Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no-8.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS thought the blank ought to be filled in a two-fold way, so as to provide for the event of the ratifying States being contiguous, which would render a smaller number sufficient; and the event of their being dispersed, which would require a greater number for the introduction of the Government.

Mr. SHERMAN observed that the States being now confederated by articles which require unanimity in changes, he thought the ratification, in this case, of ten States at least ought to be made necessary.

Mr. RANDOLPH was for filling the blank with "nine," that being a respectable majority of the whole, and being a number made familiar by the constitution of the existing Congress.

Mr. WILSON mentioned "eight," as preferable.

Mr. DICKINSON asked, whether the concurrence of Congress is to be essential to the establishment of the system-whether the refusing States in the Confederacy could be deserted-and whether Congress could concur in contravening the system under which they acted?

Mr. MADISON remarked, that if the blank should be filled with "seven," "eight," or "nine," the Constitution as it stands might be put in force over the whole body of the people, though less than a majority of them should ratify it.

Mr. WILSON. As the Constitution stands, the States only which ratify can be bound. We must, he said, in this case, go to the original powers of

society. The house on fire must be extinguished, ' without a scrupulous regard to ordinary rights.

Mr. BUTLER was in favor of "nine." He revolted at the idea that one or two States should restrain the rest from consulting their safety.

Mr. CARROLL moved to fill the blank with, "the thirteen;" unanimity being necessary to dissolve the existing Confederacy, which had been unanimously established.

Mr. KING thought this amendment necessary; otherwise, as the Constitution now stands, it will operate on the whole, though ratified by a part only. Adjourned.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 31ST.

In Convention,-Mr. KING moved to add, to the end of Article 21, the words, "between the said States;" so as to confine the operation of the Government to the States ratifying it.

On the question, nine States voted in the affirmative; Maryland, no; Delaware, absent.

Mr. MADISON proposed to fill the blank in the Article with, "any seven or more States entitled to thirty-three members at least in the House of Representatives according to the allotment made in the third Section of Article 4." This, he said, would require the concurrence of a majority of both the States and the people.

Mr. SHERMAN doubted the propriety of authorizing less than all the States to execute the Constitution, considering the nature of the existing Confederation.

sup

Perhaps all the States may concur, and on that position it is needless to hold out a breach of faith. Mr. CLYMER and Mr. CARROLL moved to postpone the consideration of Article 21, in order to take up the Reports of Committees not yet acted on. On this question the States were equally divided,New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Georgia, aye-5; Massachusetts, New Jersey, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, no-5; Connecticut, divided.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS moved to strike out, "conventions of the," after "ratifications;" leaving the States to pursue their own modes of ratification.

Mr. CARROLL mentioned the mode of altering the Constitution of Maryland pointed out therein, and that no other mode could be pursued in that State.

Mr. KING thought that striking out "conventions," as the requisite mode, was equivalent to giving up the business altogether. Conventions alone, which will avoid all the obstacles from the complicated formation of the Legislatures, will succeed; and if not positively required by the plan, its enemies will oppose that mode.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS said, he meant to facilitate the adoption of the plan, by leaving the modes approved by the several State Constitutions to be followed.

Mr. MADISON Considered it best to require Conventions; among other reasons for this, that the powers given to the General Government being taken from the State Governments, the Legislatures would be more disinclined than Conventions composed in part at least of other men; and if disinclined, they could

devise modes apparently promoting, but really thwarting, the ratification. The difficulty in Maryland was no greater than in other States, where no mode of change was pointed out by the Constitution, and all officers were under oath to support it. The people were, in fact, the fountain of all power, and by resorting to them, all difficulties were got over. They could alter constitutions as they pleased. It was a principle in the Bills of Rights, that first principles might be resorted to.

Mr. MCHENRY said, that the officers of government in Maryland were under oath to support the mode of alteration prescribed by the Constitution.

Mr. GORHAM urged the expediency of "Conventions;" also Mr. PINCKNEY, for reasons formerly urged on a discussion of this question.

Mr. L. MARTIN insisted on a reference to the State Legislatures. He urged the danger of commotions from a resort to the people and to first principles; in which the Government might be on one side, and the people on the other. He was apprehensive of no such consequences, however, in Maryland, whether the Legislature or the people should be appealed to. Both of them would be generally against the Constitution. He repeated also the peculiarity in the Maryland Constitution.

Mr. KING observed, that the Constitution of Massachusetts was made unalterable till the year 1790; yet this was no difficulty with him. The State must have contemplated a recurrence to first principles, before they sent deputies to this Convention.

Mr. SHERMAN moved to postpone Article 21, and to take up Article 22; on which question,—

Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, aye-5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no-6.

On Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS's motion, to strike out "Conventions of the," it was negatived,

Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Georgia, aye-4; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia, South Carolina, no-6.

On the question for filling the blank in Article 21, with "thirteen," moved by Mr. CARROLL and Mr. L. MARTIN, all the States were no, except Maryland. Mr. SHERMAN and Mr. DAYTON moved to fill the blank with "ten."

Mr. WILSON Supported the motion of Mr. MADISON, requiring a majority both of the people and of States.

Mr. CLYMER was also in favor of it.

Colonel MASON was for preserving ideas familiar to the people. Nine States had been required in all great cases under the Confederation, and that number was on that account preferable.

On the question for "ten,”—

Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Georgia, aye -4; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, no-7.

On the question for "nine,”

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Georgia, aye-8; Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, no-3.

Article 21, as amended, was then agreed to by all