happened that "the first Wednesday in March," 1789, was March 4, and as the Congress holds for two years and the President for four years, the 4th of March became a fixed day regardless of the day of the week. It was intended by the Constitution that the first Monday in December should be the time to start the new Government, but the delay in its ratification pushed over the beginning from December until March, and everything else merely followed. Nothing short of a constitutional amendment could now change Inauguration Day and the beginning of the term of Congress from March 4 to some other day.

How should the Executive be elected?

This question presented almost insurmountable difficulties. "If ever the tranquillity of the Nation is to be disturbed," said Chancellor Kent, and its liberties endangered by a struggle for power, it will be upon this very subject of a choice for President."

All sorts of plans were proposed. One, that the President be chosen by Congress, was adopted and afterwards rejected. A proposal to elect by direct vote of the people was defeated. Another, that the "National Executive" be elected by the governors of the States was rejected.

Gradually, the idea of an election by the people directly or indirectly gained ground, until, at last it was agreed that the choice should be made by electors, appointed by the legislatures of the States. This was a compromise between the large and the small States. This method was intended to place absolute control of the choice of a President in a small body of citizens carefully selected by the several States. And to avoid, on the one hand, the popular tumult and passion that a direct election by the people might involve, and on the other, the legislative domination of the Executive by the Congress.

Each State was to have electors equal in number to its Senators and Representatives, who were to meet in that State on the same day on which the electors met in all the other States. It was thought that each separate State group would be unaware of the decision of the others. But time proved this to be more theoretical than practical. There were then no political parties as now. Electors voted as they pleased. They were independent, unpledged, and voted in secret. But by and by they became dominated, first by caucuses and then by conventions, until they became automatons to register the party will. They were no longer independent. The party spirit first manifested itself in John Adam's time, and to-day a presidential elector who should fail to cast his vote for his party's nominee would become infamous. Thousands have kept faith, and not one has failed to vote for his party's candidate.

It is recorded, however, that three electors voted for John Adams against their party, and that one Federalist elector in Pennsylvania voted for Jefferson, but this was before the party system, as we now understand it, came into being.

We speak of the electors in the States as the "Electoral College." This term was first used about the year 1800 and in 1845 it appeared in legislation. It is therefore an official term. The Electoral Colleges were intended to be the exact counterpart of the joint convention of the two Houses of Congress in the representations of the State as units, as well as the population of the States. We have seen that

electors were to be appointed in such manner as the State legislatures may direct. This power was to be absolute. A State, if it chose, could vest the appointment of electors in a turnpike corporation or any other set of individuals; and as a matter of fact in our early years under the Constitution in many of the States presidential electors were not elected at all but were appointed by the legislatures. South Carolina was the last State to give up the practice of appointing. This she did in 1868, and since that time electors in all of the States have been chosen by the people on a general ticket. Two are known as presidential electors at large, corresponding to the number of Senators from each State, and the remainder equal in number to a State's Representatives, are selected from but not by congressional districts.

The only limitation imposed by the Constitution on the electors was that they should not be in the service of the United States.

One high and competent authority concludes that none- but a State voter is eligible, and that every person holding any office of profit or trust under the United States or any office of profit under a State who is required to take and subscribe to an oath to support the Constitution of the State or the United States is disqualified from being a presidential elector.

Although each State was left to its own way of appointing electors, Congress was given authority to determine the time of choosing them and the day on which they should cast their votes; which day, says the Constitution, shall be the same throughout the United States. This was important because if the time for an election had been left to the States each State might have had a different day, resulting in confusion. Hence, Congress fixed as the day for the national election "The Tuesday next after the first Monday in November in every fourth year," which this year will be next Tuesday, November 4, in every State, and also fixed the second Monday in January next following as the day on which the electors shall meet and give their votes, at such place in each State as the legislature of such State shall direct. The Electoral Colleges having once met, voted, and transmitted their certificates to the seat of Government can not be reconvened. Therefore, the electors chosen next Tuesday in each State will meet at the respective State capitals on January 12, 1925, and cast their votes. We will not have to wait until that time, however, to know their choice. We shall possibly know Tuesday night or Wednesday morning whether any candidate has received a majority of electoral votes (266 out of 531) or whether the election must be decided in the House of Representatives or the Senate between the second Wednesday in February next, February 11, 1925, the day fixed for counting the electoral vote, and the 4th of March, the day on which the present Congress will adjourn.

It was not enough for the Constitution to vest the executive power in a President of the United States and say that he should be chosen by electors appointed by the State legislatures; but the Constitution makers looked further. Suppose the electors could not choose; that no person had a majority, or there should be a tie vote. What then? Something more was necessary. We find, therefore, that in the original provision of the Constitution under which early elections were determined the electors were free to choose two persons for President. A majority of the whole number was neces

sary to elect. Obviously, then, more than one person might have a majority, or two persons might have an equal number of votes. In either of these events the election was to be decided by the House of Representatives.

If no person had a majority the House was to choose from the five highest on the list; but as a concession to the small States the vote was to be taken by States, the entire representation from each State having but one vote, a majority of the States being necessary to a choice. After a President was chosen the person having the greatest number of electoral votes was to be Vice President; but in case of a tie the Senate was to choose from them by ballot. But this the Senate could not do until the House had acted, and if the House became deadlocked a total suspension of the power of the Government would result. Madison said this provision was the compromise of compromises of the convention.

It is interesting here to observe that no provision for a Vice President was made until the closing days of the convention, which had previously decided that the President pro tempore of the Senate should be the next in line for succession to the Presidency. Also to note that originally the Senate and not the House of Representatives was to choose the President in case the Electoral College failed to do so. Those changes were made at the last minute for fear of giving the Senate too much power.

Only a few years were needed to develop some of the worst imperfections of the original electoral plan. As early as 1797 a proposed amendment sought to require the electors to distinguish in their ballots between candidates for the Presidency and the Vice Presidency, but it was not until a real crisis arose which threatened the life of the Republic that some defects were cured. John Adams became Vice President in 1789, though he did not receive half the votes. The mention of his name is a reminder that he presided at the electoral count of 1797. It has been said and repeated frequently that he counted the votes that made him President. did nothing of the kind. The custom had been established and was then followed of counting the vote by tellers representing the Senate and the House. Adams merely opened the certificates and handed them to the tellers, who reported the result. Adams then declared the result, showing himself to have been elected President.

He

The only time the President of the Senate ever counted the votes was in the First Congress, when George Washington was elected President. John Langdon, of Virginia, was President of the Senate, and he was empowered by a resolution of the Continental Congress to count the electoral votes. Thereafter this was done by tellers.

In 1800 Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr received the same number of votes-73-and each a majority. It was well known that the electors desired Jefferson for President and Burr for Vice President. This demonstrated the unwidsom of voting for both President and Vice President upon the same ballot. It proved the possibility of electing a President from one party and a Vice President from another, and it showed the danger of a tie vote and opened the door to cabals, bargains, and coalitions. Jefferson was a Republican and Burr a Federalist. Party and personal feeling ran high. Highhanded methods were seriously proposed and revolution was threatened. Hamilton, a Federalist, but a hater of Burr, is given credit,

patriotically, for bringing about Jefferson's election on the thirtysixth ballot, although he regarded Jefferson as "an atheist in religion and a fanatic in politics." It will be remembered that it was Burr who later killed Hamilton in a duel.

The Jefferson-Burr controversy threatened a dissolution of the Government. It was said that the country escaped from a civil war only from the prevelance of that kind temper and magnanimity in the Congress which prevailed in the convention itself. It was seriously proposed to pass a law to create a President in which the person was to be named leaving the votes and choice of the people out of consideration altogether. Had this been effected it was freely predicted that such person's head would not have remained on his shoulders for 24 hours afterwards. Jefferson himself, in a letter to Monroe, said that the "day such an act passed the Middle States would arm." This was the first time a presidential election had been thrown into the House of Representatives, and it nearly wrecked the young Republic.

Another thing was discovered. The original Constitution left the door wide open for a foreigner or a person under age to become President in case the Vice President became Acting President because no qualifications for the Vice President had been prescribed. This bitter experience led in 1804 to the adoption of the twelfth amendment to the Constitution. And although imperfect it is vastly better than the old provision. It is the one under which we now elect a President, and time has proved its inadequacy. It is interesting to note that the twelfth amendment passed the House by one vote, that of the Speaker.

The main features of the change were:

That electors were to vote separately for President and Vice President. If no person received the electoral majority for President, the House of Representatives is to choose from the three (instead of the five) highest; while the Senate became empowered for the first time to choose the Vice President under circumstances similar to those which would carry the Presidential election into the House, its choice being made by the votes of the Senators instead of by States as in the House.

In case of failure of the House to elect by the 4th of March, then person elected Vice President by the Senate becomes President. The Senate does not await the result in the House, but proceeds at once to vote. Thus it may be known who has been elected Vice President even before the House elects a President. The first and only time in our history the Senate elected a Vice President was in 1837. Martin Van Buren received a large majority for President in the Electoral College, but the vote for Vice President was divided between four candidates. Richard M. Johnson, of Kentucky, lacked three of a majority of the whole number; his nearest competitor was Francis Granger, of New York. On the same day the vote was counted at the joint session of Congress the Senate withdrew to its own chamber and proceeded at once on the first ballot to elect Johnson. This fact destroys the theory that the Senate must wait until the House fails to elect a President before voting for a Vice President. One of the purposes of the twelfth amendment in conferring upon the Senate the power to elect a Vice President was to avoid, if possible, an interregnum in Government, which would certainly occur,

however brief it might be, if the Senate postponed the election of a Vice President until the House failed to elect a President.

Moreover, a law provides that the term of four years for which a President and Vice President shall be elected shall in all cases commence on the 4th day of March next succeeding the day on which the votes of the electors have been given.

Another defect in the old provision of the Constitution was remedied in the twelfth amendment by prescribing that no person ineligible to the Presidency should ever become Vice President.

The second and last time an election was thrown into the House of Representatives was in 1824, just 100 years ago. In the Electoral College there were 182 votes, of which Andrew Jackson had 99, John Quincy Adams 84, William H. Crawford 41, and Henry Clay 37. Jackson had a plurality of 50,000 in the popular vote.

There was no question as to the election of John C. Calhoun as Vice President.

Henry Clay was Speaker of the House at that time. Before the day for counting the votes a great scandal arose. Charges of corruption were made against Clay, which were investigated without result. The situation was one which invited intrigue, and no doubt there was much bargaining and attempted trading of votes. Excitement ran high. A coalition between the followers of Clay and those of Adams resulted in the election of John Quincy Adams on the first ballot. Clay, on account of being fourth in the Electoral College, was eliminated in the House. If the old provision of voting for the five highest on the list had not been changed to the three highest Clay instead of Adams probably would have been the choice. Adams when a Senator had opposed the change from five to three, and had his argument prevailed it is unlikely he would have become President.

When the election was thrown into the House of Representatives in 1800 and in 1824, the House adopted rules, practically the same in both cases, to regulate the ballot.

First the State delegations voted among themselves to ascertain the vote of each State. The voting was done by ballot in duplicate and was counted by two sets of tellers. If their reports agreed the result was stated to the House and accepted as the true votes of the States. In case the ballots of a State were equally divided then the word "divided" was written on each duplicate. In the JeffersonBurr fight the votes of two States were divided.

The counting of the electoral vote has always been a source of grave trouble. The twelfth amendment contains the original provision declaring that the President of the Senate, which is the Vice President, when there is one, shall in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates "and the vote. shall then be counted."

The meaning of these last four words has always been in doubt, and this doubt came very near leading to serious consequences in 1877 in the Hayes-Tilden controversy. It is not clear as to who shall do the counting, and therefore who shall determine what votes shall be counted in case there is a question as to their regularity or

correctness.