Alexandria daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1803-1808, 1804-03-03

Y ace and power Of ths saaller states. |
shall not altogether rely q the extreme I'M
probability of such an event, although 1t ap-
pears to me that it is as likely that the Sc
nate, insuch a state Of things, should falllto
elect a ". President, as that we should fall
to elect a President. Remote as such an
event IS; for it depends on the election Ell
Their IF President or Vice-President by the
electors, in the first instance aclrcunstance
extremely improbable when I. designation
takes place, end afterwards on a refusal on
our part, to. make choice, out Of those Of
fsred for our selection, shall not dwell
upon its being a case barely possible, but
willask whether the right OF this House to
make an election car ysscs abandoned but
with its own consent But upon a refusal
It, par.s1Is ,,, assrnsgise right e choice
Aud how the ps.l..t of the people can be
said tobe affected, by sessA atransier OF the.
right of election from this kvaase tosthe o.
Their, when it is notorious that IN electing
that House, the vote is taken by states.
Those of the greatest population & wealth
have no more influence than the smallest.
Is not tic Senate as likely to prove faith
full organ of the will of the states at this
House voting by states? In conceding this
point therefore, what do we give up? It's
because the amendment contains the prin-
ciple ofdesignation because in the first
place the electors must fail &c elect a Presi-
dent, in the next place they must fail to G.
lect vice president IN the third place this
house must refuse te exercise their constr
tutional rightto choose president, out OF
those In nomination for that oihce; because
all these events must concur before an cleo
ton can devolve upon the Senate; and
then they are restricted to a small number
of those nominated forthe vice presidency
persons, too, who will be selected by the
electors. with a view to this contingency j;
because the wealth and population of the
states have no more influence here IN an
election than they have in the Senate; 1t is
for these reasons that / am in favor OF the
amendment. Even if this possibility of
the election of chief magistrate devolving
on the Senate, were mores Objectionable
to me than it is, I would not sacrifice the
discriminating principle contained in this
resolution for bare possibility. In oaseof
refusal, however, on the part of this
house to make an election, will It not be
better that the functions Of president should
be exercised even by a person nominated
by the electors and appointed by the Sc
nate, than that there should be an lnterreg-
NUN, as gentlemen have chosen to style it.
Are not the people as willing that such ala
officer should discharge those duties, as
that they should devolve upon 6 president
pro tempore of the Senate, Ga person who
could never have been contemplated on his
election to a seat in that bodyas succeed
ing to the presidency who would necessa-
srily act as president, in case OF the death,
designations, disability, orremoyal from Of
fee, both of the president and vice prcsi-
dent; events equally prcbable, and in my
opinion more so than that contemplated by
this amendment. But perhaps ! Shall be
told that this POSITIONS inconsistent witha
doctrine advanced by me at the outset, that
I should approve an abolition Of the Office
ofvice. president. But thessole condition
on which I would consent to such 81 abo-
lition would be an Immediate re .electlon
IN case Of a vacancy in the Office OF presi-
dent. I.never could assentto the exercise
of those powers bya president pro tempore
Of the Senate, longer than was absolutely
necessaryto make a new election ~ the
people. s. !,
Having stated some OF the reasons which
viii induce me to vote for the resolution
onsyour table, permit me Sir, to reply to
some of the observations which have fallen
from. the gentleman from North Carolina
and Connecticut. The first of these gen
!, -.slNT, p,,,,,;anca9 &c of oninion RI r