The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 2Madison, James
History
The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 2
Madison, James
Constitutional law -- United States; Constitutions -- United States; United States. Constitution
M^r Gov^r Morris. This would be going too far. There are a thousand
laws, relating to bringing actions--limitations, of actions & which
affect contracts. The Judicial power of the U. S. will be a protection
in cases within their jurisdiction; and within the State itself a
majority must rule, whatever may be the mischief done among themselves.
M^r Sherman. Why then prohibit bills of credit?
M^r Wilson was in favor of M^r King's motion.
M^r Madison admitted that inconveniences might arise from such a
prohibition but thought on the whole it would be overbalanced by the
utility of it. He conceived however that a negative on the State laws
could alone secure the effect. Evasions might and would be devised by
the ingenuity of the Legislatures.
Col: Mason. This is carrying the restraint too far. Cases will happen
that cannot be foreseen, where some kind of interference will be proper
& essential. He mentioned the case of limiting the period for bringing
actions on open account--that of bonds after a certain lapse of
time--asking whether it was proper to tie the hands of the States from
making provision in such cases?
M^r Wilson. The answer to these objections is that retrospective
interferences only are to be prohibited.
M^r Madison. Is not that already done by the prohibition of ex post
facto laws, which will oblige the Judges to declare such interferences
null & void.
M^r Rutlidge moved instead of M^r King's Motion to insert--"nor pass
bills of attainder nor retrospective[44] laws" on which motion
N. H. ay. C^t no. N. J. ay. P^a ay. Del. ay. M^d no. Virg^a no.
N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.
[44] In the printed Journal--ex post facto.--Madison's Note.
M^r Madison moved to insert after the word "reprisal" (art. XII) the
words "nor lay embargoes." He urged that such acts by the States would
be unnecessary--impolitic--and unjust.
M^r Sherman thought the States ought to retain this power in order to
prevent suffering & injury to their poor.
Col: Mason thought the amendment would be not only improper but
dangerous, as the Gen^l Legislature would not sit constantly and
therefore could not interpose at the necessary moments. He enforced his
objection by appealing to the necessity of sudden embargoes during the
war, to prevent exports, particularly in the case of a blockade.
M^r Gov^r Morris considered the provision as unnecessary; the power of
regulating trade between State & State already vested in the Gen^l
Legislature, being sufficient.
On the question
N. H. no. Mas. ay. C^t no. N. J. no. P^a no. Del. ay. M^d no.
V^a no. N. C. no. S. C. ay. Geo. no.
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