decided upon. The new republic was hardly strong enough to venture upon a course of favoritism or vindictiveness. The matter of appointments was also significant; but here, too, favoritism found no place. It was also decided that the Senate should choose its committees by ballot, and that its members should be divided into the classes by lot. The House, after the first session, decided to allow the speaker to appoint its committees. While the president's message was presented to the two houses orally, it was decided that all executive communications to the Senate should be submitted in writing. Some of the senators wanted the president to appear in the Senate in person and to remain until a ballot in ratification had been taken, but this idea did not prevail. It The formation of the Cabinet was one of the most important matters in connection with the organization of the government; Congress provided for three executive departments, that of foreign affairs, the treasury, and war. was the duty of the president to appoint the heads of these departments; and these three department heads, in connection with the attorney-general, became the advisory body of the executive. The appointments were made with good judgment. Thomas Jefferson was made secretary of foreign affairs. He had had a long experience in the diplomatic service, and was therefore conversant with international affairs. In addition to this he was a man of influence and popularity at home and was looked upon as a friend of the new form of government, although he had taken no part in its formation. Washington and Jefferson were both Virginians, but their relations had never been confidential and hardly sympathetic. They were utterly unlike both in temperament and abilities, and the appointment was made, not on personal grounds, but on the basis of merit. Hamilton was placed in charge of the treasury department. The appointment was a bold one. Washington passed over the entire treasury board and appointed the brilliant young West Indian at the age of thirty-two "to unravel the tangled skein of Continental finances." No better selection could possibly be made. Hamilton must be accorded first place in the list of American financiers. As his duties were the most arduous, so were they the most successfully accomplished. It is not too much to say that the very life of the republic depended upon the management of this department. The finances of the Confederation had been woefully mismanaged since the retirement of Robert Morris. The affairs of the department were in a deplorable condition. There was ample opportunity for Hamilton to display that brilliant constructive statesmanship for which he was so justly noted. If Alexander Hamilton had done nothing else but lay the foundation of our national credit, he would deserve a high place among American statesmen. As it is, he stands second only to Washington among the men of his time. Henry Knox, a distinguished soldier of the Revolution, was appointed to preside over the war department. Knox was honest, able, and loyal, and an element of strength to the new Cabinet. Edmund Randolph, the proposer of the Virginia Plan in the Constitutional Convention, was made attorney-general. The department of justice was not established as a separate executive department until a later time, but Randolph was included by Washington in his advisory body. Such, then, was the personnel of Washington's first Cabinet. Although the members were still young men,-Hamilton was thirty-two; Randolph, thirty-six; Knox, thirty-nine; and Jefferson, forty-six,-they were all well known on both sides of the Atlantic, and, taken collectively, this first presidential Cabinet has never been excelled in ability. There were, however, other matters pertaining to the Cabinet besides the appointment of the members which demanded attention. It was definitely specified in the Constitution that the president's appointments should be approved by the Senate. The question now arose: Can the president remove the members of his Cabinet upon his own authority, or is the concurrence of the Senate necessary? Madison contended in Congress that the president should have the sole power to remove a Cabinet officer, and his view prevailed. If it had not, a Cabinet officer might cultivate a following in the Senate and thus remain in office against the wishes of the president and to the embarrassment of the executive department. Vice-president John Adams is entitled to credit in this connection, as it was by his casting vote in the Senate that the necessary authority was granted to the president. In It was also necessary to determine the relations which should exist between the president and his Cabinet. The matter was not definitely set forth in the Constitution. fact, there was no specific reference to a Cabinet at all. The proposition to constitute an advisory council for the executive was defeated in the Convention, and the Constitution makes only a vague reference to an advisory body when it says that the president "may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices." This clause would not necessarily imply a Cabinet such as now exists, and Washington interpreted it in its most obvious meaning. He usually took the advice of each member separately and never convened the Cabinet as a whole except on extraordinary occasions. Having procured the advice of each individual member, he decided the point in question as it seemed best to him. During the administration of John Adams the functions of the Cabinet were more fully developed, and that body was inclined to insist somewhat upon being consulted. During Jefferson's administration the Cabinet practically assumed the position which it now holds. Jefferson was accustomed to submit important matters to his advisory body for discussion and decision. He himself voted with the rest and usually looked upon the decision thus obtained as final. He always held that he had a constitutional right to reverse the decision of his Cabinet, but, as a matter of fact, rarely did so. It was also necessary to determine the relationship and mode of communication which should exist between the |