shal. oe His Excellency.' He shall be elected by ballot by the legislature. He shall hold his office during the term of seven years; but shall not be elected a second time."

On the question for vesting the power in a single person, it was agreed to, nem. con. So also on the style and title.

Mr. RUTLEDGE moved to insert "joint" before the word "ballot," as the most convenient mode of electing.

Mr. SHERMAN objected to it, as depriving the states, represented in the Senate, of the negative intended them in that House.

Mr GORHAM said it was wrong to be considering, at every turn, whom the Senate would represent. The public good was the true object to be kept in view. Great delay and confusion would ensue, if the two Houses should vote separately, each having a negative on the choice of the other.

Mr. DAYTON. It might be well for those not to consider how the Senate was constituted, whose interest it was to keep it out of sight. If the amendment should be agreed to, a joint ballot would in fact give the appointment to one House. He could never agree to the clause with such an amendment. There could be no doubt of the two Houses separately concurring in the same person for President. The importance and necessity of the case would insure a con

currence.

Mr. CARROLL moved to strike out, "by the legislature," and insert" by the people." Mr. WILSON seconded him; and on the question,

Pennsylvania, Delaware, ay, 2; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 9.

Mr. BREARLY was opposed to inserting the word "joint." The argument, that the small states should not put their hands into the pockets of the large ones, did not apply in this case.

Mr. WILSON urged the reasonableness of giving the larger states a larger share of the appointment, and the danger of delay from a disagreement of the two Houses. He remarked, also, that the Senate had peculiar powers, balancing the advantage given by a joint ballot in this case to the other branch of the legislature.

Mr. LANGDON. This general officer ought to be elected by the joint and general voice. In New Hampshire, the mode of separate votes by the two Houses was productive of great difficulties. The negative of the Senate would hurt the feelings of the man elected by the votes of the other branch. He was for inserting "joint," though unfavorable to New Hampshire as a small state.

Mr. WILSON remarked that, as the president of the Senate was to be the President of the United States, that body, in cases of vacancy, might have an interest in throwing dilatory obstacles in the way, if its separate concurrence should be required.

Mr. MADISON. If the amendment be agreed to, the rule of voting will give to the largest state, compared with the smallest, at influence as four to one only, although the population is as ten to

one.

This surely cannot be unreasonable, as the President is to act

for the people, not for the states. The president of the Senate also is to be occasionally President of the United States, and by his negative alone can make three fourths of the other branch necessary to the passage of a law. This is another advantage enjoyed by the Senate On the question for inserting "joint," it passed in the affirma

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, ay, 7; Connecticut, New Jersey, Maryland, Georgia, no, 4. Mr. DAYTON then moved to insert, after the word "legislature,' the words, "each state having one vote."

Mr. BREARLY seconded him; and, on the question, it passed in the negative.

Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Georgia, ay, 5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, no, 6.

Mr. PINCKNEY moved to insert, after the word "legislature," the words,

"to which election a majority of the votes of the members present shall be required.”

And, on this question, it passed in the affirmative.

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 10; New Jersey, no, 1.

Mr. READ moved that,

in case the numbers for the two highest in votes should be equal, then the president of the Senate shall have an additional casting vote,"

which was disagreed to by a general negative.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS opposed the election of the President by the legislature. He dwelt on the danger of rendering the executive uninterested in maintaining the rights of his station, as leading to legislative tyranny. If the legislature have the executive. dependent on them, they can perpetuate and support their usurpations by the influence of tax-gatherers and other officers, by fleets, armies, &c. Cabal and corruption are attached to that mode of election. So is ineligibility a second time. Hence the executive is interested in courting popularity in the legislature, by sacrificing his executive rights; and then he can go into that body, after the expiration of his executive office, and enjoy there the fruits of his policy. To these considerations he added, that rivals would be continually intriguing to oust the President from his place. To guard against all these evils, he moved that the President

"shall be chosen by electors to be chosen by the people of the several states." Mr. CARROLL seconded him; and, on the question, it passed in the negative.

Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, ay, 5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 6.

Mr. DAYTON moved to postpone the consideration of the two last clauses of article 10, sect. 1, which was disagreed to without a count of the states.

Mr BROOM moved to refer the two clauses to a committee of a member from each state; and, on the question, it failed, the states being equally divided.

New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, ay, 5; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 5; Connecticut, divided.

On the question taken on the first part of Mr. Gouverneur Morris's motion, to wit, "shall be chosen by electors," as an abstract question, it failed, the states being equally divided.

New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, ay, 4; New Hampshire, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 4; Connecticut, Maryland, divided; Massachusetts, absent.

The consideration of the remaining clauses of article 10, sect. 1, was then postponed till to-morrow, at the instance of the deputies of New Jersey.232

Article 10, sect. 2, being taken up, the word "information" was transferred, and inserted after "legislature."

On motion of Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS, "he may struck out, and "and" inserted before "recommend," in the second clause of article 10, sect. 2, in order to make it the duty of the President to recommend, and thence prevent umbrage or cavil at his doing it.

Mr. SHERMAN objected to the sentence,

"and shall appoint officers in all cases not otherwise provided for in this Constitution."

He admitted it to be proper that many officers in the executive department should be so appointed; but contended that many ought not, as general officers in the army, in time of peace, &c. Herein lay the corruption in Great Britain. If the executive can model the army, he may set up an absolute government; taking advantage of the close of a war, and an army commanded by his creatures. James II. was not obeyed by his officers, because they had been appointed by his predecessors, not by himself. He moved to insert," or by law," after the word "Constitution."

On motion of Mr. MADISON, "officers" was struck out, and "to offices" inserted, in order to obviate doubts that he might appoint officers without a previous creation of the offices by the legislature. On the question for inserting "or by law," as moved by Mr. Sher

nan,

Connecticut, ay, 1; New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, no, 9; North Carolina, absent.

Mr. DICKINSON moved to strike out the words,

and shall appoint to offices in all cases not otherwise provided for by this Constitution,"

and insert,

"and shall appoint to all offices established by this Constitution, except in cases herein otherwise provided for; and to all offices which may hereafter be created by law."

Mr. RANDOLPH observed, that the power of appointments was a formidable one, both in the executive and legislative hands; and suggested whether the legislature should not be left at liberty to refer appointments, in some cases, to some state authority.

Mr. DICKINSON'S motion passed in the affirmative.

Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, ay, 6, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Delaware, South Carolina, no, 4; North Carolina, absent.

Mr. DICKINSON then moved to annex to his last amendment, "except where, by law, the appointment shall be vested in the legislatures or executives of the several states."

Mr. RANDOLPH seconded the motion.

Mr. WILSON. If this be agreed to, it will soon be a standing instruction to the state legislatures to pass no law creating offices, unless the appointment be referred to them.

Mr. SHERMAN objected to "legislatures," in the motion, which was struck out by consent of the movers.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS. This would be putting it in the power of the states to say, "you shall be viceroys, but we will be viceroys over you."

The motion was negatived without a count of the states.

Ordered, unanimously, that the order respecting the adjournment at four o'clock be repealed, and that in future the House assemble at ten o'clock, and adjourn at three.

Adjourned.

Saturday, August 25.

In Convention. The first clause of article 7, sect. 1, being reconsidered,

Col. MASON objected to the term "shall fulfil the engagements and discharge the debts," &c., as too strong. It may be impossible to comply with it. The creditors should be kept in the same plight. They will, in one respect, be necessarily and properly in a better. The government will be more able to pay them. The use of the term shall will beget speculations, and increase the pestilential practice of stock-jobbing. There was a great distinction between original creditors and those who purchased fraudulently of the ignorant and distressed. He did not mean to include those who have bought stock in the open market. He was sensible of the difficulty of drawing the line in this case, but he did not wish to preclude the attempt. Even fair purchasers, at four, five, six, eight, for one, did not stand on the same footing with the first holders, supposing them not to be blamable. The interest they received, even in paper, is equal to their purchase money. What he particularly wished was, to leave the door open for buying up the securities, which he thought would be precluded by the term "shall," as requiring nominal payment, and which was not inconsistent with his ideas of public faith. He was afraid, also, the word "shall" might extend to all the old continental paper.

Mr. LANGDON wished to do no more than leave the creditors in

statu quo.

Mr. GERRY said, that, for himself, he had no interest in the question, being not possessed of more of the securities than would, by the interest, pay his taxes. He would observe, however, that, as the public had received the value of the literal amount, they ought to pay that value to somebody. The frauds on the soldiers ought to have been foreseen. These poor and ignorant people could not but part with their securities. There are other creditors, who will part with any thing, rather than be cheated of the capital of their advances. The interest of the states, he observed, was different on this point, some having more, others less, than their proportion of the paper. Hence the idea of a scale for reducing its value had arisen. If the public faith would admit, of which he was not clear, he would not object to a revision of the debt, so far as to compel restitution to the ignorant and distressed, who have been defrauded. As to stockjobbers, he saw no reason for the censures thrown on them. They keep up the value of the paper. Without them, there would be no market.

Mr. BUTLER said he meant neither to increase nor diminish the security of the creditors.

Mr. RANDOLPH moved to postpone the clause, in favor of the following:

"All debts contracted, and engagements entered into, by or under the authority of Congress, shall be as valid against the United States, under this Constitution, as under the Confederation."

Dr. JOHNSON. The debts are debts of the United States, of the great body of America. Changing the government cannot change the obligation of the United States, which devolves, of course, on the new government. Nothing was, in his opinion, necessary to be said. If any thing, it should be a mere declaration, as moved by Mr. Randolph.

Mr. GOUVERNEUR MORRIS said, he never had become a public creditor, that he might urge, with more propriety the compliance with public faith. He had always done so, and always would, and preferred the term "shall," as the most explicit. As to buying up the debt, the term "shall" was not inconsistent with it, if provision be first made for paying the interest; if not, such an expedient was a mere evasion. He was content to say nothing, as the new government would be bound, of course; but would prefer the clause with the term " shall," because it would create many friends to the plan. On Mr. Randolph's motion,

New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, ay, 10; Pennsylvania, no, 1.233

Mr. SHERMAN thought it necessary to connect with the clause for laying taxes, duties, &c., an express provision for the object of the old debts, &c., and moved to add to the first clause of art cle 7 sect 1.