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
propositions reported from the Committee go forth to the people. He was
under no apprehensions. The Large States dare not dissolve the
Confederation. If they do the small ones will find some foreign ally of
more honor and good faith, who will take them by the hand and do them
justice. He did not mean by this to intimidate or alarm. It was a
natural consequence, which ought to be avoided by enlarging the federal
powers not annihilating the federal system. This is what the people
expect. All agree in the necessity of a more efficient Gov^t and why not
make such an one as they desire.
M^r Elseworth. Under a National Gov^t he should participate in the
National Security, as remarked by (M^r King) but that was all. What he
wanted was domestic happiness. The Nat^l Gov^t could not descend to the
local objects on which this depended. It could only embrace objects of a
general nature. He turned his eyes therefore for the preservation of his
rights to the State Gov^{ts}. From these alone he could derive the
greatest happiness he expects in this life. His happiness depends on
their existence, as much as a new born infant on its mother for
nourishment. If this reasoning was not satisfactory, he had nothing to
add that could be so.
M^r King was for preserving the States in a subordinate degree, and as
far as they could be necessary for the purposes stated by M^r Elseworth.
He did not think a full answer had been given to those who apprehended a
dangerous encroachment on their jurisdictions. Expedients might be
devised as he conceived that would give them all the security the nature
of things would admit of. In the establish^t of Societies the
Constitution was to the Legislature what the laws were to individuals.
As the fundamental rights of individuals are secured by express
provisions in the State Constitutions; why may not a like security be
provided for the Rights of States in the National Constitution. The
articles of Union between Engl^d & Scotland furnish an example of such a
provision in favor of sundry rights of Scotland. When that Union was in
agitation, the same language of apprehension which has been heard from
the smaller States, was in the mouths of the Scotch patriots. The
articles however have not been violated and the Scotch have found an
increase of prosperity & happiness. He was aware that this will be
called a mere _paper security_. He thought it a sufficient answer to say
that if fundamental articles of compact, are no sufficient defence
against physical power, neither will there be any safety ag^{st} it if
there be no compact. He could not sit down, without taking some notice
of the language of the honorable gentleman from Delaware (M^r Bedford).
It was not he that had uttered a dictatorial language. This intemperance
had marked the honorable Gentleman himself. It was not he who with a
vehemence unprecedented in that House, had declared himself ready to
turn his hopes from our common Country, and court the protection of some
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