MINUTES.

JANUARY 15, 1788. The paragraph in debate was the biennial election of the representatives.

CALEB STRONG. Stated the grounds proceeded on in Federal Convention; determined at first to be triennial; afterwards reduced to biennial; South Carolina having at home biennial elections, and it was a compromise.

FISHER AMES. People cannot, without a representation, exercise any powers but pulling down a government. Man has no natural liberty in a state of nature, because he has no security for it. Too long or too short a time for elections is dangerous and inconvenient. The time must be regulated by the nature of the business the representatives have to do. 1. The extensive dominion to be governed. 2. The object of legislation. 3. The security of the liberties of the people.

GILBERT DENCH. Immaterial whether biennial or annual. My difficulty is, whether biennial elections are secured to the people in the fourth section. He was called to order, for reasoning on that section, by Mr. Dana. After debate, Mr. Dench stated, he was satisfied he was out of order.

Gov. BOWDOIN. Thought that Dench was in order. He was called to order by Mr. Parsons, when, after some debate, the following question was put :

To reconsider the order of debate passed yesterday, so far as to amend it by allowing any member to refer to any other paragraph which in his opinion relates to the paragraph under debate, and it passed in the affirmative.

Then Gov. BOWDOIN arose. There was no reason for annual elections arising from the course of the sun, for the time of election would then be varied in every planet. He then argued in favor of a biennial election. 1. There was no danger, as

they cannot alter the Constitution. 2. They can lay no burdens but such as they bear their part of. 3. A shorter election would not give sufficient time for information.

Gen. HEATH showed the importance of the subject from the extent of country. Opinions of the best writers show that short elections are necessary. Montesquieu says more than a year would be dangerous. In this country we have always had annual elections; that length of time is necessary to acquaint themselves with their business is a novel observation, for being a representative of the people implies a knowledge of their circumstances. While sitting in Congress how can they learn the situation of other States? Members of British Parliament return home for the knowledge of the situation of their constituents. He was, however, in favor of biennial elections, as there will be but one session in a year, and all the business not being then done will be left, if the same body cannot meet again. CHARLES TURNER, Esq. Is for a year, because it is the most proper length of time. If we allow two years, then by some means or other there will be a stretch as long as the new star's revolution.

Mr. DAWES.

Montesquieu's opinion applies only to single governments, not to a confederated one.

Gen. BROOKS, of Medford. Montesquieu gives the greatest plaudits to the British government, where elections were never annual. In answer to the objection that biennial elections are novel: But our situation is new-which he states-rising from dependent colonies to independent States. Then reasons from the state of parliaments in Europe.

Gen. SAM. THOMPSON. Argues for frequent reëlections, because if the administration had not been changed last year, we should now be in blood. He was called to order by Dr. Jarvis. After debate, it was moved that he proceed. Then Dr. Spring presented a letter to the Convention from Mr. Gerry. After some debate, a motion was made to adjourn, which passed in the affirmative.

3 O'CLOCK, P. M.

Gen. THOMPSON. Was in favor of annual elections, for the end of government is to please the people, who can please them

selves by annual elections, and the people are quieted by a new election, the last year. It is said the elected will want time to learn, but he hopes the people will not send men who are unlearned; it is the duty of a representative to know the interests of his own constituents, and then to determine, by comparing their situation with the state of the nation. Also, he objects that the representatives pay themselves; compares it to the king's government and the judges being paid by the king; here they pay themselves.

Mr. GORE. We must be careful in taking the opinion of writers on the subject of government. Opinions deduced from the state of ancient governments do not apply. They did not check their governments by having different branches, with negatives. He then observes on the nature of British parliaments, and applies his observations in favor of biennial elections; was in favor of frequent elections, but the true rule is to give them time to inform themselves, and not too much time to feel independent of the electors.

He states the rise of Elections longer than

Mr. KING. The rule is, that the elected should have time enough to inform themselves, and not so much time as will make them independent of the electors. parliaments upon the feudal system. annual have been thought of by Massachusetts; instanced in the confederation of the united New England colony. Remarks on Heath's notion, that any man chosen a representative has knowledge enough. Thought there was no danger of loss of liberty from biennial elections.

Hon. CHARLES TURNER charges King with ridiculing him about the planets, and resents it.

Mr. KING explains himself. He did not mean to ridicule any argument, and had a profound opinion for the gentleman.

Hon. Mr. DANA. From annual elections, States, in Congress, have frequently been deprived of their votes for want of the delegates receiving their commissions.

Hon. ABRAM WHITE says, our delegates being chosen in June, there is time enough.

Hon. Mr. DANA. He applies to the southern States.

Hon. Mr. GORHAM says, Congress is not represented at present for the same reason; observes, as Congress will have but one

session a year, and our General Court have two, biennial elections for Congress will not be longer than annual elections for this State.

Mr. NASSON. If members will not engage in business for fear of not finishing, then no man would undertake any business lest he should die and leave it unfinished to his executors or administrators.

Mr. GORHAM, in reply, referred to the situation of our General Court the last session, when the whole session was employed in collecting and arranging materials for the next session.

Mr. CARNES reads part of a letter from Mr. Otis, that Congress was now not sitting, as only five States were represented. Hon. JOB SPRAGUE. The advantages of biennial elections have been sufficiently demonstrated. If any still object, it is incumbent on them to prove the inconveniences.

Hon. JNO. TAYLOR. If one session in a year is not sufficient to originate and complete the business, then let them have two sessions, or sit all the year, if necessary.

Capt. SOUTHWORTH, from Stoughton. He thought the advantages of a biennial election had been sufficiently stated; his difficulty was, whether the fourth section did not render the right of biennial elections insecure.

Adjourned to to-morrow.

JANUARY 16, 1788, A. M.

Voted to pass to the next paragraph.

Moved to reconsider the vote, and debate thereon, but it did not prevail. The next paragraph was read, viz.: “No person shall be a representative, &c., in which he shall be chosen."

Mr. DENCH observed that he wished to add something on the paragraph last debated, and asked leave, and it was granted. His difficulty was, that no provision was made to qualify the election but by the intervention of the State legislatures, and still under the control of the Congress, and so the rights of election are insecure.

Mr. GORHAM cannot see how Mr. Dench's objection applies to

biennial elections, for if biennial elections are insecure, so would annual elections, or elections for any shorter time, be.

That the practice of the several States, in conducting elections, is various, and the legislature of each State will devise the best possible way for itself.

That the age of twenty-five was necessary, that the man might be old enough to understand public business, and a citizenship of seven years is necessary to give his electors evidence of his knowledge and attachment to their interests.

Hon. Mr. WHITE. Though the legislature may devise and ordain the manner of election, and Congress can and will control it, and so we shall be slaves to the southern States.

Mr. GORHAM said, he did not mean to consider the effect of the revising power of Congress; it was time enough to consider that when we come to it.

Mr. PIERCE, of Partridgefield, said he had no objection to the qualifications in the article under debate, but he wanted to be satisfied why there was no qualification in point of property.

Mr. KING said it was necessary to show the certainty of the people's exercising the right of election. It is clearly certain and positive in the paragraph last under debate, and the question is, whether it is rendered insecure by the fourth section.

Now, that does not render it insecure; for 1. Time of election does not mean the term for which the representatives are chosen; 2. Nor the place where elections are held; nor 3. The manner of holding elections. Therefore the controlling power of Congress does not extend to altering biennial elections. The legislatures of the several States shall prescribe in these cases; it is their duty. But the difficulty is, why should Congress have those powers? For the same reasons that the General Court have power to compel every town to send representatives; otherwise the electors may be negligent, and the liberties of the people may be utterly destroyed, without the vigilance and coercion of government.

Dr. TAYLOR. My difficulty is, Congress may make such regulations as to deprive the people of the right of electing. I make no difficulty as to the time, but as to the place; Congress may fix the place in Berkshire or Lincoln, where the people cannot attend.