George Mason, "it was necessary that the great rights of human nature should be secure from the encroachments of the legislature . . . Unless there were a bill of rights, implication might swallow up all our rights.", Jume 14, 1788

   "Mr. GEORGE MASON still thought that there ought to be some express declaration in the Constitution, asserting that rights not given to the general government were retained by the states. He apprehended that, unless this was done, many valuable and important rights would be concluded to be given up by implication. All governments were drawn from the people, though many were perverted to their oppression. The government of Virginia, he remarked, was drawn from the people; yet there were certain great and important rights, which the people, by their bill of rights, declared to be paramount to the power of the legislature. He asked, Why should it not be so in this Constitution? Was it because we were more substantially represented in it than in the state government? If, in the state government, where the people were substantially and fully represented, it was necessary that the great rights of human nature should [Pg. 445] be secure from the encroachments of the legislature, he asked if it was not more necessary in this government, where they were but inadequately represented? He declared that artful sophistry and evasions could not satisfy him. He could see no clear distinction between rights relinquished by a positive grant, and lost by implication. Unless there were a bill of rights, implication might swallow up all our rights."--Jume 14, 1788, The Debates In The Convention Of The State Of Virginia, On The Adoption Of The Federal Constitution. [Elliot's Debates, Vol. III, Pg. 445]