Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/569

1787.] be not appointed by the legislature, he will be more narrowly watched, and more readily impeached.

Mr. SHERMAN. As the two Houses appropriate money, it is best for them to appoint the officer who is to keep it; and to appoint him as they make the appropriation, not by joint, but several votes.

Gen. PINCKNEY. The treasurer is appointed by joint ballot in South Carolina. The consequence is, that bad appointments are made, and the legislature will not listen to the faults of their own officer.

On the motion to strike out,—

New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 8; Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, no 3.

Article I, sect. 8, the words,

"but all such duties, imposts, and excises, shall be uniform throughout the United States," were unanimously annexed to the power of taxation.

On the clause,

"to define and punish piracies and felonies on the high seas, and punish offences against the law of nations,"—

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved to strike out "punish" before the words "offences against the law of nations," so as to let these be definable, as well as punishable, by virtue of the preceding member of the sentence.

Mr. WILSON hoped the alteration would by no means be made. To pretend to define the law of nations, which depended on the authority of all the civilized nations of the world, would have a look of arrogance that would make us ridiculous.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. The word define is proper when applied to offences in this case; the law of nations being often too vague and deficient to be a rule.

On the question to strike out the word "punish," it passed in the affirmative.

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

Dr. FRANKLIN moved to add, after the words "post roads," article 1, sect. 8, a power "to provide for cutting canals where deemed necessary."

Mr. WILSON seconded the motion.

Mr. SHERMAN objected. The expense, in such cases, will fall on the United States, and the benefit accrue to the places where the canals may be cut.

Mr. WILSON. Instead of being an expense to the United States, they may be made a source of revenue.

Mr. MADISON suggested an enlargement of the motion, into a power,

"to grant charters of incorporation where the interest of the United States might require, and the legislative provisions of individual states may be incompetent."