new States, to be decided when that admission shall be asked.  See the Journal of Congress of April 20, 1784.  Another doubt was started in this debate; viz. whether the agreement of the nine Stales, required by the Confederation, was to be made by their legislatures, or by their delegates in Congress.  The expression adopted, viz. ’so many States, in Congress, is first obtained,’ show what was their sense of this matter.  If it be agreed, that the 11th article of the Confederation is not to be applied to the admission of these new States, then it is contended that their admission comes within the 13th article, which forbids ’any alteration, unless agreed to in a Congress of the United States, and afterwards confirmed by the legislatures of every State.’  The independence of the new States of Kentucky and Franklin, will soon bring on the ultimate decision of all these questions.

8.  Particular instances, whereby the General Assembly of Virginia have shown, that they considered the ordinance called their constitution, as every other ordinance, or act of the legislature, subject to be altered by the legislature for the time being.

1.  The convention which formed that constitution, declared themselves to be the House of Delegates, during the term for which they were originally elected, and, in the autumn of the year, met the Senate, elected under the new constitution, and did legislative business with them.  At this time, there were malefactors in the public jail, and there was, as yet, no court established for their trial.  They passed a law, appointing certain members by name, who were then members of the Executive Council, to be a court for the trial of these malefactors, though the constitution had said, in express words, that no person should exercise the powers of more than one of the three departments, legislative, executive, and judiciary, at the same time.  This proves, that the very men who had made that constitution, understood that it would be alterable by the General Assembly.  This court was only for that occasion.  When the next General Assembly met, after the election of the ensuing year, there was a new set of malefactors in the jail, and no court to try them.  This Assembly passed a similar law to the former, appointing certain members of the Executive Council to be an occasional court for this particular case.  Not having the journals of Assembly by me, I am unable to say whether this measure was repealed afterwards.  However, they are instances of executive and judiciary powers exercised by the same persons, under the authority of a law, made in contradiction to the constitution.