Page:Debates in the Several State Conventions, v5.djvu/394

368 On Mr. PINCKNEY'S motion, that no person shall serve in the executive more than six years in twelve years, it passed in the negative.

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

On a motion that the members of the Committee be furnished with copies of the proceedings, it was so determined, South Carolina alone being in the negative.

It was then moved, that the members of the House might take copies of the resolutions which had been agreed to; which passed in the negative.

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

Mr. GERRY and Mr. BUTLER moved to refer the resolution relating to the executive (except the clause making it consist of a single person) to the committee of detail.

Mr. WILSON hoped that so important a branch of the system would not be committed, until a general principle should be fixed by a vote of the House.

Mr. LANGDON was for the commitment.

Adjourned. 

, July 26.

In Convention.—Mr. MASON. In every stage of the question relative to the executive, the difficulty of the subject, and the diversity of the opinions concerning it, have appeared; nor have any of the modes of constituting that department been satisfactory. First, it has been proposed that the election should be made by the people at large; that is, that an act which ought to be performed by those who know most of eminent characters and qualifications should be performed by those who know least; secondly, that the election should be made by the legislatures of the states; thirdly, by the executives of the states. Against these modes, also, strong objections have been urged. Fourthly, it has been proposed that the election should be made by electors chosen by the people for that purpose. This was at first agreed to; but on further consideration has been rejected. Fifthly, since which, the mode of Mr. Williamson, requiring each freeholder to vote for several candidates, has been proposed. This seemed, like many other propositions, to carry a plausible face, but on closer inspection is liable to fatal objections. A popular election in any form, as Mr. Gerry has observed, would throw the appointment into the hands of the Cincinnati, a society for the members of which he had a great respect, but which he never wished to have a preponderating influence in the government. Sixthly, another expedient was proposed by Mr. Dickinson, which is liable to so palpable and material an inconvenience, that he had little doubt of its being by this time rejected by himself. It would exclude every man who happened not to be popular within his own state; though the causes of his local unpopularity might be of such a nature, as to 