2. On what principle are Congresses numbered? When does the legal existence of a Congress begin? When does it terminate?

3. Give an account of the two regular sessions of Congress.

4. What are the duties of the Speaker of the House?

5. Give an account of the committee system.

6. How is it possible for the committee on rules to control the course of legislation in the House?

7. Describe the Senate in its leading characteristic. On what principle is debate in the Senate conducted?

8. Discuss in a broad way the powers of Congress.

9. Describe the process of Impeachment.

10. What is the power of the Senate in reference to treaties and presidential appointments. What is meant by "senatorial courtesy ''?

SUGGESTIVE QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES

1. Answer the following questions by referring to the Constitution: How is a Speaker of the House of Representatives chosen (13)? When does the Vice-President have a vote in the Senate? When a President is impeached who presides at the impeachment trial in the Senate (20)? What constitutes a quorum in the House (26) ? How may disorderly behavior in Congress be punished (29)? How may a member of Congress be expelled (29)? How may a yea and nay vote be secured (30)? Give the history of a bill after it has passed Congress (37). How may the veto of the President be overcome (40)? Under what circumstances may the President defeat a bill without vetoing it (41)? To what things besides bills is the approval of the President necessary (42) ?

2. Give reasons for not allowing the Vice-President to preside at an impeachment trial when the President is accused.

3. Why is it unfortunate that so long a time should elapse between the election of Congress and its first regular session?

4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of "senatorial courtesy ''? What is meant by "filibustering''?

Topics for Special Work.-Congressional Procedure: 7, 71-78. The Powers of Congress: 5, 268-281. The Senate, its Workings and Influence: 2, 83-93. The House at Work: 2, 108–114. The Committees of Congress: 2, 115-122; also 30, 162-166. Freedom of Debate in the Senate: 30, 167-170. A Defense of the Senate: 30, 177–184.

XVIII

THE PRESIDENCY

The Election of the President. As we have seen, a fatal weakness of the Union under the Articles of Confederation was the absence of an executive to enforce the laws. The Convention soon decided to remedy this defect by establishing a strong executive department and vesting its powers in a President (78). How was this officer to be selected? This question gave rise to a vast amount of discussion. Some wanted him elected by Congress, but it was said that this would make the executive dependent upon the legislature, and it was highly important that these two branches should be independent of each other. It was suggested that he be elected by the Senate, but this method was opposed as being too aristocratic. An election by a popular vote of the whole country was recommended; this plan was opposed as being too democratic. To end the discussion a plan of indirect election was adopted: the President was to be chosen by State colleges of electors, the electoral college of each State to have a number of electors equal to the combined number of senators and representatives to which the State was entitled in Congress (81). Each State was permitted to select its electors in a way agreeable to the legislature (80). Each of the electors was to vote for two persons (82) and the person who received the greatest number of votes (providing it was a majority) was to be the President, and the one who stood second in the list was to be Vice-President (83). If more than one person received a majority of the

electoral votes the election of the President was to be made by the House (84).

The electoral plan as first adopted proved to be as clumsy in practice as it was excellent in theory. It worked well enough at the first and second presidential elections when Washington was the choice of every elector, but when in the third election it resulted in choosing a Federalist (John Adams) as President and a Democrat (Thomas Jefferson) as Vice-President, its efficiency as a means of expressing the popular will began to be questioned. In the fourth presidential election the electoral system as devised by the framers broke down almost completely and the Constitution had to be speedily amended (146). By Amendment XII, which was adopted in 1804, the work of the electoral college is simplified by making the election of Vice-President an affair distinct from the election of the President (147).

The State legislature may appoint the electors itself, it may vest their appointment in some other body, or it may call upon the people to elect them. In the early days of the Union the States differed in their methods of selecting electors. In some States they were elected by the legislature, in some they were elected by districts as representatives in Congress are at the present time, while in a few States they were elected on a common ticket. To-day every State elects its presidential electors in the same way

on a common ticket by a popular vote. Such uniformity is at first sight almost amazing. Why have all the States agreed to do this thing in the same way? Democracy and party organization must answer. We still adhere to the forms of the electoral system as provided in the twelfth amendment, but the spirit of that system has long since departed. The people long ago took the election of the President into their own hands. They have done this through the agency of political parties, and the requirements of party organization have produced uniformity in the methods of electing the presidential electors. How

eighty millions of people actually accomplish this stupendous and inspiring task of selecting one of themselves as their ruler may best be told when we come to speak of party organization (p. 227).

The Powers and Duties of the President. The members of the Convention were distrustful of executive power and were disposed to clothe the new President with only so much authority as was absolutely necessary. Nevertheless, they probably gave him fully as much power as an executive ought to have. They made him commander-inchief of the military forces (92); they gave him the power of pardoning offenses against the government of the United States (94); they conferred upon him jointly with the Senate the treaty-making power (95) and the power of appointing foreign ministers, consuls, judges of the Supreme Court and many other federal officers (96); they imposed upon him the function of receiving foreign ambassadors and representatives of foreign governments (101); they gave him authority to lay before Congress at the beginning of a session a message setting forth the condition of public affairs and recommending measures for legislation (100); they gave him power to convene Congress in extraordinary session and to adjourn Congress when the two Houses cannot agree as to the matter of adjournment (101); they gave him the veto power (38).

The highest and the chief duty of the President is "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed" (102). This is a purely executive duty and one that the President cannot escape. A law may be distasteful to the President, he may regard it as hurtful or unconstitutional, yet as long as it is law he must enforce it. "As the citizen may not elect what laws he will obey neither may the executive elect which he will enforce." Should the President wantonly refuse to execute a law he would be removable by the process of impeachment.

The President's Share in Law-making. While the President is bound to carry out laws that have been made whether he is in sympathy with them or not, he at the same time may do much to prevent the enactment of laws obnoxious to himself and much to secure the enactment of

favorite measures. His power of prevention lies in the veto. How great this power is may be seen by a simple calculation. A bill may pass in the present House of 391 members by a vote of 196 to 195, and in the Senate by a vote of 47 to 45. Now if the President should veto the bill it would require 65 more votes in the House and 15 more in the Senate (40) to pass the measure over his veto. The legislative weight of the President, therefore, is nearly one sixth as great as that of Congress itself.

In theory the veto is placed in the hands of the President solely as a weapon for defending the Constitution and the executive department against the encroachments of the legislature; it is not placed there for the purpose of making the President a law-maker. Early Presidents acted upon this theory, but Andrew Jackson set the example of using the veto power to prevent the passage of any measure to which he was opposed; he exercised his independent judgment on every bill which Congress sent to him and vetoed all bills to which he objected, whether his objection rested upon constitutional reasons or upon partizan or personal reasons. In other words, Jackson assumed to share with Congress responsibility for legislation, and his successors in the Presidency have not hesitated to use the veto as a real legislative engine. Taking it all in all, however, Presidents have not abused the veto power, and no President is likely to abuse it while Congress is faithful to the Constitution and to the interests of the nation.

The President's share in law-making does not end with the negative power of the veto; he possesses several legislative powers of a positive nature. In making the laws known as treaties (p. 260) he takes the initiative and is