Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/434

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

Mr. GERRY moved to strike out the words, "when it shall be acting in its legislative capacity," in order to extend the provision to the Senate when exercising its peculiar authorities; and to insert, "except such parts thereof as in their judgment require secrecy," after the words, "publish them." (It was thought by others that provision should be made with respect to these, when that part came under consideration which proposed to vest those additional authorities in the Senate.)

On this question for striking out the words, "when acting in its legislative capacity,"—

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

Adjourned. 

, Aug. 11.

In Convention.—Mr. MADISON and Mr. RUTLEDGE moved, "that each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, and shall publish the same from time to time; except such part of the proceedings of the Senate, when acting not in its legislative capacity, as may be judged by that House to require secrecy."

Mr. MERCER. This implies that other powers than legislative will be given to the Senate, which he hoped would not be given.

Mr. Madison and Mr. Rutledge's motion was disagreed to by all the states except Virginia.

Mr. GERRY and Mr. SHERMAN moved to insert, after the words, "publish them," the following, "except such as relate to treaties and military operations." Their object was to give each House a discretion in such cases. On this question,—

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

Mr. ELLSWORTH. As the clause is objectionable in so many shapes, it may as well be struck out altogether. The legislature will not fail to publish their proceedings from time to time. The people will call for it, if it should be improperly omitted.

Mr. WILSON thought the expunging of the clause would be very improper. The people have a right to know what their agents are doing or have done, and it should not be in the option of the legislature to conceal their proceedings. Besides, as this is a clause in the existing Confederation, the not retaining it would furnish the adversaries of the reform with a pretext by which weak and suspicious minds may be easily misled.

Mr. MASON thought it would give a just alarm to the people, to make a conclave of their legislature.

Mr. SHERMAN thought the legislature might be trusted in this case, if in any.

