Chapter II: Front Matter (2)

M^r Elseworth would prefer a negative in the Executive on a nomination by the 2^d branch, the negative to be overruled by a concurrence of 2/3 of the 2^d b. to the mode proposed by the motion; but preferred an absolute appointment by the 2^d branch to either. The Executive will be regarded by the people with a jealous eye. Every power for augmenting unnecessarily his influence will be disliked. As he will be stationary it was not to be supposed he could have a better knowledge of characters. He will be more open to caresses & intrigues than the Senate. The right to supersede his nomination will be ideal only. A nomination under such circumstances will be equivalent to an appointment.

M^r Gov^r Morris supported the motion. 1. The States in their corporate capacity will frequently have an interest staked on the determination of the Judges. As in the Senate the States are to vote the Judges ought not to be appointed by the Senate. Next to the impropriety of being Judge in one's own cause, is the appointment of the Judge. 2. It had been said the Executive would be uninformed of characters. The reverse was y^e truth. The Senate will be so. They must take the character of candidates from the flattering pictures drawn by their friends. The Executive in the necessary intercourse with every part of the U. S. required by the nature of his administration, will or may have the best possible information. 3. It had been said that a jealousy would be entertained of the Executive. If the Executive can be safely trusted with the command of the army, there cannot surely be any reasonable ground of Jealousy in the present case. He added that if the Objections ag^{st} an appointment of the Executive by the Legislature, had the weight that had been allowed there must be some weight in the objection to an appointment of the Judges by the Legislature or by any part of it.

M^r Gerry. The appointment of the Judges like every other part of the Constitution sh^d be so modelled as to give satisfaction both to the people and to the States. The mode under consideration will give satisfaction to neither. He could not conceive that the Executive could be as well informed of characters throughout the Union, as the Senate. It appeared to him also a strong objection that 2/3 of the Senate were required to reject a nomination of the Executive. The Senate would be constituted in the same manner as Congress. And the appointments of Congress have been generally good.

M^r Madison, observed that he was not anxious that 2/3 should be necessary to disagree to a nomination. He had given this form to his motion chiefly to vary it the more clearly from one which had just been rejected. He was content to obviate the objection last made, and accordingly so varied the motion as to let a majority reject.

Col. Mason found it his duty to differ from his colleagues in their opinions & reasonings on this subject. Notwithstanding the form of the proposition by which the appointment seemed to be divided between the Executive & Senate, the appointment was Substantially vested in the former alone. The false complaisance which usually prevails in such cases will prevent a disagreement to the first nominations. He considered the appointment by the Executive as a dangerous prerogative. It might even give him an influence over the Judiciary department itself. He did not think the difference of interest between the Northern and Southern States could be properly brought into this argument. It would operate & require some precautions in the case of regulating navigation, commerce & imposts; but he could not see that it had any connection with the Judiciary department.

On the question, the motion now being "that the executive should nominate & such nominations should become appointments unless disagreed to by the Senate"

Mass. ay. C^t no. P^a ay. Del. no. M^d no. V^a ay. N. C. no.
S. C. no. Geo. no.

On question for agreeing to the clause as it stands by which the Judges are to be appointed by the 2^d branch

Mass. no. C^t ay. P^a no. Del. ay. M^d ay. V^a no. N. C. ay.
S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

Adjourned.

MONDAY JULY 23. IN CONVENTION

M^r John Langdon & M^r Nicholas Gilman[5] from N. Hampshire,[6] took their seats.

[5] M^r Gilman is modest, genteel, and sensible. There is
nothing brilliant or striking in his character, but there is
something respectable and worthy in the man.--About 30 years
of age."--Pierce's Notes, _Am. Hist. Rev._, iii., 325.

He did not speak in the convention.

[6] The act appointing deputies to the convention was not passed
by the New Hampshire Legislature till June 27,
1787.--_Journal of Federal Convention_, 17.

Resol:^n 17. that provision ought to be made for future amendments of the Articles of Union, agreed to, nem. con.

Resol^n 18. "requiring the Legis: Execut: & Jud^y of the States to be bound by oath to support the articles of Union," taken into consideration.

M^r Williamson suggests that a reciprocal oath should be required from the National officers, to support the Governments of the States.

M^r Gerry moved to insert as an amendm^t that the oath of the officers of the National Government also should extend to the support of the Nat^l Gov^t which was agreed to nem. con.

M^r Wilson said he was never fond of oaths, considering them as a left handed security only. A good Gov^t did not need them, and a bad one could not or ought not to be supported. He was afraid they might too much trammel the members of the existing Gov^t in case future alterations should be necessary; and prove an obstacle to Resol: 17. just ag^d to.

M^r Ghorum did not know that oaths would be of much use; but could see no inconsistency between them and the 17. Resol. or any regular amend^t of the Constitution. The oath could only require fidelity to the existing Constitution. A constitutional alteration of the Constitution, could never be regarded as a breach of the Constitution, or of any oath to support it.

M^r Gerry thought with M^r Ghorum there could be no shadow of inconsistency in the case. Nor could he see any other harm that could result from the Resolution. On the other side he thought one good effect would be produced by it. Hitherto the officers of the two Governments had considered them as distinct from, and not as parts of the General System, & had in all cases of interference given a preference to the State Gov^{ts}. The proposed oath will cure that error.

The Resol^n (18) was agreed to nem. con.

Resol: 19. referring the new Constitution to Assemblies to be chosen by the people for the express purpose of ratifying it was next taken into consideration.

M^r Elseworth moved that it be referred to the Legislatures of the States for ratification. M^r Patterson 2^{ded} the motion.

Col. Mason considered a reference of the plan to the authority of the people as one of the most important and essential of the Resolutions. The Legislatures have no power to ratify it. They are the mere creatures of the State Constitutions, and cannot be greater than their creators. And he knew of no power in any of the Constitutions, he knew there was no power in some of them, that could be competent to this object. Whither then must we resort? To the people with whom all power remains that has not been given up in the Constitutions derived from them. It was of great moment he observed that this doctrine should be cherished as the basis of free Government. Another strong reason was that admitting the Legislatures to have a competent authority, it would be wrong to refer the plan to them, because succeeding Legislatures having equal authority could undo the acts of their predecessors; and the National Gov^t would stand in each State on the weak and tottering foundation of an Act of Assembly. There was a remaining consideration of some weight. In some of the States the Gov^{ts} were not derived from the clear & undisputed authority of the people. This was the case in Virginia. Some of the best & wisest citizens considered the Constitution as established by an assumed authority. A national Constitution derived from such a source would be exposed to the severest criticisms.

M^r Randolph. One idea has pervaded all our proceedings, to wit, that opposition as well from the States as from individuals, will be made to the System to be proposed. Will it not then be highly imprudent, to furnish any unnecessary pretext by the mode of ratifying it. Added to other objections ag^{st} a ratification by the Legislative authority only, it may be remarked that there have been instances in which the authority of the Common law has been set up in particular States ag^{st} that of the Confederation which has had no higher sanction than Legislative ratification.--Whose opposition will be most likely to be excited ag^{st} the System? That of the local demagogues who will be degraded by it from the importance they now hold. These will spare no efforts to impede that progress in the popular mind which will be necessary to the adoption of the plan, and which every member will find to have taken place in his own, if he will compare his present opinions with those brought with him into the Convention. It is of great importance therefore that the consideration of this subject should be transferred from the Legislatures where this class of men, have their full influence to a field in which their efforts can be less mischievous. It is moreover worthy of consideration that some of the States are averse to any change in their Constitution, and will not take the requisite steps, unless expressly called upon to refer the question to the people.

M^r Gerry. The arguments of Col. Mason & M^r Randolph prove too much. They prove an unconstitutionality in the present federal system & even in some of the State Gov^{ts}. Inferences drawn from such a source must be inadmissible. Both the State Gov^{ts} & the federal Gov^t have been too long acquiesced in, to be now shaken. He considered the Confederation to be paramount to any State Constitution. The last article of it authorizing alterations must consequently be so as well as the others, and every thing done in pursuance of the article must have the same high authority with the article. Great confusion he was confident would result from a recurrence to the people. They would never agree on any thing. He could not see any ground to suppose that the people will do what their rulers will not. The rulers will either conform to, or influence the sense of the people.

M^r Ghorum was ag^{st} referring the plan to the Legislatures. 1. Men chosen by the people for the particular purpose, will discuss the subject more candidly than members of the Legislature who are to lose the power which is to be given up to the Gen^l Gov^t. 2. Some of the Legislatures are composed of several branches. It will consequently be more difficult in these cases to get the plan through the Legislatures, than thro' a Convention. 3. in the States many of the ablest men are excluded from the Legislatures, but may be elected into a convention. Among these may be ranked many of the Clergy who are generally friends to good Government. Their services were found to be valuable in the formation & establishment of the Constitution of Massach^{ts}. 4. the Legislatures will be interrupted with a variety of little business, by artfully pressing which designing men will find means to delay from year to year, if not to frustrate altogether the national system. 5. If the last art: of the Confederation is to be pursued the unanimous concurrence of the States will be necessary. But will any one say, that all the States are to suffer themselves to be ruined, if Rho. Island should persist in her opposition to general measures. Some other States might also tread in her steps. The present advantage which N. York seems to be so much attached to, of taxing her neighbours by the regulation of her trade, makes it very probable, that she will be of the number. It would therefore deserve serious consideration whether provision ought not to be made for giving effect to the System without waiting for the unanimous concurrence of the States.

M^r Elseworth. If there be any Legislatures who should find themselves incompetent to the ratification, he should be content to let them advise with their constituents and pursue such a mode as w^d be competent. He thought more was to be expected from the Legislatures than from the people. The prevailing wish of the people in the Eastern States is to get rid of the public debt; and the idea of strengthening the Nat^l Gov^t carries with it that of strengthening the public debt. It was said by Col. Mason 1. that the Legislatures have no authority in this case. 2. that their successors having equal authority could rescind their acts. As to the 2^d point he could not admit it to be well founded. An Act to which the States by their Legislatures, make themselves parties, becomes a compact from which no one of the parties can recede of itself. As to the 1^{st} point, he observed that a new sett of ideas seemed to have crept in since the articles of Confederation were established. Conventions of the people, or with power derived expressly from the people, were not then thought of. The Legislatures were considered as competent. Their ratification has been acquiesced in without complaint. To whom have Cong^s applied on subsequent occasions for further powers? To the Legislatures; not to the people. The fact is that we exist at present, and we need not enquire how, as a federal Society, united by a charter one article of which is that alterations therein may be made by the Legislative authority of the States. It has been said that if the confederation is to be observed, the States must _unanimously_ concur in the proposed innovations. He would answer that if such were the urgency & necessity of our situation as to warrant a new compact among a part of the States, founded on the consent of the people; the same pleas would be equally valid in favor of a partial compact, founded on the consent of the Legislatures.

M^r Williamson thought the Resol:^n (19) so expressed as that it might be submitted either to the Legislatures or to Conventions recommended by the Legislatures. He observed that some Legislatures were evidently unauthorized to ratify the system. He thought too that Conventions were to be preferred as more likely to be composed of the ablest men in the States.

M^r Gov^r Morris considered the inference of M^r Elseworth from the plea of necessity as applied to the establishment of a new System on y^e consent of the people of a part of the States, in favor of a like establishm^t on the consent of a part of the Legislatures, as a non sequitur. If the Confederation is to be pursued no alteration can be made without the unanimous consent of the Legislatures: Legislative alterations not conformable to the federal compact, would clearly not be valid. The Judges would consider them as null & void. Whereas in case of an appeal to the people of the U. S., the supreme authority, the federal compact may be altered by a _majority of them_; in like manner as the Constitution of a particular State may be altered by a majority of the people of the State. The amendm^t moved by M^r Elseworth erroneously supposes that we are proceeding on the basis of the Confederation. This Convention is unknown to the Confederation.

M^r King thought with M^r Elseworth that the Legislatures had a competent authority, the acquiescence of the people of America in the Confederation, being equivalent to a formal ratification by the people. He thought with M^r E. also that the plea of necessity was as valid in the one case as the other. At the same time he preferred a reference to the authority of the people expressly delegated to Conventions, as the most certain means of obviating all disputes & doubts concerning the legitimacy of the new Constitution; as well as the most likely means of drawing forth the best men in the States to decide on it. He remarked that among other objections made in the State of N. York to granting powers to Cong^s one had been that such powers as would operate within the State, could not be reconciled to the Constitution; and therefore were not grantible by the Legislative authority. He considered it as of some consequence also to get rid of the scruples which some members of the State Legislatures might derive from their oaths to support & maintain the existing Constitutions.

M^r Madison thought it clear that the Legislatures were incompetent to the proposed changes. These changes would make essential inroads on the State Constitutions, and it would be a novel & dangerous doctrine that a Legislature could change the constitution under which it held its existence. There might indeed be some Constitutions within the Union, which had given a power to the Legislature to concur in alterations of the federal Compact. But there were certainly some which had not; and in the case of these, a ratification must of necessity be obtained from the people. He considered the difference between a system founded on the Legislatures only, and one founded on the people, to be the true difference between a _league_ or _treaty_, and a _Constitution_. The former in point of _moral obligation_ might be as inviolable as the latter. In point of _political operation_, there were two important distinctions in favor of the latter. 1. A law violating a treaty ratified by a pre-existing law, might be respected by the Judges as a law, though an unwise or perfidious one. A law violating a constitution established by the people themselves, would be considered by the Judges as null & void. 2. The doctrine laid down by the law of Nations in the case of treaties is that a breach of any one article by any of the parties, frees the other parties from their engagements. In the case of a union of people under one Constitution, the nature of the pact has always been understood to exclude such an interpretation. Comparing the two modes in point of expediency he thought all the considerations which recommended this Convention in preference to Congress for proposing the reform were in favor of State Conventions in preference to the Legislatures for examining and adopting it.

On question on M^r Elseworth's motion to refer the plan to the Legislatures of the States

N. H. no. Mass. no. C^t ay. P^a no. Del. ay. M^d ay. V^a no.
N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no.

M^r Gov^r Morris moved that the reference of the plan be made to one general Convention, chosen & authorized by the people to consider, _amend_, & establish the same.--Not seconded.

On question for agreeing to Resolution 19. touching the mode of Ratification as reported from the Committee of the Whole; viz, to refer the Const^n, after the approbation of Cong^s to assemblies chosen by the people;

N. H. ay. Mass. ay. C^t ay. P^a ay. Del. no. M^d ay. V^a ay.
N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

M^r Gov^r Morris & M^r King moved that the representation in the second branch consist of ---- members from each State, who shall vote per capita.

M^r Elseworth said he had always approved of voting in that mode.

M^r Gov^r Morris moved to fill the _blank_ with _three_. He wished the Senate to be a pretty numerous body. If two members only should be allowed to each State, and a majority be made a quorum, the power would be lodged in 14 members, which was too small a number for such a trust.

M^r Ghorum preferred two to three members for the blank. A small number was most convenient for deciding on peace & war &c. which he expected would be vested in the 2^d branch. The number of States will also increase. Kentucky, Vermont, the Province of Mayne & Franklin will probably soon be added to the present number. He presumed also that some of the largest States would be divided. The strength of the General Gov^t will lie not in the largeness, but in the smallness of the States.

Col. Mason thought 3 from each State including new States would make the 2^d branch too numerous. Besides other objections, the additional expence ought always to form one, where it was not absolutely necessary.

M^r Williamson. If the number be too great, the distant States will not be on an equal footing with the nearer States. The latter can more easily send & support their ablest Citizens. He approved of the voting per capita.

On the question for filling the blank with "_three_"

N. H. no. Mass. no. Con^t no. P^a ay. Del. no. V^a no. N. C. no.
S. C. no. Geo. no.

On question for filling it with "two." Agreed to nem. con.

M^r L Martin was opposed to voting per Capita, as departing from the idea of the _States_ being represented in the 2^d branch.

M^r Carroll,[7] was not struck with any particular objection ag^{st} the mode; but he did not wish so hastily to make so material an innovation.

[7] "Mr. Carrol is a Man of large fortune, and influence in his
State. He possesses plain good sense, and is in the full
confidence of his Countrymen. This Gentleman is about
[blank] years of age."--Pierce's Notes, _Am. Hist. Rev._,
iii., 330.

On the question on the whole motion viz. the 2^d b. to consist of 2 members from each State and to vote per Capita,

N. H. ay. Mass. ay. C^t ay. P^a ay. Del. ay. M^d no. V^a ay. N.
C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

M^r Houston[8] & M^r Spaight moved "that the appointment of the Executive by Electors chosen by the Legislatures of the States, be reconsidered." M^r Houston urged the extreme inconveniency & the considerable expence, of drawing together men from all the States for the single purpose of electing the Chief Magistrate.

[8] "Mr. Houston is an Attorney at Law, and has been Member of
Congress for the State of Georgia. He is a Gentleman of
Family, and was educated in England. As to his legal or
political knowledge he has very little to boast of. Nature
seems to have done more for his corporeal than mental
powers. His Person is striking, but his mind very little
improved with useful or elegant knowledge. He has none of
the talents requisite for the Orator, but in public debate
is confused and irregular. Mr. Houston is about 30 years of
age of an amiable and sweet temper, and of good and
honorable principles."--Pierce's Notes, _Am. Hist. Rev._,
iii., 334.

On the question which was put without any debate

N. H. ay. Mass. ay. Ct. ay. P^a no. Del. ay. M^d no. Virg^a no.
N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

Ordered that tomorrow be assigned for the reconsideration, Con^t & Pen^a no--all the rest ay.

M^r Gerry moved that the proceedings of the Convention for the establishment of a Nat^l Gov^t (except the part relating to the Executive), be referred to a Committee to prepare & report a Constitution conformable thereto.

Gen^l Pinkney reminded the Convention that if the Committee should fail to insert some security to the Southern States ag^{st} an emancipation of slaves, and taxes on exports, he sh^d be bound by duty to his State to vote ag^{st} their Report. The app^t of a Com^e as moved by M^r Gerry. Ag^d to nem. con.

Shall the Com^e consist of 10 members one from each State pres^t--All the States were _no_, except Delaware, _ay_.

Shall it consist of 7. members

N. H. ay. Mas. ay. C^t ay. P^a no. Del. no. M^d ay. V^a no. N.
C. no. S. C. ay. Geo. no.

The question being lost by an equal division of Votes.

It was agreed, nem-con- that the Committee consist of 5 members to be appointed tomorrow.

Adjourned.

TUESDAY JULY 24. IN CONVENTION

The appointment of the Executive by Electors reconsidered.

M^r Houston moved that he be appointed by the "Nat^l Legislature," instead of "Electors appointed by the State Legislatures" according to the last decision of the mode. He dwelt chiefly on the improbability, that capable men would undertake the service of Electors from the more distant States.

M^r Spaight seconded the motion.

M^r Gerry opposed it. He thought there was no ground to apprehend the danger urged by M^r Houston. The election of the Executive Magistrate will be considered as of vast importance and will create great earnestness. The best men, the Governours of the States will not hold it derogatory from their character to be the electors. If the motion should be agreed to, it will be necessary to make the Executive ineligible a 2^d time, in order to render him independent of the Legislature; which was an idea extremely repugnant to his way of thinking.

M^r Strong supposed that there would be no necessity, if the Executive should be appointed by the Legislature, to make him ineligible a 2^d time; as new elections of the Legislature will have intervened; and he will not depend for his 2^d appointment on the same sett of men as his first was rec^d from. It had been suggested that _gratitude_ for his past appointment w^d produce the same effect as dependence for his future appointment. He thought very differently. Besides this objection would lie ag^{st} the Electors who would be objects of gratitude as well as the Legislature. It was of great importance not to make the Gov^t too complex which would be the case if a new sett of men like the Electors should be introduced into it. He thought also that the first characters in the States would not feel sufficient motives to undertake the office of Electors.

M^r Williamson was for going back to the original ground; to elect the Executive for 7 years and render him ineligible a 2^d time. The proposed Electors would certainly not be men of the 1^{st} nor even of the 2^d grade in the States. These would all prefer a seat either in the Senate or the other branch of the Legislature. He did not like the Unity in the Executive. He had wished the Executive power to be lodged in three men taken from three districts into which the States should be divided. As the Executive is to have a kind of veto on the laws, and there is an essential difference of interests between the N. & S. States, particularly in the carrying trade, the power will be dangerous, if the Executive is to be taken from part of the Union, to the part from which he is not taken. The case is different here from what it is in England; where there is a sameness of interests throughout the Kingdom. Another objection ag^{st} a single Magistrate is that he will be an elective King, and will feel the spirit of one. He will spare no pains to keep himself in for life, and will then lay a train for the succession of his children. It was pretty certain he thought that we should at some time or other have a King; but he wished no precaution to be omitted that might postpone the event as long as possible.--Ineligibility a 2^d time appeared to him to be the best precaution. With this precaution he had no objection to a longer term than 7 years. He would go as far as 10 or 12 years.

M^r Gerry moved that the Legislatures of the States should vote by ballot for the Executive in the same proportions as it had been proposed they should chuse electors; and that in case a majority of the votes should not centre on the same person, the 1^{st} branch of the Nat^l Legislature should chuse two out of the 4 candidates having most votes, and out of these two, the 2^d branch should chuse the Executive.

M^r King seconded the motion--and on the Question to postpone in order to take it into consideration. The _noes_ were so predominant, that the States were not counted.

Question on M^r Houston's motion that the Executive be app^d by the Na^l Legislature.

N. H. ay. Mass. ay. C^t no. N. J. ay. P^a no. Del. ay. M^d no.
V^a no. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

M^r L. Martin & M^r Gerry moved to re-instate the ineligibility of the Executive a 2^d time.

M^r Elseworth. With many this appears a natural consequence of his being elected by the Legislature. It was not the case with him. The Executive he thought should be reelected if his conduct proved him worthy of it. And he will be more likely to render himself, worthy of it if he be rewardable with it. The most eminent characters also, will be more willing to accept the trust under this condition, than if they foresee a necessary degradation at a fixt period.

M^r Gerry. That the Executive sh^d be independent of the Legislature is a clear point. The longer the duration of his appointment the more will his dependence be diminished. It will be better then for him to continue 10. 15. or even 20. years and be ineligible afterwards.

M^r King was for making him re-eligible. This is too great an advantage to be given up for the small effect it will have on his dependence, if impeachments are to lie. He considered these as rendering the tenure during pleasure.

M^r L. Martin, suspending his motion as to the ineligibility, moved "that the appointm^t of the Executive shall continue for Eleven years.

M^r Gerry suggested fifteen years.

M^r King twenty years. This is the medium life of princes.[9]

[9] This might possibly be meant as a carricature of the
previous motions in order to defeat the object of
them.--Madison's Note.

M^r Davie eight years.

M^r Wilson. The difficulties & perplexities into which the House is thrown proceed from the election by the Legislature which he was sorry had been reinstated. The inconveniency of this mode was such that he would agree to almost any length of time in order to get rid of the dependence which must result from it. He was persuaded that the longest term would not be equivalent to a proper mode of election, unless indeed it should be during good behaviour. It seemed to be supposed that at a certain advance of life, a continuance in office would cease to be agreeable to the officer, as well as desirable to the public. Experience had shewn in a variety of instances that both a capacity & inclination for public service existed in very advanced stages. He mentioned the instance of a Doge of Venice who was elected after he was 80 years of age. The Popes have generally been elected at very advanced periods, and yet in no case had a more steady or a better concerted policy been pursued than in the Court of Rome. If the Executive should come into office at 35 years of age, which he presumes may happen & his continuance should be fixt at 15 years, at the age of 50. in the very prime of life, and with all the aid of experience, he must be cast aside like a useless hulk. What an irreparable loss would the British Jurisprudence have sustained, had the age of 50. been fixt there as the ultimate limit of capacity or readiness to serve the public. The great luminary (L^d Mansfield) held his seat for thirty years after his arrival at that age. Notwithstanding what had been done he could not but hope that a better mode of election would yet be adopted; and one that would be more agreeable to the general sense of the House. That time might be given for further deliberation he w^d move that the present question be postponed till tomorrow.

M^r Broom seconded the motion to postpone.

M^r Gerry. We seem to be entirely at a loss on this head. He would suggest whether it would not be advisable to refer the clause relating to the Executive to the Committee of detail to be appointed. Perhaps they will be able to hit on something that may unite the various opinions which have been thrown out.

M^r Wilson. As the great difficulty seems to spring from the mode of election, he w^d suggest a mode which had not been mentioned. It was that the Executive be elected for 6 years by a small number, not more than 15 of the Nat^l Legislature, to be drawn from it, not by ballot, but by lot and who should retire immediately and make the election without separating. By this mode intrigue would be avoided in the first instance, and the dependence would be diminished. This was not he said a digested idea and might be liable to strong objections.

M^r Gov^r Morris. Of all possible modes of appointment that by the Legislature is the worst. If the Legislature is to appoint, and to impeach or to influence the impeachment, the Executive will be the mere creature of it. He had been opposed to the impeachment but was now convinced that impeachments must be provided for, if the app^t was to be of any duration. No man w^d say, that an Executive known to be in the pay of an Enemy, should not be removable in some way or other. He had been charged heretofore (by Col. Mason) with inconsistency in pleading for confidence in the Legislature on some occasions, & urging a distrust on others. The charge was not well founded. The Legislature is worthy of unbounded confidence in some respects, and liable to equal distrust in others. When their interest coincides precisely with that of their Constituents, as happens in many of their Acts, no abuse of trust is to be apprehended. When a strong personal interest happens to be opposed to the general interest, the Legislature cannot be too much distrusted. In all public bodies there are two parties. The Executive will necessarily be more connected with one than with the other. There will be a personal interest therefore in one of the parties to oppose as well as in the other to support him. Much had been said of the intrigues, that will be practised by the Executive to get into office. Nothing had been said on the other side of the intrigues to get him out of office. Some leader of a party will always covet his seat, will perplex his administration, will cabal with the Legislature, till he succeeds in supplanting him. This was the way in which the King of England was got out, he meant the real King, the Minister. This was the way in which Pitt (L^d Chatham) forced himself into place. Fox was for pushing the matter still farther. If he had carried his India bill, which he was very near doing, he would have made the Minister, the King in form almost as well as in substance. Our President will be the British Minister, yet we are about to make him appointable by the Legislature. Something had been said of the danger of Monarchy. If a good government should not now be formed, if a good organization of the Executive should not be provided, he doubted whether we should not have something worse than a limited monarchy. In order to get rid of the dependence of the Executive on the Legislature, the expedient of making him ineligible a 2^d time had been devised. This was as much as to say we sh^d give him the benefit of experience, and then deprive ourselves of the use of it. But make him ineligible a 2^d time--and prolong his duration even to 15 years, will he by any wonderful interposition of providence at that period cease to be a man? No he will be unwilling to quit his exaltation, the road to his object thro' the Constitution will be shut; he will be in possession of the sword, a civil war will ensue, and the Co[~m]ander of the victorious army on which ever side, will be the despot of America. This consideration renders him particularly anxious that the Executive should be properly constituted. The vice here would not, as in some other parts of the system be curable. It is the most difficult of all rightly to balance the Executive. Make him too weak: The Legislature will usurp his powers. Make him too strong. He will usurp on the Legislature. He preferred a short period, a re-eligibility, but a different mode of election. A long period would prevent an adoption of the plan: it ought to do so. He sh^d himself be afraid to trust it. He was not prepared to decide on M^r Wilson's mode of election just hinted by him. He thought it deserved consideration. It would be better that chance sh^d decide than intrigue.

On a question to postpone the consideration of the Resolution on the subject of the Executive

N. H. no. Mass. no. C^t ay. N. J. no. P^a ay. Del. div^d.
M^d ay. V^a ay. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no.

M^r Wilson then moved that the Executive be chosen every ---- years by ---- Electors to be taken by lot from the Nat^t Legislature who shall proceed immediately to the choice of the Executive and not separate until it be made."

M^r Carrol 2^{ds} the motion.

M^r Gerry. This is committing too much to chance. If the lot should fall on a sett of unworthy men, an unworthy Executive must be saddled on the Country. He thought it had been demonstrated that no possible mode of electing by the Legislature could be a good one.

M^r King. The lot might fall on a majority from the same State which w^d ensure the election of a man from that State. We ought to be governed by reason, not by chance. As nobody seemed to be satisfied, he wished the matter to be postponed.

M^r Wilson did not move this as the best mode. His opinion remained unshaken that we ought to resort to the people for the election. He seconded the postponement.

M^r Gov^r Morris observed that the chances were almost infinite ag^{st} a majority of Electors from the same State.

On a question whether the last motion was in order, it was determined in the affirmative: 7 ays. 4 noes.

On the question of postponem^t it was agreed to nem. con.

M^r Carrol took occasion to observe that he considered the clause declaring that direct taxation on the States should be in proportion to representation, previous to the obtaining an actual census, as very objectionable, and that he reserved to himself the right of opposing it, if the Report of the Committee of detail should leave it in the plan.

M^r Gov^r Morris hoped the Committee would strike out the whole of the clause proportioning direct taxation to representation. He had only meant it as a bridge[10] to assist us over a certain gulph; having passed the gulph the bridge may be removed. He thought the principle laid down with so much strictness, liable to strong objections.

[10] The object was to lessen the eagerness on one side, & the
opposition on the other, to the share of representation
claimed by the S. States on account of the
Negroes.--Madison's Note.

On a ballot for a Committee to report a Constitution conformable to the Resolutions passed by the Convention, the members chosen were

M^r Rutlidge, M^r Randolph, M^r Ghorum, M^r Elseworth, M^r Wilson--

On motion to discharge the Com^e of the whole from the propositions submitted to the Convention by M^r C. Pinkney as the basis of a constitution, and to refer them to the Committee of detail just appointed, it was ag^d to nem: con.

A like motion was then made & agreed to nem: con: with respect to the propositions of M^r Patterson.

Adjourned.

WEDNESDAY JULY 25. IN CONVENTION

Clause relating to the Executive being again under consideration[11]

[11] "Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise &
seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of
Foreigners into the administration of our national
Government; and to declare expressly that the command in
chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor
devolve on, any but a natural _born_ citizen."--John Jay to
Washington, July 25, 1787 (Wash. MSS.).

M^r 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.

M^r Gerry repeated his remark that an election at all by the Nat^l 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--

M^r Madison. There are objections ag^{st} every mode that has been, or perhaps can be proposed. The election must be made either by some existing authority under the Nat^l or State Constitutions--or by some special authority derived from the people--or by the people themselves.--The two Existing authorities under the Nat^l Constitution w^d 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. 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. 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. The Ministers of foreign powers would have and would 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 Governm^t a man attached to their respective politics & interests. No pains, nor perhaps expence, will be spared, to gain from the Legislature an appointm^t 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 foreign 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 Nat^l 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 Nat^l Legisl^{re} was to controul this propensity. One object of the Nat^l Executive, so far as it would have a negative on the laws, was to controul the Nat^l Legislature so far as it might be infected with a similar propensity. Refer the appointm^t of the Nat^l 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 appointm^t 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 Nat^l 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 Judiciary had not & he presumed w^d 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 ag^{st} it, and greatly preferable to an appointment by the Nat^l 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 further precaution, it might be required that they should meet at some place, distinct from the seat of Gov^t and even that no person within a certain distance of the place at the time sh^d 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 argum^{ts}. for or the objections ag^{st} 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 w^d throw on the smaller States. Great as this objection might be he did not think it equal to such as lay ag^{st} 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. 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. That local considerations must give way to the general interest. As an individual from the S. States, he was willing to make the sacrifice.

M^r 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 w^d invariably have the man.

Question on M^r Elseworth's motion as above.

N. H. ay. Mass. no. C^t ay. N. J. no. P^a ay. Del. no. M^d ay.
V^a no. N. C. no. S. C. no. Geo. no.

M^r 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, of an absolute ineligibility a 2^d time.

Col. Mason approved the idea. It had the sanction of experience in the instance of Cong^s 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 Nat^l 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.

M^r 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 Nat^l Legislature. On the other hand. The Gov^t should not be made so complex & unwieldy as to disgust the States. This would be the case, if the election sh^d be referred to the people. He liked best an election by Electors chosen by the Legislatures of the States. He was ag^{st} a re-eligibility at all events. He was also ag^{st} 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.

M^r Gerry approved of M^r Pinkney's motion as lessening the evil.

M^r Gov^r Morris was ag^{st} a rotation in every case. It formed a political School, in w^{ch} we were always governed by the scholars, and not by the Masters. The evils to be guarded ag^{st} in this case are. 1. the undue influence of the Legislature. 2. instability of Councils. 3. misconduct in office. To guard ag^{st} 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 Pen^a. The self-sufficiency of a victorious party scorns to tread in the paths of their predecessors. Rehoboam will not imitate Soloman. 2. 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. To avoid the third evil, impeachments will be essential. And hence an additional reason ag^{st} 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 M^r Wilson, of introducing a mixture of lot. It will diminish, if not destroy both cabal & dependence.

M^r Williamson was sensible that strong objections lay ag^{st} an election of the Executive by the Legislature, and that it opened a door for foreign influence. The principal objection ag^{st} 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 them 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.

M^r Gov^r 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.

M^r 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 hav^g given his vote for his favorite fellow Citizen, w^d 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.