Page:The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 Volume 3.djvu/335

, and many in the United States. I do not know what explanation the honorable gentleman asks. I can say with great truth, that the honorable gentleman, in private conversation with me, expressed himself against it: Neither did I ever hear any of the delegates from this state advocate it.

Mr. Madison declared himself satisfied with this, unless the committee thought themselves entitled to ask a further explanation.

After some desultory remarks, Mr. Mason continued.—I have heard that opinion advocated by gentlemen, for whose abilities, judgment, and knowledge, I have the highest reverence and respect.

… The last clause is still more improper. To give them cognizance in disputes between a state and the citizens thereof, is utterly inconsistent with reason or good policy.

Here Mr. Nicholas arose, and informed Mr. Mason, that his interpretation of this part was not warranted by the words.

Mr. Mason replied, that if he recollected rightly, the propriety of the power as explained by him, had been contended for; but that as his memory had never been good, and was now much impaired from his age, he would not insist on that interpretation.

ⅭⅭⅩⅤ.

June 20, 1788.

(The 1st and 2d sections, of the 3d article, still under consideration.)

Mr. Madison.—… It may be proper to remark, that the organization of the general government for the United States, was, in all its parts, very difficult.—There was a peculiar difficulty in that of the Executive.—Every thing incident to it, must have participated of that difficulty.—That mode which was judged most expedient was adopted, till experience should point out one more eligible.—This part was also attended with difficulties. It claims the indulgence of a fair and liberal interpretation. I will not deny that, according to my view of the subject, a more accurate attention might place it in terms which would exclude some of the objections now made to it. But if we take a liberal construction, I think we shall find nothing dangerous or inadmissible in it. In compositions of this kind, it is difficult to avoid technical terms which have the same meaning. An attention to this may satisfy gentlemen, that precision was not so easily obtained as may be imagined. I will illustrate this by one thing in the constitution.—There is a general