same overt act, or to different overt acts. He thought also, that proof of an overt act ought to be expressed as essential in the case.

Doctor JOHNSON considered "giving aid and comfort" as explanatory of "adhering," and that something should be inserted in the definition concerning overt acts. He contended that treason could not be both against the United States, and individual States; being an offence against the sovereignty, which can be but one in the same community.

Mr. MADISON remarked that "and," before "in adhering," should be changed into "or;" otherwise both offences, viz. of "levying war," and of "adhering to the enemy," might be necessary to constitute treason. He added, that, as the definition here was of treason against the United States, it would seem that the individual States would be left in possession of a concurrent power, so far as to define and punish treason particularly against themselves, which might involve double punishment.*

320

It was moved that the whole clause be recommitted, which was lost, the votes being equally divided,

New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, aye-5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, South Carolina, no-5; North Carolina, divided.

Mr. WILSON and Doctor JOHNSON moved, that " or any of them," after "United States," be struck out, in order to remove the embarrassment; which was agreed to, nem. con.

Mr. MADISON. This has not removed the embarrassment. The same act might be treason against

the United States, as here defined; and against a particular State, according to its laws.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. There can be no danger to the general authority from this; as the laws of the United States are to be paramount.

Doctor JOHNSON was still of opinion there could be no treason against a particular State. It could not, even at present, as the Confederation now stands; the sovereignty being in the Union; much less can it be under the proposed system.

Col. MASON. The United States will have a qualified sovereignty only. The individual States will retain a part of the sovereignty. An act may be treason against a particular State, which is not so against the United States. He cited the rebellion of Bacon in Virginia, as an illustration of the doctrine.

Doctor JOHNSON. That case would amount to treason against the sovereign, the supreme sovereign, the United States.

Mr. KING observed, that the controversy relating to treason, might be of less magnitude than was supposed; as the Legislature might punish capitally under other names than treason.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS and Mr. RANDOLPH Wished to substitute the words of the British statute, and moved to postpone Article 7, Section 2, in order to consider the following substitute: "Whereas it is essential to the preservation of liberty to define precisely and exclusively what shall constitute the crime of treason, it is therefore ordained, declared and established, that if a man do levy war against the United States, within their territories, or be adherent to the

enemies of the United States within the said territories, giving them aid and comfort within their territories or elsewhere, and thereof be provably attainted of open deed, by the people of his condition, he shall be adjudged guilty of treason."

On this question,—

New Jersey, Virginia, aye-2; Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no-8.

It was then moved to strike out "against the United States" after "treason," so as to define treason generally; and on this question,—

Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, Georgia, aye-8; Virginia, North Carolina, no-2.

It was then moved to insert, after "two witnesses," the words, "to the same overt act.”

Doctor FRANKLIN wished this amendment to take place. Prosecutions for treason were generally virulent; and perjury too easily made use of against innocence.

Mr. WILSON. Much may be said on both sides. Treason may sometimes be practised in such a manner as to render proof extremely difficult-as in a traitorous correspondence with an enemy.

On the question, as to "same overt act,"-New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, Georgia, aye-8; New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, no-3.

Mr. KING moved to insert, before the word "power," the word, "sole," giving the United States the exclusive right to declare the punishment of treason.

Mr. BROOM seconds the motion.

Mr. WILSON. In cases of a general nature, treason can only be against the United States; and in such they should have the sole right to declare the punishment; yet in many cases it may be otherwise. The subject was, however, intricate, and he distrusted his present judgment on it.

Mr. KING. This amendment results from the vote defining treason generally, by striking out, "against the United States," which excludes any treason against particular States. These may, however, punish offences, as high misdemeanours.

On the question for inserting the word "sole," it passed in the negative,-New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, South Carolina, aye-5; Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, no-6.

Mr. WILSON. The clause is ambiguous now. "Sole" ought either to have been inserted, or "against the United States," to be re-instated.

Mr. KING. No line can be drawn between levying war and adhering to the enemy against the United States, and against an individual State. Treason against the latter must be so against the former.

Mr. SHERMAN. Resistance against the laws of the United States, as distinguished from resistance against the laws of a particular State, forms the line.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. The United States are sovereign on one side of the line, dividing the jurisdictions the States on the other. Each ought to have power to defend their respective sovereignties.

Mr. DICKINSON. War or insurrection against a

member of the Union must be so against the whole body; but the Constitution should be made clear on this point.

The clause was reconsidered, nem. con.; and then Mr. WILSON and Mr. ELLSWORTH moved to reinstate, "against the United States," after "treason;" on which question,-Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, aye-6; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, South Carolina, no-5.

Mr. MADISON was not satisfied with the footing on which the clause now stood. As treason against the United States involves treason against particular States, and vice versa, the same act may be twice tried, and punished by the different authorities.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS viewed the matter in the same light.

It was moved and seconded to amend the sentence to read: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies;" which was agreed to.

Col. MASON moved to insert the words, "giving them aid and comfort," as restrictive of "adhering to their enemies, &c." The latter, he thought, would be otherwise too indefinite. This motion was agreed to,-Connecticut, Delaware and Georgia only being in the negative.

Mr. L. MARTIN moved to insert after conviction, &c. "or on confession in open court;" and on the question (the negative States thinking the words superfluous,) it was agreed to,-New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Ma