The Debates in
the Federal Convention of 1787
|
|
|
As Recorded by James
Madison |
Return to
Federal Debates Calendar
TUESDAY
JULY 25.
IN CONVENTION
1 Clause relating to the
Executive 2 again under
consideration.
Mr. ELSEWORTH moved "that the
Executive be appointed by the Legislature," except when the
magistrate last chosen shall have continued in office the whole term
for which he was chosen, & be reeligible, in which case the choice
shall be by Electors appointed by the Legislatures of the States for
that purpose." By this means a deserving magistrate may be reelected
without making him dependent on the Legislature.
3
Mr. GERRY repeated his remark
that an election at all by the Natl. Legislature was radically and
incurably wrong; and moved that the Executive be appointed by the
Governours & Presidents of the States, with advice of their
Councils, and where there are no Councils by Electors chosen by the
Legislatures. The executives to vote in the following proportions:
viz —
Mr. MADISON. There are
objections agst. every mode that has been, or perhaps can be
proposed. The election must be made either by some existing
authority under the Natil. or State Constitutions — or by some
special authority derived from the people — or by the people
themselves. — The two Existing authorities under the Natl.
Constitution wd. be the Legislative & Judiciary. The latter he
presumed was out of the question. The former was in his Judgment
liable to insuperable objections. Besides the general influence of
that mode on the independence of the Executive, 1.
4 the election of the Chief Magistrate would
agitate & divide the legislature so much that the public interest
would materially suffer by it. Public bodies are always apt to be
thrown into contentions, but into more violent ones by such
occasions than by any others. 2. 5
the candidate would intrigue with the Legislature, would derive his
appointment from the predominant faction, and be apt to render his
administration subservient to its views. 3. 6
The Ministers of foreign powers would have and
7 make use of, the opportunity to mix their intrigues
& influence with the Election. Limited as the powers of the
Executive are, it will be an object of great moment with the great
rival powers of Europe who have American possessions, to have at the
head of our Governmt. a man attached to their respective politics &
interests. No pains, nor perhaps expense, will be spared, to gain
from the Legislature an appointmt. favorable to their wishes.
Germany & Poland are witnesses of this danger. In the former, the
election of the Head of the Empire, till it became in a manner
hereditary, interested all Europe, and was much influenced by
foreign interference. In the latter, altho' the elective Magistrate
has very little real power, his election has at all times produced
the most eager interference of forign princes, and has in fact at
length slid entirely into foreign hands. The existing authorities in
the States are the Legislative, Executive & Judiciary. The
appointment of the Natl. Executive by the first, was objectionable
in many points of view, some of which had been already mentioned. He
would mention one which of itself would decide his opinion. The
Legislatures of the States had betrayed a strong propensity to a
variety of pernicious measures. One object of the Natl. Legislre.
was to controul this propensity. One object of the Natl. Executive,
so far as it would have a negative on the laws, was to controul the
Natl. Legislature, so far as it might be infected with a similar
propensity. Refer the appointmt. of the Natl. Executive to the State
Legislatures, and this controuling purpose may be defeated. The
Legislatures can & will act with some kind of regular plan, and will
promote the appointmt. of a man who will not oppose himself to a
favorite object. Should a majority of the Legislatures at the time
of election have the same object, or different objects of the same
kind, The Natl. Executive would be rendered subservient to them. —
An appointment by the State Executives, was liable among other
objections to this insuperable one, that being standing bodies, they
could & would be courted, and intrigued with by the Candidates, by
their partizans, and by the Ministers of foreign powers. The State
Judiciarys had not 8 & he
presumed wd. not be proposed as a proper source of appointment. The
option before us then lay between an appointment by Electors chosen
by the people — and an immediate appointment by the people. He
thought the former mode free from many of the objections which had
been urged agst. it, and greatly preferable to an appointment by the
Natl. Legislature. As the electors would be chosen for the occasion,
would meet at once, & proceed immediately to an appointment, there
would be very little opportunity for cabal, or corruption. As a
farther precaution, it might be required that they should meet at
some place, distinct from the seat of Govt. and even that no person
within a certain distance of the place at the time shd. be eligible.
This Mode however had been rejected so recently & by so great a
majority that it probably would not be proposed anew. The remaining
mode was an election by the people or rather by the qualified part
of them, at large: With all its imperfections he liked this best. He
would not repeat either the general argumts. for or the objections
agst. this mode. He would only take notice of two difficulties which
he admitted to have weight. The first arose from the disposition in
the people to prefer a Citizen of their own State, and the
disadvantage this wd. throw on the smaller States. Great as this
objection might be he did not think it equal to such as lay agst.
every other mode which had been proposed. He thought too that some
expedient might be hit upon that would obviate it. The second
difficulty arose from the disproportion of qualified voters in the
N. & S. States, and the disadvantages which this mode would throw on
the latter. The answer to this objection was 1.
9 that this disproportion would be continually
decreasing under the influence of the Republican laws introduced in
the S. States, and the more rapid increase of their population. 2.
10 That local considerations
must give way to the general interest. As an individual from the S.
States he was willing to make the sacrifice.
Mr. ELSEWORTH. The objection
drawn from the different sizes of the States, is unanswerable. The
Citizens of the largest States would invariably prefer the Candidate
within the State; and the largest States wd. invariably have the
man.
11 Question on Mr.
Elseworth's motion as above.
N. H. ay. Mas. no. Ct ay. N. J. no. Pa. ay. Del. no. Md. ay. Va.
no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no. 12
Mr. PINKNEY moved that the
election by the Legislature be qualified with a proviso that no
person be eligible for more than 6 years in any twelve years. He
thought this would have all the advantage & at the same time avoid
in some degree the inconveniency, 13
of an absolute ineligibility a 2d. time.
Col. MASON approved the idea. It had the
sanction of experience in the instance of Congs. and some of the
Executives of the States. It rendered the Executive as effectually
independent, as an ineligibility after his first election, and
opened the way at the same time for the advantage of his future
services. He preferred on the whole the election by the Nati.
Legislature: Tho' Candor obliged him to admit, that there was great
danger of foreign influence, as had been suggested. This was the
most serious objection with him that had been urged.
Mr. BUTLER. The two great evils
to be avoided are cabal at home, & influence from abroad. It will be
difficult to avoid either if the Election be made by the Natl.
Legislature. On the other hand: The Govt. should not be made so
complex & unwieldy as to disgust the States. This would be the case,
if the election shd. be referred to the people. He liked best an
election by Electors chosen by the Legislatures of the States. He
was agst. are — eligibility at all events. He was also agst. a ratio
of votes in the States. An equality should prevail in this case. The
reasons for departing from it do not hold in the case of the
Executive as in that of the Legislature.
Mr. GERRY approved of Mr.
Pinkney's motion as lessening the evil.
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
was agst. a rotation in every case. It formed a political School, in
wch we were always governed by the scholars, and not by the Masters.
The evils to be guarded agst. in this case are 1.
14 the undue influence of the Legislature. 2.
14 instability of Councils. 3.
14 misconduct in office. To
guard agst. the first, we run into the second evil. We adopt a
rotation which produces instability of Councils. To avoid Sylla we
fall into Charibdis. A change of men is ever followed by a change of
measures. We see this fully exemplified in the vicissitudes among
ourselves, particularly in the State of Pena. The self-sufficiency
of a victorious party scorns to tread in the paths of their
predecessors. Rehoboam will not imitate Soloman. 2.
15 the Rotation in office will not prevent
intrigue and dependence on the Legislature. The man in office will
look forward to the period at which he will become re-eligible. The
distance of the period, the improbability of such a protraction of
his life will be no obstacle. Such is the nature of man, formed by
his benevolent author no doubt for wise ends, that altho' he knows
his existence to be limited to a span, he takes his measures as if
he were to live for ever. But taking another supposition, the
inefficacy of the expedient will be manifest. If the magistrate does
not look forward to his re-election to the Executive, he will be
pretty sure to keep in view the opportunity of his going into the
Legislature itself. He will have little objection then to an
extension of power on a theatre where he expects to act a
distinguished part; and will be very unwilling to take any step that
may endanger his popularity with the Legislature, on his influence
over which the figure he is to make will depend. 3.
16 To avoid the third evil, impeachments will
be essential, and hence an additional reason agst. an election by
the Legislature. He considered an election by the people as the
best, by the Legislature as the worst, mode. Putting both these
aside, he could not but favor the idea of Mr. Wilson, of introducing
a mixture of lot. It will diminish, if not destroy both cabal &
dependence.
Mr. WILLIAMSON was sensible
that strong objections lay agst. an election of the Executive by the
Legislature, and that it opened a door for foreign influence. The
principal objection agst. an election by the people seemed to be,
the disadvantage under which it would place the smaller States. He
suggested as a cure for this difficulty, that each man should vote
for 3 candidates, One of these 17
he observed would be probably of his own State, the other 2. of some
other States; and as probably of a small as a large one.
Mr. GOVr. MORRIS
liked the idea, suggesting as an amendment that each man should vote
for two persons one of whom at least should not be of his own State.
Mr. MADISON also thought
something valuable might be made of the suggestion with the proposed
amendment of it. The second best man in this case would probably be
the first, in fact. The only objection which occurred was that each
Citizen after havg. given his vote for his favorite fellow Citizen,
wd. throw away his second on some obscure Citizen of another State,
in order to ensure the object of his first choice. But it could
hardly be supposed that the Citizens of many States would be so
sanguine of having their favorite elected, as not to give their
second vote with sincerity to the next object of their choice. It
might moreover be provided in favor of the smaller States that the
Executive should not be eligible more than times in years from the
same State.
Mr. GERRY. A popular election
in this case is radically vicious. The ignorance of the people would
put it in the power of some one set of men dispersed through the
Union & acting in Concert to delude them into any appointment. He
observed that such a Society of men existed in the Order of the
Cincinnati. They are respectable, United, and influencial. They will
in fact elect the chief Magistrate in every instance, if the
election be referred to the people. His respect for the characters
composing this Society could not blind him to the danger &
impropriety of throwing such a power into their hands.
Mr. DICKENSON. As far as he
could judge from the discussions which had taken place during his
attendance, insuperable objections lay agst. an election of the
Executive by the Natl. Legislature; as also by the Legislatures or
Executives of the States. He had long leaned towards an election by
the people which he regarded as the best & purest source. Objections
he was aware lay agst. this mode, but not so great he thought as
agst. the other modes. The greatest difficulty in the opinion of the
House seemed to arise from the partiality of the States to their
respective Citizens. But, might not this very partiality be turned
to a useful purpose. Let the people of each State chuse its best
Citizen. The people will know the most eminent characters of their
own States, and the people of different States will feel an
emulation in selecting those of which 18
they will have the greatest reason to be proud. Out of the thirteen
names thus selected, an Executive Magistrate may be chosen either by
the Natl. Legislature, or by Electors appointed by it.
On a Question which was moved for postponing Mr. Pinkney's
motion; in order to make way for some such proposition as had been
hinted by Mr. Williamson & others: it passed in the negative.
N. H. no. Mas. no. Ct. ay. N. J. ay. Pa. ay. Del. no. Md. ay. Va.
ay. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no. 19
On Mr. Pinkney's motion that no person shall serve in the
Executive more than 6 years in 12. years, it passed in the negative.
N. H. ay. Mas. ay. Ct. no. N. J. no. Pa. no. Del. no. Md. no. Va.
no. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay. 20
On a motion that the members of the Committee be furnished with
copies of the proceedings it was so determined; S. Carolina alone
being in the negative.
It was then moved that the members of the House might take copies
of the Resolions which had been agreed to; which passed in the
negative. N. H. no. Mas. no. Con: ay. N. J. ay. Pa. no. Del. ay.
Maryd. no. Va. ay. N. C. ay. S. C. no. Geo. no.
21
Mr. GERRY & Mr. BUTLER
moved to refer the resolution relating to the Executive (except the
clause making it consist of a single person) to the Committee of
detail.
Mr. WILSON hoped that so
important a branch of the System wd. not be committed untill a
general principle shd. be fixed by a vote of the House.
Mr. LANGDON, was for the
Commitment — Adjd.
1. The word "The" is here
inserted in the transcript.
2. The word "being" is here
inserted in the transcript.
3. The transcript italicizes the
phrase "making him dependent on the Legislature."
4. The figure "1" is changed to
"In the first place" in the transcript.
5. The figure "2" is changed to
"In the second place" in the transcript.
6. The figure "3" is changed to
"In the third place" in the transcript.
7. The word "would" is here
inserted in the transcript.
8. The word "been" is here
inserted in the transcript.
9. The figure "1" is changed to
"in the first place" in the transcript.
10. The figure "2" is changed to
"in the second place" in the transcript.
11. The words "On the" are here
inserted in the transcript.
12. In the transcript the vote
reads: "New Hampshire, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, aye — 4:
Massachusetts, New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, no — 7."
13. The word "inconveniency" is
changed to "inconvenience" in the transcript.
14. The figures "1," "2" and "3"
are changed to "first," "secondly" and "thirdly" in the transcript.
15. The figure "2" is changed to
"Secondly" in the transcript.
16. The figure "3" is changed to
"Finally" in the transcript.
17. The word "them" is
substituted in the transcript for "these."
18. The word "whom" is
substituted in the transcript for "which."
19 In the transcript the vote
reads: "Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia,
aye — 5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Delaware, North Carolina,
South Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no — 6."
20. In the transcript the vote
reads: "New Hampshire, Massachusetts, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Georgia, aye — 5; Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, no — 6."
21. In the transcript the vote
reads: "Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina,
aye — 5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Maryland, South
Carolina, Georgia, no — 6."