Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/519

1787.] On Mr. Gouverneur Morris's motion, for striking out,—

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 9; Maryland, Virginia, no, 2.

Mr. L. MARTIN and Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved to strike out of article 17,—

"But to such admission the consent of two thirds of the members present shall be necessary." Before any question was taken on this motion,$244$

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved the following proposition, as a substitute for the seventeenth article:—

"New states may be admitted by the legislature into the Union; but no new states shall be erected within the limits of any of the present states, without the consent of the legislature of such state, as well as of the general legislature."

The first part, to "Union," inclusive, was agreed to, ''nem. con.''

Mr. L. MARTIN opposed the latter part. Nothing, he said, would so alarm the limited states, as to make the consent of the large states, claiming the western lands, necessary to the establishment of new states within their limits. It is proposed to guaranty the states. Shall Vermont be reduced by force, in favor of the states claiming it? Frankland, and the western county of Virginia, were in a like situation.

On Mr. Gouverneur Morris's motion, to substitute, &c., it was agreed to.

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

Article 17 being before the House, as amended,

Mr. SHERMAN was against it. He thought it unnecessary. The Union cannot dismember a state without its consent.

Mr. LANGDON thought there was great weight in the argument of Mr. Luther Martin; and that the proposition substituted by Mr. Gouverneur Morris would excite a dangerous opposition to the plan.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS thought, on the contrary, that the small states would be pleased with the regulation, as it holds up the idea of dismembering the large states.

Mr. BUTLER. If new states were to be erected without the consent of the dismembered states, nothing but confusion would ensue. Whenever taxes should press on the people, demagogues would set up their schemes of new states.

Dr. JOHNSON agreed in general with the ideas of Mr. Sherman; but was afraid that, as the clause stood, Vermont would be subjected to New York, contrary to the faith pledged by Congress. He was of opinion that Vermont ought to be compelled to come into the Union.

Mr. LANGDON said, his objections were connected with the case of Vermont. If they are not taken in, and remain exempt from taxes, it would prove of great injury to New Hampshire and the other neighboring states.

Mr. DICKINSON hoped the article would not be agreed to. He dwelt on the impropriety of requiring the small slates to secure the large ones in their extensive claims of territory.

Mr. WILSON. When the majority of a state wish to divide, they