Abbildungen der Seite

ground again. To strike out the section, was to unhinge the compromise of which it made a part. The duration of the Senate made it improper. He does not object to that duration. On the contrary, he approved of it. But joined with the smallness of the number, it was an argument against adding this to the other great powers vested in that body. His idea of an aristocracy was, that it was the government of the few over the many. An aristocratic body, like the screw in mechanics, working its way by slow degrees, and holding fast whatever it gains, should ever be suspected of an encroaching tendency. The purse-strings should never be put into its hands.

Mr. MERCER considered the exclusive power of originating money bills as so great an advantage, that it rendered the equality of votes in the Senate ideal and of no consequence.

Mr. BUTLER was for adhering to the principle which had been settled.

Mr. WILSON was opposed to it on its merits, without regard to the compromise.

Mr. ELLSWORTH did not think the clause of any consequence; but as it was thought of consequence by some members from the larger States, he was willing it should stand.

Mr. MADISON was for striking it out; considering it as of no advantage to the large States, as fettering the Government, and as a source of injurious altercations between the two Houses.

On the question for striking out "Article 4, Sect. 5,"-New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, aye-7;

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, North
Carolina, no-4.297


In Convention,-Article 4, Sect. 6, was taken up. Mr. RANDOLPH expressed his dissatisfation at the disagreement yesterday to Sect. 5, concerning money bills, as endangering the success of the plan, and extremely objectionable in itself; and gave notice that he should move for a reconsideration of the vote.

Mr. WILLIAMSON said he had formed a like intention.

Mr. WILSON gave notice that he should move to reconsider the vote requiring seven instead of three years of citizenship, as a qualification of candidates for the House of Representatives.

Article 4, Sections 6 and 7, were agreed to, nem.


Article 5, Sect. 1, was then taken up.

Mr. WILSON objected to vacancies in the Senate being supplied by the Executives of the States. It was unnecessary, as the Legislatures will meet so frequently. It removes the appointment too far from the people, the Executives in most of the States being elected by the Legislatures. As he had always thought the appointment of the Executive by the Legislative department wrong, so it was still more so that the Executive should elect into the Legislative department.

Mr. RANDOLPH thought it necessary in order to

prevent inconvenient chasms in the Senate. In some States the Legislatures meet but once a year. As the Senate will have more power and consist of a smaller number than the other House, vacancies there will be of more consequence. The Executives might be safely trusted, he thought, with the appointment for so short a time.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. It is only said that the Executive may supply vacancies. When the Legislative meet ing happens to be near, the power will not be exerted. As there will be but two members from a State, vacancies may be of great moment.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Senators may resign or not accept. This provision is therefore absolutely necessary.

On the question for striking out, "vacancies shall be supplied by the Executives,"-Pennsylvania, aye -1; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no-8; Maryland, divided.

Mr. WILLIAMSON moved to insert, after "vacancies shall be supplied by the Executives," the words, "unless other provision shall be made by the Legislature" (of the State).

Mr. ELLSWORTH. He was willing to trust the Legislature, or the Executive of a State, but not to give the former a discretion to refer appointments for the Senate to whom they pleased.

On the question on Mr. Williamson's motion,— Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye, 4; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, no-6.

Mr. MADISON, in order to prevent doubts whether

resignations could be made by Senators, or whether they could refuse to accept, moved to strike out the the words after "vacancies," and insert the words, "happening by refusals to accept, resignations, or otherwise, may be supplied by the Legislature of the State in the representation of which such vacancies shall happen, or by the Executive thereof until the next meeting of the Legislature."

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. This is absolutely necessary; otherwise, as members chosen into the Senate are disqualified from being appointed to any office by Sect. 9, of this Article, it will be in the power of a Legislature, by appointing a man a Senator against his consent, to deprive the United States of his services.

The motion of Mr. MADISON was agreed to, nem. con. Mr. RANDOLPH called for a division of the Section, so as to leave a distinct question on the last words, "each member shall have one vote." He wished this last sentence to be postponed until the reconsideration should have taken place on Article 4, Sect. 5, concerning money bills. If that section should not be re-instated, his plan would be to vary the representation in the Senate.

Mr. STRONG Concurred in Mr. RANDOLPH's ideas on this point.

Mr. READ did not consider the section as to money-bills of any advantage to the larger States, and had voted for striking it out as being viewed in the same light by the larger States. If it was considered by them as of any value, and as a condition of the equality of votes in the Senate, he had no objection to its being re-instated.

Mr. WILSON, Mr. ELLSWORTH, and Mr. MADISON, urged, that it was of no advantage to the larger States; and that it might be a dangerous source of contention between the two Houses. All the principal powers of the National Legislature had some relation to money.

Doctor FRANKLIN considered the two clauses, the originating of money bills, and the equality of votes in the Senate, as essentially connected by the compromise which had been agreed to.

Colonel MASON said this was not the time for discussing this point. When the originating of money bills shall be reconsidered, he thought it could be demonstrated, that it was of essential importance to restrain the right to the House of Representatives, the immediate choice of the people.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. The State of North Carolina had agreed to an equality in the Senate, merely in consideration that money bills should be confined to the other House: and he was surprised to see the smaller States forsaking the condition on which they had received their equality.

On the question on the first section, down to the last sentence,-New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, aye-7; Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, no-3; South Carolina, divided.

Mr. RANDOLPH moved that the last sentence "each member shall have one vote," be postponed.

It was observed that this could not be necessary; as in case the sanction as to originating money bills

* In the printed Journal, Pennsylvania, aye.

« ZurückWeiter »