The Mystery of the Pinckney DraughtNott, Charles C.
History
The Mystery of the Pinckney Draught
Nott, Charles C.
Constitutional history -- United States; Pinckney, Charles, 1757-1824
"At an early day, June 6, this question of legislative
power was determined by two decisive votes. The Convention
adopted the principle of revision, but being mindful, as
Rutledge afterwards said, that 'the judges ought never to
give their opinion on a law, till it comes before them,'
and that they 'of all men are the most unfit to be
concerned in the Revisionary Council,' struck out
Randolph's 'convenient number of the national judiciary'
and left the power of revision in the President alone. At a
later day, August 6th, Rutledge 'delivered in the Report of
the Committee of Detail,' the committee which embodied the
previously ascertained views of the Convention in a draught
of the proposed Constitution. This section was couched in
the very words of the constitution of New York: Every bill
shall be presented to the President '_for his revision_';
'if upon _such revision_' he approve it, he shall sign it;
'if upon _such revision_ it shall appear to him improper
for being passed into a law,' he shall return it. On the
15th of August, with this word _revision_ three times
repeated, 'The thirteenth section of article 6, as amended,
was then agreed to' by all the States. It is this vote
which is expressive of the final intent of the Convention.
The verbal form in which the provision stands in the
Constitution was the work of the Committee of Style.
"This 'revisionary business,' as Madison calls it, came up
again and again; appears and reappears in his Journal from
the 6th of June to the 16th of August; was considered and
reconsidered, discussed and rediscussed. The views of
members swung between the extremes of absolute affirmative
power in Congress and absolute negative power in the
President. The proposition of Hamilton 'to give the
Executive an absolute negative on the laws,' identical with
the legislative power of the Crown, was rejected by ten
States and supported by none. The proposition of Madison to
add the judges of the Supreme Court in the 'revision' of
bills was likewise rejected. At last the deliberations
ended where they had begun. The Convention held fast to the
principle of a Council of Revision and left the duties of
the council in the President alone. He was to be the
Council of Revision. In the words of Madison, the
Convention 'gave the Executive alone, without the
judiciary, the _revisionary control_ on the laws, unless
overruled by two-thirds of each branch.'" _The United
States v. Weil_ (29 Court of Claims Reports 523; affirmed
in _La Abra Co. v. The United States_, 175 U.S.R. 423.
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