OLD METHOD OF CHOOSING ELECTORS.

295

Henry Lee, the most zealous and irreconcilable opponent of the Constitution, after pronouncing the Vice-President "not a very important, if not an unnecessary part of the system, he may be a part of the Senate at one period, and act as the supreme executive magistrate at another," added, "The election of this officer, as well as of the President of the United States seems to be properly secured." 1 The Constitution provided that the electors should meet in their respective States and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one, at least, should not be an inhabitant of the same State with themselves. They made out a list of all persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each, and sent this, sealed and certified, to the capital, directed to the President of the Senate. In the presence of both Houses, this officer opened all the certificates and the votes were then counted. The person having the greatest number of votes was thereby President, if the number was a majority of the whole number of electors. If more than one person had a majority, and an equal number of votes, the House of Representatives should immediately, by ballot, choose one of them for President. If no person had a majority, then, from the five highest on the list, the House, in like manner, should choose the President; but in choosing him, the votes should be taken by States, the representation from each State having one vote. A quorum for this purpose should consist of a member, or members, from two-thirds of the States, and a majority of all the States was necessary for a choice. In every case, after the choice of President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors should be the Vice-President. If there remained two or more with

1 Letters of a Federal Farmer, III.

2 Art. II, 1: 3.

296

NO NOMINATIONS.

equal votes, the Senate should by ballot choose the VicePresident from them.

Here was no intimation of any nomination of candidates, either for President or Vice-President. The issue of an election was ever uncertain. There was no designation of the electoral vote, for either office. The end was reached by events almost accidental. Whatever the reasons that finally led the Convention to adopt this procedure, it may be assumed that the prospective power of party organization and of political alliances and schemes, did not weigh with the members as factors likely to deflect the electoral choice from fit characters for the two offices. It is not strange that Lee, and other opponents of the Constitution, pronounced the Vice-President a superfluous officer. The Convention imposed great confidence in the stability of the presidential electors. No hint of collusion among them, or of bargain and corruption is suggested in the debates. The choice of the Chief Magistrate was to be a federal act. Each State should appoint its electors. A choice by the people, though advocated by Wilson, was never seriously considered by the Convention. The electors acted for the States and were to give the people a President and a Vice-President. In case two persons received, each, a majority and the same number of votes, the House, voting by States, should elect the President, and if there remained two with equal votes, the Senate, a federal body, should elect the Vice-President. Thus, whether the electors, or the House chose the President, the act was a federal act. When an election proceeded in, what may be termed, the usual way, the Vice-President was chosen, as it were, by remainder, or ex officio: as he might have been President, and the person, made President, might have become Vice-President, by the change of a few votes. When the choice of President

THE NATIONAL SENTIMENT FEEBLE.

297

devolved upon the House, the person having the second greatest number of electoral votes became Vice-President, but in case there were several persons having the same number, the choice was by the Senate,—a federal body.

1

As long as Washington lived and would continue in the Presidency, no one else was thought of, but the distribution of the electoral vote, in 1789, among twelve persons, in 1792, among five,2 and in 1796, among thirteen,3 indicated that, unless public opinion was loud and clear for one person for President, the number of candidates was ever likely to be large, the electoral vote to be divided, and a choice by the House, the rule, instead of the exception. It was a condition that could not well have been anticipated by the framers of the Constitution.

The national sentiment was feeble all through Washington's administration, and it gained little strength during the administration of John Adams. The common speech of the day, the usual language of debate in Congress and in the State legislatures, described the States as "Free, sovereign and independent." Therefore, whatever tended to disturb, or to diminish, State equality excited greater alarm than any threat or disturbance of the national government. But the sign of possible discord in the election of a Chief Magistrate was likely to be detected by supporters of what was then called, a federal or consolidated plan of government. Certainly an election by the House was not desirable, if for no other reason than that it was not an election by the electors appointed by the State legislatures. The election of 1796 occurred on the eighth of November, and it was some time in doubt whether Adams, Jefferson or Pinckney would be chosen President.

1 Annals, 17.

2 Annals, 2nd Congress, 645.

* Annals, 4th Congress, 2nd Sess., 1543-1544.

298

THE TWELFTH AMENDMENT IN THE SENATE.

On the eighth of January, 1797, William Smith, of South Carolina, offered a resolution in the House, for an amendment to the Constitution that would remedy the great inconvenience that might arise from the prescribed mode of choosing the President and Vice-President and that would carry into effect the real intention of the electors; they should be directed to designate for whom they voted as President, and for whom as Vice-President; but the resolution received no further attention than to be ordered to be printed. A month later, the electoral vote was counted, and John Adams, the Vice-President, announced as the result of the vote, seventy-one votes for John Adams, sixty-eight for Thomas Jefferson, and one hundred and thirty-seven votes divided among eleven other persons. In the election of 1796, the electors were appointed by the legislature, in six States2 and chosen by the people, in ten. There were no nominations of candidates, no conventions, no political platforms. Not one State gave its full vote for Adams and Jefferson; and four that cast votes for them3 also voted for six others.* Adams received the full electoral vote of eight States; Jefferson, of four; Pinckney, of five; Burr and Ellsworth, each, of two, and Clinton, of one.5

Considering the strength and the prevalence of State

1 Annals, 1824.

2 Conn., N. J., N. Y., Del., S. C., Ga.

3 Pa., Md., Va., N. C.

4 Pinckney, Burr (Pa.); John Henry (Md.); Pinckney, Burr, Samuel Adams, Geo. Clinton, Washington (Va.); Pinckney, Burr, Iredell, Washington, C. C. Pinckney (N. C.).

5 For Adams, N. H., Mass., R. I., Ct., Vt., N. Y., N. J., Del.

For Jefferson, Pa., Ky., Tenn., Ga.

For Pinckney, Vt., N. Y., N. J., Del., S. C.

For Burr, Ky., Tenn.

For Ellsworth, N. H., R. I.

For Clinton, Ga.

THE ELECTION OF 1796.

299

sovereignty notions, in 1796, and the manner of choosing the President then prevailing, it is not strange that dissatisfaction should be expressed with a political system which gave the country a President who was the first choice of only eight States in sixteen, and a Vice-President who was the unanimous choice of only four,-and yet between whom and the President there was the difference of only three votes. The result displeased the Federalists, for they had planned to elect Adams and Pinckney, and this displeasure at the system chiefly affected the Federalist region which lay north and east of Pennsylvania, to which Delaware must be added, for its vote was solid for the two leading Federalists, Adams and Pinckney. In Pennsylvania, and in States to the south and southwest the vote, though much divided, was mostly for Jefferson and Burr, and throughout this southern half of the country there was more or less dissatisfaction with the constitutional provision for choosing the President and Vice-President. Moreover, though there were no formal platforms or nominations, there was not lacking a clear and common understanding that Adams and Jefferson represented two, widely differing, political schools. The anomaly of a Federalist President and a DemocraticRepublican Vice-President, at the same time, increased political apprehensions in both parties.

That a month before the counting of the electoral vote, in 1797, a resolution was offered to amend the Constitution so as to direct the electors to designate their choice for President and Vice-President, is evidence that the public mind was not at rest on the subject. But Smith's resolution was quite forgotten, and three years had passed and Adams' stormy administration was drawing to a close, when, on the sixteenth of February, 1799,1 Abiel 1 Annals, 2919.