"could not be removed by Congress itself. These related to "the coining of money, the granting of letters of marque and

reprisal, the making of treaties, alliances, and confederations, "and the granting of titles of nobility. All the other restraints 66 on the States were to be operative or inoperative, according "to the pleasure of Congress. Among these were included "bills of credit; laws making other things than specie a tender "in payment of debts; the laying of imposts or duties on "imports; the keeping of troops or ships of war in time of "peace; the entering into agreements or compacts with other "States, or with foreign powers; and the engaging in war, "when not invaded, or in danger of invasion, before Congress "could be consulted. The enactment of attainder and ex post "facto laws, and of laws impairing the obligation of contracts, "was not prohibited at all.

66

"But when these various subjects came to be regarded more "closely, it was perceived that the list of absolute prohibitions "must be considerably enlarged. Thus the power of emitting "bills of credit, which had been the fruitful source of great "evils, must either be taken away entirely, or the contest "between the friends and the opponents of paper money would "be transferred from the State legislatures to Congress, if Congress should be authorized to sanction the exercise of the power. Fears were entertained that an absolute prohibition "of paper money would excite the strenuous opposition of its partizans against the Constitution; but it was thought best to "take this opportunity to crush it entirely; and accordingly "the votes of all the States but two were given to a proposition "to prohibit absolutely the issuing of bills of credit. [That is, "their being issued by the States.] To the same class of legis"lation belonged the whole of that system of laws by which "the States had made a tender of certain other things than "coin legal satisfaction of a debt. By placing this class of laws "under the ban of a strict prohibition, not to be removed by "the consent of Congress in any case, the mischiefs of which they had been a fruitful source would be at once extin guished. This was accordingly done, by unanimous con"sent."

I read also, with your Honors' permission, some remarks on that occurrence in the Convention on which I lay great stress, by which they refused to give the power to emit bills of credit to Congress. I read from page 328 of the same volume:

66

66

66

"I have not been able to discover on what ground it was "supposed to be proper or expedient to confer a power of emitting bills of credit on the United States, and to prohibit "the States from doing the same thing. That the same thing. was in contemplation in the two provisions reported by the committee, sufficiently appears from the debates, and from "the history of the times. The object of the prohibition on "the States was to prevent the issue and circulation of paper. "money; the object of the proposed grant of power to the "United States, was to enable the Government to employ a paper currency, when it should have occasion to do so. But "the records of the discussions that have come down to us, do "not disclose the reasons which may have led to the supposi"tion that a paper currency could be used by the United States "with any more propriety or safety than by a State. One of "the principal causes which had led to the experiment of making a National Government, with power to prevent such "abuses, had been the frauds and injustice perpetrated by the "States in their issues of paper money; and there was at this 66 very time a loud and general outcry against the conduct of the "people of Rhode Island, who had kept themselves aloof from "the National Convention, for the express purpose, among "others, of retaining to themselves the power to issue such a 66 currency.

66

"It is possible that the phrase 'emit bills on the credit of "the United States' might have been left in the Constitution "without any other danger than the hazard of a doubtful con"struction, which would have confined its meaning to the issu"ing of certificates of debt under the power to borrow money.' But this was not the sense in which the term bills "of credit' was generally received throughout the country, "nor the sense intended to be given to it in the clause which "contained the prohibition on the States. The well-understood "meaning of the term had reference to paper issues, intended

66

"to circulate as currency, and bearing the public promise to pay a sum of money at a future time, whether made or not "made a legal tender in payment of debts. It would have "been of no avail, therefore, to have added a prohibition "against making such bills a legal tender. If a power to issue "them should once be seen in the Constitution, or should be suspected by the people to be there, wrapt in the power of "borrowing money, the instrument would array against itself a formidable, and probably a fatal opposition. It was deemed "wiser, therefore, even if unforeseen emergencies might, in "some cases, make the exercise of such a power useful, to "withhold it altogether. It was accordingly stricken out by a "vote of nine States to two, and the authority of Congress was "thus confined to borrowing money on the credit of the United "States, which appears to have been intended to include the "issuing of Government notes not transferable as currency."

I now ask your Honors' attention for a moment to this transaction, that took place in the Convention, in order to see whether it does not justify the observations I have read. In the original draft of the Constitution, the powers of Congress stood thus, in the report of the committee on details :

"To coin money." [A separate clause by itself.]

"To regulate the value of foreign coin." [Another clause.] "To borrow money, and emit bills on the credit of the United "States."

I will ask my colleage (Mr. Dory) to read all that I wish to bring to the notice of your Honors in this connection, from the debates of the Convention.

Mr. DoTY then read as follows:

"Mr. GOVERNEUR MORRIS moved to strike out and emit bills "on the credit of the United States.' If the United States had credit, such bills would be unnecessary; if they had not, unjust "and useless.

"Mr. BUTLER seconds the motion.

"Mr. MADISON: Will it not be sufficient to prohibit the

"making them a tender? This will remove the temptation to "emit them with unjust views. And promissory notes, in that "shape, may in some emergencies be best.

"Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS: Striking out the words will "leave room still for notes of a responsible minister, which will "do all the good without the mischief. The moneyed interest "will oppose the plan of government, if paper emissions be not prohibited.

66

“Mr. GORHAM was for striking out without inserting any prohibition. If the words stand, they may suggest and lead to "the measure.

66

"Mr. MASON had doubts on the subject.

Congress, he thought, would not have the power, unless it were expressed. Thongh he had a mortal hatred to paper money, yet as he "could not foresee all emergencies, he was unwilling to tie the "hands of the legislature. He observed that the late war "could not have been carried on, had such a prohibition ex"isted.

"Mr. GORHAM: The power, as far as it will be necessary, or "safe, is involved in that of borrowing.

66

66

"Mr. MASON was a friend to paper money, though in the present state and temper of America, he should neither propose, nor approve of, such a measure. He was consequently opposed to a prohibition of it altogether. It will stamp suspicion on the government, to deny it a discretion on this "point. It was impolitic, also, to excite the opposition of all "those who were friends to paper money. The people of "property would be sure to be on the side of the plan, and it "was impolitic to purchase their further attachment with the "loss of the opposite class of citizens.

"Mr. ELLSWORTH thought this a favorable moment to shut "and bar the door against paper money. The mischiefs of the "various experiments which had been made were now fresh in "the public mind, and had excited the disgust of all the re"spectable part of America. By withholding the power from "the new government, more friends of influence would be "gained to it than by almost anything else. Paper money can "in no case be necessary. Give the government credit, and "other resources will offer. The power may do harm, never

"Mr. RANDOLPH, notwithstanding his antipathy to paper money, would not agree to strike out the words, as he could "not foresee all the occasions that might arise.

"Mr. WILSON: It will have a most salutary influence on the "credit of the United States, to remove the possibility of paper money. This expedient can never succeed, whilst its mis"chiefs are remembered. And as long as it can be resorted to, "it will be a bar to other resources.

"Mr. BUTLER remarked, that paper was a legal tender in no country in Europe. He was urgent for disarming the gov "ernment of such a power.

"Mr. MASON was still averse to tying the hands of the legislature altogether. If there was no example in Europe, as 'just remarked, it might be observed, on the other side, that "there was none in which the government was restrained on "this head.

"Mr. READ thought the words, if not struck out, would be "as alarming as the mark of the Beast in Revelation.

"Mr. LANGDON had rather reject the whole plan, than re"tain the three words and emit bills." "

"On the motion for striking out

"New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia,* North Carolina, South Carolina, 66 Georgia, aye-9.

"New Jersey, Maryland, no-2.

"The clause for borrowing money was agreed to, nem. con."

NOTE BY MR. MADISON.

"This vote in the affirmative by Virginia was occasioned by the acquiescence "of Mr. MADISON, who became satisfied that striking out the words would not dis"able the government from the use of public notes, as far as they could be safe " and proper, and would only cut off the pretext for a paper currency, and, particularly, for making the bills a tender, either for public or private debts."

Mr. CURTIS I have submitted these facts under that portion of my argument in which I had undertaken to show that this power was expressly withheld out of the Constitution, and that it was withheld for a purpose.

The third fact attending the formation of the Constitution,