He

as more burdensome to the United States than the slaves. thought this could be demonstrated, if the occasion were a proper

'one.

Mr. WILSON thought the motion premature. An agreement to the clause would be no bar to the object of it.

On the question, on the motion to insert "free" before "inhabitants,"

New Jersey, ay, 1; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 10.

On the suggestion of Mr. DICKINSON, the words, "provided that each state shall have one representative, at least," were added,

nem. con.

Article 4, sect. 4, as amended, was agreed to, nem. con.'
Article 4, sect. 5, was then taken up.

196

Mr. PINCKNEY moved to strike out sect. 5, as giving no pecu liar advantage to the House of Representatives, and as clogging the government. If the Senate can be trusted with the many great powers proposed, it surely may be trusted with that of originating money bills.

Mr. GORHAM was against allowing the Senate to originate, but was for allowing it only to amend.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. It is particularly proper that the Senate should have the right of originating money bills. They will sit constantly, will consist of a smaller number, and will be able to prepare such bills with due correctness, and so as to prevent delay of business in the other House.

Col. MASON was unwilling to travel over this ground again. To strike out the section was to unhinge the compromise of which it made a part. The duration of the Senate made it improper. He does not object to that duration; on the contrary, he approved of it. But, joined with the smallness of the number, it was an argument against adding this to the other great powers vested in that body. His idea of an aristocracy was, that it was the government of the few over the many. An aristocratic body, like the screw in mechanics, working its way by slow degrees, and holding fast whatever it gains. should ever be suspected of an encroaching tendency. The pursestrings should never be put into its hands.

Mr. MERCER considered the exclusive power of originating money bills as so great an advantage, that it rendered the equality of votes in the Senate ideal, and of no consequence.

Mr. BUTLER was for adhering to the principle which had been settled.

Mr. WILSON was opposed to it on its merits, without regard to the compromise.

Mr. ELLSWORTH did not think the clause of any consequence; but as it was thought of consequence by some members from the larger states, he was willing it should stand.

Mr. MADISON was for striking it out, considering it as of no

advantage to the large states, as fettering the government, and as a source of injurious altercations between the two Houses.

On the question for striking out article 4, sect. 5, —

New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 7; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, North Carolina, no, 4.197 Adjourned.

In Convention.

THURSDAY, August 9.

Article 4, sect. 6, was taken up.

Mr. RANDOLPH expressed his dissatisfaction at the disagreement yesterday to sect. 5, concerning money bills, as endangering the success of the plan, and extremely objectionable in itself; and gave notice that he should move for a reconsideration of the vote.

Mr. WILLIAMSON said he had formed a like intention.

Mr. WILSON gave notice that he should move to reconsider the vote requiring seven instead of three years of citizenship, as a qualification of candidates for the House of Representatives.

Article 4, sect. 6 and 7, were agreed to, nem. con.

Article 5, sect. 1, was then taken up.

Mr. WILSON objected to vacancies in the Senate being supplied by the executives of the states. It was unnecessary, as the legislatures will meet so frequently. It removes the appointment too far from the people, the executives in most of the states being elected by the legislatures. As he had always thought the appointment of the executive by the legislative department wrong, so it was still more so that the executive should elect into the legislative department.

Mr. RANDOLPH thought it necessary, in order to prevent incon venient chasms in the Senate. In some states the legislatures meet but once a year. As the Senate will have more power, and consist of a smaller number, than the other House, vacancies there will be of more consequence. The executives might be safely trusted, he thought, with the appointment for so short a time.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. It is only said that the executive may supply vacancies. When the legislative meeting happens to be near, the power will not be exerted. As there will be but two members from a state, vacancies may be of great moment.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Senators may resign or not accept. This provision is therefore absolutely necessary.

On the question for striking out "vacancies shall be supplied by the executives,"

Pennsylvania, ay, 1; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 8; Maryland, divided.

Mr. WILLIAMSON moved to insert, after "vacancies shall be supplied by the executives," the words, "unless other provision shall be made by the legislature" (of the state).

Mr. ELLSWORTH. He was willing to trust the legislature, or the executive, of a state, but not to give the former a discretion to refer appointments for the Senate to whom they pleased.

On the question on Mr. Williamson's motion,

Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 4; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, no, 6.

Mr. MADISON, in order to prevent doubts whether resignations could be made by senators, or whether they could refuse to accept, moved to strike out the words after "vacancies," and insert the words, "happening by refusals to accept, resignations, or otherwise, may be supplied by the legislature of the state in the representation of which such vacancies shall happen, or by the executive thereof until the next meeting of the legislature.'

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. This is absolutely necessary; otherwise, as members chosen into the Senate are disqualified from being appointed to any office, by sect. 9, of this article, it will be in the power of a legislature, by appointing a man a senator against his consent, to deprive the United States of his services.

The motion of Mr. Madison was agreed to, nem. con.

Mr. RANDOLPH called for a division of the section, so as to leave a distinct question on the last words, "each member shall have one vote." He wished this last sentence to be postponed until the reconsideration should have taken place on article 4, sect. 5, concerning money bills. If that section should not be reinstated, his plan would be to vary the representation in the Senate.

Mr. STRONG concurred in Mr. Randolph's ideas on this point. Mr. READ did not consider the section as to money bills of any advantage to the larger states, and had voted for striking it out as being viewed in the same light by the larger states. If it was considered by them as of any value, and as a condition of the equality of votes in the Senate, he had no objection to its being reinstated.

Mr. WILSON, Mr. ELLSWORTH, and Mr. MADISON, urged, that it was of no advantage, to the larger states; and that it might be a dangerous source of contention between the two Houses. AI! the principal powers of the national legislature had some relation to money.

Dr. FRANKLIN considered the two clauses, the originating of money bills and the equality of votes in the Senate, as essentially connected by the compromise which had been agreed to.

Col. MASON said, this was not the time for discussing this point. When the originating of money bills shall be reconsidered, he thought it could be demonstrated that it was of essential importance to restrain the right to the House of Representatives, the immediate choice of the people.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. The state of North Carolina had agreed to an equality in the Senate, merely in consideration that money bills should be confined to the other House; and he was surprised to see the smaller states forsaking the condition on which they had received their equality.

On the question on the first section, down to the last sentence, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia,

Georgia, ay,

7; Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, no, 3; South Carolina, divided. (In the printed Journal, Pennsylvania, ay.)

Mr. RANDOLPH moved that the last sentence, "each member shall have one vote," be postponed.

It was observed that this could not be necessary; as, in case the sanction as to originating money bills should not be reinstated, and a revision of the Constitution should ensue, it would still be proper that the members should vote per capita. A postponement of the pre ceding sentence, allowing to each state two members, would have been more proper.

Mr. MASON did not mean to propose a change of this mode of voting per capita, in any event. But as there might be other modes proposed, he saw no impropriety in postponing the sentence. Each state may have two members, and yet may have unequal votes. Ho said that, unless the exclusive right of originating money bills should be restored to the House of Representatives, he should not from obstinacy, but duty and conscience oppose throughout the equality of representation in the Senate.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. Such declarations were, he supposed, addressed to the smaller states, in order to alarm them for their equality in the Senate, and induce them, against their judgments, to concur in restoring the section concerning money bills. He would declare, in his turn, that, as he saw no prospect of amending the Constitution of the Senate, and considered the section relating to money bills as intrinsically bad, he would adhere to the section establishing the equality, at all events.

Mr. WILSON. It seems to have been supposed by some, that the section concerning money bills is desirable to the large states. The fact was, that two of those states (Pennsylvania and Virginia) had uniformly voted against it, without reference to any other part of the system.

Mr. RANDOLPH urged, as Col. Mason had done, that the sen tence under consideration was connected with that relating to money bills, and might possibly be affected by the result of the motion for reconsidering the latter. That the postponement was therefore not improper.

On the question for postponing, "each member shall have one vote,"

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

The words were then agreed to as part of the section.

Mr. RANDOLPH then gave notice that he should move to reconsider this whole article 5, sect. 1, as connected with article 4, sect. 5, as to which he had already given such notice.

Article 5, sect. 2, was then taken up.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved to insert, after the words, "immediately after," the following: "they shall be assembled in con

sequence of," which was agreed to, nem. con., as was then the whole

section.

Article 5, sect. 3, was then taken up.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved to insert fourteen instead of four years' citizenship, as a qualification for senators; urging the danger of admitting strangers into our public councils.

Mr. PINCKNEY seconded him.

Mr. ELLSWORTH was opposed to the motion, as discouraging meritorious aliens from emigrating to this country.

Mr. PINCKNEY. As the Senate is to have the power of making treaties and managing our foreign affairs, there is peculiar danger and impropriety in opening its door to those who have foreign attachments. He quoted the jealousy of the Athenians on this subject, who made it death for any stranger to intrude his voice into their legislative proceedings.

Col. MASON highly approved of the policy of the motion. Were it not that many, not natives of this country, had acquired great credit during the revolution, he should be for restraining the eligibility into the Senate to natives.

Mr. MADISON was not averse to some restrictions on this subject, but could never agree to the proposed amendment. He thought any restriction, however, in the Constitution, unnecessary and improper: unnecessary, because the national legislature is to have the right of regulating naturalization, and can by virtue thereof fix different periods of residence, as conditions of enjoying different privileges of citizenship; improper, because it will give a tincture of illiberality to the Constitution; because it will put it out of the power of the national legislature, even by special acts of naturalization, to confer the full rank of citizens on meritorious strangers ; and because it will discourage the most desirable class of people from emigrating to the United States. Should the proposed Constitution have the intended effect of giving stability and reputation to our government, great numbers of respectable Europeans, men who love liberty, and wish to partake its blessings, will be ready to transfer their fortunes hither. All such would feel the mortification of being marked with suspicious incapacitations, though they should not covet the public honors. He was not apprehensive that any dangerous number of strangers would be appointed by the state legislatures, if they were left at liberty to do so: nor that foreign powers would make use of strangers, as instruments for their purposes. Their bribes would be expended on men whose circumstances would rather stifle than excite jealousy and watchfulness in the public.

Mr. BUTLER was decidedly opposed to the admission of foreigners without a long residence in the country. They bring with them, not only attachments to other countries, but ideas of government so distinct from ours, that in every point of view they are dangerous. He acknowledged that, if he himself had been called into public life