December, 1789.
Note.
These letters are ascribed to Sherman on the authority mentioned at page
213.
In a letter from James Madison to Edmund Randolph, (_Correspondence_, 1,
63), he says:
On the subject of amendments, nothing has been publickly, and very little
privately, said. Such as I am known to have espoused will, as far as I can
gather, be attainable from the federalists, who sufficiently predominate
in both branches, though with some the concurrence will proceed from a
spirit of conciliation rather than conviction. Connecticut is least
inclined, though I presume not inflexibly opposed, to a moderate revision.
A paper, which will probably be republished in the Virginia gazettes,
under the signature of a citizen of New Haven, unfolds Mr. Sherman's
opinions.
In the _Writings of John Adams_, (VI, 427), is a correspondence between
Adams and Sherman, produced by these articles, which should be studied in
connection with them.
A Citizen Of New Haven, I.
The New Haven Gazette, (Number 48)
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1788.
_Observations on the Alterations Proposed as Amendments to the new Federal
Constitution._
Six of the states have adopted the new constitution without proposing any
alteration, and the most of those proposed by the conventions of other
states may be provided for by congress in a code of laws without altering
the constitution. If congress may be safely trusted with the affairs of
the Union, and have sufficient powers for that purpose, and possess no
powers but such as respect the common interest of the states (as I have
endeavored to show in a former piece), then all the matters that can be
regulated by law may safely be left to their discretion, and those will
include all that I have noticed except the following, which I think on due
consideration will appear to be improper or unnecessary.
1. It is proposed that the consent of two-thirds or three-fourths of the
members present in this branch of the congress shall be required for
passing certain acts.
On which I would observe, that this would give a minority in congress
power to controul the majority, joined with the concurrent voice of the
president, for if the president dissents, no act can pass without the
consent of two-thirds of the members in each branch of congress; and would
not that be contrary to the general principles of republican government?
2. That impeachments ought not to be tried by the senate, or n
|