The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 1Madison, James
History
The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 1
Madison, James
Constitutional law -- United States; Constitutions -- United States; United States. Constitution
M^r Randolph, was not scrupulous on the point of power. When the
Salvation of the Republic was at stake, it would be treason to our
trust, not to propose what we found necessary. He painted in strong
colours, the imbecility of the existing Confederacy, & the danger of
delaying a substantial reform. In answer to the objection drawn from the
sense of our Constituents as denoted by their acts relating to the
Convention and the objects of their deliberation, he observed that as
each State acted separately in the case, it would have been indecent for
it to have charged the existing Constitution with all the vices which it
might have perceived in it. The first State that set on foot this
experiment would not have been justified in going so far, ignorant as it
was of the opinion of others, and sensible as it must have been of the
uncertainty of a successful issue to the experiment. There are certainly
reasons of a peculiar nature where the ordinary cautions must be
dispensed with; and this is certainly one of them. He w^d not as far as
depended on him leave any thing that seemed necessary, undone. The
present moment is favorable, and is probably the last that will offer.
The true question is whether we shall adhere to the federal plan, or
introduce the national plan. The insufficiency of the former has been
fully displayed by the trial already made. There are but two modes, by
which the end of a Gen^l Gov^t can be attained: the 1^{st} is by
coercion as proposed by M^r P's plan 2. by real legislation as prop^d
by the other plan. Coercion he pronounced to be _impracticable_,
_expensive_, _cruel to individuals_. It tended also to habituate the
instruments of it to shed the blood & riot in the Spoils of their fellow
Citizens, and consequently trained them up for the service of Ambition.
We must resort therefore to a National _Legislation over individuals_,
for which Cong^s are unfit. To vest such power in them, would be
blending the Legislative with the Executive, contrary to the rec^d maxim
on this subject: If the Union of these powers heretofore in Cong^s has
been safe, it has been owing to the general impotency of that body.
Cong^s are moreover not elected by the people, but by the Legislatures
who retain even a power of recall. They have therefore no will of their
own, they are a mere diplomatic body, and are always obsequious to the
views of the States, who are always encroaching on the authority of the
U. States. A provision for harmony among the States, as in trade,
naturalization &.--for crushing rebellion whenever it may rear its
crest--and for certain other general benefits, must be made. The powers
for these purposes can never be given to a body, inadequate as Congress
are in point of representation, elected in the mode in which they are,
and possessing no more confidence than they do: for notwithstanding what
has been said to the contrary, his own experience satisfied him that a
rooted distrust of Congress pretty generally prevailed.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account