Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/502

476 Mr. LANGDON wished to do no more than leave the creditors in statu quo.

Mr. GERRY said, that, for himself, he had no interest in the question, being not possessed of more of the securities than would, by the interest, pay his taxes. He would observe, however, that, as the public had received the value of the literal amount, they ought to pay that value to somebody. The frauds on the soldiers ought to have been foreseen. These poor and ignorant people could not but part, with their securities. There are other creditors, who will part with any thing, rather than be cheated of the capital of their advances. The interest of the states, he observed, was different on this point, some having more, others less, than their proportion of the paper. Hence the idea of a scale for reducing its value had arisen. If the public faith would admit, of which he was not clear, he would not object to a revision of the debt, so far as to compel restitution to the ignorant and distressed, who have been defrauded. As to stock-jobbers, he saw no reason for the censures thrown on them. They keep up the value of the paper. Without them, there would be no market.

Mr. BUTLER said he meant neither to increase nor diminish the security of the creditors.

Mr. RANDOLPH moved to postpone the clause, in favor of the following:—

"All debts contracted, and engagements entered into, by or under the authority of Congress, shall be as valid against the United States, under this Constitution, as under the Confederation."

Dr. JOHNSON. The debts are debts of the United States, of the great body of America. Changing the government cannot change the obligation of the United States, which devolves, of course, on the new government. Nothing was, in his opinion, necessary to be said. If any thing, it should be a mere declaration, as moved by Mr. Randolph.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS said, he never had become a public creditor, that he might urge, with more propriety the compliance with public faith. He had always done so, and always would, and preferred the term "shall," as the most explicit. As to buying up the debt, the term "shall" was not inconsistent with it, if provision be first made for paying the interest; if not, such an expedient was a mere evasion. He was content to say nothing, as the new government would be bound, of course; but would prefer the clause with the term "shall," because it would create many friends to the plan.

On Mr. Randolph's motion,—

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 10; Pennsylvania, no, 1.$233$

Mr. SHERMAN thought it necessary to connect with the clause for laying taxes, duties, &c., an express prevision for the object of the old debts, &c., and moved to add to the first clause of article 7, sect 1.