II.

THE FIRST ELECTION.

It was provided by the Constitution of the United States that the "ratification of the conventions of nine States shall be sufficient for the establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the same." New Hampshire was the ninth State to signify its adhesion to the new form of government, on June 21, 1788; Virginia followed on the 26th of the same month; and New York yielded, after a memorable and bitter struggle, on July 26.

It then became the duty of the Congress of the Confederation, in obedience both to the advice of the Convention of 1787 and to its own resolution, to fix the time for the new government to go into operation. But Congress wasted time in a dreary discussion where the seat of government should be fixed. A decision was at last reached in favor of New York; and on the 13th of September, 1788, Congress passed a resolution, reciting in a preamble that a sufficient number of States had ratified the Constitution, and directing that the choice of electors of President and Vice-President should take place on the first Wednesday of January, 1789, that they should meet in their respective States on the first Wednesday in February and give in their votes, and that the new Congress should meet in New York on the first Wednesday in March. The people had begun to be very impatient at the long delay of Congress, and they hailed this resolu tion with great satisfaction.

The interval of time before the appointment of electors was to take place was short. No preparations whatever

had been made for an election in any of the States. It would have been idle, so many of the people must have thought, to pass laws for the choice of representatives and electors under a Constitution which was so bitterly opposed as was that of 1787, and which might never go into effect. Accordingly it was necessary to begin with. the preliminaries for an election only four months distant, after the resolution of Congress was adopted.

In those days communication was very slow. It would have been nearly impossible, in the time allowed, to have made full preparation for such an election as is that of electors to-day in some of the States. The news of the resolution of Congress would hardly reach some of the distant State capitals in two weeks. The governor must then issue a proclamation summoning the legislature, and again, an allowance must be made for the slowness of the mails. Then would follow the meeting of the legislature and a discussion, perhaps prolonged, as to the manner in which the electors should be appointed; the passage of a law conferring upon the people the right to choose them; and the further preparations for the election. The general impression seems to have been that Congress intended, when it made the time so short, that the legislatures themselves should make the choice. "It is evident," wrote a newspaper correspondent at Philadelphia, on Oct. 1, 1788, "that Congress construe the Constitution that the legislatures of the several States, not the people, are to choose the electors, as that body has ordered the choice of said electors to be on the first Wednesday of January, and their meeting for the choice of President four weeks later. For if the people, as hath been asserted, are to choose the electors, is it possible that in the large States of Massachusetts, Virginia, etc., the returns can be made for the choice, notice given to the persons chosen, and the

persons thus chosen have time to meet together in the short space of one month? No, it is impossible, and can only be remedied by the legislature, who, in fact, are 'the States' making the choice."

Nevertheless, even at that first election, an attempt was made in several States to give the people the choice of electors. Rhode Island and North Carolina had not ratified the Constitution, and of course did not appoint electors. In Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, the governors did not summon the legislatures in season to provide for popular elections, and the appointment of electors was made on the designated day by the legislatures themselves. The proceedings in the other States are interesting.

In New Hampshire an act was passed under which the people virtually nominated the electors, but the actual appointment was reserved for the legislature. Under this law an election took place and the votes were returned to and counted by the legislature. On the day fixed by Congress, the 7th of January, 1789, the legislature being in session, no agreement had been reached as to the manner in which the appointment should be made. The Senate claimed equal power with the House of Representatives in the appointment. The House proposed a joint ballot. The contest was prolonged far into the night, the House stubbornly refusing to admit the pretension of the Senate to a full negative upon its action. At last, shortly before midnight, in order that the vote of the State might not be lost by a delay beyond the time fixed by Congress, the House yielded, under protest, and concurred in the appointment of the electors chosen by the Senate. They were all Federalists.

A somewhat elaborate scheme was devised and put in

operation in Massachusetts. The State having been divided into districts for the choice of representatives in Congress, the people were directed to bring in their ballots for two candidates for electors in each district. On the first Wednesday in January, the votes having been previously canvassed, the legislature chose one of these two for each district, and also two electors at large.

The vote of New York was lost. A contest similar to that in New Hampshire took place, but one much more bitter than the latter. The Assembly was willing to elect by a joint ballot of the two branches, or to divide the electors with the Senate. The Senate would assent to nothing short of a complete negative upon the action of the Assembly, which was not yielded, and the time for election passed.

Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia passed laws providing for popular elections, which took place without great excitement. Not only in these States, but in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, the vote was very light. The two parties were made up of those who favored the Constitution on the one hand, and those who opposed it on the other. Political sentiment seems to have been largely one way or the other in each community. Here the Federalists comprised nearly the whole population; there, scarcely a Federalist was to be found. There were thus present none of the elements necessary for a great political contest. The majority cast perhaps a half of their possible vote, the minority hardly appeared at the polls; in fact, they often had no candidates in the field.

Meantime, who were to be voted for when the electors should meet? Washington, of course, was to be one of the two persons equally to be voted for by the electors, he who had the highest number, being a majority of all

the electors, to be President, and the candidate receiv ing the next highest number to be Vice-President. But there was no formal nomination and no agreement among the electors, even among those belonging to the Federalist party, that Washington should be chosen. It was simply regarded as the obvious and proper course to make him the first President. Nor did the Anti-Federalists at any time come to the point of deciding to oppose him. Probably they never even seriously considered the propriety of so doing. It was charged that they did so, but the accusation was never supported by any evidence. For example: it is said in the life of Alexander Hamilton, by his son, that "for a time the pretensions of Franklin were discussed in private circles. But the incomparably superior claims of Washington silenced this purpose, which there is no evidence was encouraged by Franklin, whose extreme age would alone have presented an insuperable objection." As a matter of fact, there is no evidence that Franklin was even aware of any such purpose, if it ever existed. There is too good reason to believe that the alleged disposition to pass by the claims of Washington was a figment of the imagination, — an invention for the purpose of forming the basis of an intrigue either to control the vice-presidency, or to make the vote for John Adams so small as to exhibit him to the country as a most unpopular candidate.

Public opinion had, indeed, concentrated itself upon Mr. Adams as Vice-President almost as decidedly as it had fixed upon Washington for the first place in the new government. The propriety of taking the Vice President from New England was recognized by all Federalists. The names of Governor Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, and General Knox, were canvassed. The last named was a soldier, like Washington, and he