risdiction given was constructively limited to cases of a judiciary nature.

On motion of Mr. RUTLEDGE, the words "passed by the Legislature," were struck out; and after the words, "United States," were inserted, nem. con., the words, "and treaties made or which shall be made under their authority," conformably to a preceding amendment in another place.

The clause, "in cases of impeachment," was postponed.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS wished to know what was meant by the words: "In all the cases beforementioned it [jurisdiction] shall be appellate, with such exceptions, &c."-whether it extended to matters of fact as well as law-and to cases of common law, as well as civil law.

Mr. WILSON. The Committee, he believed, meant facts as well as law, and common as well as civil law. The jurisdiction of the Federal court of appeals had, he said, been so construed.

Mr. DICKINSON moved to add, after the word "appellate," the words, "both as to law and fact;" which was agreed to, nem. con.

Mr. MADISON and Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved to strike out the beginning of the third section, "The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court," and to insert the words, "the Judicial power," which was agreed to,

nem. con.

The following motion was disagreed to, to wit, to insert, "In all the other cases beforementioned, the judicial power shall be exercised in such manner as the Legislature shall direct."

Delaware, Virginia, aye-2; New Hampshire,

Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, South Carolina, Georgia, no—6.

On a question for striking out the last sentence of the third Section, " The Legislature may assign, &c." it passed, nem. con.

Mr. SHERMAN moved to insert, after the words, "between citizens of different States," the words, "between citizens of the same State claiming lands under grants of different States,"—according to the provision in the 9th Article of the Confederation; which was agreed to, nem. con.338

Adjourned.

TUESDAY, AUGUST 8TH.

In Convention,-Mr. SHERMAN, from the Committee to whom were referred several propositions on the twenty-fifth instant, made the following report; which was ordered to lie on the table:

"That there be inserted, after the fourth clause of the 7th Section: 'Nor shall any regulation of commerce or revenue give preference to the ports of one State over those of another, or oblige vessels bound to or from any State to enter clear or pay duties in another; and all tonnage, duties, imposts, and excises laid by the Legislature, shall be uniform throughout the United States.'"

Article 11, Section 3, being considered,-it was moved to strike out the words, "it shall be appellate," and to insert the words, "the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction,”-in order to prevent uncertainty whether "it" referred to the Supreme Court, or to the Judicial pomer.

On the question,-New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, aye -9; Maryland, no-1; New Jersey, absent.

Section 4 was so amended, nem. con., as to read: "The trial of all crimes (except in cases of impeachment) shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the State where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, then the trial shall be at such place or places as the Legislature may direct." The object of this amendment was, to provide for trial by jury of offences committed out of any State.

Mr. PINCKNEY, urging the propriety of securing the benefit of the Habeas Corpus in the most ample manner, moved, that it should not be suspended but on the most urgent occasions, and then only for a limited time not exceeding twelve months.

Mr. RUTLEDGE was for declaring the Habeas Corpus inviolate. He did not conceive that a suspension could ever be necessary, at the same time, through all the States.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved, that, "The privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless where, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."

Mr. WILSON doubted whether in any case a suspension could be necessary, as the discretion now exists with Judges, in most important cases, to keep in gaol or admit to bail.

The first part of Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS'S motion, to the word "unless," was agreed to, nem. con. On the remaining part,-New Hampshire, Massa

chusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, aye-7; North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no-3.

The fifth Section of Article 11, was agreed to,nem.

con.

Article 12 being then taken up,

Mr. WILSON and Mr. SHERMAN moved to insert, after the words, "coin money," the words, "nor emit bills of credit, nor make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts;" making these prohibitions absolute, instead of making the measures allowable, as in the thirteenth Article, with the consent of the Legislature of the United States.

Mr. GORHAM thought the purpose would be as well secured by the provision of Article 13, which makes the consent of the General Legislature necessary; and that in that mode no opposition would be excited; whereas an absolute prohibition of paper-money would rouse the most desperate opposition from its partisans.

Mr. SHERMAN thought this a favorable crisis for crushing paper-money. If the consent of the Legislature could authorize emissions of it, the friends of paper-money would make every exertion to get into the Legislature in order to license it.

The question being divided, on the first part : "nor emit bills of credit,"

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, North Carolina, South

The vote on this section, as stated in the printed Journal, is not unanimous: the statement here is probably the right one.

Carolina, Georgia, aye-8; Virginia, no-1; Maryland, divided.

The remaining part of Mr. WILSON'S and SHERMAN's motion was agreed to, nem. con.

339

Mr. KING moved to add, in the words used in the ordinance of Congress establishing new States, a prohibition on the States to interfere in private con

tracts.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. This would be going too far. There are a thousand laws relating to bringing actions, limitations of actions, &c., which affect contracts. The judicial power of the United States will be a protection in cases within their jurisdiction; and within the State itself a majority must rule, whatever may be the mischief done among themselves.

Mr. SHERMAN. Why then prohibit bills of credit? Mr. WILSON was in favor of Mr. KING's motion. Mr. MADISON admitted that inconveniences might arise from such a prohibition; but thought on the whole it would be overbalanced by the the utility of it. He conceived, however, that a negative on the State laws could alone secure the effect. Evasions might and would be devised by the ingenuity of the Legislatures.

Col. MASON. This is carrying the restraint too far. Cases will happen that cannot be foreseen, where some kind of interference will be proper and essential. He mentioned the case of limiting the period for bringing actions on open account-that of bonds after a certain lapse of time-asking, whether it was proper to tie the hands of the States from making provision in such cases.