The Formation & Evolution of the American Constitution. Madison James

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ Sherman, would like an election by the Legislatures best, but is content with the plan as it stands.

      Mr. Rutlidge could not admit the solidity of the distinction between a mediate & immediate election by the people. It was the same thing to act by oneself, and to act by another. An election by the Legislature would be more refined than an election immediately by the people: and would be more likely to correspond with the sense of the whole community. If this Convention had been chosen by the people in districts it is not to be supposed that such proper characters would have been preferred. The Delegates to Congress he thought had also been fitter men than would have been appointed by the people at large.

      Mr. Wilson considered the election of the 1st branch by the people not only as the Corner Stone, but as the foundation of the fabric: and that the difference between a mediate & immediate election was immense. The difference was particularly worthy of notice in this respect: that the Legislatures are actuated not merely by the sentiment of the people; but have an official sentiment opposed to that of the General Government and perhaps to that of the people themselves.

      Mr. King enlarged on the same distinction. He supposed the Legislatures wouldconstantly choose men subservient to their own views as contrasted to the general interest; and that they might even devise modes of election that would be subversive of the end in view. He remarked several instances in which the views of a State might be at variance with those of the General Government: and mentioned particularly a competition between the National & State debts, for the most certain & productive funds.

      General Pinkney was for making the State Governments a part of the General System. If they were to be abolished, or lose their agency, S. Carolina & other States would have but a small share of the benefits of Government.

      On the question for General Pinkney motion to substitute election of the 1st branch in such mode as the Legislatures should appoint, in stead of its being elected by the people"

      Massachusetts no. Connecticut ay. N. Y. no. N. J. ay. Pennsylvania no. Del. ay. Maryland divd. Virginia no. N. C. no. S. C. ay. Geo. no.

      General Pinkney then moved that the 1st branch be elected by the people in such mode as the Legislatures should direct; but waived it on its being hinted that such a provision might be more properly tried in the detail of the plan.

      On the question for the election of the 1st branch by the people"

      Massachusetts ay. Connecticut ay. N. Y. ay. N. J. no. Pennsylvania ay. Del. ay. Maryland divd. Virginia ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

      Election of the 1st branch "for the term of three years," considered.

      Mr. Randolph moved to strike out, "three years" and insert "two years" — he was sensible that annual elections were a source of great mischiefs in the States, yet it was the want of such checks against the popular intemperence as were now proposed, that rendered them so mischievous. He would have preferred annual to biennial, but for the extent of the U. S. and the inconveniency which would result from them to the representatives of the extreme parts of the Empire. The people were attached to frequency of elections. All the Constitutions of the States except that of S. Carolina, had established annual elections.

      Mr. Dickinson. The idea of annual elections was borrowed from the antient Usage of England, a country much less extensive than ours. He supposed biennial would be inconvenient. He preferred triennial, and in order to prevent the inconveniency of an entire change of the whole number at the same moment, suggested a rotation, by an annual election of one third.

      Mr. Elseworth was opposed to three years, supposing that even one year was preferable to two years. The people were fond of frequent elections and might be safely indulged in one branch of the Legislature. He moved for 1 year.

Mr. Strong4 seconded & supported the motion.

      Mr. Wilson being for making the 1st branch an effectual representation of the people at large, preferred an annual election of it. This frequency was most familiar & pleasing to the people. It would not be more inconvenient to them, than triennial elections, as the people in all the States have annual meetings with which the election of the National representatives might be made to co-incide. He did not conceive that it would be necessary for the National Leigsl: to sit constantly; perhaps not half — perhaps not one fourth of the year.

      Mr. Madison was persuaded that annual elections would be extremely inconvenient and apprehensive that biennial would be too much so; he did not mean inconvenient to the electors; but to the representatives. They would have to travel seven or eight hundred miles from the distant parts of the Union; and would probably not be allowed even a reimbursement of their expences. Besides, none of those who wished to be re-elected would remain at the seat of Government; confiding that their absence would not affect them. The members of Congress had done this with few instances of disappointment. But as the choice was here to be made by the people themselves who would be much less complaisant to individuals, and much more susceptible of impressions from the presence of a Rival candidate, it must be supposed that the members from the most distant States would travel backwards & forwards at least as often as the elections should be repeated. Much was to be said also on the time requisite for new Members who would always form a large proportion, to acquire that knowledge of the affairs of the States in general without which their trust could not be usefully discharged.

      Mr. Sherman preferred annual elections, but would be content with biennial. He thought the Representatives ought to return home and mix with the people. By remaining at the seat of Government they would acquire the habits of the place which might differ from those of their Constituents.

      Col. Mason observed that the States being differently situated such a rule ought to be formed as would put them as nearly as possible on a level. If elections were annual the middle States would have a great advantage over the extreme ones. He wished them to be biennial; and the rather as in that case they would coincide with the periodical elections of S. Carolina as well of the other States.

      Col. Hamilton urged the necessity of 3 years, there ought to be neither too much nor too little dependence, on the popular sentiments. The checks in the other branches of the Government would be but feeble, and would need every auxiliary principle that could be interwoven. The British House of Commons were elected septennially, yet the democratic spirit of the Constitution had not ceased. Frequency of elections tended to make the people listless to them; and to facilitate the success of little cabals. This evil was complained of in all the States. In Virginia it had been lately found necessary to force the attendance & voting of the people by severe regulations.

      On the question for striking out "three years"

      Massachusetts ay. Connecticut ay. N. Y. no. N. J. divd. Pennsylvania ay. Del. no. Maryland no. Virginia ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. ay.

      The motion for "two years" was then inserted nem. con.

      Adjourned.

1 From June 21 to July 18 inclusive not copied by Mr. Eppes. — Madison's Note. This applies evidently to notes he permitted Hon. George W. Eppes, Jefferson's son-in-law, to take.

2

      "Dr. Johnson is a character much celebrated for his legal knowledge; he is said to be one of the first classics in America, and certainly possesses a very strong and enlightened understanding.

      "As an Orator in my opinion, there is nothing in him that warrants СКАЧАТЬ