Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/494

468 Mr. CHARLES PINCKNEY moved to add, as an additional power to be vested in the legislature of the United States,—

"to negative all laws passed by the several states, interfering, in the opinion of the legislature, with the general interests and harmony of the Union, provided that two thirds of the members of each House assent to the same." This principle, he observed, had formerly been agreed to. He considered the precaution as essentially necessary. The objection drawn from the predominance of the large states had been removed by the equality established in the Senate.

Mr. BROOM seconded the proposition.

Mr. SHERMAN thought it unnecessary, the laws of the general government being supreme and paramount to the state laws, according to the plan as it now stands.

Mr. MADISON proposed that it should be committed. He had been, from the beginning, a friend to the principle, but thought the modification might be made better.

Mr. MASON wished to know how the power was to be exercised. Are all laws whatever to be brought up? Is no road nor bridge to be established without the sanction of the general legislature? Is this to sit constantly, in order to receive and revise the state laws? He did not mean, by these remarks, to condemn the expedient, but he was apprehensive that great objections would lie against it.

Mr. WILLIAMSON thought it unnecessary, and, having been already decided, a revival of the question was a waste of time.

Mr. WILSON considered this as the key-stone wanted to complete the wide arch of government we are raising. The power of self-defence had been urged as necessary for the state governments. It was equally necessary for the general government. The firmness of judges is not, of itself, sufficient. Something further is requisite. It will be better to prevent the passage of an improper law, than to declare it void, when passed.

Mr. RUTLEDGE. If nothing else, this alone would damn, and ought to damn, the Constitution. Will any state ever agree to be bound hand and foot in this manner? It is worse than making mere corporations of them, whose by-laws would not be subject to this shackle.

Mr. ELLSWORTH observed, that the power contended for would require, either that all laws of the state legislature should, previously to their taking effect, be transmitted to the general legislature, or be repealable by the latter; or that the state executives should be appointed by the general government, and have a control over the state laws. If the last was meditated, let it be declared.

Mr. PINCKNEY declared, that he thought the state executives ought to be so appointed, with such a control; and that it would be so provided if another Convention should take place.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS did not see the utility or practicability of the proposition of Mr. Pinckney, but wished it to be referred to the consideration of a committee.