generally sought refuge from the dangers of popular elections in hereditary chief magistrates, as the lesser evil of the two. Archdeacon Paley condemns all elective monarchies, and thinks nothing gained by a popular choice worth the dissensions, tumults, and interruptions of regular industry with which it is inseparably connected. But these consequences rarely attend our elections, and no such evils as he describes have ever been experienced in our elections of a President by the electors; although on one memorable occasion, of which I shall speak hereafter, much riotous and violent conduct was exhibited in the House of Representatives, when, upon an equality of electoral votes between Mr. Jefferson and Colonel Burr, in 1801, the choice between them devolved on that body. Nor can any serious danger be apprehended in future from such occurrences, when we reflect on the nature of the precautions which have been so happily concerted to prevent them-in the manner of electing the President, and the limitations in the nature, extent, and duration of his power. The question, too, with us, was very different from the wisdom or policy of preferring hereditary to elective monarchies in Europe; where the same restraints on the executive authority do not exist to diminish its value in the estimation of competitors-where different orders and ranks are established in the community, and large masses of property are accumulated in the hands of individuals-where ignorance and poverty are widely diffused, and standing armies are requisite to preserve the stability of the government. The state of society and property in this country, and the moral and political habits of the people, have enabled us to adopt the Republican principle in relation to the chief executive magistrate, and to maintain it hitherto with signal success. From the pe

culiar character of our Federative Union, in which the concerns only of the nation, as such, are confided to the General Government, and those of a local description to the states-from the nature of the civil and municipal institutions of the states, which favour the exertions of industry by the certainty of adequate rewards, and secure enjoyment, but discourage and prevent the accumulation of overgrown estates-from the spread of knowledge and the prevalence of morality and religious habits, we may reasonably hope that the checks which the Constitution has provided against the dangerous propensities of our system, although sometimes contemned by ambitious popular leaders, will prove continually and ultimately successful. The election, however, of a supreme ma gistrate for a whole nation, affects so many interests, addresses itself so strongly to popular passions, and holds forth such powerful temptations to ambition, that even under the most favourable circumstances and wisest regulations, it necessarily becomes a formidable trial to public virtue, and sometimes hazardous to the public tranquillity. The framers of our Constitution, from an enlightened view of all the difficulties of the case, did not think it safe or prudent to refer the election of the President immediately to the people, but confided that power to a small body of electors appointed in each state, under the direction of the Legislature; and in order to close the door as effectually as possible against negotiation, intrigue, and corruption, they declared that Congress might determine the day on which the election should be held, and that the day of election should be the same in every state.

It was essential that the sense of the people should operate in the choice of a person to whom so important a trust was to be confided; and this end is

answered by committing the right of election, not to any pre-established body, but to men chosen by the people for the special purpose, and under such circumstances as would best ensure the freedom and purity of the election. It was also desirable that the immediate election should be made by men capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favourable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination and comparison of all the reasons and inducements proper to govern their choice; and it was fairly and reasonably supposed that a small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, would be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such an investigation. It was,

moreover, peculiarly desirable to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder; and it was therefore considered that the choice of several, to form an intermediate body of electors, would be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent emotions, than the choice of one, who would himself be the first object of the public wishes; and by requiring the electors chosen in each state to assemble and vote in the state in which they are appointed, it was intended that they should be less exposed to heats and ferments communicated to them from the people, than if they were all to be assembled at the same place.

Nothing more was to be desired, and nothing was more anxiously attempted, than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These deadly foes to Republicanism were naturally to be expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter; but chiefly from abroad-from the desire of foreign powers to gain an improper ascendency in our public councils;

H

and it was apprehended that they might effect this, by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union. The Convention, therefore, guarded against all danger of this sort with the most provident and judicious attention. Another, and not less important object was, that the President should be independent for his continuance in office on all but the people themselves. This object was also designed to be secured by making, as we have seen, his re-election depend upon a special body of representatives, deputed by the nation for the single purpose of his election, instead of permitting his continuance in office to depend on the will of Congress; to whose favour he might, in that case, be tempted to sacrifice his duty and official consequence.

Such were the advantages intended to be combined and ensured by the plan devised by the Convention. Whether they have been altogether realized, we shall hereafter have occasion to inquire; for the present, it is as well to suggest that the contest which arose in 1801 has not been imitated, at least by none of equal violence, since the adoption of an amendment of the Constitution, intended to prevent such violence for the future. (It has, nevertheless, been deemed expedient, by some of our ablest and most experienced statesmen, to propose a farther amend-f ment, disqualifying the President from re-election.)

The Constitution ordains that each state shall appoint, in such manner as its Legislature may direct, a number of electors equal to the whole number of senators and representatives which the state is entitled to send to Congress; and to prevent the President in office at the time of the election from having an improper influence on his re-election by his ordinary agency in the government, it is declared that no senator or representative in Congress, nor any per

son holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector. In no other respect has the Constitution defined the qualifica. tions of the electors. In several of the states the electors were formerly chosen by the Legislature itself, in a mode prescribed by law, and this method still prevails in Delaware and South Carolina. But it is to be presumed that there will be less opportunity for dangerous coalitions, for ambitious, selfish, or party purposes, where the choice of the electors is referred, as, according to the clear sense of public opinion, it now almost universally is, to the people at large. The electors are directed by the Constitution to meet in their respective states on the same day throughout the Union, which, in pursuance of the discretionary power vested in Congress, has been fixed by law on the first Wednesday in December, in every fourth year succeeding the last election. The place of meeting rests in the discretion of the state legislatures, and is usually at the seat of the state government. When thus assembled, and fully organized, by filling up vacancies occurring from the death or absence of any of their number, the electors proceed to vote by ballot for two persons, one of whom, at least, must not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves. According to the original Constitution, they were not to designate which of the two they vote for as President, and which as Vicepresident; who was, nevertheless, to be elected at the same time, in the same manner, and for the same term as the President. It was merely provided that the person having the greatest number of votes should be the President, if such number were a majority of the whole number of electors chosen, and that the person having the next greatest number of votes of the electors should be the Vice-president. But the