Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

proposed valuation, should continue in force until revoked by Congress, or a period be now fixed, beyond which it should not continue in force. The importance of the distinction lay in the necessity of having seven votes on every act of Congress. The Eastern States were, generally, for the latter; supposing that the Southern States, being impoverished by the recent havoc of the enemy, would be underrated in the first valuation. The Southern States were, for the same reason, interested in favor of the former. On the question there were six ayes only, which produced a dispute whether, in a Committee of the Whole, a majority would decide, or whether seven votes were necessary.

In favor of the first rule it was contended by Mr. GORHAM, and others, that in committees of Congress the rule always is that a majority decides.

In favor of the latter it was contended, that if the rule of other committees applies to a Committee of the Whole, the vote should be individual per capita, as well as by a majority; that in other deliberative assemblies the rules of voting were not varied in Committees of the Whole, and that it would be inconvenient in practice to report to Congress, as the sense of the body, a measure approved by four or five States, since there could be no reason to hope that, in the same body, in a different form, seven States would approve it; and, consequently, a waste of time would be the result.

The Committee rose, and Congress adjourned.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5TH, and THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 6TH.

In order to decide the rule of voting in a Committee of the Whole, before Congress should go into the said Committee, Mr. BLAND moved that the rule should be to vote by States, and the majority of States in committee to decide. Mr. WILSON moved to postpone Mr. BLAND's motion, in order to resolve that the rule be to vote by States, and according to the same rules which govern Congress; as this general question was connected, in the minds of members, with the particular question to which it was to be immediately applied, the motion for postponing was negatived, chiefly by the Eastern States. A division of the question on Mr. BLAND'S motion was then called for, and the first part was agreed to, as on the Journal. The latter clause, to wit, a majority to decide, was negatived; so nothing as to the main point was determined. In this uncertainty, Mr. OSGOOD proposed that Congress should resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole. Mr. CARROLL, as Chairman, observed, that as the same difficulty would occur, he wished Congress would, previously, direct him how to proceed. Mr. HAMILTON proposed that the latter clause of Mr. BLAND's motion should be reconsidered, and agreed to, wrong as it was, rather than have no rule at all. In opposition to which it was said, that there was no more reason why one, and that not the minor side, should wholly yield to the inflexibility of the other, than vice versa; and that if they should be willing to yield, on the present occasion, it would be

better to do it tacitly than to saddle themselves with an express and perpetual rule, which they judged improper. This expedient was assented to, and Congress accordingly went into a Committee of the Whole.

The points arising on the several amendments proposed were, first, the period beyond which the rule of the first valuation should not be in force. On this point Mr. COLLINS proposed five years, Mr. BLAND ten years, Mr. BOUDINOT seven years: New Jersey having instructed her delegates thereon. The Connecticut Delegates proposed three years. On the question for three years, New Hampshire, no; Massachusetts, no; Rhode Island, aye; Connecticut, aye; all the other States, no. On the question for five years, all the States aye, except Connecticut.

The second point was whether, and how far, the rule should be retrospective. On this point the same views operated as on the preceding. Some were against any retrospection; others for extending it to the whole debt, and others for extending it so far as was necessary for liquidating and closing the accounts between the United States and each individual State.

The several motions expressive of these different ideas were at length withdrawn, with a view that the point might be better digested, and more accurately brought before Congress; so the Report was agreed to in the Committee, and made to Congress. When the question was about to be put, Mr. MADISON observed, that the Report lay in a great degree of confusion; that several points had been decided in a way too vague and indirect to ascertain the real

sense of Congress; that other points involved in the subject had not received any decision; and proposed the sense of Congress should be distinctly and successively taken on all of them, and the result referred to a special committee to be digested, &c. The question was, however, put, and negatived, the votes being as they appear on the Journal. The reasons on which Mr. HAMILTON'S motion was grounded appear from its preamble.

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 7TH.

On motion of Mr. LEE, who had been absent when the report was yesterday negatived, the matter was reconsidered. The plan of taking the sense of Congress on the several points, as yesterday proposed by Mr. MADISON, was generally admitted as proper.

The first question proposed in Committee of the Whole by Mr. MADISON, was: Shall a valuation of land within the United States, as directed by the Articles of Confederation, be immediately attempted?eight ayes; New York, only, no. The States present were New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina; Rhode Island, one member; Maryland, one.

By Mr. WILSON,

Q. Shall each State be called on to return to the United States, in Congress assembled, the number of acres granted to, or surveyed for, any person, and also the number of buildings within it?-eight ayes; North Carolina, no-supposing this not to accord

with the plan of referring the valuation to the States, which was patronized by that Delegation. A supplement to this question was suggested as follows:

Q. Shall the male inhabitants be also returned, the blacks and whites being therein distinguished?aye; North Carolina, no-for the same reason as above. Connecticut divided.

By Mr. MADISON,

Q. Shall the States be called on to return to Congress an estimate of the value of their lands, with the buildings and improvements within each, respectively? After some discussion on this point, in which the inequalities which would result from such estimates were set forth at large, and effects of such an experiment in Virginia had been described by Mr. MERCER, and a comparison of an average valuation in Pennsylvania and Virginia, which amounted in the latter to fifty per cent. more than in the formeralthough the real value of land in the former was confessedly thrice that of the latter-had been quoted by Mr. MADISON, the apprehensions from a reference of any thing more to the States, than a report of simple facts, increased; and on the vote the States were as follows: New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, no— Mr. BLAND, aye; Mr. LEE, silent-Connecticut, NorthCarolina, South Carolina, aye; New York, divided: so it passed in the negative.

By Mr. MADISON,

Q. Shall a period be now fixed, beyond which the rule to be eventually established by Congress shall not be in force?-aye, unanimously.

« ZurückWeiter »