The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-01-25
THE ELECTION OF SENATORS.

To THE EDITOR: In the discussion OF pro-
posed amendment to the constitution OF the
United States providing for a change In the
method of electing United States senators,
namely, to supercede by popular choice the ex-
listing system OF election by state legislatures it
is desirable to briefly recall some OF the circum-
stances which led to the adoption OF the present
law. In the creation OF the federal government
the trainers of the constitution successfully
endeavored to establish such harmonious rela-
ons between the executive, Legislative and
judicial departments, that while each would be
check upon the operations OF the other, all
would unite to form a complete and lasting
union of states for national purposes The ere
alton of the executive department was attended
with more difficulty than that of either of the
others. for the delegation of power to q single
head savored strongly of monarchy, and the
fathers had no intention of placing the liberty
OF the people at the unrestrained mercy of On
individual. At the time of the adoption of the
constitution the smaller states were fearful
lest they should be swallowed up and deprived
of voice in national affairs by the larger states
which contained the bulk of population. The
position of New Jersey then. for example, with
reference to New York or Pennsylvania was
what the position of Washington would be to.
day under similar circumstances with reference
to Illinois or Indiana In the House of Repre-
sentatives representation was based upon popu-
lation while the allotment of two representa-
tives from each state in the United States Sem
ate was an admirable compromise In favor of
the small states whose influence in the popular
branch Of the national legislature was scarcely
felt
As to the method of choosing United States
senators there was a wide difference of opinion,
and much of the straw now being threshed on
this subject was well failed in the constitutional
convention over century ago. Without refer
ence to the arguments, pro and con, it is inter-
esting to remember that the convention mega
lived proposition that senators should be elected
by the representatives out of persons nominated
by the state legislatures by vote OF 3to7. A
proposition that the executive should appoint
senators out OF persons nominated by the state
Legislatures did not reach vote. When the
question was put that senators should be elected
by the people 1t was defeated by vote of / to 10
and the proposition to elect senators by state
legislatures was first carried unanimously and
subsequently affirmed by a vote of Q to 2. The
trainers OF the constitution foresaw, and ma
jofity OF them intended, that the Senate would
differ widely from the House of Representatives,
both in personnel and the method OF election
A combination of state governments in the ma
tional government was declared to be as polite
as 1t was unavoidable, and In choosing senators
by state Legislatures and representatives by the
people, the citizens OF the state were represented
in congress both individually and collectively
Dickinson, in the debates of 1857, expressed
the sentiments of majority OF the convention
when he hoped that the Senate would
consist Of men distinguished for their rank in
life and their weight of property, and also said
that such characters were more likely to be &C.
leeted by state legislatures than in any other
way. The use OF the Senate, 1t was then de-
clared, was to proceed in the transaction of pub
lie business with more GOODNESS, system and
wisdom than the popular branch of the legisIa.
ture.
Insofar as the personnel OF the United States
Senate is concerned, great changes have &C.
Cured within the century. Even greater
changes have transpired in our social and busi-
ness life during 100 years. The national govern
ment, feeble infant when first clad In the
symmetrical robes fashioned by the makers of
the federal constitution, is now the pride and
nope OF mighty people. individual power
and wealth have naturally increased with the
growth OF population and the development of
trade and commerce 1t is argued in support OF
the proposition for the choice OF senators by
popular elections that ii would relieve the
legislatures OF a burdensome and oftentimes
eorrupting task; that IL would bring the people
closer to their representatives in both branches
OF congress and would change the Senate from
an oligarchy of the few rich to q conservative
body having at heart only the welfare of the
masses. Conceding that change in the
method OF choosing senators would accomplish
such reforms, concession wildly improbable,
what would be the result a. regards our form of
government? The system OF checks and bal
ances would be overturned. The fabric of rep
resentative government designed by the
trainers of the constitution which has well en-
dured the test of time in peace aud war would
be mutilated and dishgured. Both branches of
the national legislature would be swayed
hither aud thither as their respective members
endeavored to follow the changing tides of pub
lie opinion. There would sc dom be found that
desirable difference in political faith between
the two houses of congress which, acting as a
cheek upon the liberality OF the one, holds the
other to rigid accountability for its acts of
omission. The House Of Representatives nav
De compared to a superb engine furnishing
power TO drive the machinery OF government,
Under our present system OF elections the
senate is the governor regulating the speed of
the revolving wheels When by system of
popular election OF senators this CHECK il thrown
on there will be constant danger of an accident.
more or less serious, to the now nicely adjusted
mechanism OF representative government
O., NC