310

CHECKS AND BALANCES.

at large, nor did they represent them in their individual capacities." "They were sent to represent the interests and views of thirteen distinct sovereignties; were appointed by the governments of the different States and held their authority from the States." When met therefore, in convention, "their object was not to form one general consolidated government for the inhabitants scattered over this vast territory, but to modify still further, and to draw still closer the bands of alliance by which the States were already connected." One of the chief objections to the Constitution was its violation of the federative principle, that it "approached too nearly to a consolidation of the different members of the Confederacy, and one general national government." Finally, when ratification was the issue, the point on which the fate of the Constitution rested was that point which balanced the great and the small States.

The difficulty, in detail, was to determine how much of State sovereignty was yielded to the Union. Representation was not fixed on mere numbers; that would have put an end to State sovereignty. As a partial check, the federative principle was preserved in the States; and in the House, to a certain extent, also. If the chief executive was to be chosen on the republican principle, instead of the federative, he would be the creature of the large States. The compromise finally agreed upon, provided for his election by States, not by the people at large. "I have ever understood, I have ever been taught to believe, by those few of the original framers of the Constitution with whom I have had the happiness to be acquainted, or to converse on the subject, that this very provision which obliges the electors in each State to vote indiscriminately for two persons to fill the offices of President and Vice-President, and which it is now pro

A STATE QUESTION.

311

posed to do away, was regarded as the best, the most effectual means, and that which did in fact tend most to soothe and quiet the fears of the smaller States, and was in this view, and for this very purpose, adopted as a part of the Constitution."

The proposition to change the manner of election was therefore "neither more nor less than a State question," one involving the vital principle upon which the Federal compact was formed; the compromise between the large and the small States. By the Constitution, the House, voting as equal States, could make its choice of five candidates; by the amendment, the choice, the electors in the larger States by agreeing on their candidates would always bring them in. By the Constitution, the smaller States always had a chance of securing the Vice-President. It should not be forgotten that the person elected President would usually be a man advanced in years; the Vice-President, the heir apparent, would succeed. Moreover it should be remembered that the Vice-President participated in the high functions of the Senate, the treaty power, the confirmation of executive appointments. The amendment would give a death-blow to the sovereignty reserved to the States and prove "a monstrous and more than a gigantic stride" towards their consolida

tion.

Huger remarked that he was not on popular ground; that the principles for which he contended no longer influenced the public as they did when the Federal Convention met. Nor were they regarded in the small States as formerly. The prosperity which the country had enjoyed under the General Government had done away, in a very considerable degree, with State jealousies. It was not true that the public demanded the amendment. It had been worked up by party zeal and its ultimate suc

312

SLAVE REPRESENTATION.

cess depended upon continuing that irritation "so industriously kept up since the late contested election of the President." Hastings, of Massachusetts, reminded the House that if the Constitution was to be amended, the article authorizing the representation of slaves, as it operated with peculiar inequality in the Northern and Eastern States, ought first to receive consideration. To this, Matthew Lyon replied that he would have kept silence if the old subject of irritation had not been brought up: for himself, although he had once represented a free State and now represented Kentucky, he believed that the sacrifice, which some complained of in the Constitution, was on the part of the people where slavery was admissible. "The blacks who are slaves are much more useful and beneficial to the community and to the nation, according to their number, than those that are free." Without further debate the resolution was adopted by a vote of eighty-eight to thirty-one.

While this resolution was in progress in the House, the Senate had been discussing a similar amendment. Dewitt Clinton, on the 21st of October,2 had brought forward an amendment, which he said, expressed the will of the State of New York and of other States, on the necessity of designating the electoral votes. It was made the order for the following day. Bradley, of Vermont, wished it further amended so that a majority of the electoral votes should be requisite for a choice of the Vice-President. If no choice was made, the Senate should elect; Butler, of South Carolina, wished a further amendment, making a person ineligible to the Presidency for more than four years in any eight. The whole was referred to a Select Committee of Five. It reported, on the twenty-fourth, when

1 Annals, Id., 554-555.

2 Id., 16.

JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.

313

Dayton, of New Jersey, moved to strike out all providing for a Vice-President. This would solve the problem and prevent jealousies, natural between the President and the heir-apparent. John Quincy Adams remarked that the discriminating principle was well understood among the people, but the question of abolishing the Vice-Presidency was new. It might be well to consider it. But there was a general request for further consideration and Dayton, agreeing, cited the first of Madison's twelve amendments, proposed in 1789, on regulating representation in Congress, which, impracticable, absurd and a striking monument of legislative haste as it was, yet lacked only one or two States to add it to the Constitution. Not until the twenty-third of November was the subject resumed, when a tedious debate ensued, whether two-thirds of the whole Senate or of the members present could pass an amendment. It was decided that two-thirds of those present could act, and with this conclusion, the Senate proceeded to consider the report of the committee.

After rejecting both five and two as the number from which the House might choose, three was agreed on, though Adams urged five, as the House had already accepted that number. He further suggested an objection, that the acquisition of Louisiana made a change in the amendment necessary, because there was no alternative but to admit those born there as well as those born in the United States, to the right of being chosen President and Vice-President. Butler replied, citing the late treaty, that the people of Louisiana were naturalized citizens,2 a fact which disposed of their candidacy. But as to the immediate question, it was a reasonable principle, that each State, in its turn, should have the choice of the Presi

1 Annals, Id., 85.

2 Treaties and Conventions, 332.

314

THE DEBATE IN THE SENATE.

dent from among its citizens. Let the smaller States agree to this amendment, and the larger would forever choose both President and Vice-President. The change would violate the compact of the Union. True, it had been said, that if the amendment was not adopted, the Federalists would elect the Vice-President, and this, as everybody knew, was the pivot upon which the whole matter turned. Ought the Republicans, now in power, to do an act which, out of power, they had loudly condemned? But the report was adopted by a vote of twenty to eleven.

The debate, which followed in the Senate, differed little from that heard in the House. Smith, of Maryland, asserted that by limiting the choice of the House to three candidates, the will of the people would more likely be carried out. Who did not remember the recent election, when it had been seriously discussed, that in case no choice were made, a President should be created by a special law, leaving out of consideration the votes of the electors, and ignoring public opinion.? Was not a civil war seriously apprehended? If a person had been found to accept the Presidency under such conditions, "his head would not have remained on his shoulders for twenty-four hours afterwards." Hillhouse, of Connecticut, defended the existing provision, as it had been defended in the House. "If the amendment pass," said he, "nine out of ten times the election will go to the other House, and then the only difference will be that you had a comedy the last time and you will have a tragedy the next." The conflicting interests of large States and small had been apparent all through the government. Federal and Republican parties had had their day; new parties would arise. If the confidence, under the compromises of the Constitution, existing between the small States and the large, was once