The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 2

by United States. Constitutional Convention; James Madison

M^r Gov^r Morris moved to commit also the following proposition on the same subject.

"Full faith ought to be given in each State to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other State; and the Legislature shall by general laws, determine the proof and effect of such acts, records, and proceedings" and it was committed nem. contrad:

The Committee appointed for these references, were M^r Rutlidge, M^r Randolph, M^r Gorham, M^r Wilson, & M^r Johnson.

M^r Dickenson mentioned to the House that on examining Blackstone's Commentaries, he found that the term "ex post facto" related to criminal cases only; that they would not consequently restrain the States from retrospective laws in civil cases, and that some further provision for this purpose would be requisite.

Art: VII Sect. 6 by y^e Com̃ittee of eleven reported to be struck out (see the 24 instant) being now taken up.

M^r Pinkney moved to postpone the Report in favor of the following proposition–"That no act of the Legislature for the purpose of regulating the commerce of the U. S. with foreign powers among the several States, shall be passed without the assent of two thirds of the members of each House." He remarked that there were five distinct commercial interests. 1. the fisheries & W. India trade, which belonged to the N. England States. 2. the interest of N. York lay in a free trade. 3. Wheat & flour the Staples of the two middle States (N. J. & Penn^a). 4. Tob^o the staple of Maryl^d & Virginia & partly of N. Carolina. 5. Rice & Indigo, the staples of S. Carolina & Georgia. These different interests would be a source of oppressive regulations if no check to a bare majority should be provided. States pursue their interests with less scruple than individuals. The power of regulating commerce was a pure concession on the part of the S. States. They did not need the protection of the N. States at present.

M^r Martin 2^ded the motion.

Gen^l Pinkney said it was the true interest of the S. States to have no regulation of commerce; but considering the loss brought on the commerce of the Eastern States by the revolution, their liberal conduct towards the views [46] of South Carolina, and the interest the weak Southⁿ States had in being united with the strong Eastern States, he thought it proper that no fetters should be imposed on the power of making commercial regulations, and that his constituents though prejudiced against the Eastern States, would be reconciled to this liberality. He had himself, he said, prejudices ag^st the Eastern States before he came here, but would acknowledge that he had found them as liberal and candid as any men whatever.

[ [46] He meant the permission to import slaves. An understanding on the two subjects of navigation and slavery, had taken place between those parts of the Union, which explains the vote on the motion depending, as well as the language of Gen^l Pinkney & others.–Madison's Note.

M^r Clymer. The diversity of commercial interests of necessity creates difficulties, which ought not to be increased by unnecessary restrictions. The Northern & middle States will be ruined, if not enabled to defend themselves against foreign regulations.