will be observed that they divide themselves into two classes: those which are political in their character, as an exercise of sovereignty, and those which more especially regard the private rights of individuals. In the latter the prohibition is absolute and universal. In the former it is sometimes absolute and sometimes sub

jected to the consent of congress. It will at once be perceived how full of difficulty and delicacy the task was, to reconcile the jealous tenacity of the states over their own sovereignty, with the permanent security of the national government, and the inviolability of private rights. The task has been accomplished with eminent

success.

Pertinent Questions.

When was slavery introduced into the United States? Give an account of the steps taken to abolish it.

What is the use of the writ of habeas corpus? If a sane person were confined in an asylum, how could he be got out? Could a person who had taken religious vows imposing seclusion from the world, be released by means of this writ? Show the necessity of power to suspend the writ in cases of rebellion or invasion. Could the thing forbidden in a bill of attainder be done by a court? Give an example of an ex post facto law.

What is meant by "entering" and "clearing" a port?

How could the president get hold of any United States money other than that received in payment of his salary?

Could you receive a present from a foreign government? Name any American who has received a title or a present from a foreign government. Must a titled foreigner renounce his title on becoming an American citizen?

What are "greenbacks?" Did you ever see a state "greenback?" When do you expect to see one?

What is a contract? Could a legislature pass a law doing away with imprisonment for debt? What argument did Daniel Webster make in the famous Dartmouth College Case?

Name the various state inspectors in this state. How are they paid? May a state impose taxes to defray its own expenses? What prohibitions apply to both the general and the state governments. Arrange all the prohibitions in tabular form, classifying as indicated by Judge Story in the paragraph quoted.

* Story.

CHAPTER XXIII.

ARTICLE II.-THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.

It seems to us a matter of course that there should be an executive department in the government—that after the laws are made there should be some person or persons whose duty it should be to carry them into execution. But it will be remembered that under the confederation there was no executive department. The colonists had suffered from kingly rule, and in forming their first government after independence, they naturally avoided anything having the appearance of kingliness. After trying their experiment for some years, however, their "sober second sense" told them that the executive department is a necessity, and when the convention assembled to "revise the articles of confederation" (as they at first intended to do) one of the things upon which there was practical unanimity of opinion was the necessity of having the government organized into three departments.

The question in regard to the executive department was how to organize it, so as to secure two chief qualities; namely, energy of execution and safety to the people. The former was fully appreciated, for the weakness of execution during the confederation period, or the lack of execution, had impressed upon all thinking persons the necessity of more vigor in carrying out the laws. The experience during colonial days emphasized the necessity of surrounding the office with proper safeguards. And among those entrusted with the organization of a scheme of government, were many who were well versed in history-men who knew that the executive department is the one in which lies the menace to human liberty.

Under these two main branches of the problem, arose such questions as: How many persons shall constitute the executive? What shall the term be? How shall the executive be chosen? What powers, other than those which are purely executive, shall be vested in the department? What checks shall be placed about the executive, or how shall the department be held responsible, without crippling its efficiency?

How well the problem was solved, we shall find out in our study of the provisions of the constitution pertaining to this department.

Clause 1.- Vestment of Power.

1

The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years,' and together with the vice-president, chosen for the same term, shall be elected as follows:

'This sentence answers the question, "How many persons shall constitute the executive?" and gives the official title of the executive.

The executive authority is vested in one person for two chief reasons: To secure energy in execution, and to impose upon the executive a sense of responsibility. If the executive power were vested in a number of persons, the differences and jealousies sure to arise, and the absence of responsibility, would result in a feeble administration, which is but another name for a bad administration.

"The term first reported by the committee of the whole was seven years, with the provision forbidding re-election. Some of the delegates were in favor of annual elections, while others thought that the executive should be elected for life or good behavior. And other

terms, varying from two to ten years, had their advocates. After much discussion, the term of four years was agreed upon as a compromise, and no limitation was put upon the number of terms for which a person might be elected.

In another place it is made the duty of the president to recommend to congress such measures as he deems necessary for the good of the country. He should, therefore, have a term long enough to fairly test his "policy" and to stimulate him to personal firmness in the execution of his duties, yet not so long as to free him from a sense of responsibility. It was thought that a term of four years would cover both of the conditions mentioned.

"The purpose of having a vice-president is to provide a successor for the president in case of his disability or death.

CHOOSING THE PRESIDENT AND VICE-PRESIDENT.

Clause 2.-Number and Appointment of Electors. Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the legis lature thereof may direct, a number of electors equal to the whole number of senators and representatives to which the state may be entitled in the congress; but no senator or representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an elector.

Three plans for the election of president and vicepresident were proposed: First, election by congress; second, election by the people; third, election by persons chosen by the people for that special purpose.

The objection to the first plan was, that it would rob the executive department of that independence which

in our plan of government it is designed to possess-it would render the executive department in a measure subordinate to the legislative department.

The objections to the second plan came from two sources. Some of the delegates feared that, inexperienced as they were, the people could not be trusted to act wisely in the choice of a president-that they would be swayed by partizan feeling, instead of acting with cool deliberation. And the small states feared that in a popular election their power would count for little.

Then the compromise in the organization of the congress was remembered, and it was resolved that the election of the president and vice-president should be placed in the hands of persons chosen for that special purpose, and that the number of the electors from each state should be that of its representation in congress. This satisfied both parties. Those who thought that the people could not be entrusted with so important a matter as the choice of the president, hoped that this mode would place the election in the hands of the wise men of the several states. And the delegates from the small states secured in this all the concession which they could fairly ask.

next question was: There being much

This matter being settled, the How shall the electors be chosen? difference of opinion on the subject, it was thought best to let each state choose its electors in the way which it might prefer.

Naturally the modes of choosing electors varied. In some states the legislature chose them, but this mode soon became unpopular. * In some states they were chosen by the people on a general ticket, and in others,

* South Carolina, however, retained this mode until very recently.