M^r Butler. If new States were to be erected without the consent of the dismembered States, nothing but confusion would ensue. Whenever taxes should press on the people, demagogues would set up their schemes of new States. Doc^r Johnson agreed in general with the ideas of M^r Sherman, but was afraid that as the clause stood, Vermont would be subjected to N. York, contrary to the faith pledged by Congress. He was of opinion that Vermont ought to be compelled to come into the Union. M^r Langdon said his objections were connected with the case of Vermont. If they are not taken in, & remain exempt from taxes, it would prove of great injury to N. Hampshire and the other neighbouring States. M^r Dickinson hoped the article would not be agreed to. He dwelt on the impropriety of requiring the small States to secure the large ones in their extensive claims of territory. M^r Wilson. When the _majority_ of a State wish to divide they can do so. The aim of those in opposition to the article, he perceived was that the Gen^l Government should abet the _minority_, & by that means divide a State against its own consent. M^r Gov^r Morris. If the forced division of the States is the object of the new system, and is to be pointed ag^{st} one or two States, he expected the Gentlemen from these would pretty quickly leave us. Adjourned. THURSDAY AUGUST 30TH 1787. IN CONVENTION Art XVII resumed for a question on it as amended by M^r Gov^r Morris's substitutes. M^r Carrol moved to strike out so much of the article as requires the consent of the State to its being divided. He was aware that the object of this prerequisite might be to prevent domestic disturbances; but such was our situation with regard to the Crown lands, and the sentiments of Maryland on that subject, that he perceived we should again be at sea, if no guard was provided for the right of the U. States to the back lands. He suggested that it might be proper to provide that nothing in the Constitution should affect the Right of the U. S. to lands ceded by G. Britain in the Treaty of peace, and proposed a committment to a member from each State. He assured the House that this was a point of a most serious nature. It was desirable above all things that the act of the Convention might be agreed to unanimously. But should this point be disregarded, he believed that all risks would be run by a considerable minority, sooner than give their concurrence. M^r L. Martin 2^{ded} the motion for a commitment. M^r Rutlidge. Is it to be supposed that the States are to be cut up without their own consent. The case of Vermont will probably be particularly provided for. There could be no room to fear, that Virginia or N. Carolina would call on the U. States to maintain their Government over the Mountains.