The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 2 — John Shaqi
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 Madison thought it clear that the Legislatures were incompetent to
the proposed changes. These changes would make essential inroads on the
State Constitutions, and it would be a novel & dangerous doctrine that a
Legislature could change the constitution under which it held its
existence. There might indeed be some Constitutions within the Union,
which had given a power to the Legislature to concur in alterations of
the federal Compact. But there were certainly some which had not; and in
the case of these, a ratification must of necessity be obtained from the
people. He considered the difference between a system founded on the
Legislatures only, and one founded on the people, to be the true
difference between a _league_ or _treaty_, and a _Constitution_. The
former in point of _moral obligation_ might be as inviolable as the
latter. In point of _political operation_, there were two important
distinctions in favor of the latter. 1. A law violating a treaty
ratified by a pre-existing law, might be respected by the Judges as a
law, though an unwise or perfidious one. A law violating a constitution
established by the people themselves, would be considered by the Judges
as null & void. 2. The doctrine laid down by the law of Nations in the
case of treaties is that a breach of any one article by any of the
parties, frees the other parties from their engagements. In the case of
a union of people under one Constitution, the nature of the pact has
always been understood to exclude such an interpretation. Comparing the
two modes in point of expediency he thought all the considerations which
recommended this Convention in preference to Congress for proposing the
reform were in favor of State Conventions in preference to the
Legislatures for examining and adopting it.
On question on M^r Elseworth's motion to refer the plan to the
Legislatures of the States
N. H. no. Mass. no. C^t ay. P^a no. Del. ay. M^d ay. V^a no.
N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no.
M^r Gov^r Morris moved that the reference of the plan be made to one
general Convention, chosen & authorized by the people to consider,
_amend_, & establish the same.--Not seconded.
On question for agreeing to Resolution 19. touching the mode of
Ratification as reported from the Committee of the Whole; viz, to refer
the Const^n, after the approbation of Cong^s to assemblies chosen by the
people;
N. H. ay. Mass. ay. C^t ay. P^a ay. Del. no. M^d ay. V^a ay.
N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.
M^r Gov^r Morris & M^r King moved that the representation in the second
branch consist of ---- members from each State, who shall vote per
capita.
M^r Elseworth said he had always approved of voting in that mode.
M^r Gov^r Morris moved to fill the _blank_ with _three_. He wished the
Senate to be a pretty numerous body. If two members only should be
allowed to each State, and a majority be made a quorum, the power would
be lodged in 14 members, which was too small a number for such a trust.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account