The Debates in
the Federal Convention of 1787
|
|
|
As Recorded by James
Madison |
Return to
Federal Debates Calendar
FRIDAY
JUNE 1st
1787
William Houston from Georgia took his seat.
The Committee of the whole proceeded to Resolution 7.
1 "that a national Executive be
instituted, to be chosen by the national Legislature — for the term
of ______ years &c to be ineligible thereafter, to possess the
executive powers of Congress &c."
Mr. PINKNEY was for a vigorous
Executive but was afraid the Executive powers of the existing
Congress might extend to peace & war &c., which would render the
Executive a monarchy, of the worst kind, to wit an elective one.
Mr. WILSON moved that the
Executive consist of a single person.
Mr. C PINKNEY seconded the
motion, so as to read "that a National Ex. to consist of a single
person, be instituted.
A considerable pause ensuing and the Chairman asking if he should
put the question, DOCr. FRANKLIN
observed that it was a point of great importance and wished that the
gentlemen would deliver their sentiments on it before the question
was put.
Mr. RUTLIDGE animadverted on
the shyness of gentlemen on this and other subjects. He said it
looked as if they supposed themselves precluded by having frankly
disclosed their opinions from afterwards changing them, which he did
not take to be at all the case. He said he was for vesting the
Executive power in a single person, tho' he was not for giving him
the power of war and peace. A single man would feel the greatest
responsibility and administer the public affairs best.
Mr. SHERMAN said he considered
the Executive magistracy as nothing more than an institution for
carrying the will of the Legislature into effect, that the person or
persons ought to be appointed by and accountable to the Legislature
only, which was the depositary of the supreme will of the Society.
As they were the best judges of the business which ought to be done
by the Executive department, and consequently of the number
necessary from time to time for doing it, he wished the number might
not be fixed but that the legislature should be at liberty to
appoint one or more as experience might dictate.
Mr. WILSON preferred a single
magistrate, as giving most energy dispatch and responsibility to the
office. He did not consider the Prerogatives of the British Monarch
as a proper guide in defining the Executive powers. Some of these
prerogatives were of Legislative nature. Among others that of war &
peace &c. The only powers he conceived 2
strictly Executive were those of executing the laws, and appointing
officers, not appertaining to and appointed by the Legislature.
Mr. GERRY favored the policy of
annexing a Council to the Executive in order to give weight &
inspire confidence. Mr. RANDOLPH
strenuously opposed a unity in the Executive magistracy. He regarded
it as the foetus of monarchy. We had he said no motive to be
governed by the British Governmt. as our prototype. He did not mean
however to throw censure on that Excellent fabric. If we were in a
situation to copy it he did not know that he should be opposed to
it; but the fixt genius of the people of America required a
different form of Government. He could not see why the great
requisites for the Executive department, vigor, despatch &
responsibility could not be found in three men, as well as in one
man. The Executive ought to be independent. It ought therefore in
order to support its independence to consist of more than one.
Mr. WILSON said that unity in
the Executive instead of being the fetus of monarchy would be the
best safeguard against tyranny. He repeated that he was not governed
by the British Model which was inapplicable to the situation of this
Country; the extent of which was so great, and the manners so
republican, that nothing but a great confederated Republic would do
for it. Mr. Wilson's motion for a single magistrate was postponed by
common consent, the Committee seeming unprepared for any decision on
it; and the first part of the clause agreed to, viz — "that a
National Executive be instituted."
Mr. MADISON thought it would be
proper, before a choice shd. be made between a unity and a plurality
in the Executive, to fix the extent of the Executive authority; that
as certain powers were in their nature Executive, and must be given
to that departmt. whether administered by one or more persons, a
definition of their extent would assist the judgment in determining
how far they might be safely entrusted to a single officer. He
accordingly moved that so much of the clause before the Committee as
related to the powers of the Executive shd. be struck out & that
after the words "that a national Executive ought to be instituted"
there be inserted the words following viz. "with power to carry into
effect the national laws, to appoint to offices in cases not
otherwise provided for, and to execute such other powers "not
Legislative nor Judiciary in their nature," as may from time to time
be delegated by the national Legislature." The words "not
legislative nor judiciary in their nature" were added to the
proposed amendment in consequence of a suggestion by Genl. Pinkney
that improper powers might otherwise be delegated.
Mr. WILSON seconded this motion
—
Mr. PINKNEY moved to amend the
amendment by striking out the last member of it; viz: "and to
execute such other powers not Legislative nor Judiciary in their
nature as may from time to time be delegated." He said they were
unnecessary, the object of them being included in the "power
3 to carry into effect the
national laws."
Mr. RANDOLPH seconded the
motion.
Mr. MADISON did not know that
the words were absolutely necessary, or even the preceding words —
"to appoint to offices &c. the whole being perhaps included in the
first member of the proposition. He did not however see any
inconveniency 4 in retaining
them, and cases might happen in which they might serve to prevent
doubts and misconstructions.
In consequence of the motion of Mr. Pinkney, the question on Mr.
Madison's motion was divided; and the words objected to by Mr.
Pinkney struck out; by the votes of Connecticut, N. Y. N. J. Pena.
Del. N. C. & Geo. 5 agst. Mass.
Virga. & S. Carolina 5 the
preceding part of the motion being first agreed to; Connecticut
divided, all the other States in the affirmative. The next clause in
Resolution 7, 6 relating to the
mode of appointing, & the duration of, the Executive being under
consideration,
Mr. WILSON said he was almost
unwilling to declare the mode which he wished to take place, being
apprehensive that it might appear chimerical. He would say however
at least that in theory he was for an election by the people.
Experience, particularly in N. York & Massts., shewed that an
election of the first magistrate by the people at large, was both a
convenient & successful mode. The objects of choice in such cases
must be persons whose merits have general notoriety.
Mr. SHERMAN was for the
appointment by the Legislature, and for making him absolutely
dependent on that body, as it was the will of that which was to be
executed. An independence of the Executive on the supreme
Legislature, was in his opinion the very essence of tyranny if there
was any such thing.
Mr. WILSON moves that the blank
for the term of duration should be filled with three years,
observing at the same time that he preferred this short period, on
the supposition that a reeligibility would be provided for.
Mr. PINKNEY moves for seven
years.
Mr. SHERMAN was for three
years, and agst. the doctrine of rotation as throwing out of office
the men best qualifyed to execute its duties.
Mr. MASON was for seven years
at least, and for prohibiting a re-eligibility as the best expedient
both for preventing the effect of a false complaisance on the side
of the Legislature towards unfit characters; and a temptation on the
side of the Executive to intrigue with the Legislature for a
re-appointment.
Mr. BEDFORD was strongly
opposed to so long a term as seven years. He begged the committee to
consider what the situation of the Country would be, in case the
first magistrate should be saddled on it for such a period and it
should be found on trial that he did not possess the qualifications
ascribed to him, or should lose them after his appointment. An
impeachment he said would be no cure for this evil, as an
impeachment would reach misfeasance only, not incapacity. He was for
a triennial election, and for an ineligibility after a period of
nine years.
On the question for seven years, 7
Massts. dividd. Cont. no. N. Y. ay. N. J. ay. Pena. ay. Del. ay.
Virga. ay. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geor. no. 8
There being 5ays, 4 noes, 1 divd., a question was asked whether a
majority had voted in the affirmative? The President decided that it
was an affirmative vote.
The mode of appointing the Executive was the next
question.
Mr. WILSON renewed his
declarations in favor of an appointment by the people. He wished to
derive not only both branches of the Legislature from the people,
without the intervention of the State Legislatures but the Executive
also; in order to make them as independent as possible of each
other, as well as of the States;
Col. MASON favors the idea, but thinks it
impracticable. He wishes however that Mr. Wilson might have time to
digest it into his own form. — the clause "to be chosen by the
National Legislature" — was accordingly postponed. —
Mr. RUTLIDGE suggests an
election of the Executive by the second branch only of the national
Legislature.
The Committee then rose and the House
Adjourned.
1. The words "the seventh
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "Resolution 7' and
the words of the resolution are italicized.
2. The transcript here
substitutes the word "considered" for "conceived."
3. The transcript uses the word
"power" in the plural.
4. The transcript changes the
word "inconveniency" to "inconvenience."
5. In the transcript the figures
"7" and "3" are inserted after the States Georgia and South Carolina
respectively.
6. The words "the seventh
Resolution" are substituted in the transcript for "Resolution 7."
7. The transcript italicizes the
phrase "for seven years."
8. In the transcript the vote
reads: "New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, aye
— 5; Connecticut, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no — 4;
Massachusetts, divided."