Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/495

1787.] Mr. LANGDON was in favor of the proposition. He considered it as resolvable into the question, whether the extent of the national Constitution was to be judged of by the general or the state governments.

On the question for commitment, it passed in the negative.

New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, ay, 5; Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 6.

Mr. PINCKNEY then withdrew his proposition.$229$

The first clause of article 7, sect. 1, being so amended as to read,—

"The legislature shall fulfil the engagements and discharge the debts of the United States; and shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises;" was agreed to.

Mr. BUTLER expressed his dissatisfaction, lest it should compel payment, as well to the blood-suckers who had speculated on the distresses of others, as to those who had fought and bled for their country. He would be ready, he said, to-morrow, to vote for a discrimination between those classes of people; and gave notice that he would move for a reconsideration.

Article 9, sect. 1, being resumed, to wit,—

"The Senate of the United States shall have power to make treaties, and to appoint ambassadors and judges of the supreme court,—" Mr. MADISON observed, that the Senate represented the states alone; and that for this, as well as other obvious reasons, it was proper that the President should be an agent in treaties.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS did not know that he should agree to refer the making of treaties to the Senate at all but for the present would move to add, as an amendment to the section, after "treaties," the following:—

"But no treaty shall be binding on the United States which is not ratified by law."

Mr. MADISON suggested the inconvenience of requiring a legal ratification of treaties of alliance, for the purposes of war, &c., &c.

Mr. GORHAM. Many other disadvantages must be experienced, if treaties of peace and all negotiations are to be previously ratified; and if not previously, the ministers would be at a loss how to proceed. What would be the case in Great Britain, if the king were to proceed in this manner? American ministers must go abroad not instructed by the same authority (as will be the case with other ministers) which is to ratify their proceedings.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. As to treaties of alliance, they will oblige foreign powers to send their ministers here, the very thing we should wish for. Such treaties could not be otherwise made, if his amendment should succeed. In general, he was not solicitous to multiply and facilitate treaties. He wished none to be made with Great Britain, till she should be at war. Then a good bargain might be made with her. So with other foreign powers. The more difficulty in making treaties, the more value will be set on them.