be not appointed by the legislature, he will be more narrowly watched, and more readily impeached.

Mr. SHERMAN. As the two Houses appropriate money, it is best for them to appoint the officer who is to keep it; and to appoint him as they make the appropriation, not by joint, but several votes.

Gen. PINCKNEY. The treasurer is appointed by joint ballot in South Carolina. The consequence is, that bad appointments are made, and the legislature will not listen to the faults of their own officer.

On the motion to strike out,

New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 8; Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, no, 3. Article 1, sect. 8, the words,

"but all such duties, imposts, and excises, shall be uniform throughout the United States,"

were unanimously annexed to the power of taxation.

On the clause,

"to define and punish piracies and felonies on the high seas, and punish offences against the law of nations,”

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved to strike out "punish" before the words "offences against the law of nations," so as to let these be definable, as well as punishable, by virtue of the preceding member of the sentence.

Mr. WILSON hoped the alteration would by no means be made. To pretend to define the law of nations, which depended on the authority of all the civilized nations of the world, would have a look of arrogance that would make us ridiculous.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. The word define is proper when applied to offences in this case; the law of nations being often too vague and deficient to be a rule.

On the question to strike out the word “ punish,” it passed in the affirmative.

**

New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, ay, 6; Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, no, 5. Dr. FRANKLIN moved to add, after the words "post roads," article 1, sect. 8, a power “ to provide for cutting canals where deened necessary."

Mr. WILSON seconded the motion.
Mr. SHERMAN objected.

The expense, in such cases, will fall on the United States, and the benefit accrue to the places where the canals may be cut.

Mr. WILSON. Instead of being an expense to the United States, they may be made a source of revenue.

Mr. MADISON suggested an enlargement of the motion, into a

power,

"to grant charters of incorporation where the interest of the United States might require, and the legislative provisions of individual states may be incompetent."

* This motion by Dr. Franklin not stated in the printed Journal, as are some other motions.

His primary object was, however, to secure an easy communication between the states, which the free intercourse now to be opened seemed to call for. The political obstacles being removed, a removal of the natural ones, as far as possible, ought to follow.

Mr. RANDOLPH seconded the proposition.

Mr. KING thought the power unnecessary.

Mr. WILSON. It is necessary to prevent a state from obstructing the general welfare.

Mr. KING. The states will be prejudiced and divided into parties by it. In Philadelphia and New York, it will be referred to the establishment of a bank, which has been a subject of contention in those cities. In other places, it will be referred to mercantile monopolies.

Mr. WILSON mentioned the importance of facilitating, by canals, the communication with the western settlements. As to banks, he did not think, with Mr. King, that the power, in that point of view, would excite the prejudices and parties apprehended. As to mercantile monopolies, they are already included in the power to regulate trade.

Col. MASON was for limiting the power to the single case of canals. He was afraid of monopolies of every sort, which he did not think were by any means already implied by the Constitution, as supposed by Mr. Wilson.

The motion being so modified as to admit a distinct question, specifying and limited to the case of canals,

Pennsylvania, Virginia, Georgia, ay, 3; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, no, 8.

The other part fell, of course, as including the power rejected. Mr. MADISON and Mr. PINCKNEY then moved to insert, in the list of powers vested in Congress, a power

"to establish a university, in which no preferences or distinctions should be allowed on account of religion."

Mr. WILSON supported the motion.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. It is not necessary. clusive power at the seat of government will reach the object.

On the question,

The ex

Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, ay, 4; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Georgia, no, 6; Connecticut, divided, (Dr. Johnson, ay; Mr. Sherman, no.)

Col. MASON, being sensible that an absolute prohibition of standing armies in time of peace might be unsafe, and wishing, at the same time, to insert something pointing out and guarding against the danger of them, moved to preface the clause, (article 1, sect. 8,) "to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia," &c., with the words,

"and that the liberties of the people may be better secured against the danger of standing armies in time of peace."

Mr. RANDOLPH seconded the motion.

Mr. MADISON was in favor of it. It did not restrain Congress from establishing a military force in time of peace, if found necessary; and as armies in time of peace are allowed, on all hands, to be an evil, it is well to discountenance them by the Constitution, as far as will consist with the essential power of the government on that head.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS opposed the motion, as setting a dishonorable mark of distinction on the military class of citizens. Mr. PINCKNEY and Mr. BEDFORD concurred in the opposition.

On the question,

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

Col. MASON moved to strike out from the clause, (article 1, sect. 9,) no bill of attainder, nor any ex post facto law, shall be passed," the words "nor any ex post facto law." He thought it not sufficiently clear that the prohibition meant by this phrase was limited to cases of a criminal nature; and no legislature ever did or can altogether avoid them in civil cases.

Mr. GERRY seconded the motion; but with a view to extend the prohibition to "civil cases," which he thought ought to be done. On the question, all the states were, no.

Mr. PINCKNEY and Mr. GERRY moved to insert a declaration, "that the liberty of the press should be inviolably observed."

Mr. SHERMAN. It is unnecessary. The power of Congress does not extend to the press.

On the question, it passed in the negative.

Massachusetts, Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina, ay, 4; New Hampshire, (In the printed Journal, New Hampshire, ay,) Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, North Carolina, Georgia, no, 7.

Article 1, sect. 9. "No capitation tax shall be laid, unless," &c. Mr. READ moved to insert after "capitation," the words "or other direct tax." He was afraid that some liberty might otherwise be taken to saddle the states with a readjustment, by this rule, of past requisitions of Congress; and that his amendment, by giving another cast to the meaning, would take away the pretext.

Mr. WILLIAMSON seconded the motion, which was agreed to. On motion of Col. MASON, the words " or enumeration were inserted after, as explanatory of, "census," -Connecticut and South Carolina, only, no.

At the end of the clause, "no tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state," was added the following amendment, conformably to a vote on the 31st of August, (p. 502,) viz. :

"No preference shall be given, by any regulation of commerce or revenue, to the ports of one state over those of another; nor shall vessels bound to or from one state be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another."

Col. MASON moved a clause requiring, "that an account of the public expenditures should be annually published.”

VOL. V.

69

Mr. GERRY seconded the motion.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS urged that this would be impossible in many cases.

Mr. KING remarked, that the term expenditures went to every minute shilling. This would be impracticable. Congress might, indeed, make a monthly publication, but it would be in such general statements as would afford no satisfactory information.

Mr. MADISON proposed to strike out "annually" from the motion, and insert "from time to time," which would enjoin the duty of frequent publications, and leave enough to the discretion of the legislature. Require too much, and the difficulty will beget a habit of doing nothing. The Articles of Confederation require half-yearly publications on this subject. A punctual compliance being often impossible, the practice has ceased altogether.

Mr. WILSON seconded and supported the motion. Many operations of finance cannot be properly published at certain times. Mr. PINCKNEY was in favor of the motion.

Mr. FITZSIMONS. It is absolutely impossible to publish expenditures in the full extent of the term.

Mr. SHERMAN thought "from time to time," the best rule to be given. "Annually" was struck out, and those words inserted, nem.

con.

The motion of Col. Mason, so amended, was then agreed to, nem. con., and added after "appropriations by law," as follows:

"and a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time."

The first clause of article 1, sect. 10, was altered so as to read, "No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility."

Mr. GERRY entered into observations inculcating the importance of public faith, and the propriety of the restraint put on the states from impairing the obligation of contracts; alleging that Congress ought to be laid under the like prohibitions. He made a motion to that effect. He was not seconded.

Adjourned.

SATURDAY, September 15.

In Convention. Mr. CARROLL reminded the House that no address to the people had yet been prepared. He considered it of great importance that such a one should accompany the Constitution. The people had been accustomed to such, on great occasions, and would expect it on this. He moved that a committee be appointed for the special purpose of preparing an address.

Mr. RUTLEDGE objected, on account of the delay it would produce, and the impropriety of addressing the people before it was known whether Congress would approve and support the plan. Congress, if an address be thought proper, can prepare as good a one.

The members of the Convention can, also, explain the reasons of what has been done to their respective constituents.

Mr. SHERMAN concurred in the opinion that an address was both unnecessary and improper.

On the motion of Mr. Carroll,

Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, ay, 4; New Hampshire, Masachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 6; North Carolina, absent. (In the printed journal, North Carolina, no; South Carolina, omitted.)

Mr. LANGDON. Some gentlemen have been very uneasy that'no increase of the number of representatives has been admitted. It has, in particular, been thought that one more ought to be allowed to North Carolina. He was of opinion that an additional one was due both to that state and to Rhode Island; and moved to reconsider for that purpose.

Mr. SHERMAN. When the committee of eleven reported the appointments, five representatives were thought the proper share of North Carolina. Subsequent information, however, seemed to entitle that state to another.

On the motion to reconsider,

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

Mr. LANGDON moved to add one member to each of the representations of North Carolina and Rhode Island.

Mr. KING was against any change whatever, as opening the door for delays. There had been no official proof that the numbers of North Carolina are greater than before estimated; and he never could sign the Constitution, if Rhode Island is to be allowed two members, that is, one fourth of the number allowed to Massachusetts, which will be known to be unjust.

Mr. PINCKNEY urged the propriety of increasing the number of representatives allowed to North Carolina.

Mr. BEDFORD contended for an increase in favor of Rhode Island, and of Delaware also.

On the question for allowing two representatives to Rhode Island, it passed in the negative.

New Hampshire, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, Georgia, ay, 5; Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, South Carolina, no, 6. On the question for allowing six to North Carolina, it passed in the negative.

Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, no, 6. Article 1, sect. 10, (the second paragraph,)

"No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay imposts or duties on imports or exports; nor with such consent, but to the use of the treasury of the United States." In consequence of the proviso moved by Col. Mason, and agreed to on the 13th of Sept., (page 540,) this part of the section was laid aside in favor of the following substitute, viz. :

"No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any imposts or duties on im