Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania—afterwards of New York—dreaded "legislative usurpations" and felt that "encroachments of the popular branch ... ought to be guarded agst." (Ib. 299.)
Gunning Bedford, Jr., of Delaware was against any "check on the Legislative" with two branches. (Ib. i, 100-01.)
James Wilson of Pennsylvania insisted that power in the Judiciary to declare laws unconstitutional "did not go far enough"—the judges should also have "Revisionary power" to pass on bills in the process of enactment. (Ib. ii, 73.)
Luther Martin of Maryland had no doubt that the Judiciary had "a negative" on unconstitutional laws. (Ib. 76.)
John Francis Mercer of Maryland "disapproved of the Doctrine that the Judges as expositors of the Constitution should have authority to declare a law void." (Records, Fed. Conv.: Farrand, 298.)
John Dickinson of Delaware "thought no such power ought to exist," but was "at a loss what expedient to substitute." (Ib. 299.)
Charles Pinckney of South Carolina "opposed the interference of the Judges in the Legislative business." (Ib. 298.)
The above is a condensed précis of all that was said in the Constitutional Convention on this vital matter.
[335] See vol. i, 452, of this work.
[336] The Virginia Resolutions.