Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v4.djvu/439

1790.]. He admitted, however, that the general government had (under that clause of the Constitution which gave the authority to exercise all powers necessary to carry the particularly enumerated powers into effect) a right to make exemptions of such officers of the government whose duties were incompatible with those of militiamen. Every thing, besides this, he believed, was vested in the particular states; and he would ask the gentleman whether it was not a desirable thing to give satisfaction on these points; and whether they ought not to avoid stretching the general power, which he had mentioned, beyond what was absolutely necessary to answer the end designed.

An accommodation (continues Mr. Sherman) on this point took place between the gentlemen, and the two motions were blended and made into one; whereupon Mr. GILES rose and said, he had now greater objections to the motion than before, and was well persuaded that if the gentleman (Mr. Sherman) attended to its consequences, he would find that it was not only extremely dissimilar in its principles, but tended to overthrow the very doctrine laid down in the first proposition, which was intended to decide whether, under the division of the authority for forming and raising the militia, the power of making exemptions remained in the state governments, or was granted by the Constitution to the government of the United States. Now, in the compromised proposition, there appears to be a mixture of power; the first part seems to declare that the states ought to make the exemptions; yet the subsequent absolutely exercises it on the part of the United States. If, then, the power of exemption be either ceded to the general government, or reserved to the state governments, the amendment must fall to the ground.

But this was not his only objection. He conceived that, whether the power of exemption was in the state or federal government, there was one description of men mentioned in the proposition which could not be exempted or further privileged by the house. He alluded to the members of the legislature of the United States. The privilege of these persons was taken up and duly considered by the Convention, who then decided what privileges they were entitled to. It is under this clause, said he, that every thing necessary or proper to be done for members of Congress was done. "The senators and representatives shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the treasury of the United States. They shall in all cases, except treason, felony, and breach of peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either house, they shall not be questioned in any other place." Now, if the Convention took up this subject, (as it is plain from the foregoing clause that they did,) it is reasonable to presume that they made a full declaration of all our privileges; and it is improper to suppose that we are possessed of similar powers with the Convention, and able to extend our own privileges. I conceive that every inconvenience which would attend the want of an exemption in the bill, is completely remedied by the Constitution; and therefore it is impolitic to make a useless regulation.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. When we departed from the straight line of duty marked out for us by the first principles of the social compact, we found ourselves involved in difficulty. The burden of militia duty lies equally upon all persons; and when we contemplate a departure from this principle, by making exemptions, it involves us in our present embarrassment. I wish, therefore, that, before we proceed any farther in