thought necessary to provide limits for the legislative power in that country yet a different opinion prevails in the United States. The people of many states, have thought it necessary to raise barriers against power in all forms and departments of government, and I am inclined to believe, if once bills of rights are established in all the states as well as the federal constitution, we shall find that altho' some of them are rather unimportant, yet, upon the whole, they will have a salutary tendency. It may be said, in some instances they do no more than state the perfect equality of mankind, this to be sure is an absolute truth, yet it is not absolutely necessary to be inserted at the head of a constitution. In some instances they assert those rights which are exercised by the people in forming and establishing a plan of government. In other instances, they specify those rights which are retained when particular powers are given up to be exercised by the legislature. In other instances, they specify positive rights, which may seem to result from the nature of the compact. Trial by jury cannot be considered a natural right, but a right resulting from the social compact which regulates the action of the community but is as essential to secure the liberty of the people as any one of the preexistent rights of nature.14 In other instances they lay down dogmatic maxims with respect to the construction of the government; declaring, that the legislative, executive, and judicial branches shall be kept separate and distinct: Perhaps the best way of securing this in practice is to provide such checks, as will prevent the encroachment of the one upon the other.
But whatever may be the form which the several states have adopted in making declarations in favor of particular rights, the great object in view is to limit and qualify the powers of government, by excepting out of the grant of power those cases in which the government ought not to act, or to act only in a particular mode. They point these exceptions sometimes against the abuse of the executive power, sometimes against the legislative, and, in some cases, against the community itself or, in other words, against the majority in favor of the minority In our government it is, perhaps, less necessary to guard against the abuse in the executive department than any other; because it is not the stronger branch of the system, but the weaker:15 It therefore must be levelled against the legislative, for it is the most powerful, and most likely to be abused, because it is under the least controul; hence, so far as a declaration of rights can tend to prevent the exercise of undue power, it cannot be doubted but such declaration is proper But I confess that I do conceive, that in a government modified like this of the United States, the great danger lies rather in the abuse of the community than in the legislative body The prescriptions in favor of liberty ought to be levelled against that quarter where the greatest danger lies, namely that which possesses the highest prerogative of power: But this is not found in either the executive or legislative departments of government, but in the body of the people, operating by the majority against the minority It may be thought all paper barriers against the power of the community are too weak to be worthy of attention. I am sensible they are not so strong as to satisfy gentlemen of every description who have seen and examined thoroughly the texture of such a defence; yet, as they have a tendency to impress some degree of respect for them, to establish the public opinion in their favor, and rouse the attention of the whole community it may be one mean to controul the majority from those acts to which they might be otherwise inclined.
It has been said by way of objection to a bill of rights, by many respectable gentlemen out of doors, and I find opposition on the same principles likely to be made by gentlemen on this floor, that they are unnecessary articles of a republican government, upon the presumption that the people have those rights in their own hands, and that is the proper place for them to rest. It would be a sufficient answer to say that this objection lies against such provisions under the state governments as well as under the general government; and there are, I believe, but few gentlemen who are inclined to push their theory so far as to say that a declaration of rights in those cases is either ineffectual or improper16 It has been said that in the federal government they are unnecessary because the powers are enumerated, and it follows that all that are not granted by the constitution are retained: that the constitution is a bill of powers, the great residuum being the rights of the people; and therefore a bill of rights cannot be so necessary as if the residuum was thrown into the hands of the government.17 I admit that these arguments are not entirely without foundation; but they are not conclusive to the extent which has been supposed. It is true the powers of the general government are circumscribed, they are directed to particular objects; but even if government keeps within those limits, it has certain discretionary powers with respect to the means, which may admit of abuse to a certain extent, in the same manner as the powers of the state governments under their constitutions may to an indefinite extent; because in the constitution of the United States there is a clause granting to Congress the power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution all the powers vested in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof this enables them to fulfil every purpose for which the government was established. Now may not laws be considered necessary and proper by Congress, for it is them who are to judge of the necessity and propriety to accomplish those special purposes which they may have in contemplation, which laws in themselves are neither necessary or proper; as well as improper laws could be enacted by the state legislatures, for fulfilling the more extended objects of those governments. I will state an instance which I think in point, and proves that this might be the case. The general government has a right to pass all laws which shall be necessary to collect its revenue; the means for enforcing the collection are within the direction of the legislature: may not general warrants be considered necessary for this purpose, as well as for some purposes which it was supposed at the framing of their constitutions the state governments had in view If there was reason for restraining the state governments from exercising this power, there is like reason for restraining the federal government.
It may be said, because it has been said, that a bill of rights is not necessary because the establishment of this government has not repealed those declarations of rights which are added to the several state constitutions: that those rights of the people, which had been established by the most solemn act, could not be annihilated by a subsequent act of that people, who meant, and declared at the head of the instrument, that they ordained and established new system, for the express purpose of securing to themselves and posterity the liberties they had gained by an arduous conflict.
I admit the force of this observation, but I do not look upon it to be conclusive. In the first place, it is too uncertain ground to leave this provision upon, if a provision is at all necessary to secure rights so important as many of those I have mentioned are conceived to be, by the public in general, as well as those in particular who opposed the adoption of this constitution. Beside some states have no bills of rights, there are others provided with very defective ones, and there are others whose bills of rights are not only defective, but absolutely improper; instead of securing some in the full extent which republican principles would require, they limit them too much to agree with the common ideas of liberty.
It has been objected also against a bill of rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration, and it might follow by implication, that those rights which were not singled out, were intended to be assigned into the hands of the general government, and were consequently insecure. This is one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard urged against the admission of a bill of rights into this system; but, I conceive, that may be guarded against. I have attempted it, as gentlemen may see by turning to the last clause of the 4th resolution.
It has been said, that it is unnecessary to load the constitution with this provision, because it was not found effectual in the constitution of the particular states. It is true, there are a few particular states in which some of the most valuable articles have not, at one time or other, been violated; but it does not follow but they may have, to a certain degree, a salutary effect against the abuse of power If they are incorporated into the constitution, independent tribunals of justice will consider themselves in a peculiar manner the guardians of those rights; they will be an impenetrable bulwark against every assumption of power in the legislative or executive; they will be naturally led to resist every encroachment upon rights expressly stipulated for in the constitution by the declaration of rights. Beside this security there is a great probability that such a declaration in the federal system would be inforced; because the state legislatures will jealously and closely watch the operations of this government, and be able to resist with more effect every assumption of power than any other power on earth can do; and the greatest opponents to a federal government admit the state legislatures to be sure guardians of the people's liberty I conclude from this view of the subject, that it will be proper in itself and highly politic, for the tranquility of the public mind, and the stability of the government, that we should offer something, in the form I have proposed, to be incorporated in the system of government, as a declaration of the rights of the people.
In the next place I wish to see that part of the constitution revised which declares, that the number of representatives shall not exceed the proportion of one for every thirty thousand persons, and allows one representative to every state which rates below that proportion. If we attend to the discussion of this subject, which has taken place in the state conventions, and even in the opinion of the friends to the constitution, an alteration here is proper It is the sense of the people of America, that the number representatives ought to be encreased, but particularly that it should not be left in the discretion of the government to diminish them, below that proportion which certainly is in the power of the legislature as the constitution now stands; and they may as the population of the country encreases, increase the house of representatives to a very unwieldy degree. I confess I always thought this part of the constitution defective, though not dangerous; and that it ought to be particularly attended to whenever congress should go into the consideration amendments.20 There are several lesser cases enumerated in my proposition, in which I wish also to see some alteration take place. That article which leaves it in the power of the legislature to ascertain its own emolument is one to which I allude. I do not believe this is a power which, in the ordinary course of government, is likely to be abused, perhaps of all the powers granted, it is least likely to abuse; but there is a seeming impropriety in leaving any set of men without controul to put their hand into the public coffers, to take out money to put in their pockets; there is a seeming indecorum in such power, which leads me to propose a change.21 We have a guide to this alteration in several of the amendments which the different conventions have proposed. I have gone therefore so far as to fix it, that no law varying the compensation, shall operate until there is a change in the legislature; in which case it cannot be for the particular benefit of those who are concerned in determining the value of the service. I wish also, in revising the constitution, we may throw into that section, which interdicts the abuse of certain powers in the state legislatures, some other provisions of equal if not greater importance than those already made. The words, "No state shall pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, &c." were wise and proper restrictions in the constitution. I think there is more danger of those powers being abused by the state governments than by the government of the United States.22 The same may be said of other powers which they possess, if not controuled by the general principle, that laws are unconstitutional which infringe the rights of the community I should therefore wish to extend this interdiction, and add, as I have stated in the 5th resolution, that no state shall violate the equal right of conscience, freedom of the press, or trial by jury in criminal cases; because it is proper that every government should be disarmed of powers which trench upon those particular rights. I know in some of the state constitutions the power of the government is controuled by such a declaration, but others are not. I cannot see any reason against obtaining even a double security on those points; and nothing can give a more sincere proof of the attachment of those who opposed this constitution to these great and important rights, than to see them join in obtaining the security I have now proposed; because it must be admitted, on all hands, that the state governments are as liable to attack these invaluable privileges as the general government is, and therefore ought to be as cautiously guarded against.23
I think it will be proper, with respect to the judiciary powers, to satisfy the public mind on those points which I have mentioned. Great inconvenience has been apprehended to suitors from the distance they would be dragged to obtain justice in the supreme court of the United States, upon an appeal on an action for a small debt. To remedy this, declare, that no appeal shall be made unless the matter in controversy amounts to a particular sum: This, with the regulations respecting jury trials in criminal cases, and suits at common law it is to be hoped will quiet and reconcile the minds of the people to that part of the constitution.
I find, from looking into the amendments proposed by the state conventions, that several are particularly anxious that it should be declared in the constitution, that the powers not therein delegated, should be reserved to the several states. Perhaps words which may define this more precisely than the whole of the instrument now does, may be considered as superfluous. I admit they may be deemed unnecessary; but there can be no harm in making such a declaration, if gentlemen will allow that the fact is as stated, I am sure understand it so, and do therefore propose it.
These are the points on which I wish to see a revision of the constitution take place. How far they will accord with the sense of this body I cannot take upon me absolutely to determine; but I believe every gentleman will readily admit that nothing is in contemplation, so far as I have mentioned, that can endanger the beauty of the government in any one important feature, even in the eyes of its most sanguine admirers. I have proposed nothing that does not appear to me as proper in itself or eligible as patronised by a respectable number of our fellow citizens; and if we can make the constitution better in the opinion of those who are opposed to it, without weakening its frame, or abridging its usefulness, in the judgment of those who are attached to it, we act the part of wise and liberal men to make such alterations as shall produce that effect.
Having done what I conceived was my duty in bringing before this house the subject amendments, and also stated such as I wish for and approve, and offered the reasons which occurred to me in their support; I shall content myself for the present with moving, that a committee be appointed to consider of and report such amendments as ought to be proposed by congress to the legislatures of the states, to become, if ratified by three-fourths thereof part of the constitution of the United States.26 By agreeing to this motion, the subject may be going on in the committee, while other important business is proceeding to a conclusion in the house. I should advocate greater dispatch in the business of amendments, if I was not convinced of the absolute necessity there is of pursuing the organization of the government; because I think we should obtain the confidence of our fellow citizens, in proportion as we fortify the rights of the people against the encroachments of the government.
The more I consider the subject amendments, the more, mr. speaker, I am convinced it is improper I revere the rights of my constituents as much as any gentleman in congress, yet, I am against inserting a declaration of rights in the constitution, and that upon some of the reasons referred to by the gentleman last up. If such an addition is not dangerous or improper, it is at least unnecessary: that is a sufficient reason for not entering into the subject at a time when there are urgent calls for our attention to important business. Let me ask gentlemen, what reason there is for the suspicions which are to be removed by this measure? Who are congress that such apprehensions should be entertained of them? Do we not belong to the mass of the people? Is there a single right but, if infringed, will affect us and our connections as much as any other person? Do we not return at the expiration of two years into private life, and is not this a security against encroachment? Are we not sent here to guard those rights which might be endangered, if the government was an aristocracy or despotism? View for a moment the situation of Rhode-Island and, say whether the people's rights are more safe under state legislatures than under a government of limited powers? Their liberty is changed to licentiousness. But do gentlemen suppose bills of rights necessary to secure liberty? If they do, let them look at New-York, New-Jersey Virginia, South Carolina, and Georgia. Those states have no bills of rights, and are the liberty of the citizens less safe in those states, than in the other of the United States? I believe they are not.
There is a maxim in law and it will apply to bills of rights, that when you enumerate exceptions, that the exceptions operate to the exclusion of all circumstances that are omitted; consequently unless you except every right from the grant of power, those omitted are inferred to be resigned to the discretion of the government.
The gentleman endeavours to secure the liberty of the press; pray how is this in danger? There is no power given to congress to regulate this subject as they can commerce, or peace, or war. Has any transactions taken place to make us suppose such an amendment necessary? An honorable gentleman, a member of this house, has been attacked in the public news-papers, on account of sentiments delivered on this floor. Have congress taken any notice of it? Have they ordered the writer before them, even for a breach of privilege, altho' the constitution provides that a member shall not be questioned in any place for any speech or debate in the house? No, these things are suffered to public view and held up to the inspection of the world. These are principles which will always prevail; I am not afraid, nor are other members I believe, our conduct should meet the severest scrutiny Where then is the necessity of taking measures to secure what neither is nor can be in danger?
I hold, mr. speaker, that the present is not a proper time for considering amendments. The States of Rhode-Island and North-Carolina are not in the Union. As to the latter, we have every presumption that they will come in. But in Rhode-Island I think the antifederal interest yet prevails. I am sorry for it, particularly on account of the firm friends of the Union, who are kept without the embrace of the confederacy by their countrymen. These persons are worthy of our patronage; and I wish they would apply to us for protection; they should have my consent to be taken into the Union upon such an application. I understand there are some important mercantile and manufacturing towns in that state, who ardently wish to live under the laws of the general government; if they were to come forward and request us to take measures for this purpose, I would give my sanction to any which are likely to bring about such an event.
But to return to my argument. It being the case that those states are not yet come into the Union, when they join us we shall have another list of amendments to consider, and another bill of rights to frame. Now in my judgment, it is better to make but one work of it whenever we set about the business.
But in what a situation shall we be with respect to those foreign powers with whom we desire to be in treaty? They look upon us as a nation emerging into figure and importance: But what will be their opinion if they see us unable to retain the national advantages we have just gained? they will smile at our infantine efforts to obtain consequence, and treat us with the contempt we have hitherto borne by reason of the imbecility of our government. Can we expect to enter into a commercial competition with any of them, while our system is incomplete? and how long it will remain in such a situation, if we enter upon amendments, God only knows. Our instability will make us objects of scorn. We are not content with two revolutions in less than 14 years; we must enter upon a third, without necessity or propriety. Our faith will be like the punica fides of Carthage; and we shall have none that will repose confidence in us. Why will gentlemen press us to propose amendments, while we are without experience? Can they assure themselves that the amendments, as they call them, will not want amendments as soon as they are adopted? I will not tax gentlemen with a desire of amusing the people; I believe they venerate their country too much for this; but what more can amendments lead to? That part of the constitution which is proposed to be altered, may be the most valuable part of the whole; and perhaps those who now clamour for alterations may ere long discover that they have marred a good government, and rendered their own liberties insecure. I again repeat it, this is not the time for bringing forward amendments; and, notwithstanding the honorable gentleman's ingenious arguments on that point, I am now more strongly persuaded it is wrong.
If we actually find the constitution bad upon experience, or the rights and privileges of the people in danger, I here pledge myself to step forward among the first friends of liberty to prevent the evil; and if nothing else will avail, I will draw my sword in the defence of freedom, and chearfully immolate at that shrine my property and my life. But how are we now proceeding? Why on nothing more than theoretical speculation, pursuing a mere ignis fatuus, which may lead us into serious embarrassments. The imperfections of the government are now unknown; let it have a fair trial, and I will be bound they shew themselves; then we can tell where to apply the remedy so as to secure the great object we are aiming at.
There are, Mr. Speaker, a number of important bills on the table which require dispatch, but I am afraid if we enter on this business, we shall not be able to attend to them for a long time. Look, sir, over the long list of amendments proposed by some of the adopting states, and say when the house could get thro' the discussion; and I believe, sir, every one of those amendments will come before us. Gentlemen may feel themselves called by duty or inclination to propose them; how are we then to extricate ourselves from this labyrinth of business? certainly we shall lose much of our valuable time, without any advantage whatsoever I hope therefore the gentleman will press us no further, he has done his duty and acquitted himself of the obligation under which he lay. He may now accede to what I take to be the sense of the house, and let the business amendments lay over until next spring, that will be soon enough to take it up to any good purpose.
I do not rise to go into the merits or demerits of the subject of amendments; nor shall I make any other observations on the motion for going into a committee of the whole, on the state of the union, which is now withdrawn, than merely to say that, referring the subject to that committee, is treating it with the dignity its importance requires. But I consider it improper to take up this business at this time, when our attention is occupied by other important objects: We should dispatch the subjects now on the table, and let this lie over until a period of more leisure for discussion and attention. The gentleman from Virginia says it is necessary to go into a consideration of this subject, in order to satisfy the people. For my part I cannot be of his opinion. The people know we are employed in the organization of the government, and cannot expect that we should forego this business for any other. But I would not have it understood, that I am against entering upon amendments when the proper time arrives. I shall be glad to set about it as soon as possible, but I would not stay the operations of the government on this account. I think, with the gentleman from Delaware (Mr Vining), that the great wheels of the political machine should first be set in motion; and with the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Jackson), that the vessel ought to be got under way lest she lays by the wharf till she beat off her rudder, and runs herself wreck on shore.
I say sir, I wish as early a day as possible may be assigned for taking up this business, in order to prevent the necessity which the states may think themselves under of calling a new convention. For I am not, sir, one of those blind admirers of this system, who think it all perfection; nor am I so blind as not to see its beauties. The truth is, it partakes of humanity; in it is blended virtue and vice, errors and excellence. But I think, if it is referred to a new convention, we run the risk of losing some of its best properties; this is a case I never wish to see. Whatever might have been my sentiments of the ratification of the constitution without amendments, my sense now is, that the salvation of America depends upon the establishment of this government, whether amended or not. If the constitution which is now ratified should not be supported, I despair of ever having a government of these United States.
I wish the subject to be considered early for another reason: There are two states not in the union; it would be a very desirable circumstance to gain them. I should therefore be in favor of such amendments as might tend to invite them and gain their confidence; good policy will dictate to us to expedite that event. Gentlemen say that we shall not obtain the consent of two-thirds of both houses to amendments. Are gentlemen willing then to throw Rhode-Island and North Carolina into the situation of foreign nations? They have told you, that they cannot accede to the union unless certain amendments are made to the constitution; if you deny a compliance with their request in this particular, you refuse an accommodation to bring about that desirable event, and leave them detached from the union.28
I have another reason for going early into this business: It is necessary to establish an energetic government. My idea of such a government is, that due deliberation be had in making laws, and efficiency in the execution. I hope in this country the latter may obtain without the dread of despotism: I would wish to see the execution of good laws irresistible. But from the view which we have already had of the disposition of the government, we seem really to be afraid to administer the powers with which we are invested lest we give offence. We appear afraid to exercise the constitutional powers of the government, which the welfare of the state requires, lest a jealousy of our powers be the consequence. What is the reason of this timidity? why because we see a great body of our constituents opposed to the constitution as it now stands, who are apprehensive of the enormous powers of governments. But if this business is taken up, and it is thought proper to make amendments, it will remove this difficulty Let us deal fairly and candidly with our constituents, and give the subject a full discussion; after that I have no doubt but the decision will be such as upon examination, we shall discover to be right. If it shall then appear proper and wise to reject the amendments, I dare to say the reasons for so doing, will bring conviction to the people out of doors, as well as it will to the members of this house; and they will acquiesce in the decision, though they may regret the disappointment of their fondest hopes for the security of the liberties of themselves and their posterity. Thus, and thus only the government will have its due energy and accomplish the end for which it was instituted.
I am against referring the subject to a select committee; because I conceive it would be disrespectful to those states which have proposed amendments. The conventions of the states consisted of the most wise and virtuous men of the community; they have ratified this constitution, in full confidence that their objections would at least be considered; and shall we, sir, preclude them by the appointment of a special committee, to consider of a few propositions brought forward by an individual gentleman. Is it in contemplation that the committee should have the subject at large before them, or that they should report upon the particular amendments just mentioned, as they think proper? And are we to be precluded from the consideration of any other amendments but those the committee may report? A select committee must be considered improper, because it is putting their judgments against that of the conventions who have proposed amendments; but if the committee are to consider the matter at large, they will be liable to this objection, that their report will be only waste of time: For if they do not bring forward the whole of the amendments recommended, individual members will consider themselves bound to bring them forward for the decision of the house. would therefore submit, if gentlemen are determined to proceed in the business at this time, whether it is not better that it should go, in the first instance, to a committee of the whole, as first proposed by the gentleman from Virginia.
Some gentlemen consider it necessary to do this to satisfy our constituents: I think referring the business to a special committee will be attempting to amuse them with trifles. Our fellow citizens are possessed of too much discernment not to be able to discover the intention of congress by such procedure. It will be the duty of their representatives to tell them, if they were not able to discover it of themselves; they require the subject to be fairly considered, and if it be found to be improper to comply with their reasonable expectations tell them so. I hope there is no analogy between federal and punic faith; but unless congress shall candidly consider the amendments which have been proposed in confidence by the state conventions, federal faith will not be considered very different from the punica fides of Carthage. The ratification of the constitution in several states would never have taken place, had they not been assured, that the objections would have been duly attended to by congress: And I believe many members of these conventions would never have voted for it, if they had not been persuaded that congress would notice them with that candor and attention which their importance requires. I will say nothing respecting the amendments themselves; they ought to stand or fall on their own merits. If any of them are eligible they will be adopted, if not, they will be rejected.
Was against this motion; not that he was against amendments at a proper time; it is enjoined on him to act a rational part in procuring certain amendments, and he meant to do so; but he could not say what amendments were requisite, until the government was organized. He supposed the judiciary law would contain certain regulations that would remove the anxiety of the people respecting such amendments as related thereto; because he thought much of the minutiae respecting suits between citizens of different states, &c. might be provided by law. He could not agree to make jury trials necessary on every occasion; they were not practiced even at this time, and there were some cases in which a cause could be better decided without a jury than with one.29
In addition to the judiciary business, there is that which relates to the revenue. Gentlemen had let one opportunity go through their hands of getting considerable supply from the impost on the spring importation. He reminded them of this: and would tell them now was the time to finish that business; for if they did not sow in seed time, they would be beggars in harvest. He was well satisfied in his own mind, that the people of America did not look for amendments at present; they never could imagine it to be the first work of Congress.
He wished the concurrence of the senate upon entering on this business, because if they opposed the measure, all the house did would be a mere waste of time; and there was some little difficulty on this point, because it required the consent of two-thirds of them as well as the house representatives to agree to what was proper on this occasion. He said moreover it would be better to refer the subject generally if referred to them at all, than to take up the propositions of individual members.
I do not suppose the constitution to be perfect, nor do I imagine if congress and all the legislatures on the continent were to revise it, that their united labours would make it perfect. I do not expect any perfection on this side the grave in the works of man; but my opinion is, that we are not at present in circumstances to make it better. It is a wonder that there has been such unanimity in adopting it, considering the ordeal it had to undergo; and the unanimity which prevailed at its formation, is equally astonishing; amidst all the members from the twelve states present at the federal convention, there were only three who did not sign the instrument to attest their opinion of its goodness. Of the eleven states who have received it, the majority have ratified it without proposing a single amendment; this circumstance leads me to suppose that we shall not be able to propose any alterations that are likely to be adopted by nine states; and gentlemen know before the alterations take effect, they must be agreed to by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states in the union. Those states that have not recommended alterations will hardly adopt them, unless it is clear that they tend to make the constitution better; now how this can be made out to their satisfaction I am yet to learn; they know of no defect from experience. It seems to be the opinion of gentlemen generally that this is not the time for entering upon the discussion amendments: our only question therefore is, how to get rid of the subject; now for my own part I would prefer to have it referred to a committee of the whole, rather than a special committee, and therefore shall not agree to the motion now before the house.
Mr. Gerry moved, that the business lie over until the 1st. day of July next, and that it be the order for that day Mr SUMMER.
I consider the subject amendments of such great importance to the Union, that I should be glad to see it undertaken in any manner I am not, mr. speaker, disposed to sacrifice substance to form; therefore, whether the business shall originate in a committee of the whole, or in the house, is a matter of indifference to me, so that it be put in train. Although I am seriously inclined to give this subject a full discussion, yet I do not wish it to be fully entered into at present, but am willing it should be postponed to a future day when we shall have more leisure. With respect to referring to a select committee, I am rather against it; because I consider it as treating the applications of the state conventions rather slightly; and I presume it is the intention of the house to take those applications into consideration as well as any other; if it is not, I think it will give fresh cause for jealousy; it will rouse the alarm which is now suspended, and the people will become clamorous for amendments; they will decline any further application to Congress, and resort to the other alternative pointed out in the constitution. I hope, therefore, this house, when they do go into the business, will receive those propositions generally This I apprehend will tend to tranquilize the public mind, and promote that harmony which ought to be kept up between those in the exercise of the powers of government, and those who have cloathed them with the authority or in other words between Congress and the people. Without a harmony and confidence subsists between them, the measures of government will prove abortive, and we shall have still to lament that imbecility and weakness which has long marked our public councils.
Found himself in a delicate situation respecting the subject of amendments. He came from a small state, and therefore his sentiments would not be considered of so much weight as the sentiments of those gentlemen who spoke the sense of much larger states; besides his constituents had prejudged the question, by an unanimous adoption of the constitution, without suggesting any amendments thereto. His sense accorded with the declared sense of the state of Delaware, and he was doubly bound to object to amendments, which were either improper or unnecessary But he had good reasons for opposing the consideration of even proper alterations at this time. He would ask the gentleman who pressed them, whether he would be responsible for the risk the government would run of being injured by an inter regnum? Proposing amendments at this time, is suspending the operations of government, and may be productive of its ruin.
He would not follow the gentleman in his arguments, tho' he supposed them all answerable, because he would not take up the time of the house; he contented himself with saying that a bill of rights was unnecessary in a government deriving all its powers from the people; and the constitution enforced the principle in the strongest manner by the practical declaration prefixed to that instrument; he alluded to the words, "We the people do ordain and establish."
There were many things mentioned by some of the state conventions which he would never agree to, on any conditions whatever; they changed the principles of the government, and were therefore obnoxious to its friends—the honorable gentleman from Virginia, had not touched upon any of them; he was glad of it, because he could by no means bear the idea of an alteration respecting them; he referred to the mode of obtaining direct taxes, judging of elections, &c.
He found he was not speaking to the question; he would therefore return to it and declare he was against committing it to a select committee; if it was to be committed at all, he preferred committee of the whole, but hoped the subject would be postponed.
Found himself unfortunate in not satisfying gentlemen with respect to the mode of introducing the business; he thought from the dignity and peculiarity of the subject that it ought to be referred to a committee of the whole; he had accordingly made that motion first, but finding himself not likely to succeed in that way he had changed his ground. Fearing again to be discomfited, he would change his mode, and move the propositions he had stated before, and the house might do what they thought proper with them. He accordingly moved the propositions by way of resolutions to be adopted by the house.
Mr. Livermore objected to these propositions, because they did not take up the amendments of the several states.
Mr Page was much obliged to his colleague for bringing the subject forward in the manner he had done. He conceived it to be just and fair. What was to be done when the house would not refer it to a committee of any sort, but bring the question at once before them? He hoped it would be the means of bringing about a decision.
Mr. Laurance moved to refer Mr. Madison's motion to the committee of the whole on the state of the union.
Mr. Lee thought it ought to be taken up in that committee; and hoped his colleague would bring the propositions before the committee, when on the state of the union, as he had originally intended.

Resource Metadata





  • Unknown