Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/489

1787.] Mr. WILSON was against inserting any thing in the Constitution as to ex post facto laws. It will bring reflections on the Constitution and proclaim that we are ignorant of the first principles of legislation, or are constituting a government that will be so.

The question being divided, the first part of the motion, relating to bills of attainder, was agreed to, ''nem. con.''

On the second part, relating to ex post facto laws,—

Mr. CARROLL remarked, that experience overruled all other calculations. It had proved that, in whatever light they might be viewed by civilians or others, the state legislatures had passed them, and they had taken effect.

Mr. WILSON. If these prohibitions in the state constitutions have no effect, it will be useless to insert them in this Constitution. Besides, both sides will agree to the principle, but will differ as to its application.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Such a prohibitory clause is in the constitution of North Carolina; and, though it has been violated, it has done good there, and may do good here, because the judges can take hold of it.

Dr. JOHNSON thought the clause unnecessary, and implying an improper suspicion of the national legislature.

Mr. RUTLEDGE was in favor of the clause.

On the question for inserting the prohibition of ex post facto laws,—

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 7; Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, no, 3; North Carolina, divided.$225$

The report of the committee of five, made by Mr. Rutledge, was taken up, and then postponed, that each member might furnish himself with a copy.

The report of the committee of eleven, delivered in and entered on the Journal of the 21st instant, was then taken up; and the first clause, containing the words,—

"The legislature of the United States shall have power to fulfil the engagements which have been entered into by Congress,"— being under consideration,—$226$

Mr. ELLSWORTH argued, that they were unnecessary. The United States heretofore entered into engagements by Congress, who were their agents. They will hereafter be bound to fulfil them by their new agents.

Mr. RANDOLPH thought such a provision necessary: for, though the United States will be bound, the new government will have no authority in the case, unless it be given to them.

Mr. MADISON thought it necessary to give the authority, in order to prevent misconstruction. He mentioned the attempt made by the debtors to British subjects, to show that contracts under the old government were dissolved by the revolution, which destroyed the political identity of the society.