said Mason, and he joined with Gerry in moving for a bill of rights. The declaration of American independence, by the truths which it announced, called forth sympathy in all parts of the world. Could the constitution of the United States have been accompanied by a like solemn declaration of the principles on which it rested, the states would have been held together by the holiest and strongest bonds.* But the motion was lost by the unanimous vote of ten states, Massachusetts being absent, and Rhode Island and New York not represented. The style of the executive, as silently carried forward from the committee of detail, was still "his Excellency;" this vanished in the committee of revision, so that he might be known only as the president of the United States. Following a precedent of the first congress, Mason, on the thirteenth, seconded by Johnson, moved for a committee to report articles of association for encouraging economy, frugality, and American manufactures.† It was adopted without debate and without opposition. The proposal was referred to Mason, Franklin, Dickinson, Johnson, and William Livingston; but they made no report. From the work of the committee of detail the word "servitude" survived as applied to the engagement to labor for a term of years; on the motion of Randolph the word "service" *Here manuscripts and printed texts differ in an astonishing manner. Text of Madison in Elliot, i., 306. It was moved and seconded to appoint a committee to prepare a bill of rights; which passed UNANIMOUSLY in the negative. Manuscript of Madison. On the question for a committee to prepare a bill of rights N. H. no, Mas. abst., Ct. no, N. J. no, Pa. no, Del. no, Md. no, Va. no, N. C. no, S. C. no, Geo. no. Text of Madison in Gilpin, 1566; in Elliot, 538. On the question for a committec to prepare a bill of rights New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, aye-5; Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no-5; Massachusetts, absent. The manuscript of Madison, which is plainly written, represents the motion as negatived unanimously; the printed edition, as lost by a purely geographical division. The change remains as yet a mystery. Gilpin, 1568; Elliot, 540. was unanimously substituted for it, servitude being thought to express the condition of slaves, service an obligation of free On the same day Johnson, from the committee on style, reported resolutions for the ratification of the constitution through congress by conventions of the people of the several states; and then for the election of senators, representatives, and electors, and through them of president. Nothing was omitted to make it certain that at a fixed time and place the government under the constitution would start into being. On the fourteenth it was confirmed without dissent that congress should have no right to change the places of the election of senators. The appointment of the treasurer as the keeper of the purse had thus far been jealously reserved to the two houses of congress. It marks the confidence of the convention in its own work, that at this period the selection of that officer was confided to the president and senate. On the same day Franklin, seconded by Wilson, moved to add, after the authority to establish post-offices and post-roads, a power "to provide for cutting canals." # "The expense," objected Sherman, "will fall on the United States, and the benefit accrue to the places where the canals are cut.” "Canals," replied Wilson, "instead of being an expense to the United States, may be made a source of revenue." Madison, supported by Randolph, suggested an enlargement of the motion into a warrant to grant charters of incorporation which might exceed the legislative provisions of individual states, and yet be required by the interest of the United States; political obstacles to an easy communication between the states being removed, a removal of natural ones ought to follow. The necessity of the power was denied by King. "It is necessary," answered Wilson, "to prevent a state from obstructing the general welfare." "The states," rejoined King, "will be divided into parties to grant charters of incorporation, in Philadelphia and New York to a bank, in other places to mercantile * Gilpin, 1233, 1544, 1569; Elliot, 379, 540, 559. Gilpin, 1570, 1571; Elliot, 541. Gilpin, 1574; Elliot, 542. #Gilpin, 1576; Elliot, 548. monopolies." Wilson mentioned the importance of facilitating by canals the communication with the western settlements. The motion, even when limited to the case of canals, gained no votes but those of Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Georgia.* Madison and Charles Pinckney asked for congress permission to establish a university in which no preferences should be allowed on account of religion. "The exclusive power of congress at the seat of government will reach the object," said Gouverneur Morris. The motion was sustained only by Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North and South Carolina; in Connecticut, Johnson divided against Sherman.† In framing the constitution, Madison kept in mind that the functions of the general government should extend to the prevention of "trespasses of the states on the rights of each other." "The rights of individuals," he said in the convention, "are infringed by many of the state laws, such as issuing paper money, and instituting a mode to discharge debts differing from the form of the contract." # It has already been told how the delegates from Connecticut had agreed among themselves, "that the legislatures of the individual states ought not to possess a right to make any laws for the discharge of contracts in any manner different from the agreement of the parties." Stringent clauses in the constitution already prohibited paper money. For the rest, King, as we have seen, proposed a clause forbidding the states to interfere in private contracts; but the motion had been condemned as reaching too far; and instead of it, at the instance of Rutledge, the convention denied to the states the power "to pass bills of attainder or ex post facto laws." A In this manner it was supposed that laws for closing the courts, or authorizing the debtor to pay his debts by more convenient instalments than he had covenanted for, were effectually prohibited. But Dickinson, as we have seen, after consulting Blackstone, mentioned to the house that the term ex post facto related to criminal * Gilpin, 1576, 1577; Elliot, 544. Gilpin, 1577, 1578; Elliot, 544. #Yates's Minutes, Elliot, i., 424, 425. Compare Gilpin, 898; Elliot, 208, Sherman by J. Evarts in Biography of the Signers, ii., 43. cases only; and that restraint of the states from retrospective law in civil cases would require some further provision.* Before an explanatory provision had been made, the section came into the hands of the committee on revision and style. That committee had no authority to bring forward any new proposition, but only to make corrections of style. Gouverneur Morris retained the clause forbidding ex post facto laws; and, resolute not "to countenance the issue of paper money and the consequent violation of contracts," he of himself added the words: "No state shall pass laws altering or impairing the obligation of contracts." The convention reduced the explanatory words to the shorter form: "No state shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts." In this manner an end was designed to be made to barren land laws, laws for the instalment of debts, and laws closing the courts against suitors. On the fifteenth, from fresh information, it appeared to Sherman that North Carolina was entitled to another representative; and Langdon moved to allow one more member to that state, and likewise one more to Rhode Island.# "If Rhode Island is to be allowed two members," said King, "I can never sign the constitution.” Charles Pinckney urged separately the just claim of North Carolina; on which Bedford put in a like claim for Rhode Island and for Delaware; and the original proposition was hopelessly defeated. Randolph and Madison disliked leaving the pardon for treason to the president alone; but the convention would not suffer the legislature or the senate to share that power.A The committee of revision had described a fugitive slave as "a person legally held to service or labor in one state." The language seemed to imply that slavery was a "legal" condition; the last word of the convention relating to the subject defined the fugitive slave to be "a person held to service or labor in one state under the laws thereof," making it clear that, in the meaning of the constitution, slavery was local and not federal.◊ * Gilpin, 1450; Elliot, 488. + G. Morris by Sparks, iii., 323. Gilpin, 1552, 1581; Elliot, 546, 561. ◊ Gilpin, 1558, 1589, 1620; #Gilpin, 1583; Elliot, 547. Gilpin, 1583, 1584; Elliot, 547. The convention gave the last touches to the modes of amending the constitution. In August the committee of detail had reported that, "on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the states in the union, the legislature of the United States shall call a convention for that purpose."* On the thirtieth day of August, Gouverneur Morris had suggested that congress "should be at liberty to call a convention whenever it pleased." "An easier mode of introducing amendments," said Hamilton, reviving the question, "is desirable. The state legislatures will not apply for alterations but with a view to increase their own powers. The national legislature will be the first to perceive the necessity of amendments; and on the concurrence of each branch ought to be empowered to call a convention, reserving the final decision to the people." + Madison supported Hamilton. Here Sherman suggested an alternative: the legislature may propose amendments directly to the several states, not to be binding until consented to by them all.# "To be binding when consented to by two thirds of the several states," interposed Wilson. To facilitate amendments, the convention authorized two thirds of congress to introduce amendments to the constitution; but, to prevent hasty changes, required for their ratification the assent of three fourths of the legislatures or conventions of the states. Madison, summing up the ideas that had found favor, moved that the legislature of the United States, upon a vote of two thirds of both houses, or upon the application of two thirds of the legislatures of the states, shall propose amendments to the constitution which shall be valid when they shall have been ratified by three fourths at least of the several states in their legislatures or conventions, as one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the legislature of the United States. This motion was accepted, but not till it had been agreed that the clauses in the constitution forming special covenants with the South on slavery should not be liable to change. * Gilpin, 1241; Elliot, 381. #Gilpin, 1535; Elliot, 581. |