Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

exclusive right to declare what should be treason. In case of a contest between the United States and a particular state, the people of the latter must, under the disjunctive terms of the clause, be traitors to one or other authority.

Mr. RANDOLPH thought the clause defective in adopting the words, "in adhering," only. The British statute adds, "giving them aid and comfort," which had a more extensive meaning. Mr. ELLSWORTH considered the definition as the same in fact with that of the statute.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. "Adhering" does not go so far as "giving aid and comfort," or the latter words may be restrictive of "adhering." In either case the statute is not pursued.

Mr. WILSON held "giving aid and comfort" to be explanatory, not operative words, and that it was better to omit them.

Mr. DICKINSON thought the addition of "giving aid and comfort" unnecessary and improper, being too vague and extending too far. He wished to know what was meant by the "testimony of two witnesses;" whether they were to be witnesses to the same overt act, or to different overt acts. He thought, also, that proof of an overt act ought to be expressed as essential in the case.

Dr. JOHNSON considered "giving aid and comfort" as explanatory of "adhering," and that something should be inserted in the definition concerning overt acts. He contended that treason could not be both against the United States and individual states, being an offence against the sovereignty, which can be but one in the same community.

Mr. MADISON remarked, that "and," before "in adhering," should be changed into "or;" otherwise both offences, viz., of "levying war," and of " adhering to the enemy," might be necessary to constitute treason. He added that, as the definition here was of treason against the United States, it would seem that the individual states would be left in possession of a concurrent power, so far as to define and punish treason particularly against themselves, which might involve double punishment.220

It was moved, that the whole clause be recommitted, which was lost, the votes being equally divided.

New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, ay, 5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, South Carolina, no, 5; North Carolina, divided.

Mr. WILSON and Dr. JOHNSON moved, that "or any of them," after "United States," be struck out, in order to remove the embarrassment; which was agreed to, nem. con.

Mr. MADISON. This has not removed the embarrassment. The same act might be treason against the United States, as here defined, and against a particular state, according to its laws.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. There can be no danger to the general authority from this, as the laws of the United States are to be paramount.

Dr. JOHNSON was still of opinion there could be no treason against a particular state. It could not, even at present, as the Confederation now stands, the sovereignty being in the Union; much less can it be under the proposed system.

Col. MASON. The United States will have a qualified sovereignty only. The individual states will retain a part of the sovereignty. An act may be treason against a particular state, which is not so against the United States. He cited the rebellion of Bacon, in Virginia, as an illustration of the doctrine.

Dr. JOHNSON. That case would amount to treason against the sovereign, the supreme sovereign, the United States.

Mr. KING observed, that the controversy relating to treason might be of less magnitude than was supposed, as the legislature might punish capitally under other names than treason.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS and Mr. RANDOLPH wished to substitute the words of the British statute, and moved to postpone article 7, sect. 2, in order to consider the following substitute:

"Whereas it is essential to the preservation of liberty to define precisely and exclusively what shall constitute the crime of treason, it is therefore ordained, declared, and established, that, if a man do levy war against the United States within their territories, or be adherent to the enemies of the United States within the said territories, giving them aid and comfort within their territories or elsewhere, and thereof be provably attainted of open deed, by the people of his condition, he shall be adjudged guilty of treason."

On this question, —

New Jersey, Virginia, ay, 2; Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 8.

It was then moved to strike out "against the United States," after "treason," so as to define treason generally; and on this question,— Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 8; Virginia, North Carolina, no, 2.

It was then moved to insert, after "two witnesses," the words "to the same overt act."

Dr. FRANKLIN wished this amendment to take place. Prosecutions for treason were generally virulent, and perjury too easily made use of against innocence.

Mr. WILSON. Much may be said on both sides. Treason may sometimes be practised in such a manner as to render proof extremely difficult, as in a traitorous correspondence with an enemy.

On the question, as to "same overt act,"

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 8; New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, no, 3. Mr. KING moved to insert, before the word "power," the word "sole," giving the United States the exclusive right to declare the punishment of treason.

Mr. BROOM seconds the motion.

Mr. WILSON. In cases of a general nature, treason can only be against the United States; and in such they should have the sole right to declare the punishment; yet in many cases it may be other

[blocks in formation]

wise. The subject was, however, intricate, and he distrusted his present judgment on it.

Mr. KING. This amendment results from the vote defining treason generally, by striking out "against the United States," which excludes any treason against particular states. These may, however, punish offences, as high misdemeanors.

On the question for inserting the word "sole," it passed in the negative.

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, South Carolina, ay, 5; Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, no, 6. Mr. WILSON. The clause is ambiguous now. "Sole" ought either to have been inserted, or "against the United States" to be reinstated.

Mr. KING. No line can be drawn between levying war and adhering to the enemy against the United States and against an individual state. Treason against the latter must be so against the

former.

Mr. SHERMAN. Resistance against the laws of the United States, as distinguished from resistance against the laws of a particular state, forms the line.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. The United States are sovereign on one side of the line dividing the jurisdictions- the states on the other. Each ought to have power to defend their respective sovereignties.

Mr. DICKINSON. War or insurrection against a member of the Union must be so against the whole body; but the Constitution should be made clear on this point.

The clause was reconsidered, nem. con. ; and then Mr. WILSON and Mr. ELLSWORTH moved to reinstate "against the United States," after "treason;" on which question,

Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, ay, 6; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, South Carolina, no, 5.

Mr. MADISON was not satisfied with the footing on which the clause now stood. As treason against the United States involves treason against particular states, and vice versa, the same act may be twice tried, and punished by the different authorities.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS viewed the matter in the same light.

It was moved and seconded to amend the sentence to read, "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies ;"

which was agreed to.

Col. MASON moved to insert the words "giving them aid and comfort," as restrictive of "adhering to their enemies," &c. The latter, he thought, would be otherwise too indefinite. This motion was agreed to,Connecticut, Delaware, and Georgia only being in the negative.

Mr. L. MARTIN moved to insert, after conviction, &c., " or on

confession in open court;" and on the question, (the negative states thinking the words superfluous,) it was agreed to.

New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, ay, 7; Massachusetts, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 3; North Carolina, divided.

Article 7, sect. 2, as amended, was then agreed to, nem. con.221

Article 7, sect. 3, was taken up. The words "white and others" were struck out, nem. con., as superfluous.

Mr. ELLSWORTH moved to require the first census to be taken within "three," instead of "six," years from the first meeting of the legislature; and on the question,

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, ay, 9; South Carolina, Georgia, no, 2.

Mr. KING asked what was the precise meaning of direct taxation. No one answered.

Mr. GERRY moved to add to article 7, sect. 3, the following clause :

"That, from the first meeting of the legislature of the United States until a census shall be taken, all moneys for supplying the public treasury by direct taxation shall be raised from the several states, according to the number of their representatives respectively in the first branch."

Mr. LANGDON. This would bear unreasonably hard on New Hampshire, and he must be against it.

Mr. CARROLL opposed it. The number of representatives did not admit of a proportion exact enough for a rule of taxation. Before any question, the House adjourned.

[ocr errors]

TUESDAY, August 21.

In Convention. Gov. Livingston, from the committee of eleven, to whom were referred the propositions respecting the debts of the several states, and also the militia, entered on the eighteenth instant, delivered the following report:

"The legislature of the United States shall have power to fulfil the engagements which have been entered into by Congress, and to discharge, as well the debts of the United States, as the debts incurred by the several states, during the late war, for the common defence and general welfare.

"To make laws for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States; reserving to the states, respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia, according to the discipline prescribed by the United States."

Mr. GERRY considered giving the power only, without adopting the obligation, as destroying the security now enjoyed by the public creditors of the United States. He enlarged on the merit of this class of citizens, and the solemn faith which had been pledged under the existing Confederation. If their situation should be changed,' as here proposed, great opposition would be excited against the plan. He urged, also, that as the states had made different degrees of exertion to sink their respective debts, those who had done most would be alarmed, if they were now to be saddled with a share of the debts of states which had done least.

Mr. SHERMAN. It means neither more nor less than the Confederation, as it relates to this subject.

Mr. ELLSWORTH moved that the report delivered in by Gov. Livingston should lie on the table; which was agreed to, nem. con. Article 7, sect. 3, was then resumed.

Mr. DICKINSON moved to postpone this, in order to reconsider article 4, sect. 4, and to limit the number of representatives to be allowed to the large states. Unless this were done, the small states would be reduced to entire insignificance, and encouragement given to the importation of slaves.

Mr. SHERMAN would agree to such a reconsideration, but did not see the necessity of postponing the section before the House. Mr. Dickinson withdrew his motion.

Article 7, sect. 3, was then agreed to, alone no.

ten

ayes;

Delaware

Mr. SHERMAN moved to add to section 3 the following clause:

"And all accounts of supplies furnished, services performed, and moneys advanced, by the several states to the United States, or by the United States to the several states, shall be adjusted by the same rule."

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS seconds the motion.

Mr. GORHAM thought it wrong to insert this in the Constitution. The legislature will no doubt do what is right. The present Congress have such a power, and are now exercising it.

Mr. SHERMAŃ. Unless some rule be expressly given, none will exist under the new system.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Though the contracts of Congress will be binding, there will be no rule for executing them on the states; and one ought to be provided.

Mr. SHERMAN withdrew his motion, to make way for one of Mr. WILLIAMSON, to add to section 3, –

"By this rule the several quotas of the states shall be determined, in settling the expenses of the late war."

Mr. CARROLL brought into view the difficulty that might arise on this subject from the establishment of the Constitution as intended, without the unanimous consent of the states.

Mr. Williamson's motion was postponed, nem. con.

Article 6, sect. 12, which had been postponed on the 15th of August, was now called for by Col. MASON, who wished to know how the proposed amendment, as to money bills, would be decided, before he agreed to any further points.

Mr. GERRY'S motion of yesterday, "that, previous to a census, direct taxation be proportioned on the states according to the number of representatives," was taken up. He observed, that the principal acts of government would probably take place within that period; and it was but reasonable that the states should pay in proportion to their share in them.

Mr. ELLSWORTH thought such a rule unjust. There was a

« AnteriorContinuar »