The rule of secrecy governing the Convention’s proceedings has not inhibited newspapers from speculating or putting their “spin” on rumors. Yesterday, The Pennsylvania Gazette published the disturbing but inaccurate report that the Convention is considering a monarchy. The Pennsylvania Herald and General Advertiser reported that “the debates of the federal convention continued until five o’clock on Monday evening; when, it is said, a decision took place upon the most important question that has been agitated since the meeting of this assembly.” Of course, the paper did not identify this “most important question.” It most assuredly is not privy to that information.
Edmund Randolph’s Virginia Plan, introduced on May 29, proposed that “the national legislature ought to enjoy the legislative rights vested in Congress by the [Articles of] Confederation, and to legislate in call cases to which the separate States are incompetent, or in which the harmony of the United States may be interrupted by the exercise of individual legislation.” The statement is too vague to have any operational meaning. Consequently, the Committee of Detail boldly moved beyond such an ambiguous, inexplicit statement of national authority to devising a list of specific, enumerated powers. These are found in Article VII, Sect. 1 of the Committee’s report.
Sect. 1 authorizes the national legislature to “lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises.” Maryland’s Luther Martin, always suspicious of new powers proposed for the national legislature, asked what the Committee meant by “duties” and “imposts.” If they meant the same thing, he said, “the former is unnecessary; if different, the matter ought to be made clear.”
James Wilson, a member of the Committee, responded. “Duties are applicable to many objects to which the word imposts does not relate,” he said. “The latter are appropriated to commerce; the former extends to a variety of objects, as stamp duties, etc.” Martin is not the only one who harbors suspicions of others’ motives. Virginia’s George Mason observed that this section does not prohibit taxes on exports. He was “unwilling to trust to its being done in a future article” and “hoped the northern States did not mean to deny the southern this security.” He moved to insert an amendment prohibiting the legislature from laying any “tax, duty, or imposition on articles exported from any State.”
Roger Sherman was not necessarily opposed to the provision, “other than it would derange the parts of the report as made by the Committee, to take them in such an order.” Rutledge, on the other hand, said it is “of no consequence in what order points are decided.” Only substance matters. He declared he ”should vote for the clause as it stands, but on condition that the subsequent part relating to negroes should also be agreed to.”.
Gouverneur Morris was on his feet in an instant. Just a week ago on this floor he had waxed eloquently and passionately against slavery. Now, provoked by Rutledge, he snapped back.” Such a proviso is inadmissible anywhere. It is so radically objectionable, that it might cost the whole system the support of some members.”
The “peculiar institution” of slavery has been lurking in the shadows, on the edges of representation and taxation, but not addressed head on. The delegates are not yet ready to broach this explosive issue which threatens to disrupt the entire business. No one responded to the brief exchange between Rutledge and Morris. James Madison simply moved on to discuss taxation on exports in general, without reference to any impacts relevant to slavery.
Although a slave owner himself, Madison opposed Rutledge’s motion. “The power of taxing exports is proper in itself,” he began, “and as the States cannot with propriety exercise it separately, it ought to be vested in them collectively.“ A grievance already existed among New Hampshire, New Jersey, Delaware, and North Carolina, “with loud complaints,” relating to imports. The same controversy would erupt relating to exports if the power to tax them were left to the States. “We are not providing for the present moment only,” he advised, “and time will equalize the situation of the States in this matter.”
Elbridge Gerry does not trust the legislature with such a power. “It might ruin the country,” he bellowed. “It might be exercised partially, raising one [part of the country] and depressing another part of it.” Gerry opposes almost any increase in the power of the national government. The Convention voted to end further discussion until properly brought up when it “stood in the report” and to leave Sect. 1 as written. Only Gerry voted “no.”
Of the eighteen enumerated powers of Congress proposed in the Committee report, the next four passed without dissent: the power to regulate “commerce with foreign nations;” to coin money; to regulate “the value of foreign coin;” and to “fix the standard of weights and measures.” The fifth, “to establish post-offices,” was readily agreed to after approving Gerry’s proposal to add “and post-roads.”.
The sixth in the list of enumerated powers, “to borrow money, and emit bills on the credit of the United States,” stimulated an animated discussion. Immediately, Morris moved to strike “and emit bills on the credit of the United States.” The reason is obvious, he asserted, “If the United States had credit, such bills would be unnecessary; if they had not, unjust and useless.” Striking the clause would force government ministers to be responsible, he added. Moreover, “the monied interest will oppose the plan of government if paper emissions be not prohibited.”
George Mason has a “mortal hatred to paper money,” but because he “cannot foresee all emergencies, he is unwilling to tie the hands of the legislature. The late war could not have been carried on, had such a prohibition existed.” The motion to strike passed easily 9 – 2. The clause for borrowing money was agreed to nem. con.