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 Sherman proposed that the proportion of suffrage in the 1^{st}
branch should be according to the respective numbers of free
inhabitants; and that in the second branch or Senate, each State should
have one vote and no more. He said as the States would remain possessed
of certain individual rights, each State ought to be able to protect
itself: otherwise a few large States will rule the rest. The House of
Lords in England he observed had certain particular rights under the
Constitution, and hence they have an equal vote with the House of
Commons that they may be able to defend their rights.
M^r Rutlidge proposed that the proportion of suffrage in the 1^{st}
branch should be according to the quotas of contribution. The justice of
this rule he said could not be contested. M^r Butler urged the same
idea: adding that money was power; and that the States ought to have
weight in the Gov^t in proportion to their wealth.
M^r King & M^r Wilson,[74] in order to bring the question to a point
moved "that the right of suffrage in the first branch of the national
Legislature ought not to be according [to] the rule established in the
articles of Confederation, but according to some equitable ratio of
representation." The clause so far as it related to suffrage in the
first branch was postponed in order to consider this motion.
[74] In the printed Journal Mr. Rutlidge is named as the
seconder of the motion.--Madison's Note.
M^r Dickenson contended for the _actual_ contributions of the States as
the rule of their representation & suffrage in the first branch. By thus
connecting the interests of the States with their duty, the latter would
be sure to be performed.
M^r King remarked that it was uncertain what mode might be used in
levying a National revenue; but that it was probable, imposts would be
one source of it. If the _actual_ contributions were to be the rule the
non-importing States, as Con^t & N. Jersey, w^d be in a bad situation
indeed. It might so happen that they w^d have no representation. This
situation of particular States had been always one powerful argument in
favor of the 5 Per C^t impost.
The question being ab^t to be put Doc^r Franklin s^d he had thrown his
ideas of the matter on a paper w^{ch} Mr. Wilson read to the Committee
in the words following--Mr. Chairman
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