Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

error of opinion, are, for corruption, mal-practice, and misbehavior in office, liable to removal by impeachment in the same manner as executive officers; and are further accountable, to the people through their representatives for their character and conduct, being liable to be by them removed from office in the manner prescribed in the constitution. These provisions of the constitution, if we may trust not to theory merely, but to the experience of more than half a century in these United States, are more effectual in preventing the abuse of power in government, in securing the rights and liberties and promoting the interest and happiness of a people, than any thing before known in political institutions.

CHAPTER VI.

Of Election and Appointment to Office.

It has been already observed, that elections ought to be periodical. To prevent, in the members of the legislature, and the executive, every idea of an independent power, of a property in their appointments, they must be elected for a limited time; a period must be fixed by the constitution when their exercise of power shall cease, and leave them that preeminence only, which they may derive from the approbation of the people. The time must be sufficiently long to complete the ordinary routine of business.

In smaller states, a year will be the most convenient period for the house of representatives. In large states, the time necessary for the elections, the nature of the ordinary business,

and the magnitude of the subjects which demand their attention, may require a longer period for that body. Reasons may also be found, as has been suggested, for fixing a different period for the members of the senate from that of the representatives, and a different period may be deemed proper for the president and other officers who may receive their appointments by popular elections. But in every instance, some period ought to be fixed, beyond the power of the legislature to alter. Such provision will, on every occasion, re-call their attention to the interests of the people, and keep their accountability constantly in view. It will be necessary, however, to entrust to the legislature, the power and duty of passing laws to preserve order, to prevent and punish corruption, and to carry into full effect this provision of the constitution, as well as to order elections at other times than the stated periods, when it may be necessary for filling vacancies that may be occasioned by death, resignation, or removal. One important point to be considered is, the qualifications which ought to be required of electors and of candidates for office.

The questions of a general and of a limited right of suffrage and eligibility, have been not a little agitated in these states. Before the revolution, the colonies who had their provincial legislatures, universally followed the example of the mother country in making property a necessary qualification both of the right of suffrage and eligibility. The amount of property was different in the different colonies; but generally, a freehold property was required; in some, personal property to a larger amount in value was substituted for freehold. When, upon the revolution, the colonies became independent states, they generally, in forming their constitutions, adopted the same qualifications. On a revision of these constitutions, in several instances the qualifications have been diminished or abolished, and a nearer approach has been made to a general right of suffrage. The right of suffrage, or of the people to elect the great functionaries of the government, is the principal of those political rights, in the free exercise and enjoyment of which, alone, is found any sufficient guaranty for the permanent enjoyment of civil liberty. Whatever reasons there may be in Great Britain, arising from their mixed form of government,

or the general state of property, for limiting the right of suffrage, I am persuaded they do not exist with us, or certainly not to the same extent.

In a representative government, where every thing ought to tend, in a good degree, to a general equality, property seems not alone, or even principally, to be a just criterion of the right of suffrage. The natural, civil, and political rights of man, in society, are the subjects of legislative discussion, and provision, and their security,—the great end of all the apparatus of government in every department. The right of property is one of these rights and gives rise to a very extensive influence in society. It is, however, a right which, if it meets a too partial indulgence, if suffered to engross all political rights, will unavoidably suggest to the proprietor the idea, as it furnishes the means of infringing the rights of others with impunity. The interests of industry, of science, and the mechanic arts, have an equal claim on society. The protection and encouragement of these, tends to a more equal distribution of the goods of fortune, and to correct the unequal influence of wealth.

In a state, where, from the prevalence of corrupt principles, or from any other source, all property with its concomitant power, is accumulated in the hands of a few; where the great mass of the people are reduced to dependence, servility, and meanness, from which they can never hope to rise, but on the ruin of their oppressors, a general right of suffrage would be dangerous to the few, and at least for a time, to the people themselves, and might render impracticable the best institutions of which they are in such situation capable. But in the government of these United States, where the law equally regards the rights of the rich and the poor; where few are to be found wholly destitute of property, and fewer still without a well grounded hope of obtaining it; where industry and economy rarely fail to produce a competence, and often lead to wealth; no ill consequences are to be feared from a general right of suffrage.

By general, however, is not to be understood a universal and indiscriminate right; but so far general as to include all who are by law called upon to pay to the support of government,

or for the performance of public duties or services. Still, in every well regulated government, necessity and propriety will require exclusions. All females, from the delicate and dependent nature of their sex, and to preserve that purity and simplicity of character, on which the domestic as well as public happiness of mankind so much depends, have, generally, if not universally, been excluded from any share in political transactions. It will also be necessary and proper to exclude from the right of suffrage all those, who, from want of age, are supposed to be wanting in discretion—all who, from any legal disability are not sui juris-at their own disposal. Those whom the law deems incapable of governing themselves, can claim no voice in governing the state-and certainly the interests of virtue require, that those should be wholly excluded, who, by their crimes, have manifested a disposition totally corrupt, and by their conduct declared to the world, that they are no longer to be trusted. Indeed all who are, from situation in life, under the control of others so that they cannot be capable of acting their own opinion, ought to be excluded from the right of suffrage. But it is difficult to distinguish in this case. The control is an influence.

If, from the nature of their situation, any class of citizens are placed under a sinister influence, not ordinarily to be resisted by persons in that situation, the class ought to be excluded the right. All act under some kind of influence, who act from motives; but all influence is not inconsistent with the freedom of action. Some are capable of resisting an undue influence arising from almost any situation; others not, and far the greater number in any particular situation are found incapable of resisting, and if the good of the community so require, the whole class ought to be excluded. If it be said, that the right of suffrage is founded in the natural right of self-government, and is therefore not to be violated, the answer is, that if a society be founded in natural principles, the great end is the general utility, the greatest good of that society; and for attaining that end, there is not a right, natural, civil, or political, abstractly considered as belonging to individuals, which is not subject to limitation. No one can justly insist on the exercise of that as a right, which evidently tends to the general injury of the com

munity. But we must be careful not to mistake a partial for a general interest, the interest of a particular class or classes, for the interest of the whole.

I am unable to persuade myself, that any distinction ought, in general, to be made between the right of suffrage and eligibility. I say, in general; for a man may have placed himself in a situation, in which he owes a duty to society, incompatible with certain civil functions, and which the public good requires should not be suspended. A distinction of age also, which to abilities adds experience and maturity of judgment, may well be admitted. It is an honorary distinction, in which there is nothing invidious, and is yielded by mankind, in a certain degree, with general approbation. A distinction of other qualifications is mostly invidious. It tends to introduce a distinction of classes, and to excite a degree of haughtiness in the candidates. The electors, in such a case, feel themselves degraded, and that their class, notwithstanding their right of suffrage, is unrepresented.

If a character for abilities and integrity is to be considered the only qualifications for office, they will be more assiduously cultivated. These are all-important to the people, and of these, in relation to the principal functionaries of the legislative and executive departments, the people are competent judges. The choice of a worthy character reflects honor upon themselves, which they enjoy with the more satisfaction, as they are sensible of no restraint in the choice. From these considerations, I conclude, that the right of suffrage and of eligibility ought to be the same, or, distinguished by no qualifications but that of age, just mentioned. If in any state, different qualifications are found to be necessary, the necessity must have arisen from the different nature of the government and the condition of the people.

In a

It has been the opinion of some, that all the officers and functionaries of the government may, with the greatest safety, and therefore on principle, ought to be elected by the people. This appears to have been the opinion of Mr. Jefferson. letter written by him in the year 1816, to a friend, on the subject of a revision of the constitution of Virginia, he says, "The true foundation of a republican government is the equal right of

« AnteriorContinuar »