The Debates in
the Federal Convention of 1787
|
|
|
As Recorded by James
Madison |
Return to
Federal Debates Calendar
FRIDAY
JUNE 8th.
IN COMMITTEE
OF THE
WHOLE
On a reconsideration of the clause giving the Natl. Legislature a
negative on such laws of the States as might be contrary to the
articles of Union, or Treaties with foreign nations,
Mr. PINKNEY moved "that the
National Legislature shd. have authority to negative all laws which
they shd. judge to be improper." He urged that such a universality
of the power was indispensably necessary to render it effectual;
that the States must be kept in due subordination to the nation;
that if the States were left to act of themselves in any case, it
wd. be impossible to defend the national prerogatives, however
extensive they might be on paper; that the acts of Congress had been
defeated by this means; nor had foreign treaties escaped repeated
violations; that this universal negative was in fact the corner
stone of an efficient national Govt.; that under the British Govt.
the negative of the Crown had been found beneficial, and the States
are more one nation now, than the Colonies were then.
Mr. MADISON seconded the
motion. He could not but regard an indefinite power to negative
legislative acts of the States as absolutely necessary to a perfect
system. Experience had evinced a constant tendency in the States to
encroach on the federal authority; to violate national Treaties; to
infringe the rights & interests of each other; to oppress the weaker
party within their respective jurisdictions. A negative was the
mildest expedient that could be devised for preventing these
mischiefs. The existence of such a check would prevent attempts to
commit them. Should no such precaution be engrafted, the only remedy
wd. lie 1 in an appeal to
coercion. Was such a remedy eligible? was it practicable? Could the
national resources, if exerted to the utmost enforce a national
decree agst. Massts. abetted perhaps by several of her neighbours?
It wd. not be possible. A small proportion of the Community, in a
compact situation, acting on the defensive, and at one of its
extremities might at any time bid defiance to the National
authority. Any Govt. for the U. States formed on the supposed
practicability of using force agst. the unconstitutional proceedings
of the States, wd. prove as visionary & fallacious as the Govt. of
Congs. The negative wd. render the use of force unnecessary. The
States cd. of themselves then 2
pass no operative act, any more than one branch of a Legislature
where there are two branches, can proceed without the other. But in
order to give the negative this efficacy, it must extend to all
cases. A discrimination wd. only be a fresh source of contention
between the two authorities. In a word, to recur to the
illustrations borrowed from the planetary system. This prerogative
of the General Govt. is the great pervading principle that must
controul the centrifugal tendency of the States; which, without it,
will continually fly out of their proper orbits and destroy the
order & harmony of the political System.
Mr. WILLIAMSON was agst. giving
a power that might restrain the States from regulating their
internal police.
Mr. GERRY cd. not see the
extent of such a power, and was agst. every power that was not
necessary. He thought a remonstrance agst. unreasonable acts of the
States wd. reclaim 3 them If it
shd. not force might be resorted to. He had no objection to
authorize a negative to paper money and similar measures. When the
confederation was depending before Congress, Massachussetts was then
for inserting the power of emitting paper money amg. the exclusive
powers of Congress. He observed that the proposed negative wd.
extend to the regulations of the Militia, a matter on which the
existence of a 4 State might
depend. The Natl. Legislature with such a power may enslave the
States. Such an idea as this will never be acceded to. It has never
been suggested or conceived among the people. No speculative
projector, and there are eno' of that character among us, in
politics as well as in other things, has in any pamphlet or
newspaper thrown out the idea. The States too have different
interests and are ignorant of each other's interests. The negative
therefore will be abused. New States too having separate views from
the old States will never come into the Union. They may even be
under some foreign influence; are they in such case to participate
in the negative on the will of the other States?
Mr. SHERMAN thought the cases
in which the negative ought to be exercised, might be defined. He
wished the point might not be decided till a trial at least shd. be
made for that purpose.
Mr. WILSON would not say what
modifications of the proposed power might be practicable or
expedient. But however novel it might appear the principle of it
when viewed with a close & steady eye, is right. There is no
instance in which the laws say that the individual shd. be bound in
one case, & at liberty to judge whether he will obey or disobey in
another. The cases are parallel. Abuses of the power over the
individual person may happen as well as over the individual States.
Federal liberty is to 5 States,
what civil liberty, is to private individuals. And States are not
more unwilling to purchase it, by the necessary concession of their
political sovereignty, that 6 the
savage is to purchase civil liberty by the surrender of his
7 personal sovereignty, which he
enjoys in a State of nature. A definition of the cases in which the
Negative should be exercised, is impracticable. A discretion must be
left on one side or the other? will it not be most safely lodged on
the side of the Natl. Govt.? Among the first sentiments expressed in
the first Congs. one was that Virga. is no more, that Masts. is no
8, that Pa. is no more &c. We are
now one nation of brethren. We must bury all local interests &
distinctions. This language continued for some time. The tables at
length began to turn. No sooner were the State Govts. formed than
their jealousy & ambition began to display themselves. Each
endeavoured to cut a slice from the common loaf, to add to its own
morsel, till at length the confederation became frittered down to
the impotent condition in which it now stands. Review the progress
of the articles of Confederation thro' Congress & compare the first
& last draught of it. To correct its vices is the business of this
convention. One of its vices is the want of an effectual controul in
the whole over its parts. What danger is there that the whole will
unnecessarily sacrifice a part? But reverse the case, and leave the
whole at the mercy of each part, and will not the general interest
be continually sacrificed to local interests?
Mr. DICKENSON deemed it
impossible to draw a line between the cases proper & improper for
the exercise of the negative. We must take our choice of two things.
We must either subject the States to the danger of being injured by
the power of the Natl. Govt. or the latter to the danger of being
injured by that of the States. He thought the danger greater from
the States. To leave the power doubtful, would be opening another
spring of discord, and he was for shutting as many of them as
possible. Mr. BEDFORD. In answer
to his colleague's question where wd. be the danger to the States
from this power, would refer him to the smallness of his own State
which may be injured at pleasure without redress. It was meant he
found to strip the small States of their equal right of suffrage. In
this case Delaware would have about 1/90 for its share in the
General Councils, whilst Pa. & Va. would posses 1/3 of the whole. Is
there no difference of interests, no rivalship of commerce, of
manufactures? Will not these large States crush the small ones
whenever they stand in the way of their ambitious or interested
views. This shews the impossibility of adopting such a system as
that on the table, or any other founded on a change in the principle
of representation. And after all, if a State does not obey the law
of the new System, must not force be resorted to as the only
ultimate remedy, in this as in any other system. It seems as if Pa.
& Va. by the conduct of their deputies wished to provide a system in
which they would have an enormous & monstrous influence. Besides,
How can it be thought that the proposed negative can be exercised?
are the laws of the States to be suspended in the most urgent cases
until they can be sent seven or eight hundred miles, and undergo the
deliberations 9 of a body who may
be incapable of Judging of them? Is the National Legislature too to
sit continually in order to revise the laws of the States?
Mr. MADISON observed that the
difficulties which had been started were worthy of attention and
ought to be answered before the question was put. The case of laws
of urgent necessity must be provided for by some emanation of the
power from the Natl. Govt. into each State so far as to give a
temporary assent at least. This was the practice in Royal Colonies
before the Revolution and would not have been inconvenient, if the
supreme power of negativing had been faithful to the American
interest, and had possessed the necessary information. He supposed
that the negative might be very properly lodged in the senate alone,
and that the more numerous & expensive branch therefore might not be
obliged to sit constantly. — He asked Mr. B. what would be the
consequence to the small States of a dissolution of the Union wch.
seemed likely to happen if no effectual substitute was made for the
defective System existing, and he did not conceive any effectual
system could be substituted on any other basis than that of a
proportional suffrage? If the large States possessed the avarice &
ambition with which they were charged, would the small ones in their
neighbourhood, be more secure when all controul of a Genl. Govt. was
withdrawn.
Mr. BUTLER was vehement agst.
the Negative in the proposed extent, as cutting off all hope of
equal justice to the distant States. The people there would not he
was sure give it a hearing.
On the question for extending the negative power to all cases as
proposd. by [Mr. P. & Mr. M.] Mass. ay. Cont. no. N. Y. no. N. J.
no. Pa. ay. Del. divd. Mr. Read & Mr. Dickenson ay. Mr. Bedford &
Mr. Basset no. Maryd. no. Va. ay. Mr. R. Mr. Mason no. Mr. Blair,
Docr. Mc. g. Mr. M. ay. Genl. W. not consulted. N. C. no. S. C. no.
Geo. no. 10
On motion of Mr. GERRY and Mr.
KING tomorrow was assigned for reconsidering
the mode of appointing the National Executive: the reconsideration
being voted for by all the States except Connecticut & N. Carolina.
Mr. PINKNEY and Mr.
RUTLIDGE moved to add to Resoln. 4.
11 agreed to by the Come. the
following, viz. "that the States be divided into three classes, the
1st. class to have 3 members, the 2d. two. & the 3d. one member
each; that an estimate be taken of the comparative importance of
each State at fixed periods, so as to ascertain the number of
members they may from time to time be entitled to"
The Committee then rose and the House adjourned.
1. The word "be" is substituted
in the transcript for "lie."
2. The word "then" is omitted in
the transcript.
3. The word "restrain" is
substituted in the transcript for "reclaim."
4. The word "the" is substituted
in the transcript for "a."
5. The word "the" is here
inserted in the transcript.
6. The word "that" is changed to
"than" in the transcript.
7. The word "the" is substituted
in the transcript for "his."
8. The word "more" is here
inserted in the transcript.
9. The transcript uses the word
"deliberations" in the singular.
10. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, [Mr. Randolph and Mr.
Mason, no; Mr. Blair, Doctor McClurg and Mr. Madison, aye; General
Washington not consulted,] aye — 3; Connecticut, New York, New
Jersey, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no — 7;
Delaware, divided, [Mr. Read and Mr. Dickinson, aye; Mr. Bedford and
Mr. Basset, no]."
11. The words "the fourth
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "Resoln. 4."