The Debates in
the Federal Convention of 1787
|
|
|
As Recorded by James
Madison |
Return to
Federal Debates Calendar
WEDNESDAY
JULY 18.
IN CONVENTION
On motion of Mr. L. Martin to fix tomorrow for reconsidering the
vote concerning "eligibility of Exective. 1
a 2d. time" it passed in the affirmative.
Mas. ay. Cont. ay. N. J. absent. Pa. ay. Del. ay. Md. ay. Va. ay.
N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. absent. 2
The residue of Resol. 9 3
concerning the Executive was postpd. till tomorrow.
Resol. 10. 4 that Executive
shl. have a right to negative legislative acts not afterwards passed
by 2/3 of each branch. 5 Agreed
to nem. con.
Resol. 11 6 "that a Natl.
Judiciary 7 be estabd. to consist
of one supreme tribunal." agd. to nem. con. 8
"The Judges of which to be appointd. by the 2d. branch of the Natl.
Legislature."
Mr. GHORUM, Wd.
prefer an appointment by the 2d. branch to an appointmt. by the
whole Legislature; but he thought even that branch too numerous, and
too little personally responsible, to ensure a good choice. He
suggested that the Judges be appointed by the Execuve. with the
advice & consent of the 2d. branch, in the mode prescribed by the
constitution of Masts. This mode had been long practised in that
country, & was found to answer perfectly well.
Mr. WILSON, still wd.
9 prefer an appointmt. by the
Executive; but if that could not be attained, wd. prefer in the next
place, the mode suggested by Mr. Ghorum. He thought it his duty
however to move in the first instance "that the Judges be appointed
by the Executive." Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
2ded. the motion.
Mr. L. MARTIN was strenuous for
an appt. by the 2d. branch. Being taken from all the States it wd.
be best informed of characters & most capable of making a fit
choice.
Mr. SHERMAN concurred in the
observations of Mr. Martin, adding that the Judges ought to be
diffused, which would be more likely to be attended to by the 2d.
branch, than by the Executive.
Mr. MASON. The mode of
appointing the Judges may depend in some degree on the mode of
trying impeachments of the Executive. If the Judges were to form a
tribunal for that purpose, they surely ought not to be appointed by
the Executive. There were insuperable objections besides agst.
referring the appointment to the Executive. He mentioned as one,
that as the Seat of Govt. must be in some one State, and
10 the Executive would remain in
office for a considerable time, for 4, 5, or 6 years at least, he
would insensibly form local & personal attachments within the
particular State that would deprive equal merit elsewhere, of an
equal chance of promotion.
Mr. GHORUM. As the Executive
will be responsible in point of character at least, for a judicious
and faithful discharge of his trust, he will be careful to look
through all the States for proper characters. The Senators will be
as likely to form their attachments at the seat of Govt. where they
reside, as the Executive. If they can not get the man of the
particular State to which they may respectively belong, they will be
indifferent to the rest. Public bodies feel no personal
responsibility, and give full play to intrigue & cabal. Rh. Island
is a full illustration of the insensibility to character, produced
by a participation of numbers, in dishonorable measures, and of the
length to which a public body may carry wickedness & cabal.
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
supposed it would be improper for an impeachmt. of the Executive to
be tried before the Judges. The latter would in such case be drawn
into intrigues with the Legislature and an impartial trial would be
frustrated. As they wd. be much about the Seat of Govt. they might
even be previously consulted & arrangements might be made for a
prosecution of the Executive. He thought therefore that no argument
could be drawn from the probability of such a plan of impeachments
agst. the motion before the House.
Mr. MADISON, suggested that the
Judges might be appointed by the Executive with the concurrence of
1/3 at least, of the 2d. branch. This would unite the advantage of
responsibility in the Executive with the security afforded in the
2d. branch agst. any incautious or corrupt nomination by the
Executive.
Mr. SHERMAN, was clearly for an
election by the Senate. It would be composed of men nearly equal to
the Executive, and would of course have on the whole more wisdom.
They would bring into their deliberations a more diffusive knowledge
of characters. It would be less easy for candidates to intrigue with
them, than with the Executive Magistrate. For these reasons he
thought there would be a better security for a proper choice in the
Senate than in the Executive.
Mr. RANDOLPH. It is true that
when the appt. of the Judges was vested in the 2d. branch an
equality of votes had not been given to it. Yet he had rather leave
the appointmt. there than give it to the Executive. He thought the
advantage of personal responsibility might be gained in the Senate
by requiring the respective votes of the members to be entered on
the Journal. He thought too that the hope of receiving appts. would
be more diffusive if they depended on the Senate, the members of
which wd. be diffusively known, than if they depended on a single
man who could not be personally known to a very great extent; and
consequently that opposition to the System, would be so far
weakened.
Mr. BEDFORD thought there were
solid reasons agst. leaving the appointment to the Executive. He
must trust more to information than the Senate. It would put it in
his power to gain over the larger States, by gratifying them with a
preference of their Citizens. The responsibility of the Executive so
much talked of was chimerical. He could not be punished for
mistakes.
Mr. GHORUM remarked that the
Senate could have no better information than the Executive. They
must like him, trust to information from the members belonging to
the particular State where the Candidates resided. The Executive
would certainly be more answerable for a good appointment, as the
whole blame of a bad one would fall on him alone. He did not mean
that he would be answerable under any other penalty than that of
public censure, which with honorable minds was a sufficient one.
On the question for referring the appointment of the Judges to
the Executive, instead of the 2d. branch
Mas. ay. Cont. no. Pa. ay. Del. no. Md. no. Va. no. N. C. no. S.
C. no. — Geo. absent. 11
Mr. GHORUM moved "that the
Judges be nominated and appointed by the Executive by & with the
advice & consent of the 2d. branch & every such nomination shall be
made at least days prior to such appointment." This mode he said had
been ratified by the experience of 140 years in Massachussts. If the
appt. should be left to either branch of the Legislature, it will be
a mere piece of jobbing.
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
2ded. & supported the motion.
Mr. SHERMAN thought it less
objectionable than an absolute appointment by the Executive; but
disliked it as too much fettering the Senate.
12 Question on Mr. Ghorum's
motion
Mas. ay. Cont. no. Pa. ay. Del. no. Md. ay. Va. ay. N. C. no. S.
C. no. Geo. absent. 13
Mr. MADISON moved that the
Judges should be nominated by the Executive, & such nomination
should become an appointment if not disagreed to within days by 2/3
of the 2d. branch Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
2ded. the motion. By common consent the consideration of it was
postponed till tomorrow.
"To hold their offices during good behavior" & "to receive fixed
salaries" agreed to nem: con:
"In which [salaries of Judges] no increase or diminution shall be
made so as to affect the persons at the time in office."
14
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
moved to strike out "or increase." He thought the Legislature ought
to be at liberty to increase salaries as circumstances might
require, and that this would not create any improper dependence in
the Judges.
DOCr. FRANKLIN
was in favor of the motion. Money may not only become plentier, but
the business of the department may increase as the Country becomes
more populous.
Mr. MADISON. The dependence
will be less if the increase alone should be permitted, but it will
be improper even so far to permit a dependence Whenever an increase
is wished by the Judges, or may be in agitation in the legislature,
an undue complaisance in the former may be felt towards the latter.
If at such a crisis there should be in Court suits, to which leading
members of the Legislature may be parties, the Judges will be in a
situation which ought not to 15
suffered, if it can be prevented. The variations in the value of
money, may be guarded agst. by taking for a standard wheat or some
other thing of permanent value. The increase of business will be
provided for by an increase of the number who are to do it. An
increase of salaries may be easily so contrived as not to affect
persons in office.
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS.
The value of money may not only alter but the State of Society may
alter. In this event the same quantity of wheat, the same value
would not be the same compensation. The Amount of salaries must
always be regulated by the manners & the style of living in a
Country. The increase of business can not, be provided for in the
supreme tribunal in the way that has been mentioned. All the
business of a certain description whether more or less must be done
in that single tribunal. Additional labor alone in the Judges can
provide for additional business. Additional compensation therefore
ought not to be prohibited.
On the question for striking out "or increase"
Mas. ay. Cont. ay. Pa. ay. Del. ay. Md. ay. Va. no. N. C. no. S.
C. ay. Geo. absent. 16
The whole clause as amended was then agreed to nem: con:
12. Resol: 17 "that
18 Natl. Legislature be
empowered to appoint inferior tribunals" 19
Mr. BUTLER could see no
necessity for such tribunals. The State Tribunals might do the
business.
Mr. L. MARTIN concurred. They
will create jealousies & oppositions in the State tribunals, with
the jurisdiction of which they will interfere.
Mr. GHORUM. There are in the
States already federal Courts with jurisdiction for trial of
piracies &c. committed on the Seas. No complaints have been made by
the States or the Courts of the States. Inferior tribunals are
essential to render the authority of the Natl. Legislature effectual
Mr. RANDOLPH observed that the
Courts of the States can not be trusted with the administration of
the National laws. The objects of jurisdiction are such as will
often place the General & local policy at variance.
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
urged also the necessity of such a provision
Mr. SHERMAN was willing to give
the power to the Legislature but wished them to make use of the
State Tribunals whenever it could be done, with safety to the
general interest.
Col. MASON thought many circumstances
might arise not now to be foreseen, which might render such a power
absolutely necessary.
On 20 question for agreeing
to 12. Resol: 21 empowering the
National Legislature to appoint "inferior tribunals."
22 Agd. to nem. con.
23 13. Resol: "Impeachments
of national officers" were struck out" on motion for the purpose.
"The jurisdiction of Natl. Judiciary." Several criticisms having
been made on the definition; it was proposed by Mr. Madison so to
alter 24 as to read thus — "that
the jurisdiction shall extend to all cases arising under the Natl.
laws: And to such other questions as may involve the Natl. peace &
harmony," which was agreed to nem. con.
Resol. 14. 25 providing for
the admission of new States 26
Agreed to nem. con.
Resol. 15. 27 that provision
ought to be made for the continuance of Congs. &c. & for the
completion of their engagements. 28
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
thought the assumption of their engagements might as well be
omitted; and that Congs. ought not to be continued till all the
States should adopt the reform; since it may become expedient to
give effect to it whenever a certain number of States shall adopt
it.
Mr. MADISON the clause can mean
nothing more than that provision ought to be made for preventing an
interregnum; which must exist in the interval between the adoption
of the New Govt. and the commencement of its operation, if the old
Govt. should cease on the first of these events.
Mr. WILSON did not entirely
approve of the manner in which the clause relating to the
engagements of Congs. was expressed; but he thought some provision
on the subject would be proper in order to prevent any suspicion
that the obligations of the Confederacy might be dissolved along
with the Governt. under which they were contracted.
On the question on the 1st. part — relating to
29 continuance of Congs."
Mas. no. Cont. no. Pa no. Del. no. Md. no. Va. ay. N.C. ay. S. C.
*30 ay. Geo. no.
31
The 2d. part as to 29
completion of their engagements, 32
disagd. to. nem. con.
Resol. 16. 33 "That a
Republican Constitution & its. existing laws ought to be guarantied
to each State by the U. States." 34
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
— thought the Resol: very objectionable. He should be very unwilling
that such laws as exist in R. Island should be guaranteid.
Mr. WILSON. The object is
merely to secure the States agst. dangerous commotions,
insurrections and rebellions.
Col. MASON. If the Genl. Govt. should have
no right to suppress rebellions agst. particular States, it will be
in a bad situation indeed. As Rebellions agst. itself originate in &
agst. individual States, it must remain a passive Spectator of its
own subversion.
Mr. RANDOLPH. The Resoln. has
2. objects. 1. 35 to secure
Republican Government. 2. 35 to
suppress domestic commotions. He urged the necessity of both these
provisions.
Mr MADISON moved to substitute
"that the Constitutional authority of the States shall be guarantied
to them respectively agst. domestic as well as foreign violence."
DOCr. Mc.CLURG
seconded the motion.
Mr. HOUSTON was afraid of
perpetuating the existing Constitutions of the States. That of
Georgia was a very bad one, and he hoped would be revised & amended.
It may also be difficult for the Genl. Govt. to decide between
contending parties each of which claim the sanction of the
Constitution.
Mr. L. MARTIN was for leaving
the States to suppress Rebellions themselves.
Mr. GHORUM thought it strange
that a Rebellion should be known to exist in the Empire, and the
Genl. Govt. shd. be restrained from interposing to subdue it. At
this rate an enterprising Citizen might erect the standard of
Monarchy in a particular State, might gather together partizans from
all quarters, might extend his views from State to State, and
threaten to establish a tyranny over the whole & the Genl. Govt. be
compelled to remain an inactive witness of its own destruction. With
regard to different parties in a State; as long as they confine
their disputes to words, they will be harmless to the Genl. Govt. &
to each other. If they appeal to the sword, it will then be
necessary for the Genl. Govt., however difficult it may be to decide
on the merits of their contest, to interpose & put an end to it.
Mr. CARROL. Some such provision
is essential. Every State ought to wish for it. It has been doubted
whether it is a casus federis at present. And no room ought to be
left for such a doubt hereafter.
Mr. RANDOLPH moved to add as
36 amendt. to the motion; "and
that no State be at liberty to form any other than a Republican
Govt.
Mr. MADISON seconded the motion
Mr. RUTLIDGE thought it
unnecessary to insert any guarantee. No doubt could be entertained
but that Congs. had the authority if they had the means to
co-operate with any State in subduing a rebellion. It was & would be
involved in the nature of the thing.
Mr. WILSON moved as a better
expression of the idea, "that a Republican form of Governmt. shall
be guarantied to each State & that each State shall be protected
agst. foreign & domestic violence.
This seeming to be well received, Mr. MADISON
& Mr. RANDOLPH withdrew their
propositions & on the Question for agreeing to Mr. Wilson's motion,
it passed nem. con.
Adjd.
1. The word "eligibility of
Executive" are changed to "the ineligibility of the Executive" in
the transcript.
2. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, aye — 8; New
Jersey, Georgia, absent."
3. The words "the ninth
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "Resol. 9."
4. The words "The tenth
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "Resol. 10."
5. The word "was" is here
inserted in the transcript.
6. The words "The Eleventh
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "Resol. 11."
7. The word "shall" is here
inserted in the transcript.
8. The words "On the clause" are
here inserted in the transcript.
9. The words "still wd." are
transposed to read "would still" in the transcript.
10. The word "as" is here
inserted in the transcript.
11. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, aye — 2; Connecticut, Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, no — 6; Georgia,
absent."
12. The words "On the" are here
inserted in the transcript.
13. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, aye — 4;
Connecticut, Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, no — 4;
Georgia, absent."
14. The phrase "actually in
office at the time" is substituted in the transcript for "at the
time in office."
15. The word "be" is here
inserted in the transcript.
16. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
Maryland, South Carolina, aye — 6; Virginia, North Carolina, no — 2;
Georgia, absent."
17. The words "The twelfth
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "12, Resol."
18. The word "the" is here
inserted in the transcript.
19. The words "being taken up"
are here inserted in the transcript.
20. The word "the" is here
inserted in the transcript.
21. The words "the twelfth
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "12. Resol."
22. The words "it was" are here
inserted in the transcript.
23. This paragraph is changed in
the transcript to read as follows: "The clause of 'Impeachments of
national officers,' was struck out, on motion for the purpose. The
thirteenth Resolution, 'The jurisdiction of the National Judiciary,
&c.' being then taken up, several ..."
24. The word "it" is here
inserted in the transcript.
25. The words "The fourteenth
Resolution" are substituted in transcript for "Resol. 14."
26. The word "was" is here
inserted in the transcript.
27. The words "The fifteenth
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "Resol. 15."
28. The words "being considered"
are here inserted in the transcript.
29. The word "the" is here
inserted in the transcript.
*30. In the printed Journal, S.
Carolina no.
31. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
*30 aye — 3; Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Georgia, no — 6."
32. The word "was" is here
inserted in the transcript.
33. The words "The sixteenth
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "Resol. 16."
34. The words "being considered"
are here added in the transcript.
35. The figures "1" and "2" are
changed to "first" and "secondly" in the transcript.
36. The word "an" is here
inserted in the transcript.