The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 1Madison, James
History
The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 1
Madison, James
Constitutional law -- United States; Constitutions -- United States; United States. Constitution
M^r Gerry thought there was great weight in the objection of M^r
Sherman. He added as another objection ag^{st} admitting the eligibility
of members in any case that it would produce intrigues of ambitious men
for displacing proper officers, in order to create vacancies for
themselves.[105] In answer to M^r King he observed that although
members, if disqualified themselves might still intrigue & cabal for
their sons, brothers &c., yet as their own interests would be dearer to
them, than those of their nearest connections, it might be expected they
would go greater lengths to promote it.
[105] Yates gives Gerry's remarks:
"This amendment is of great weight, and its consequences
ought to be well considered. At the beginning of the war, we
possessed more than Roman virtue. It appears to me it is now
the reverse. We have more land and stock-jobbers than any
place on earth. It appears to me that we have constantly
endeavored to keep distinct the three great branches of
government; but if we agree to this motion, it must be
destroyed by admitting the legislators to share in the
executive, or to be too much influenced by the executive, in
looking up to them for offices."--Yates, _Secret
Proceedings_, etc., 160.
M^r Madison had been led to this motion as a middle ground between an
eligibility in all cases, and an absolute disqualification. He admitted
the probable abuses of an eligibility of the members, to offices
particularly within the gift of the Legislature. He had witnessed the
partiality of such bodies to their own members, as had been remarked of
the Virginia Assembly by his colleague (Col. Mason). He appealed however
to him, in turn to vouch another fact not less notorious in Virginia,
that the backwardness of the best citizens to engage in the Legislative
service gave but too great success to unfit characters. The question was
not to be viewed on one side only. The advantages & disadvantages on
both ought to be fairly compared. The objects to be aimed at were to
fill all offices with the fittest characters, & to draw the wisest &
most worthy citizens into the Legislative service. If on one hand,
public bodies were partial to their own members; on the other they were
as apt to be misled by taking characters on report, or the authority of
patrons and dependents.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account