Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/475

1787.] Dr. JOHNSON was still of opinion there could be no treason against a particular state. It could not, even at present, as the Confederation now stands, the sovereignty being in the Union; much less can it be under the proposed system.

Col. MASON. The United States will have a qualified sovereignty only. The individual states will retain a part of the sovereignty. An act may be treason against a particular state, which is not so against the United States. He cited the rebellion of Bacon, in Virginia, as an illustration of the doctrine.

Dr. JOHNSON. That case would amount to treason against the sovereign,—the supreme sovereign, the United States.

Mr. KING observed, that the controversy relating to treason might be of less magnitude than was supposed, as the legislature might punish capitally under other names than treason.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS and Mr. RANDOLPH wished to substitute the words of the British statute, and moved to postpone article 7, sect. 2, in order to consider the following substitute:—

"Whereas it is essential to the preservation of liberty to define precisely and exclusively what shall constitute the crime of treason, it is therefore ordained, declared, and established, that, if a man do levy war against the United States within their territories, or be adherent to the enemies of the United States within the said territories, giving them aid and comfort within their territories or elsewhere, and thereof be provably attainted of open deed, by the people of his condition, he shall be adjudged guilty of treason."

On this question,—

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

It was then moved to strike out "against the United States," after "treason," so as to define treason generally; and on this question,—

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

It was then moved to insert, after "two witnesses," the words "to the same overt act."

Dr. FRANKLIN wished this amendment to take place. Prosecutions for treason were generally virulent, and perjury too easily made use of against innocence.

Mr. WILSON. Much may be said on both sides. Treason may sometimes be practised in such a manner as to render proof extremely difficult, as in a traitorous correspondence with an enemy.

On the question, as to "same overt act,"—

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

Mr. KING moved to insert, before the word "power," the word "sole," giving the United States the exclusive right to declare the punishment of treason.

Mr. BROOM seconds the motion.

Mr. WILSON. In cases of a general nature, treason can only be against the United States; and in such they should have the sole right to declare the punishment; yet in many cases it may be 57