Alterations having been made in the Resolution, making it read, "that a Republican Constitution & its existing laws ought to be guaranteed to each State by the U. States," the whole was agreed to nem. con.4
Resolution 13. for amending the national Constitution hereafter without consent of the National Legislature being considered, Several members did not see the necessity of the Resolution at all, nor the propriety of making the consent of the National Legisl. unnecessary.
Col. Mason urged the necessity of such a provision. The plan now to be formed will certainly be defective, as the Confederation has been found on trial to be. Amendments therefore will be necessary, and it will be better to provide for them, in an easy, regular and Constitutional way than to trust to chance and violence. It would be improper to require the consent of the National Legislature, because they may abuse their power, and refuse their consent on that very account. The opportunity for such an abuse, may be the fault of the Constitution calling for amendment.
Mr. Randolph enforced these arguments.
The words, "without requiring the consent of the National Legislature" were postponed. The other provision in the clause passed nem. con.
Resolution 14. requiring oaths from the members of the State Governments to observe the National Constitution & laws, being considered,5
Mr. Sherman opposed it as unnecessarily intruding into the State jurisdictions.
Mr. Randolph considered it necessary to prevent that competition between the National Constitution & laws & those of the particular States, which had already been felt. The officers of the States are already under oath to the States. To preserve a due impartiality they ought to be equally bound to the National Government. The National authority needs every support we can give it. The Executive & Judiciary of the States, notwithstanding their nominal independence on the State Legislatures are in fact, so dependent on them, that unless they be brought under some tie to the National System, they will always lean too much to the State systems, whenever a contest arises between the two.
Mr. Gerry did not like the clause. He thought there was as much reason for requiring an oath of fidelity to the States from National officers, as vice versa.
Mr. Luther Martin moved to strike out the words requiring such an oath from the State officers, viz "within the several States," observing that if the new oath should be contrary to that already taken by them it would be improper; if coincident the oaths already taken will be sufficient.
On the question for striking out as proposed by Mr. L. Martin
Massachusetts no. Connecticut ay. N. Y. no. N. J. ay. Pennsylvania no. Del. ay. Maryland ay. Virginia no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no.
Question on whole Resolution as proposed by Mr. Randolph;
Massachusetts ay. Connecticut no. N. Y. no. N. J. no. Pennsylvania ay. Del. no. Maryland no. Virginia ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.
Committee rose & House adjourned.
1 In the printed Journal Mr. Rutlidge is named as the seconder of the motion. — Madison's Note.
2 After Gerry spoke, according to Yates, "Mr. Madison was of opinion at present, to fix the standard of representation, and let the detail be the business of a sub-committee." — Secret Proceedings, p. 116.
3 "Mr. Elsworth is a Judge of the Supreme Court in Connecticut; — he is Gentleman of a clear, deep, and copius understanding; eloquent, and connected in public debate; and always attentive to his duty. He is very happy in a reply, and choice in selecting such parts of his adversary's arguments as he finds make the strongest impressions, — in order to take off the force of them, so as to admit the power of his own. Mr. Elsworth is about 37 years of age, a Man much respected for his integrity, and venerated for his abilities." — Pierce's Notes, Am. Hist. Rev., iii., 326.
4 Yates attributes this amendment to Madison. "Mr. Madison moved an amendment, to add to or alter the resolution as follows: The republican constitutions and the existing laws of each state, to be guaranteed by the United States." — Secret Proceedings, etc., 116.
5 "Mr. Williamson. This resolve will be unnecessary, as the union will become the law of the land." — Yates, Secret Proceedings, etc., 117.
Tuesday June 12th in Committee of Whole
The Question taken on the Resolution 15, to wit, referring the new system to the people of the States for ratification it passed in the affirmative Massachusetts ay. Connecticut no. N. Y. no. N. J. no. Pennsylvania1 ay. Del. divd. Maryland divd. Virginia ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.
Mr. Sherman & Mr. Elseworth moved to fill the blank left in the 4th Resolution for the periods of electing the members of the first branch with the words, "every year;" Mr. Sherman observing that he did it in order to bring on some question.
Mr. Rutlidge proposed "every two years."
Mr. Jennifer2 proposed, "every three years," observing that the too great frequency of elections rendered the people indifferent to them, and made the best men unwilling to engage in so precarious a service.
Mr. Madison seconded the motion for three years. Instability is one of the great vices of our republics, to be remedied. Three years will be necessary, in a Government so extensive, for members to form any knowledge of the various interests of the States to which they do not belong, and of which they can know but little from the situation and affairs of their own. One year will be almost consumed in preparing for and travelling to & from the seat of national business.
Mr. Gerry. The people of New England will never give up the point of annual elections, they know of the transition made in England from triennial to septennial elections, and will consider such an innovation here as the prelude to a like usurpation. He considered annual elections as the only defence of the people against tyranny. He was as much against a triennial House as against a hereditary Executive.
Mr. Madison, observed that if the opinions of the people were to be our guide, it would be difficult to say what course we ought to take. No member of the Convention could say what the opinions of his Constituents were at this time; much less could he say what they would think if possessed of the information & lights possessed by the members here; & still less what would be their way of thinking 6 or 12 months hence. We ought to consider what was right & necessary in itself for the attainment of a proper Government. A plan adjusted to this idea will recommend itself — The respectability of this convention will give weight to their recommendation of it. Experience will be constantly urging the adoption of it, and all the most enlightened & respectable citizens will be its advocates. Should we fall short of the necessary & proper point, this influential class of Citizens, will be turned against the plan, and little support in opposition to them can be gained to it from the unreflecting multitude.
Mr. Gerry repeated his opinion that it was necessary to consider what the people would approve. This had been the policy of all Legislators. If the reasoning of Mr. Madison were just, and we supposed a limited Monarchy the best form in itself, we ought to recommend it, tho' the genius of the people was decidedly adverse