The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 2 — John Shaqi
The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 2Madison, James
History
The Journal of the Debates in the Convention which Framed the Constitution of the United States, May-September 1787. Volume 2
Madison, James
Constitutional law -- United States; Constitutions -- United States; United States. Constitution
M^r King did not like the ineligibility. He thought there was great
force in the remark of M^r Sherman, that he who has proved himself most
fit for an Office, ought not to be excluded by the constitution from
holding it. He would therefore prefer any other reasonable plan that
could be substituted. He was much disposed to think that in such cases
the people at large would chuse wisely. There was indeed some difficulty
arising from the improbability of a general concurrence of the people in
favor of any one man. On the whole he was of opinion that an appointment
by electors chosen by the people for the purpose, would be liable to
fewest objections.
M^r Patterson's ideas nearly coincided he said with those of M^r King.
He proposed that the Executive should be appointed by Electors to be
chosen by the States in a ratio that would allow one elector to the
smallest and three to the largest States.
M^r Wilson. It seems to be the unanimous sense that the Executive should
not be appointed by the Legislature, unless he be rendered in-eligible a
2^d time: he perceived with pleasure that the idea was gaining ground,
of an election mediately or immediately by the people.
M^r Madison. If it be a fundamental principle of free Gov^t that the
Legislative, Executive & Judiciary powers should be _separately_
exercised, it is equally so that they be _independently_ exercised.
There is the same & perhaps greater reason why the Executive sh^d be
independent of the Legislature, than why the Judiciary should. A
coalition of the two former powers would be more immediately & certainly
dangerous to public liberty. It is essential then that the appointment
of the Executive should either be drawn from some source, or held by
some tenure that will give him a free agency with regard to the
Legislature. This could not be if he was to be appointable from time to
time by the Legislature. It was not clear that an appointment in the
1^{st} instance even with an ineligibility afterwards would not
establish an improper connection between the two departments. Certain it
was that the appointment would be attended with intrigues and
contentions that ought not to be unnecessarily admitted. He was disposed
for these reasons to refer the appointment to some other source. The
people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself. It would be as
likely as any that could be devised to produce an Executive Magistrate
of distinguished Character. The people generally could only know & vote
for some Citizen whose merits had rendered him an object of general
attention & esteem. There was one difficulty however of a serious nature
attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was
much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the
latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the
Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and
seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account