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 Gov^r Morris & M^r Madison answered that the charge itself involved
an acquittal; since notwithstanding the augmentation of the number of
members allotted to Mass^{ts} & V^a the motion for proportioning the
burdens thereto was made by a member from the former State & was
approved by M^r M. from the latter who was on the Com^e. M^r Gov^r
Morris said that he thought P^a had her due share in 8 members; and he
could not in candor ask for more. M^r M. said that having always
conceived that the difference of interest in the U. States lay not
between the large & small, but the N. & South^n States, and finding that
the number of members allotted to the N. States was greatly superior, he
should have preferred, an addition of two members to the S. States, to
wit one to N. & 1 to S. Carl^a rather than of one member to Virg^a. He
liked the present motion, because it tended to moderate the views both
of the opponents & advocates for rating very high, the negroes.
M^r Elseworth hoped the proposition would be withdrawn. It entered too
much into detail. The general principle was already sufficiently
settled. As fractions can not be regarded in apportioning the _N^o of
representatives_, the rule will be unjust, until an actual census shall
be made. After that taxation may be precisely proportioned according to
the principle established, to the _number of inhabitants_.
M^r Wilson hoped the motion would not be withdrawn. If it sh^d it will
be made from another quarter. The rule will be as reasonable & just
before, as after a Census. As to fractional numbers, the Census will not
destroy, but ascertain them. And they will have the same effect after as
before the Census; for as he understands the rule, it is to be adjusted
not to the number of _inhabitants_, but of _Representatives_.
M^r Sherman opposed the motion. He thought the Legislature ought to be
left at liberty: in which case they would probably conform to the
principles observed by Cong^s.
M^r Mason did not know that Virg^a would be a loser by the proposed
regulation, but had some scruple as to the justice of it. He doubted
much whether the conjectural rule which was to precede the Census, would
be as just, as it would be rendered by an actual census.
M^r Elseworth & M^r Sherman moved to postpone the motion of M^r Gerry.
On y^e question, it passed in the negative. Mass. no. Con^t ay. N. J.
ay. P^a no. Del. ay. M^d ay. V^a no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no.
Question on M^r Gerry's motion, it passed in the negative, the States
being equally divided.
Mass. ay. Con^t no. N. J. no. _P^a ay._ Del. no. M^d no.
_V^a no._ N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.
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