Page:The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 Volume 2.djvu/283

 RECORDS OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION Z77 Monday MADISON August z 3 the Senate can originate no bill. The words "so as to increase or diminish the sum to be raised," were liable to the same objections. In levying indirect taxes, which it seemed to be understood were to form the principal revenue of the new Govt. the sum to be raised, would be increased or diminished by a variety of collateral circumstances influencing the con- sumption, in general, the consumption of foreign or of domestic articles--of this or that particular species of articles, and even by the mode of collection which may be closely connected with the productiveness of a tax. --The friends of the section had argued its necessity from the permanency of the Senate. He could not see how this argumt. applied. The Senate was not more permanent now than in the form it bore in the original propositions of Mr. Randolph and at the time when no objec- tion whatever was hinted agst. its originating money bills. Or if in consequence of a loss of the present question, a propor- tional vote in the Senate should be reinstated as has been urged as the indemnification the permanency of the Senate will remain the same.--If the right to originate be vested exclusively in the House of Reps. either the Senate must yield agst. its judgment to that House, in which (case) the Utility of the check will be lost- or the Senate will be in- flexible & the H. of Reps must adapt its Money bill to the views of the Senate, in which case, the exclusive right will be of no avail.- As to the Compromise of which so much had been said, he would make a single observation. There were 5 States which had opposed the equality of votes in the Senate. viz. Masts. Penna. Virga. N. Carolina & S. Caroh. As a compensation for the sacrifice extorted (from them) on this head, the exclusive origination of money bills in the other House had been tendered. Of the five States a majority viz. Penna. Virga. & S. Carola. have uniformly voted agst. the proposed compensation, on its own merits, as rendering the plan of Govt. still more objectionable- Massts has been divided. N. Carolina alone has set a value on the compen- sation, and voted on that principle. What obligation then can the small States be under to concur agst. their judgments in reinstating the section?

�