New Jersey, Tennessee, Georgia, Massachusetts, and Vermont.' This amendment, if passed, would have made the Senators directly responsible to the State legislatures. At first it would probably have resulted in the removal of such Senators as went counter to the supposed interests of their State, and it might have gone on until it would have led to the removal of all Senators who were not in harmony with the dominant party in the State legislature.2

It will be remembered that John Tyler, inasmuch as he believed in the right of instruction, resigned his seat in the Senate in 1836 rather than follow the instructions of the legis lature of Virginia to vote for the "expunging resolution.”3 Likewise Senator White of Tennessee resigned his seat during the session of 1839-40 because the legislature of his State passed resolutions censuring him for having voted on certain measures with the Whigs and calling on him in the future to act with the Democratic party.*

It is worthy of note, in connection with the doctrine of instruction, that it is customary for the States in passing a resolution in favor of some amendment to prefix a preamble instructing their Senators and requesting their Representatives to urge its adoption, thus seemingly implying that the legislatures have the right to instruct Senators, but that the Representatives are responsible only to their constituents.

30. TERM OF SENATORS.

The term of Senators is abnormally long. With the excep tion of some judgships, it is the longest term of any of the elective offices in the United States. It is not surprising,

'Annals of Congress, Tenth Congress, second session, p. 306. Ibid., Eleventh Congress, third session, p. 383. Ibid., Twelfth Congress, first session, p. 559. Archives of Massachusetts Legislature, Doc. 6845; Resolves of Massachusetts Legislature, Vol. XII, p. 365; Archives of Massachusetts, Misc. Doc., 6663.

2 Richard Brent, in 1811, was censured by the legislature of Virginia for voting for the recharter of the bank contrary to its instructions. A bill setting forth its rights appears in the Laws of Virginia. See McMaster, III, p. 390.

Senator Leigh's

3 For letter of John Tyler, see Niles' Register, Vol. L, pp. 17, 25-27. letter refusing to resign, ibid., pp. 28-32. Resolutions of the legislature of Virginia asserting the right of instruction, S. J., p. 233 (Twenty-fourth Congress, first session). Mr. Rives of Virginia had resigned his seat in the previous year because he differed from the legislature on the deposit question, Niles' Register, Vol. 1, p. 17. See also Niles' Register, Vol. XLVII, pp. 129, 161, 178, 313, 401-402, 445; Vol. 1, p. 11.

4 Benton, Thirty Years' View, II, p. 184. Webster expressed himself on several occasions against the binding force of instructions. Works, 111, pp. 228, 356; v, p. 425, Foster, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1, pp. 494-496, and notes for other instances. 5 In the Federal Congress it was first fixed at seven years, then reconsidered and after a five and a nine year term had been rejected the six-year term was adopted, Elliot, v.

therefore, that eight propositions have been presented to change the term of Senators, all within the first fifty years of the history of the Constitution. These all proposed diminishing the length of the term, some to one, others to three, and still others to four years.

Before discussing the separate amendments of this class, one amendment must be referred to, which was proposed by the ratifying convention of New York. It provided that no person should be eligible as a Senator for more than six years in any term of twelve years. This would prevent a Senator succeeding himself. The advantage of the proposi tion was not evident, and it received no consideration in the First Congress.

One proposition was, however, presented in the First Congress affecting the term of Senators; this was the only resolution that has been offered proposing to reduce the term to one year. It further stipulated that no person should be capable of serving more than five years in any term of six years. The motion of reference was lost." Three resolutions have been proposed fixing the term at three years. This suggestion first came from the legislature of Virginia in 1795.3 Their proposition made provision for the division of the Senators into three classes, one-third to retire annually. The same amendment was next proposed by Senator Hillhouse, in 1808, as a necessary part of his plan for the choice of the President by lot each year from the retiring Senators. This change was last presented in 1816, by Senator Bibb of Georgia, and after an extended discussion was rejected by an overwhelming majority of the Senate."

Amendments were proposed in 1812, 1814, 1829, and 1839 reducing the term of Senators to four years. The first two of these were resolutions from the legislature of Tennessee. The last was one of a series of propositions introduced by Mr. Talia

1 App., No. 61. Similar restrictions proposed for Representatives in First Congress. Ante, par. 26. Another evidence of the fear of the creation of a ruling class and a desire for rotation in office.

7 It would seem that Georgia had also proposed the same, for in 1816 the legislature of Louisiana, North Carolina, and Ohio passed resolutions disagreeing with an amendment proposed by Georgia. Annals of Congress, Fourteenth Congress, first session, p. 365. Archives of Massachusetts, Misc., 8105, 8183.

ferro of Virginia. It made provision for the division of the Senators into two classes, so that one class should be elected biennially. None of these resolutions were reported from the committees to which they had been referred.

31. TRIAL OF IMPEACHMENTS OF SENATORS.

1

The ratifying conventions in Virginia and North Carolina proposed as an amendment to the Constitution "that some tribunal other than the Senate be provided for trying impeachments of Senators." The same amendment was rejected by the Senate when presented in the First Congress.2 Only one attempt has been made to impeach a Senator. This was in the case of William Blount of Tennessee, in 1798. Previous to the trial he had been expelled from the Senate for violation of the neutrality laws of the United States. He was acquitted by the Senate for lack of jurisdiction.3

In 1795 the legislature of Virginia passed a resolution recommending "that a tribunal other than the Senate be instituted for the trial of impeachments." With the exception of the propositions referred to in connection with the impeachment of judges, which were also presented during the early years of the life of the Constitution, no other emendation of this clause has been sought.

32. PRESENT STATUS OF AMENDMENTS RELATING TO THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT.

In the foregoing consideration of the various attempts to change in any particular the form of the legislative department, we have seen, with the exception of the amendments relating to the apportionment of Representatives and the popular election of Senators, that by far the greater number of propositions were introduced in the earlier years of the century. In recent years, with the exception of the above-mentioned classes, amendments of this character have been comparatively few. On the other hand, it is a noteworthy fact that there

1 App., Nos. 44, 97, see post, par. 71.

2 App., No. 286.

3 Blount's counsel held that the Senate had no jurisdiction over him, first, because as a Senator he was not a civil officer liable to impeachment, and, second, that since his expulsion he was no longer a Senator. The Senate sustained the first plea. Story, 1, pp. 559– 561, 567, 568, note 4; Foster, I, pp. 529–531.

App., No. 327b.

5 Post, par. 71.

is a growing desire to place some restriction upon the exercise of certain powers by Congress.1

Among the amendments presented during the closing years of the first century of our history under the Constitution the following are the most important: The proposition to change the time for opening and closing the sessions of Congress; the attempt to increase the term of Representatives to three years; the effort to fix a limit upon the number of Representatives, and the growing movement to confer the election of Senators upon the people.

All of these amendments are evidently intended to reform Congress and make it a more efficient body. All of these proposed changes, it would seem, are worthy of being adopted, with the possible exception of the election of Senators by popular vote, the advantage of which may be questioned.

See post, pars. 147, 149.

CHAPTER III.

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AFFECTING THE FORM OF THE

GOVERNMENT: EXECUTIVE.

33. EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.

More amendments have been proposed to change the provisions of the Constitution in regard to the executive department than upon any other subject, there being some five hundred amendments that can be classified under this head. Of these, by far the greater portion were relative to the choice and term of the Executive. Of the eighteen amendments that passed one branch of Congress during the one hundred years since the inauguration of the Government, one-half have contained provisions either affecting the method of electing the President or in regard to the duration of the term, and two have been presented to change the date of Inauguration Day.1

34. PLURAL EXECUTIVE: ABOLITION OF THE PRESIDENCY OR VICE-PRESIDENCY.

Two propositions presented at the same time in the trying days just previous to the civil war suggested very radical changes in the Executive office. The first was a resolution introduced by Mr. Jenkins of Virginia, calling for the appointment of a committee to inquire as to what changes are necessary in the form of the government for the self-preservation of the slave States, and suggesting the following for consideration: A dual Executive, the division of the Senate into two bodies, or making a majority of the Senate from the two sections necessary for all action, or the creation of another advisory body,

2

1 House 1, 1802, May 1, election of President and Vice-President, App., No. 345; House 2, 1803, October 28, election of President and Vice-President, App., No. 359; Senate 3, 1813, February 17, election of President and Vice-President, App., No. 409; Senate 4, 1819, February 3, election of President and Vice-President, App., No. 485; Senate 5, 1820, January 27, election of President and Vice-President, App., No. 489; Senate 6, 1822, March 11, election of President and Vice-President, App., No. 506; Senate 7, 1824, January 30, President ineligible to third term, App., No. 535; Senate 8, 1826, April 3, President ineligible to third term, App., No. 545; Senate 9, 1869, February 9, election of President and Vice-President, App., No. 1308; Senate 10, 1886, June 18, date for Inauguration Day, App., No. 1676; Senate 11, 1887, December 13, date for Inauguration Day, App., No. 1691; the twelfth amendment declared part of Constitution, September 25, 1804, App., No. 358.

2 Under certain circumstances the McDuffie proposition would have resulted in two Executives. Post par., 50, 3.