Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1923-08-06

| and that honor was enough compen-
sation. His proposition was second
ensued. and the proposition was
| postponed for the consideration of
members. 1t was treated with great
| respect. but rather for the author
| OF ii than for any apparent convic-
ton OF its expectancy or practica-
| bility."
| Later, the committee of the whole
/ returned to the consideration as 10
| how many persons should constitute
the executive department.
| Mr.. Rutledge and Mr.. c. Pinckney
| moved that the blank for the number
| of persons in the executive be filled
in with the words one person. They
| supposed the reasons to be so OBJ
vious and conclusive in favor of one
| that no member would oppose the
| motion.
Mr.. Randolph (of Virginia) OPP
posed 1t with great earnestness. de-
| claring that he should not do justice
70 the country which sent him if he
were silently TO suffer the estab-
iishment of unity in the executive
department: He felt an opposition
to IL which he believed he should
! continue to feel as long as ne lived
| he urged first, that the permanent
temper OF the people was adverse to
| the very semblance of monarchy
secondly, that unit was unneces-
| sary. II plurality being equally COM
! petent to all the objects of the de-
| partnent: thirdly, that the necessary
| confidence would never be reposed in
| a single magistrate; fourthly. that
the appointments would generally be
| In FAVOR OF some inhabitant near the
center of the community. and CON
sequentiS the remote parts would not
pc on an equal footing. He was in
! favor of three members of the execu-
! tive, to be drawn from different por-
| tons of the country"
| Inc debate proceeded for many
gument OF Mr.. Randolph by saying
that all the thirteen colonies seemed
TO favor a single executive. for not
one Of them had a triumvfrate: all
! had single heads
Mr.. Sherman called attention to the
fact that in all the states there was
a council to advise the executive. but
MIR. Wilson objected to council on
the ground that lit oftener serves to
cover than to prevent malpractices .
Mr. Gerry objected to the policy OF
| three members in the executive. say
ing. 1T would be extremely incon-
venient in many instances particu-
! iarly in military matters. whether re-
iatinG TO the militia, an army or navy.
/ IL would be general with three
| heads"
"On the question for single execu-
| i've, 1t was agreed to- as recorded in
Elliots debates.
/ Two things will be observed in the
above quotations from the debate
creating the Constitution: First. that
a single person as chief magistrate
| was not In accord with the Judgment
or all members of the convention.
! second. that none of the arguments
aunaHceo Tor triumvirate was of
fered on the ground of lessening the
work OF the chief magistrate, but all
were founded on a fear that single
executive would be too much like a
king. with too much personal power
century and quarter of experience
| SHOWS that the checks on a presiden-
tial usurpation of power have been
| ample, but in recent years the bur
oen OF work and responsibility has been
| crushing.
There is considerable agitation
since the death of President Harding
toward relieving the strain on the
presidency. but no suggestion has
come from any source, in line with
the plans advocated in the constitu.
t,onal convention. looking to institut-
ing an executive department of three
persons. OF equal power and divided
responsibility. The proposals have
been simply to give the President one
or more assistants to the President
| Some are advocating plans TO put
more OF the Presidents responsibilit,
on the heads of the departments. who
constitute his advisers. rather thar
seek SEEK, cor. constitutional iss amendmen>
can be accomplished merely by ex.
ecutive order. without seeking an,
legislation. Business executives arr
sometimes rated by their ability t
shift work onto others. retaining
tention.
(Copyrigh 1921 br Y roIiins,