of the Articles of Confederation on the same subject. He did not understand precisely the meaning of the article.241
Mr. WILSON and Dr. JOHNSON supposed the meaning to be, that judgments in one state should be the ground of actions in other states; and that acts of the legislatures should be included, for the sake of acts of insolvency, &c.
Mr. PINCKNEY moved to commit article 16, with the following proposition: "To establish uniform laws upon the subject of bankruptcies, and respecting the damages arising on the protest of foreign bills of exchange."
Mr. GORHAM was for agreeing to the article, and committing the proposition.
Mr. MADISON was for committing both. He wished the legislature might be authorized to provide for the execution of judgments in other states, under such regulations as might be expedient. He thought that this might be safely done, and was justified by the nature of the Union.
Mr. RANDOLPH said, there was no instance of one nation executing judgments of the courts of another nation. He moved the following proposition:—
"Whenever the act of any state, whether legislative, executive, or judiciary, shall be attested and exemplified under the seal thereof, such attestation and exemplification shall be deemed in other states as full proof of the existence of that act; and its operation shall be binding in every other state, in all cases to which it may relate, and which are within the cognizance and jurisdiction of the state wherein the said act was done."
On the question for committing article 16, with Mr. Pinckney's motion,—
Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 9; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, no, 2.
The motion of Mr. Randolph was also committed, nem. con.
Mr. GOUVERNEUR 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. con.
The committee appointed for these references, were—Mr. Rutledge, Mr. Randolph, Mr. Gorham, Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Johnson.242
Mr. DICKINSON 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.
Article 7, sect. 6, by the committee of eleven reported to be struck out, (see the 24th inst.,) being now taken up,—
Mr. PINCKNEY moved to postpone the report, in favor of the following proposition:—
