The United States of America Part 6

Having thus planned for its successor, having arranged the finances, the army, the post-office, the public land system, and other national affairs as best it could, the Continental or Confederation Congress slowly dwindled in members.h.i.+p until it lacked a quorum early in October, 1788. A few members attended at intervals until the beginning of the following March, when the thirty-nine foolscap volumes recording the birth of the United States were closed, to be deposited among the archives of the United States under the Const.i.tution. A successor was now ready to undertake the task for which the Confederation had been found inadequate.

CHAPTER VII

BEGINNING AN EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT

In the manner of its formation and adoption the Const.i.tution was the product of a confederation. In these respects, it was little in advance of the rejected Articles. Its strength lay in the possibilities of its administration. But as a doc.u.ment in 1789, it was the product of federated States. If all the people of the United States could have a.s.sembled and formed a const.i.tution to go into effect immediately, or even if delegates, chosen by the people of the United States as a whole, had drawn up such a doc.u.ment, which had been adopted by the entire people or their delegates in a ratifying body, there would have been a national sovereignty wholly independent of the States from the beginning. Such a procedure was impossible--the very best reason why it was not attempted. A pure democracy is possible only among a small number of people living in a small State. For a large population and an extensive territory representative government must be subst.i.tuted.

If the idea of government in the British colonies in North America had been national instead of local from the beginning, the States would have disappeared under the Const.i.tution, or have been kept only for selecting national representatives, and performing other national functions. An equipoise between the two could never have been reached.

But fate had ordained otherwise. In a new land, the settlers naturally gathered into little groups for mutual protection. Collecting about some harbour or along some navigable waterway in the Northern colonies, or a.s.sembling from the plantations at the centre of the parish in the Southern colonies, the people inst.i.tuted local government. Cl.u.s.ters of these units under home rule formed larger divisions, and, in this way, union came as an afterthought resulting from contiguity and intercourse. The States as colonies existed long before the Union.

Individualism was born long before unity in America, and gained a prestige which aggregation has required nearly a century to overcome.

The ease with which the various States formed their first const.i.tutions and the ease with which they corrected errors by subst.i.tuting later frames, is an additional proof of their early efficiency. No State had as much difficulty as did the nation in reaching a workable basis. It is true that the national Congress first suggested State governments to the chaotic colonies, but they did not authorise them. The colonies looked to the nation for a uniform suggestion, but neither for sanction nor permission. Never for a moment did the members of the Continental Congress a.s.sume that they were working independently of their States, but considered themselves subordinate to the State a.s.semblies. The States were always the last resort of Confederation days. The story of the United States is largely taken up with the struggle of the States to retain their early supremacy when that supremacy was menaced from time to time by new conditions.

Whatever destiny may have made of the later Union, whatever theories may now be indulged in concerning the abstract Union the fathers made in 1789, the concrete Union which was put into effect was the offspring of the States not only in the thoughts of the people, but it was even dependent upon them for aid in several particulars necessary for putting it into operation. Having no electoral machinery, the Union was compelled to ask the States to choose members of both branches of its Congress. In electing its chief executive, it was obliged to give the States sole charge of choosing electors for this purpose. A national election gradually came into existence because the Union took this control practically away from the States. The Federal Government was indebted to State agency for its first capitol, the Federal Hall, furnished it by the kindness of the City of New York. It had not a foot of soil independent of the States, State militia furnished the military escort for its President-elect, and a State governor, Clinton of New York, with his staff, gave him official welcome to the State and national capital combined. Even the oath given to the chief executive, an oath required by the national Const.i.tution, was administered not by a national official, but by the chancellor of the State of New York.

An independent national government such as time has given us, and such as would be formed in the light of the present day, would not leave the method of choosing its presidential electors to the whims of the several States. At the time, no other method was possible. The State machinery was at hand and could be utilised. The national appliances had not yet been evolved. In some States the size of the precincts made voting well-nigh impossible. Residents of Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, must travel several hundred miles to the polls, according to Timothy Pickering. Although the a.s.sembly of Virginia placed a fine upon every qualified voter who failed to perform his duty, and although the Federalists of Maryland offered a roasted ox at one polling-place to attract voters, it is estimated that not more than one-fourth the men ent.i.tled to vote availed themselves of the privilege. Many had been so recently enfranchised by the State const.i.tutions that they did not appreciate the right. Independence having been won, the details of government failed to maintain civic zeal. In present-day elections, by contrast, as many as five-sixths of those qualified to vote at national elections avail themselves of the privilege.

It must also be noted that State qualifications for freemen determined who should vote in this first national election. In those States where the people voted, statistics show that only three men out of every hundred of population could vote in this first presidential election, where nowadays twenty men have that liberty. In some States, the people had no voice whatever in choosing the President, because the State Legislatures decided that they were the proper mediums to choose the presidential electors. The Const.i.tution left the matter entirely in their hands. In some States, the people voted for electors in fixed districts; in other States they voted for a whole electoral ticket.

This system of choosing a President through a set of electors, borrowed from the method of electing a German emperor, was far removed from democracy. It showed the distrust which the Const.i.tution-makers felt in the intelligence and discrimination of the ma.s.ses. Irregularity marked the elections generally. Two factions in the New York Legislature fell into a dispute over the manner in which Senators and electors should be chosen. It resulted in that State being deprived of partic.i.p.ation in the first election and in the first session of the Senate. Before the next presidential election, Congress began to make regulations governing the States in their conduct of this important matter, an innovation which grew until it culminated in the election "force laws" of reconstruction days following the Civil War.

"The first Wednesday in March next shall be the time and the present seat of government the place for commencing proceedings under the said Const.i.tution." So accustomed had the people grown to delays in public affairs, that a strict compliance with these provisions of the old Congress would have been a surprise. The first Wednesday of March, 1789, fell upon the fourth day of the month. At noon of that day, when the members const.i.tuting the two branches of the first Congress under the Const.i.tution a.s.sembled in the rooms arranged for their sessions in the reconstructed City Hall of New York, there was no quorum in either House. Since eleven States had adopted the new plan and each was ent.i.tled to two Senators, twelve members of that body would be necessary to const.i.tute a quorum. But only eight were present. These sent out one circular letter after another to the delinquent members, begging their immediate attendance. The condition of the roads at that season of the year and the inadequate means of transportation can scarcely be imagined at present. Madison, because of poor roads between Montpelier and Baltimore, missed the stage and lost two whole days, as he complained. However, one by one the tardy Senators arrived, and on April 6th, over a month late, the Senate found itself with a quorum.

Even then there were only two members present from States south of Pennsylvania. Having read their credentials of election, they proceeded to elect a presiding officer "for the sole purpose" of opening the votes cast by the electors for President and Vice-President of the United States. The latter, according to the new plan of government, would be their permanent presiding officer. The choice for the temporary office fell upon Senator Langdon, of New Hamps.h.i.+re, a member of the convention which had framed the Const.i.tution.

On the 4th day of March, the new House of Representatives had only thirteen members present. The Const.i.tution required that they should be chosen by the people in the different States. The State Legislatures were unable to monopolise the elections as they did the presidential elections in certain States. Yet the people took little interest in this first congressional election. Out of 3,200,000 people, probably not more than one hundred thousand voted. Until some count of the number of people could be taken to secure a proportionate representation, the Const.i.tution had set an arbitrary number of sixty-five, apportioning them among the States by a guess at the respective populations. Rhode Island and North Carolina not being in the Union deducted six from this total, making thirty necessary for a quorum. Day after day, the incomplete House adjourned. New members arrived at intervals until the first day of April, when a quorum was had, just four weeks late.

As first formed, the House consisted of the following members: New Hamps.h.i.+re, 1; Ma.s.sachusetts, 5; Connecticut, 5; New Jersey, 2; Pennsylvania, 6; Maryland, 2; Virginia, 8; South Carolina, 1. Other members arrived from time to time. More or less irregularity had marked the elections in the various States. A protest soon reached the House from citizens of New Jersey claiming that the four members from that State had not been legally elected. The polls had been kept open in one district for two weeks, until closed by a proclamation from the governor. From South Carolina came charges against a member that he had not been a citizen of the United States the required seven years at the time of his election. Although a native of South Carolina, he was being educated in Europe during the Revolutionary period and had returned to the State after the close of the war, but before the adoption of the national Const.i.tution. Contested elections here find early precedents. In both cases the House declared the elections valid and the members ent.i.tled to their seats.

[Ill.u.s.tration: HEADING OF THE FIRST LAW Pa.s.sED UNDER THE CONSt.i.tUTION.]

Although the delay of nearly a month in securing a quorum in the new Congress was not alarming, it was most unfortunate. Never had the National Government come so near abdicating in favour of the State governments. There had been no sessions of the old Congress for the past six months, although straggling members appeared from time to time. There was a national Board of the Treasury wrestling with the problem of home and foreign creditors, but confronted with an empty coffer. Jay was acting as Secretary of Foreign Affairs, and Knox was Secretary of War. There was positively no other evidence of "The United States of America" except an "army" composed of a few soldiers scattered along the frontier. Jefferson, Minister to France, wished a leave of absence, which Jay thought reasonable. "But, my dear sir," he said, "there is no Congress sitting, nor have any of their servants authority to interfere. As soon as the President shall be in office, I will, without delay, communicate your letters to him." Madison foresaw contentions, "first between federal and anti-federal parties, and then between northern and southern parties, which give an additional disagreeableness to the prospect." John Adams p.r.o.nounced the nation united in nothing save the choice of Was.h.i.+ngton.

After quorums were secured, new problems confronted this National Government, feeling its way without precedent. Only eleven States had come into the new agreement. The North Carolina Convention had adjourned without action, and Rhode Island had rejected the Const.i.tution by a popular vote of 2708 to 232. Had a Congress representing eleven States the right, even if it had the power, to legislate for thirteen sovereign States? Many felt that important questions like amendments to the Const.i.tution should be postponed until the United States were united in fact as well as in name. Even eleven States were insufficiently represented. Delaware had only one Senator and no Representative at hand. South Carolina had but one Senator present. The influential State of New York, the home of Hamilton and Jay, the place of meeting of the new Congress, was in the throes of a political "dead lock."

There was also no precedent for the workings of two branches of the National Legislature. Some prophets of evil who recalled the difficulties in one House of the Continental Congress predicted a double portion of woe under the new arrangement. It must not be supposed that a bicameral system was entirely a novelty. The colonies generally had such a system and, on becoming States, had adopted, with one exception, that form. It was true, as many recalled, that contests had frequently arisen between the colonial council and the popular a.s.sembly, especially where the former was appointed by the colonial governor.

It was scarcely to be hoped that all friction could be avoided between the two branches of the United States Congress. They possessed to a large extent joint powers, and yet had individual initiative and control. A further difference might arise from the variation of the const.i.tuency which they represented. The Senate was appointed by and represented the States in their sovereign capacity, as the House of Lords represented the pleasure of the British sovereign. The House of Representatives was dependent upon and represented the direct interests of the people, as did the Commons under the British Const.i.tution.

The Senate had the advantage of the prestige of the colonial council.

When the day arrived for opening the presidential ballots the Senate notified the House that it was ready, and the latter obediently mounted the stairs to the small Senate chamber, where the ballots were counted, disclosing a unanimous election for George Was.h.i.+ngton and a majority for John Adams. The Senate immediately despatched messengers to notify these men to attend and be inaugurated. This feeling of superiority on the part of the Senate was not diminished, as its members contemplated the power of ratifying treaties and confirming appointments which they shared with the Chief Executive, as well as the long tenure of office and permanent session with which the body had been endowed.

Because of this executive function, the Senate followed the example of the Continental Congress, and refused to admit the public to hear any of its deliberations during the first five sessions. It then yielded to public opinion and opened its doors when acting in its legislative capacity, going into secret session only when exercising its executive powers. To counterbalance these extraordinary functions, the House had only the exclusive right of originating revenue bills.

The necessary connection of the two Houses was recognised at the very beginning of the sessions by the appointment of joint committees to prepare rules for conference on bills upon which the two bodies might differ; to arrange for the transmission of papers; to dispose of the papers of the old Congress; to arrange for the inauguration of the first President; and to provide for the election of chaplains. Many of these matters common to both were easily adjusted. Two chaplains of different denominations were to be appointed, one by each House, and they were to interchange weekly. In this way Congress hoped to avoid the ever-recurring fear that one sect might be patronised until it became the established church. But upon the apparently minor point of the manner of transmitting papers from one body to the other a difference arose. The joint committee reported to each House an elaborate method whereby the Senate should send a bill or message to the House by its secretary. This official was to make an obeisance on entering the House, and another on delivering the paper to the Speaker, a third after it had left his hands and a fourth as he left the room.

When the House sent up a bill to the Senate, it was to be carried by two members, undoubtedly in imitation of the custom of members of the Commons carrying a bill to the Lords. Precisely as many bows and at corresponding places were demanded of these two members as the secretary of the Senate was required to make in the House. All messages except bills could be carried up by one member, who should make the four obeisances. As a return courtesy the entire Senate should rise when two members entered the room, or the President of the Senate only, in case one member appeared with a message.

This exhaustive ceremonial clearly gave such superior standing to the Senate that it was rejected by the House. Being recommitted to the joint committee, they reported a simple subst.i.tute whereby any message should be sent from either House to the other by "such persons as a sense of propriety in each House may determine to be proper." The messenger was to be announced at the door and should communicate his message to the presiding officer. This in turn was rejected by the form-admiring Senate. Finally the Senate sent notice to the House that if their members should bring up a bill or message as originally provided, they would be received as first promised; but if they chose to send it by another agent he must hand the paper to the secretary of the Senate, who would deliver it to the President of the Senate.

The House chose a messenger as their agent; the Senate soon followed the plain example; and thus a simple custom was inaugurated which has held to the present day.

The wisdom of providing some arrangement for a conference in case of disagreement between the two Houses was manifest several times in the first session. Conferences were held on no less than nine of the ninety-five measures pa.s.sed. It is impossible, in the absence of reported debates, to ascertain the att.i.tude of the Senate toward the other branch. Maclay, the garrulous Senator from Pennsylvania, whose diary is invaluable during these closed-door sessions, mentions several instances in which the Senate coerced the House by threatening to hold up appropriation bills. "It was a trial of skill in the way of starvation," he declares. The temper of the House when contending for what it considered its prerogatives can be seen from the debates.

"I am an advocate for supporting the dignity of the House," said a member from New York, debating a disagreement with the Senate, "and to me it appears somewhat inconsistent that we should change our sentiments in order to conform to the amendments of the Senate.... If we are to follow the Senate in all the alterations they propose, without hearing reasons to induce a change, our time in deliberation is taken up unnecessarily."

On a similar occasion, when the tonnage bill was being worked out by compromise, a member from Delaware hoped that the House would not recede from its position, "otherwise it might be considered that the House was under the government of the Senate, and adopted their opinions without arguments being offered to convince their judgments." A Virginia member "would rather lose any bill than have the doctrine established that this House must submit to the Senate; yet, if it was done in this instance, it would serve as a precedent in future decisions." In this slow manner, and with frequent irritation, the two branches of the National Legislature adjusted themselves to each other and formed precedents which have held for a century. The first measure to pa.s.s both Houses, receive the President's a.s.sent, and become a law, defined the oath which every officer of the National Government was required by the Const.i.tution to take. It became a law within two months after quorums were obtained.

The relations of the two branches to the Executive were not so close and, therefore, more easily adjusted. No little credit is due to the very cool and conservative man who became the executive head of the revived nation. Even the journey of the President-elect from his home to the seat of government had been a continued ovation. It can be compared only with his progress to Cambridge nearly a score of years before to take command of the Revolutionary army. In both instances he was regarded as the deliverer of the country from a great peril.

Possessed of probably the largest fortune in America, he could not be accused, as were many of his compatriots, of mercenary motives in his public actions. His freedom from personal ambition and selfish motive having been tested in the tempting days of the war, he could be relied upon by the people not to betray them in their extremity by any a.s.sumption of powers. Reputed to be a man of great self-control, almost cold-blooded in his self-guardedness, having dwelt far removed from the partisan strife pertaining naturally to populous centres, he would be careful in forming opinions, conservative in actions, and unlikely to yield to the influence of faction or partisans.h.i.+p. A moral man for that day, but neither a propagandist nor a zealot, he was unlikely to favour any sect or establishment of religion--a danger against which every possible precaution had been taken.

Even while the electors were being chosen and were holding their meetings in the several States, it was understood that Was.h.i.+ngton would undoubtedly be the choice for the first President. Indeed, before the Const.i.tution had been fully formed, Hamilton and others were naming him. In the State conventions which considered the new form, speakers did not hesitate to predict his election. The a.s.surance that the dreaded power would be first entrusted to his hands to form precedents persuaded many to try the change. John Adams, recently returned from representing his Government in Great Britain, and finding himself chosen to the second place, was said to be unable to comprehend how Was.h.i.+ngton's military experience had fitted him for this civic duty. Yet it was simply the first of many instances in which the grat.i.tude of the people, backed by innate hero-wors.h.i.+p, has singled out a war hero for the highest civic honours. Hence it came about that the very unanimity of election, for which all had hoped, defeated the purpose of the framers of the Const.i.tution to have an unbia.s.sed selection made by the presidential electors. This, or a like cause, has thwarted the purpose in every succeeding election of a President.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FEDERAL HALL, NEW YORK CITY. Upon the balcony between the pillars of the second story Was.h.i.+ngton was inaugurated President, April 30, 1789. Congress sat in this building in 1789 and 1790.]

Considering the descent of the American people at that time, it is not surprising that the inauguration of the first President was copied largely from the inauguration of a British sovereign. Our fathers were not attempting to experiment with novelties of government, but to adapt tried methods to their needs. The trappings of royalty to be seen in an ancient kingdom were replaced in this Republic by a military display, significant of the means by which its birthright had been won. The royal procession from Buckingham Palace to the Abbey was reproduced in miniature in the escort of the President from the Osgood House, his temporary residence, to the Government chambers. The religious and civic rites observed at Westminster Abbey were here separated, the religious service being held at St. Paul's Chapel and the civic in the little recess or gallery between two pillars which had been made by the architect in transforming the New York City Hall into the National Federal Hall. The oath was taken upon a copy of the Bible by both monarch and President. The shouts from the crowd in front of the Federal Hall in Wall Street which followed Chancellor Livingston's cry of "Long live George Was.h.i.+ngton, President of the United States!" were no less sincere, although coming from fewer throats, than the cries of "Long live the King!" and "G.o.d save the King!" which proclaimed the homage of British subjects to their monarch. The cannon in old Fort George, down near the Battery, could greet a President as l.u.s.tily as those in the Tower proclaimed a king.

But every departure from royal custom was in the direction of simplicity of detail. Instead of being surrounded by n.o.bles and courtiers, the President was attended by the committees on inauguration from the Senate and House, by Vice-President Adams, Governor Clinton, and others.

The coronation feast in the palace was republicanised into a dinner at the residence of Governor Clinton. The rich robes of the sovereign, to make which the resources of an empire were drawn upon, were transformed into a suit of ordinary clothing made entirely in America.

Instead of being seated in an ancient chair endowed with kingly legend, the American President stood during the short ceremony. Instead of being administered by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the oath was given to him by the Chancellor of the State of New York. The fair and festivities which commonly ended the first day of a new monarch were changed into an illumination of the city of New York and a display of fireworks.

The ceremonies between the new President and the Congress bore an even closer resemblance to those accustomed to be seen at a coronation or upon the opening of a session of Parliament. The inauguration speech of the monarch took the shape of an inaugural address by the President, which confessed a lack of personal a.s.surance and a reliance upon a Higher Power, called attention to the benefits of government, and begged the co-operation of all concerned in it. The speech from the throne at the opening of Parliament became a message to Congress at the opening of each session. Like the king's speech, it was divided into a general address to both Houses, and a special message to each.

The attention of the House of Representatives was called to various financial matters, as the English monarch had been compelled to do since the stormy Stuart period.

Early in Was.h.i.+ngton's administration the Senate showed conclusively, by refusing to hear the Secretary of War explain an Indian treaty, that the Cabinet was not to have the British privilege of initiating legislation. Was.h.i.+ngton was compelled, consequently, to recommend to each branch of Congress in his opening address such matters as he thought demanded legislation. It is the only form of influencing Congress which has ever been given to the President, barring patronage.

On these State occasions, when opening Congress, Was.h.i.+ngton was accustomed to ride down to the Federal Hall in the coach provided for him by Congress, with four instead of the two white horses usually driven, and outriders in advance as well as the two secretaries who rode habitually on horseback behind the coach. As was the custom in Parliament, a committee was appointed in each branch of Congress to draft a reply to the President's address. In due time this was carried by the Senators in solemn procession, headed by Vice-President Adams, to Was.h.i.+ngton's residence, where it was handed to him. The more democratic House of Representatives contented itself with presenting its reply to the President in a vacant room in the Federal building.

To each of these replies Was.h.i.+ngton was accustomed to make a counter-reply, thanking the members for their courtesy and promising his continued efforts to secure the objects they suggested.

These forms and ceremonials, although copied originally from Britain, had been used in the inauguration of colonial governors and in the opening of colonial a.s.semblies. They furnish a further proof that the American nation has been a thing of growth, an imitation of existing conditions until such time as originality could be developed or imitations transformed to meet the new conditions. Local forms furnished the models. They would be changed only as national ideals were developed. The fact that most of these European ceremonials were lopped off within twelve years shows how rapidly originality was developed.

During the first session Congress took up "the princ.i.p.al officer in each of the executive departments," as authorised by the Const.i.tution.

It was understood that these would be about the same as had been developed during the preceding years, viz., Foreign Affairs, Treasury, and War. It was not foreseen that they would become in time a "Cabinet."

To these three departments Congress added a fourth, Justice, for which an attorney-general was appointed. He was considered a head of an executive department and ranked with the other three among the President's advisers.

The wisdom of the framers of the Const.i.tution in simply arranging outlines instead of filling in details was nowhere better shown than in the provisions for the national judiciary. Congress was bound only to establish "one superior court" and could add such inferior courts as necessity might demand from time to time. So essential was a national judiciary felt to be, that during the pressing business of the first session the United States was divided for this purpose into thirteen judicial districts, conforming generally to the eleven States in the Union, each to have a district court held by a Federal judge. These districts were then grouped into an eastern, a middle, and a southern circuit, in accord with the geographical grouping of the States. In these two circuit courts were to be held each year by one or more district judges and one or more justices of the Supreme Court. The latter, the final tribunal of appeal from these inferior courts, was to consist of a chief justice and five a.s.sociate justices. Necessary officers, such as marshals and clerks, were given to these courts, rules were formulated for their procedure, and an act was pa.s.sed at the next session defining crimes against the United States. A resident of any State was by these acts made the subject of a new sovereign,--the United States of America,--liable to be punished for treason committed not against his State, but against the nation; to be prosecuted for piracy on the seas; for counterfeiting money, altering records, committing perjury in the Federal courts, resisting a national official, or offering violence to a foreign representative.

The United States could now command some respect from the individual.

The Union would also a.s.sume a new dignity from being a judge instead of an arbiter between the States. No more would such long-continued warfare as the territorial dispute between Connecticut and Pennsylvania bring the Republic into ill-repute. This new judicial power extended to "controversies between citizens of different States." Never again would the c.u.mbersome machinery of Federal commissioners to hear disputed claims to territory be called into service--a kind of Platonic lot-casting phantasy--because the new national judiciary system covered "controversies between two or more States." What powerful possibilities were given to the new Central Government in the provision that the Supreme Court should have "appellate jurisdiction from the courts of the several States in the cases hereinafter specially provided for."

It would be found as futile to restrict the cases in which the national court should have an appeal from the State courts as to attempt to reserve all the powers to the States not expressly granted to the Union. In the haste necessarily attendant upon suddenly putting the provisions of the new government into effect, no one had the leisure if any possessed the foresight to consider the limits to which the Federal courts might extend its authority in the light of interpretation. Even Jefferson later confessed that this member of the Federal Government was at first considered as the most harmless and helpless of all its organs.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE PRESIDENTIAL MANSION, FRANKLIN SQUARE, NEW YORK CITY 1789.]

The beginnings of the national judiciary were so modest that no one could have taken alarm. The day that he signed the judiciary bill, Was.h.i.+ngton nominated John Jay, of New York, to be chief justice of the court, Edmund Randolph, of Virginia, to be attorney-general, and John Rutledge, of South Carolina, James Wilson, of Pennsylvania, William Gus.h.i.+ng, of Ma.s.sachusetts, Robert H. Harrison, of Maryland, and John Blair, of Virginia, to be a.s.sociate justices.

State distribution of patronage was not such a criterion as in later appointments; yet the department of Justice represented all parts of the country. Considered from a sectional point, there seemed at the time little likelihood that the court would prove hostile to Southern individualism, since it contained, counting the attorney-general, four Southern men and three Northern men. District judges, attorneys, and marshals for the eleven judicial districts were appointed at the same time. A joint resolution of Congress asked the States to give their jailers power to receive and hold United States prisoners.

"Many of your old acquaintances and friends," wrote Was.h.i.+ngton to Lafayette, "are concerned with me in the administration of this government. By having Mr. Jefferson at the head of the department of state, Mr. Jay of the judiciary, Hamilton of the treasury, and Knox that of war, I feel myself supported by able coadjutors, who harmonise extremely well together."

Randolph, the Attorney-General, had never come in contact with Lafayette and consequently was not mentioned by Was.h.i.+ngton. This list of the chief administrators of the new Government must have rea.s.sured Lafayette, as well as other friends of the experiment, who wished to see it given a fair trial. They feared that the first administration might be given over to its enemies, who would be inclined to decrease rather than to strengthen its powers. Before the elections, General Lincoln had confessed to his former companion in arms, General Was.h.i.+ngton, his apprehension lest "the Anti-Federalists would try to get into office men unfriendly to the Const.i.tution and so break it down, or men who would change many of its provisions at an early date."

The att.i.tude of the President and of most of his Cabinet, it was well known, was in favour of an efficient central power. John Adams, the Vice-President, had long been an advocate of a stronger frame, and now made good his words by casting the deciding vote in twenty ties in the Senate, every time in favour of centralised authority where there was any doubt involved. By one of these close votes authority was given the President to remove an official without the necessary consent of the Senate. The Const.i.tution was silent on this point, and its decision favourable to the Executive greatly increased the prerogatives of that office.