Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 23.pdf/261

 The Election of United States Senators In fact we have more checks upon each department than in any government

ever instituted. To wantonly remove one or more of these when there is no semblance of weakness or sign of decay, with great respect to its advocates,

would be an act of sublime folly. The Senate is peculiarly a representa tive of the states; the House photographs the present feelings of the people. The

House ebbs and flows according to the caprices of popular vote, the Senate

233

House of Representatives by diﬁ'erent methods. The state of New York, for example, had adopted a constitution at Kingston on April 20, 1877, ten years

before the Constitutional Convention assembled, in which it was provided that the electors of the Assembly should

possess a freehold of the value of twenty pounds but that the Senators should be chosen by the freeholders possessing freehold of the value of one hundred pounds over and above all debts charged

is the permanent agent of the states — it is unchangeable without the consent

thereon.

of all of current, sweep a its own

sembly and for the Senate was not a

the states as such. No popular no matter how strong, can state out of the Senate without consent.

50 if we look beyond the surface of

things into the causes for the creation of the Senate we can hardly fail to be

convinced that the different method of choosing the members of each house of Congress is based upon the pro foundest study of the workings of governments. To maintain the checks

and balances each must be fed from a

This discrimination between

those voting for members of the As capricious one but based upon sound and substantial grounds to which I shall

hereafter refer. I could quote very extensively from the greatest constitutional, philoso phical and historical writers to show that

the distinction

is fundamental,

but I do not deem it essential. Perhaps at some stage of the discussion it would be interesting to do so. But at present when the advocates for change show no defects in the existing system and in fact make no criticism of its work,

diﬁ'erent political breast. If not, their ‘in spirations of duty and the result of their

and where their whole argument for a

labors would always be the same.

change rests upon speculation and guess,

It is

impossible to get a full conception of

the theory and spirit of our Confedera tion by reading the sometimes jejune reports of the debates and proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 or of the state conventions which ratified the Constitution. These must be

supplemented

by

historical

and

political research, which light up the meaning of the remarks of the dis tinguished statesmen who created it,

and which show why, and of what ma terial, the different branches of the

government were created. The members of the Convention had both ancient and contemporaneous prec edents for electing the Senate and

a recourse to general suﬂicient.

principles

is

The Senate has as its prototype the

English House of Lords, but with three profound differences:

First, the mem

bers of the one are in substance heredi tary peers, the members of the other are selected by the legislatures of the different states. The former has its origin in birth or appointment by the King-—the latter owes its selection to the people through their legislative bodies. As the people choose the members of these legislatures with

special reference

to electing United

States Senators, it is after all the people themselves, considered this time as