most popular statesman of the most numerous party. Had any other mode of election been adopted, it would have been impossible, in a Republican government, to have excluded party considerations, interests, and feelings. The great objects were to preserve purity as well as harmony in the election, and secure integrity as well as independence in the executive power. Had the choice of President been referred in the first instance to Congress, it would, without excluding party views and motives, have rendered him too dependant on the immediate authors of his elevation to comport with the requisite energy of his department, and have tempted him to indulge in intrigues and manoeuvres utterly subversive of the fairness of the election and the purity of his own character. He would then no longer consider himself responsible to the people, but would be prone to obey, and fearful to offend, a power which, in that case, would have shown itself greater than the people themselves.

Whether greater ferments and commotions would accompany a general election of the President by the whole body of the people, than have hitherto attended the elections by electors (and certainly these have as yet excited no real alarm), or whether that mode of election would, with regard to the pre scribed ratio of representation, be conveniently prac tised, remains, indeed, to be ascertained. It has beer objected that such a measure would "lead to an entire consolidation of the government, and the annihilation of the state sovereignties, so far as concerns the organization of the executive department." But if the difference should consist merely in the form and not in the objects of the election, nor in the authority which orders and controls it-if, for instance, the people, in their several states, instead of voting

for electors, should in the same manner, at the same times and places, and under the same regulations, vote directly for the President, and the whole number of votes to which the state is entitled under the present provisions of the Constitution, should be computed as given to the person receiving the highest vote from the people, I must confess my inability to discover why any greater danger should be apprehended to the sovereignty of the states than exists under the present system. Nor can I conceive any sound objection to such an amendment, if it should include a provision superseding, by a secondary resort to electors, the ultimate reference now made in case of no choice by the electors to Congress. On the contrary, upon mature consideration, I am convinced that such an alteration would be found an essential improvement. It has, indeed, been actually proposed and urged in Congress with great force of argument, especially the part which substitutes a final election by electors, in place of the last resort to the House of Representatives, in cases where no choice is made by the people.

From the example of the illustrious individual who first held the office of President, a practice has arisen, and seems now to be permanently established, for the President to decline a second re-election. As this precedent has never as yet been, and probably never will be departed from, it has, in effect, limited the period of service to eight years, subject, however, to an intermediate election. But to render the President more independent, the administration » more stable, and the people more secure, it would be better that this improvement should be sanctioned and legalized by being incorporated in the system; and this amendment of the Constitution, in connexion with that already suggested, has been actually brought

forward, and appears to be favoured by some of the most intelligent and upright of our public men.

Having fully explained the manner in which the supreme executive office is constituted, and the mode of electing the President, I proceed to consider,

II. The powers with which he is invested.

1. The first of these which offers itself to observation is one which has already been adverted to in reviewing the legislative department, and the connexion between it and the executive power, for the preservation of their mutual independence-I mean the qualified negative of the President upon the concurrent acts of Congress, or his right of returning bills and resolutions, with his objections to them, to the house in which they originated, for reconsideration, whereby they are prevented from taking effect as laws, unless again passed by two thirds of the members present in each house respectively.

The propensity of the legislative department to intrude upon the rights and absorb the powers of the other weaker branches of the government, and the consequent necessity of furnishing the latter with constitutional arms for their defence, have already been the subject of remark. From clear and indubitable principles, it has been shown that, without this control over the proceedings of Congress, the executive department would be unable to sustain itself against the encroachments of the Legislature. The President might be gradually stripped of his authority by concurrent resolutions of Congress, or so weakened as ultimately to be annihilated by a single vote even of the more popular branch of the Legislature ; and by the one mode or the other, the legislative and executive powers might speedily be united in the same hands. Indeed, if no tendency had ever been

manifested in legislative bodies to invade the rights of the executive power, just reasoning and theoretic propriety would of themselves teach us that the one ought not to be left to the mercy of the other, but should, on the contrary, be endowed with a constitutional and effectual power of self-defence.

It

But the power in question has a farther use. not only serves as a shield to the executive authority, but affords an additional security against the enactment of improper laws. It establishes a salutary guard upon the legislative power, well calculated to defend the community against the effects of faction, precipitancy, or any impulse hostile to the public good, which may happen for a moment to influence the majority of Congress. The propriety of resting such a power in the chief magistrate has been sometimes combated on the ground of its presuming that a single individual was possessed of more wisdom and virtue than a numerous assembly. The question, however, does not depend upon the supposition of superior wisdom and virtue in the President, but upon the presumption that the Legislature, if possessed of those qualities in the highest degree, would still be fallible; that the love of power would sometimes dispose them to acts injurious to the rights of the other members of the government; that a spirit of faction might sometimes pervert their deliberations; and that momentary impressions might sometimes impel them to measures which, upon mature reflection, they would themselves condemn. Thus the primary inducement of conferring this power on the President is to enable him to defend himself; the secondary, to increase the chances in favour of the community against the passage of bad laws by Congress, through haste, inadvertence, or design.

2. The President is constituted commander-inchief of the army and navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states when called into the service of the Union. The command and direction of the public force, to execute the laws, maintain peace and tranquillity at home, and resist invasion from abroad, are powers so obviously of an executive nature, and so peculiarly demand the exercise of qualities characteristic of that department - these duties have been so uniformly appropriated to it in every well-organized government, and are so consonant to the precedents of the state constitutions, that little is necessary to explain or enforce them. Of all the cares or concerns of government, the management of war, which implies the direction of the public force, demands most peculiarly the exercise of power by a single hand; and even those of our states which have, in other matters, coupled their chief magistrate with a council, have, for the most part, concentrated the military authority exclusively in him.

3. The President has the sole power of granting reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. The necessity of such an authority in every government arises from the infirmities incident to the administration of human justice. And were it possible in every case to maintain a just proportion between the crime and the penalty; were the rules of testimony, and the mode of trial, so perfect as to preclude every possibility of mistake or injustice; even then policy would sometimes require the remission of a punishment strictly due for a crime clearly ascertained. Both humanity and policy dictate that this benign prerogative of mercy should be as little as possible fettered and embarrassed, and suggest