Appendix A

May 29th

The Virginia Plan is introduced by Edmund Randolph of Virginia with resolution No. 7 stating an appointment of the president by the legislature for an unknown length of office. Vol.1, Pg 21.

June 1st

June 1st opens the debate of appointing the executive for the first time in the convention.

Popular vote - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania began the discussion, first by pointing out his apprehension to endorse a method of appointment as it "might appear chimerical" in its difficulty. However, Wilson's arguments would end with his preference for appointment by the people at large. Vol.1, Pg 68.

Legislature - Advocation. Roger Sherman of Connecticut stated his preference for appointment by the legislature. Sherman's reasoning was the "independence of the executive on the supreme legislature was the essence of tyranny." Vol.1, Pg 68.

Popular vote - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania renewed his call for an appointment by the people at large, citing separations of powers and providing independence for all the different government institutions. Vol.1, Pg 69.

Popular vote - Advocation. George Mason of Virginia concurred with Wilson in supporting the appointment by a popular vote. Vol.1, Pg 69.

Legislature - Advocation. The final proposal came from John Rutledge of South Carolina recommending appointment by the Senate only. Vol.1, Pg 69.

June 2nd

Electors - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania proposed a system of a body of electors to meet in one place chosen through districts with voters choosing each district elector. Vol.1, Pg 80.

Legislature - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts opposed an appointment by the legislature. He supported Wilson's body of electors through districts but feared state partisanship would dominate. Gerry preferred state legislatures nominate electors and the body of electors appoint as the people would be too little informed of someone's character and could be easily deceived. Vol.1, Pg 80.

Electors - Opposition. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina did not see the benefit of people voting for electors as it would create trouble and expense. Vol.1, Pg 81.

Vote. Electors - failed 2-7-1-0. For - PA, MD. Against - MA, CT, DE, VA, NC, SC, GA. Divided - NY. The 11th vote was an appointment by a body of electors from divided districts that would vote by ballot for someone not from their own body for president. This vote failed with two votes for, seven votes against, and one divided vote. Vol.1, Pg 81.

Vote. Legislature - passed 8-2-0-0. For - MA, CT, NY, DE, VA, NC, SC, GA. Against - PA, MD. The 12th vote was for the appointment by the legislature. This would pass with eight votes for and two votes against. Vol.1, Pg 81.

June 9th

Governors - Advocation. Legislature - Opposition. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts put forward that the appointment of the president is made by the state executives. Gerry's reasoning stemmed from the methods by which the other branches were appointed. According to Madison's notes, he argued if, "the first branch being chosen by the people of the states, & the 2nd by the legislatures of the states; he did not see any objection against letting the Executive be appointed by the Executives of the States." Gerry argued against appointment by the legislature. Vol.1, Pg 175.

Governors - Opposition. Edmund Randolph of Virginia refuted the idea of state executives appointing the president citing the people will lack confidence in the president and general interests will turn towards the states rather than national prerogatives as governors would be selected by state legislatures. Vol.1, Pg 176.

Vote. Governors - failed 0-10-1-0. Against - MA, CT, NY, NJ, PA, MD, VA, NC, SC, GA. Divided - DE. The 34th vote was held on the appointment of the president by state executives which failed with zero votes for, ten votes against, and one state divided. Vol.1, Pg 176.

June 13th

A revision to the Virginia Plan is introduced by Edmund Randolph of Virginia in which a single executive is chosen from the legislature for a single term of seven years. Vol.1, Pg 236.

June 15th

The New Jersey Plan is introduced by William Paterson of New Jersey in which the executive is chosen by the legislature with each state having an equal vote. Vol.1, Pg 244.

June 18th

Electors - Advocation. Alexander Hamilton of New York gives a lengthy argument covering the Virginia and New Jersey plans. One of the more interesting remarks concerning the executive was his preference for an appointment for life. Hamilton argues, "The Hereditary interest of the King was so interwoven with that of the Nation, and his personal emoluments so great, that he was placed above the danger of being corrupted from abroad -- and at the same time was both sufficiently independent and sufficiently controlled, to answer the purpose of the institution at home. One of the weak sides of Republics was they are liable to foreign influence & corruption. Men of little character, acquiring great power become easily the tools of intermeddling neighbors." After his lengthy monologue, Hamilton submits his plan with his preference for the executive to be appointed by electors chosen through district elections. Vol.1, Pg 282.

June 19th

The Committee of the Whole rejected the New Jersey Plan by a vote of seven states to three, with one state divided. Vol.1, Pg 322.

July 2nd

The First Committee of Eleven was formed to resolve issues over the legislature and would report back after the July 4th holiday. Vol.1, Pg 516.

July 5th

The First Committee of Eleven presented the famous "Great Compromise" in which the upper chamber would have equal voting among the states and the lower chamber would have votes based on population. Vol.1, Pg 526.

July 16th

With the 156th vote, the constitutional convention adopts The Great Compromise with five votes for, four votes against, and one state divided. Vol.2, Pg 15.

July 17th

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania begins the discussion by arguing against an appointment by the legislature stating, "If the Legislature elect, it will be the work of intrigue, of cabal, and of faction: it will be like the election of a pope by a conclave of cardinals; real merit will rarely be the title to the appointment." Morris claimed the popular vote a better system as the people would likely "never fail to prefer some man of distinguished character" or "of continental reputation." Vol.2, Pg 29.

Legislature - Advocation. Popular vote - Opposition. Roger Sherman of Connecticut preferred an appointment by the legislature as a majority could be required to appoint the president and would bear out "the sense of the nation." Sherman argued against the popular vote method as it would likely never achieve a majority of votes, voters would generally vote for someone of their own state, and the largest states would have the advantage. Vol.2, Pg 29.

Popular vote - Advocation. Legislature - Opposition. James Wilson of Pennsylvania argued against two objections to a popular vote for president, the instability of the Polish elections and the likelihood of a candidate not achieving a majority vote. Wilson claimed the Polish example did not suffice as the source of the conflict was rooted in the noble class and he viewed the majority vote requirement as simply not necessary. Wilson was against appointment by the legislature as it could choose a president not preferred by the people and would lead to intrigue and cabal. Vol.2, Pg 29.

Popular vote - Opposition. Legislature - Advocation. Charles Pinckney of South Carolina warned against an appointment by popular election as regular voters would "be led by a few active & designing men," and the largest states would have the advantage by combining votes. Pinckney predicted the legislature would choose the fittest man available to carry out their legislation into execution. Vol.2, Pg 30.

Popular vote - Advocation. Legislature - Opposition. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania chimed in a second time on the day to refute the arguments against the popular vote. Regarding the combining of big states to control the appointment, he claimed the legislature method would be more vulnerable. The issue of a few designing men could occur at a local level, but "never throughout the continent." He added the president would not be independent if chosen through the legislature and appointments by numerous bodies would lead to corruption. Vol.2, Pg 30.

Legislature - Advocation. Popular vote - Opposition. George Mason of Virginia was confused by the contradictory viewpoints regarding the legislature method. On one hand, it could be trusted with near indefinite power. On the other, it was susceptible to intrigue and cabal. He opposed the popular vote claiming it an unnatural method and compared it to holding "a trial of colours to a blind man." The large extent of a republic makes judgment of a candidate by a popular vote nearly impossible. Vol.2, Pg 31.

Popular vote - Advocation. Legislature - Opposition. James Wilson of Pennsylvania again argued for the popular vote and against the legislature. Responding to Mason's claim of contradictions, Wilson made the point that it could "deserve confidence in some respects, and distrust in others," as legislative bodies were notorious for corruption. Vol.2, Pg 31.

Vote. Popular vote - failed 1-9-0-0. For - PA. Against - MA, CT, NJ, DE, MD, VA, NC, SC, GA. The 165th vote was held for an appointment by popular vote which failed with one vote for and nine votes against. Vol.2, Pg 32.

Electors - Advocation. Luther Martin of Maryland moved for the appointment of the president by a body of electors chosen through the state legislatures. Vol.2, Pg 32.

Electors - Advocation. Jacob Broome of Delaware seconded this motion for the appointment of the president by a body of electors chosen through the state legislatures. Vol.2, Pg 32.

Vote. Electors - failed 2-8. For - DE, MD. Against - MA, CT, NJ, PA, VA, NC, SC, GA. The 166th vote for appointment by a body of electors chosen through state legislatures failed with two votes for and eight votes against. Vol.2, Pg 32.

Vote. Legislature - passed 10-0. For - MA, CT, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA, NC, SC, GA. The 167th vote for appointment by the legislature was passed unanimously with all ten states voting for the method. Vol.2, Pg 32.

Legislature - Opposition. James Madison of Virginia made a lengthy speech, citing Charles Montesquieu and the importance of the separation of powers, and ultimately arguing against appointment or reappointment by the legislature. Vol.2, Pg 34.

July 19th

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris began the day's debate by arguing for appointment by popular vote with the observation of the "maxim in political science" that large republics struggle because they cannot extend their influence throughout effectively. This requires an executive with sufficient energy to respond to extreme emergencies. An appointment by the legislature made up of aggrandizing wealthy elites would use opportunities like war and calamity to pursue their own interests. The president should be "the great protector of the mass of the people." Independence of the legislature is also crucial as a check against legislative power. Not simply a check to investigate possible criminal actions of individual legislators, but to check against corrupt laws created through their own legal processes. A law may be legal but that does not mean a law is in the interest of the people and appointment by the people will ensure the executive pursues the interests of the people against the legislature. Vol.2, Pg 52.

Legislature - Advocation. Popular vote - Opposition. Edmund Randolph of Virginia claimed large states would likely combine to control the appointment process. Making the executive ineligible for reappointment could negate legislative corruption and be partial to the popular vote. Vol.2, Pg 54.

Electors - Advocation. Popular vote - Opposition. Rufus King of Massachusetts found it difficult to see a popular vote favoring a single candidate and produce a majority. He strongly agreed with Roger Sherman's remarks that the legislature would create a sense of the nation, but instead thought a body of electors chosen by the people would be best and receive the fewest objections. Vol.2, Pg 55.

Electors - Advocation. William Paterson of New Jersey concurred with King but added that states should appoint electors with one elector to the smallest states and three to the largest. Vol.2, Pg 56.

James Wilson observed the unanimous sense that an appointment by the legislature would not be chosen. He was pleased to see that the decision was being narrowed down to either an election by the people or some mediating body that would ultimately be the selection method. Vol.2, Pg 56.

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. James Madison of Virginia argued for the separation of the legislative, executive, and judicial powers, and along these lines, the appointment of the president should allow him free agency from the legislature. Appointment by the legislature would negate this agency. And it has not been convincingly proven that ineligibility to a second term would relieve the president of any dependence. He concluded by viewing the popular vote as the best method for an appointment. Vol.2, Pg 56.

Popular vote - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts was against popular election as the people are uninformed and would be misled by a few designing men. He repeated his preference for state executive influence however he altered the idea from the appointment by state executives to an appointment by a body of electors chosen by the state executives. He saw it more fitting to build a national system that would establish separated factions sourced from different interest groups. Vol.2, Pg 57.

Legislature - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut motioned for the use of a body of electors chosen by state legislatures to appoint the president with the largest states allocated three electors, medium states two electors, and small states one elector. Vol.2, Pg 57.

Legislature - Advocation. John Rutledge of South Carolina was against all methods except for appointment by the national legislature. Any fears of dependence on Congress would be negated as long as the president was ineligible for a second term. Vol.2, Pg 57.

Electors - Advocation. Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Opposition. Governors - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts supported the motion of appointing the president by a body of electors chosen by the state legislatures. He opposed both legislature and popular vote appointment methods but approved of an appointment by state executives. Gerry added his list of electors allocated to each state. Vol.2, Pg 58.

Vote. Electors - passed 6-3-1-0. For - CT, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA. Against - NC, SC, GA. Divided - MA. The 182nd vote for the appointment of the president by a body of electors passed with six votes for, three votes against, and one state divided. Vol.2, Pg 58.

Vote. Electors - passed 8-2-0-0. For - MA, CT, NJ, PA, DE, MD, NC, GA. Against - VA, SC. The 183rd vote for the appointment of the president by a body of electors chosen by state legislatures passed with eight votes for and two votes against. Vol.2, Pg 58.

Electors - Opposition. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina expressed his disapproval of a body of electors appointing the president as "they would not be the most respectable citizens" and "would be liable to undue influence." Vol.2, Pg 58.

July 20th

The discussion of the day predominantly revolved around the proportion of electors given to each state, mostly assigning specific ratios as well as impeachment procedures and powers.

Electors - Neutral. James Madison of Virginia pointed out that the ratio based on a set population would over time make all states equal in elector allocation as the country grew in population. Vol.2, Pg 63.

Electors - Neutral. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts submitted his list of allocated electors for each state. Vol.2, Pg 63.

Electors - Neutral. Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut moved for New Hampshire and Georgia to be allotted two electors. Vol.2, Pg 63.

Electors - Neutral. William Houston of New Jersey seconded the motion of Ellsworth for New Hampshire and Georgia to be allotted two electors. Vol.2, Pg 64.

Vote. Electors - Failed 3-7-0-0. For - CT, SC, GA. Against - MA, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA, NC. The 190th vote for the appointment of the president by a body of electors in which the states of New Hampshire and Georgia would receive an additional elector failed with three votes for and seven votes against. Vol.2, Pg 64.

Electors - Neutral. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina moved that states be allotted a number of electors equal to their respective numbers in the House of Representatives. Vol.2, Pg 64.

Vote. Electors - Passed 6-4-0-0. For - MA, CT, PA, VA, NC, SC. Against - NJ, DE, MD, GA. The 191st vote for the appointment of the president by a body of electors in which the first instance the several states will receive the following ratios: NH 1, MA 3, RI 1, CT 2, NY 2, NJ 2, PA 3, DE 1, MD 2, VA 3, NC 2, SC 2, GA 1, passed with six votes for and four votes against. Vol.2, Pg 64.

Legislature - Advocation. Electors - Opposition. George Mason of Virginia argued his preference for an appointment by the legislature and discredited an appointment by a body of electors claiming they would be at risk of being corrupted by the candidates. Vol.2, Pg 65.

July 23rd

Electors - Opposition. William Houston of New Jersey requested to reconsider the debate over the appointment of the executive by a body of electors chosen by state legislatures the "inconveniency [sic] & the considerable expense, of drawing together men from all the States for the single purpose of electing the Chief Magistrate." Vol.2, Pg 95.

Electors - Opposition. Richard Spaight of North Carolina concurred with Houston's motion against the appointment of the president by a body of electors. Vol.2, Pg 95.

July 24th

Legislature - Advocation. Electors - Opposition. William Houston of New Jersey motioned to strike the appointment by a body of electors and be replaced by an appointment by the legislature arguing that it was unlikely that capable men would take up the role of elector from distant states. Vol.2, Pg 99.

Legislature - Advocation. Electors - Opposition. Richard Spaight of North Carolina seconded the motion by Houston to remove the appointment of the president by a body of electors chosen by state legislatures and replaced by an appointment by the legislature. Vol.2, Pg 99.

Legislature - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts refuted Houston's arguments, believing the system would create an atmosphere of "great earnestness" in the role of elector by the men and governors of the states. Vol.2, Pg 100.

Legislature - Advocation. Electors - Opposition. Caleb Strong of Massachusetts argued in favor of the appointment by the legislature, refuting the claim that the executive would be dependent on them for reeligibility. After the first appointment, elections would change the legislature ensuring that a second appointment would be determined by a second set of men. He added it was important not to make government too complicated. Adding electors would do this. And also concurred that the best-quality characters would not pursue the role of elector. Vol.2, Pg 100.

Legislature - Advocation. Electors - Opposition. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina preferred appointment by the legislature for seven years and was ineligible for reappointment. He did not support a body of electors as they would not be the first or second-tier men. He made a recommendation that the executive branch be made up of three different men from three different districts in the states. His argument was that if the president was derived from only one area of the country, his interests would be aligned with the interests of his state or region only. Vol.2, Pg 100.

Legislature (States, House, Senate) - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts proposed the state legislatures vote for the president in the same proportions as suggested in the body of elector method. Under this format, no person would achieve majority. Next, the House of Representatives would choose two from the four highest candidates to receive votes. Finally, the Senate would select one of the two candidates from the House of Representatives. Vol.2, Pg 101.

Legislature (States, House, Senate) - Advocation. Rufus King of Massachusetts concurred with Gerry's proposed method of state legislatures nominating candidates followed by a vote by the House of Representatives from the top four candidates and a final vote by the Senate from the top two candidates. Vol.2, Pg 101.

Vote. Legislature (States, House, Senate) - failed 0-10. Against - MA, CT, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA, NC, SC, GA. A vote on the state legislatures nominating and the House of Representatives voting from the top four candidates, followed by the Senate voting from the top two candidates method had so many no votes that states were not counted. Vol.2, Pg 101.

Vote. Legislature - passed 7-4. For - NH, MA, NJ, DE, NC, SC, GA. Against - CT, PA, MD, VA. The 215th vote was held for the appointment by the legislature and passed with seven votes for and four votes against. Vol.2, Pg 101.

Legislature - Opposition. James Wilson of Pennsylvania opposed the reinstatement of the legislature as a mode of appointing the executive and moved to postpone deliberation. Being opposed he added he would agree to any length of time to mitigate the president's dependence on the legislature. Vol.2, Pg 102.

Legislature - Opposition. Jacob Broome of Delaware seconded Wilson's opposition and motion to postpone deliberation over the appointment of the president. Vol.2, Pg 103.

Legislature (Committee) - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania suggested an alteration to the appointment by the legislature method where a group of 15 would choose the president but immediately retire from congress. This would diminish the influence of the legislature over the president. Vol.2, Pg 103.

Legislature - Opposition. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania insisted appointment by the legislature was the worst, as the president "will be a mere creature of it" and made a lengthy argument against the method. Vol.2, Pg 103.

Legislature (Committee) - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania simplified his previous method to a small body of electors, an unspecified number, from the national legislature. Vol.2, Pg 105.

Legislature (Committee) - Advocation. Daniel Carroll of Maryland seconded Wilson's appointment method of a small body of electors from the national legislature. Vol.2, Pg 105.

Legislature (Committee) - Opposition. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts disapproved citing this would leave the chance to a group of unworthy men to control the appointment. He added no method from the legislature would be acceptable. Vol.2, Pg 105.

Legislature (Committee) - Opposition. Rufus King of Massachusetts pointed out the small group may be derived from the same state ensuring they choose someone from their own state. Choosing the president should "be governed by reason, not by chance." He moved to postpone. Vol.2, Pg 105.

Legislature (Committee) - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania concurred with King in opposition against a committee of 15 to appoint the president, adding his preference for the popular vote. Vol.2, Pg 106.

Legislature (Committee) - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania suggested the extreme unlikelihood of a majority of electors originating from the same state. A vote to postpone the discussion passed with seven votes for and four votes against. Vol.2, Pg 106.

July 25th

Legislature (Electors reappoint) - Advocation. Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut proposed a possible solution to ease the hesitations of the legislature method. For a first term, the legislature would appoint the executive, however, for reappointment, electors chosen from the state legislatures would decide on an additional term in office. This would reduce the dependency on the legislature. Vol.2, Pg 108.

Legislature - Opposition. Governors - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts repeated his opinion that any form of the legislature appointing the executive is wrong. He reiterated his method of appointment by the governors of the states along with the advice from their state legislatures or a body of electors. Vol.2, Pg 109.

Legislature - Opposition. State legislatures - Opposition. Governors - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Popular vote - Advocation. James Madison of Virginia weighed in with a lengthy opinion arguing there have been objections to every suggested method. He added his criticisms of appointment by the legislature as it would "agitate and divide the legislature," make the president subservient to the dominant faction that appointed him, and susceptible to foreign influence. Madison also warned against appointments from standing bodies such as state legislatures or state executives. He viewed the only real options left were appointment by a body of electors chosen by the people or a popular vote. Appointment by electors seemed the least controversial, "as the electors would be chosen for the occasion, would meet at once, & proceed immediately to an appointment, there would be very little opportunity for cabal, or corruption." Although, this method had been strongly rejected by the convention. He pointed out the two main disadvantages being voters' preference for someone of their own state and the advantage of larger states. Vol.2, Pg 109.

Popular vote - Opposition. Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut argued against the popular vote citing native son preference and the large state advantage. Vol.2, Pg 111.

Vote. Legislature (Electors reappoint) - failed 4-7. For - NH, CT, PA, MD. Against - MA, NJ, DE, VA, NC, SC, GA. The 218th vote for the appointment of the president by the national legislature with reeligibility by a body of electors chosen by state legislatures for a second term was defeated with four votes in favor and seven votes against. Vol.2, Pg 111.

Legislature - Advocation. Charles Pinckney of South Carolina promoted the appointment by the legislature for six years and no reeligibility. Vol.2, Pg 111.

Legislature - Advocation. George Mason of Virginia approved of this concept as it would create independence for the executive. Vol.2, Pg 111.

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Peirce Butler of South Carolina expressed that the two great evils in government to avoid are "cabal at home, & influence from abroad," and appointment by the legislature would be vulnerable to both of these. The popular vote would be too complex to be effective. He endorsed the idea of appointing the president through electors but not through any sort of ratio based on a state's size but each state having an equal number of electors. His preference was for appointment by a body of electors chosen by the state legislatures. Vol.2, Pg 112.

Legislature - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts approved of Pinckney's method of appointment by the legislature. Vol.2, Pg 112.

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania thought an election by the people was the best method and the appointment by the legislature the worst. Vol.2, Pg 112.

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina viewed appointment by the legislature as suspect to foreign influence but more importantly would reduce the influence of smaller states. He recommended a popular vote in which everyone voted for three different candidates. One would likely be from their own state and the other two from both large and small states. Vol.2, Pg 113.

Popular vote - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania concurred with the concept of voting for multiple candidates, adding the modification that voters choose two candidates with one of them not being from their own state. Vol.2, Pg 113.

Popular vote - Advocation. James Madison of Virginia approved of the popular vote using multiple votes as the second best man would be more agreeable to the many interests across the vast republic. His only caveat was the possibility of some obscure candidate coming into the presidency. Vol.2, Pg 114.

Popular vote - Opposition. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts strongly opposed a popular vote, claiming the ignorance of the people would hand the election into the arms of some small select group of men, for example, the Order of the Cincinnati. Vol.2, Pg 114.

Popular vote - Advocation. Legislature - Advocation. John Dickinson of Delaware preferred the popular vote as the best method. He understood the negatives of this method so he suggested the voters of each state choose their best citizen. Then the legislature or a group of electors chosen from the legislature would select one of these nominees. Vol.2, Pg 114.

Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts and Peirce Butler of South Carolina recommended the issue of appointing the president to be considered by the Committee of Detail. Vol.2, Pg 115.

July 26th

Legislature - Advocation. George Mason of Virginia began the day reporting all the various methods that have been proposed: election by the people at large, election by the state legislatures, election by the governors of the states, election by electors chosen by the people, election by the people voting for several candidates, election by electors chosen from the elected winners of each state, and a lottery system. Mason ended with his opinion that appointment by the legislature was the best and held the least objections. He motioned for the executive to be appointed by the legislature for a term of seven years and ineligible for a second term. Vol.2, Pg 118.

Legislature - Advocation. William Davie of North Carolina seconded Mason's motion for an appointment of the executive by the legislature. Vol.2, Pg 120.

Popular vote - Advocation. Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania defended the use of a popular vote amidst the many derogatory statements made against its potential use. Vol.2, Pg 120.

Vote. Legislature - passed 7-3-0-1. For - NH, NJ, MD, VA, NC, SC, GA. Against - CT, PA, DE. Absent - MA. The 224th vote for the appointment of the president by the legislature for a term of seven years without reappointment passed with seven votes for, three against, and one abstention. Vol.2, Pg 120.

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania was against the method of legislative appointment in its entirety and made a case for the appointment by the mass of the people. Vol.2, Pg 120.

Vote. Legislature - passed 6-3-1-1. For - NH, CT, NJ, NC, SC, GA. Against - PA, DE, MD. Divided - VA. Absent - MA. The 225th vote for the appointment of the president by the legislature for a term of seven years without reappointment passed with six votes for, three votes against, one vote divided, and one vote absent. Vol.2, Pg 121.

August 6th

John Rutledge of South Carolina delivered and provided copies of the report from the Committee of Detail. Regarding the appointment of the president, Article X, Section 1, read as follows:

The Executive Power of the United States shall be vested in a single person. His title shall be "The President of the United States of America;" and his title shall be, "His Excellency". He shall be elected by ballot by the Legislature. He shall hold his office during the term of seven years, but shall not be elected a second time. Vol.2, Pg 185.

August 24th

After many days of debating Articles I through IX of the report from the Committee of Detail, the convention turned to debating Article X covering the appointment of the executive. Debate centered around the legislature and whether to use a joint ballot or vote in separate chambers. Vol.2, Pg 401.

Legislature (Joint ballot) - Advocation. John Rutledge of South Carolina began the debate by inserting the word "'joint' before the word 'ballot', as the most convenient mode of electing." Vol.2, Pg 401.

Legislature (Joint ballot) - Opposition. Roger Sherman of Connecticut rejected this language as it would eliminate the small states' ability to have a negative power on anything against their interests. Vol.2, Pg 401.

Legislature (Separate ballots) - Opposition. Nathaniel Gorham of Massachusetts argued against a mode of voting in separate chambers as it would delay the appointment, cause confusion, and undermine the public good intended. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Legislature (Joint ballot) - Opposition. Jonathan Dayton of New Jersey argued a joint ballot would give the appointment to the House of Representatives. He felt voting in separate chambers would settle on the same person for president. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. In the midst of debating which version of appointment by the legislature, Daniel Carroll of Maryland moved to strike out the appointment by the legislature method and replace it with the popular vote. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Legislature - Opposition. Popular vote - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania seconded this motion to strike the legislative method and use the popular vote. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Vote. Popular vote - failed 2-9-0-0. For - PA, DE. Against - NH, MA, CT, NJ, MD, VA, NC, SC, GA. The 355th vote was held for the appointment of the president by popular vote and failed with two votes for and nine votes against. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Legislature (Joint ballot) - Opposition. Returning to the debate over joint vs separate ballots by the legislature for the appointment of the president, David Brearley of New Jersey stated his opposition to a joint ballot. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Legislature (Joint ballot) - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania favored a joint ballot by Congress for the appointment of the president. It was reasonable for larger states to have a larger share of the appointment and delays from voting in separate chambers would invite danger. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Legislature (Joint ballot) - Advocation. John Langdon of New Hampshire preferred a joint ballot to get the general voice of the legislature. His experience with New Hampshire's method of two separate votes proved to be difficult and the negative vote created by the other chamber would create an atmosphere of hostility. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Legislature (Separate ballots) - Opposition. James Wilson of Pennsylvania felt the Senate would have too much influence if given a separate vote. Vol.2, Pg 402.

Legislature (Joint ballot) - Advocation. James Madison of Virginia pointed out that the advantage of large states in a joint ballot would have a ratio of four to one whereas the real population ratio was somewhere closer to ten to one. Since the president was meant to act for the people this minimal advantage was not unreasonable. Vol.2, Pg 403.

Vote. Legislature (Joint ballot) - passed 7-4-0-0. For - NH, MA, PA, DE, VA, NC, SC. Against - CT, NJ, MD, GA. The 356th vote was held for the appointment of the president by the legislature through a joint ballot which passed with seven votes for and four votes against. Vol.2, Pg 403.

Legislature (Joint ballot by state delegation) - Advocation. Jonathan Dayton of New Jersey moved to insert the phrase "each state having one vote" after the word legislature. Vol.2, Pg 403.

Legislature (Joint ballot by state delegation) - Advocation. David Brearley of New Jersey seconded Dayton's proposal to appoint the president by a joint ballot with each state having one vote. Vol.2, Pg 403.

Vote. Legislature (Joint ballot by state delegation) - failed 5-6-0-0. For - CT, NJ, DE, MD, GA. Against - NH, MA, PA, VA, NC, SC. The 357th vote was taken for the appointment of the president by joint ballot with each state having a single vote and failed with five votes for and six votes against. Vol.2, Pg 403.

Legislature - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania continued his stance against the appointment by the legislature claiming legislative tyranny as it would create cabal and corruption. He moved to appoint the president through a body of electors chosen by the people of the several states. Vol.2, Pg 403.

Legislature - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Daniel Carroll of Maryland seconded Morris' opposition against the appointment of the president by the legislature and support of a body of electors to appoint the president. Vol.2, Pg 403.

Vote. Electors - failed 5-6-0-0. For - CT, NJ, PA, DE, VA. Against - NH, MA, MD, NC, SC, GA. The 359th vote held for the appointment of the president by a body of electors chosen by the people of the several states failed with five votes for and six votes against. Vol.2, Pg 404.

Vote. Electors - failed 4-4-2-1. For - NJ, PA, DE, VA. Against - NH, NC, SC, GA. Divided - CT, MD. Absent - MA. The 361st vote was held for the appointment of the president by a body of electors in the abstract failed with four votes for, four votes against, two votes divided, and one state absent. Vol.2, Pg 404.

August 31st

Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania moved to strike out the words "choose the President of the US" as the matter of appointing the president was not fully agreed to. A vote was held to postpone the debate over the appointment of the president until a further date passed with nine votes for, one vote against, and one divided. Vol.2, Pg 480.

The convention forms the Third Committee of Eleven to determine various subjects including the appointment of the president. The members of the Third Committee of Eleven included Nicholas Gilman of New Hampshire, Rufus King of Massachusetts, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, David Brearley of New Jersey, Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania, John Dickinson of Delaware, Daniel Carroll of Maryland, James Madison of Virginia, Hugh Williamson of North Carolina, Peirce Butler of South Carolina, and Abraham Baldwin of Georgia. Vol.2, Pg 481.

September 4th

David Brearley of New Jersey submits to the convention a partial report from the Committee of Eleven. Regarding the appointment of the president, the report reads as follows:

After the word 'Excellency' in sect. 1. art. 10. to be inserted. 'He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and together with the vice president, chosen for the same term, be elected in the following manner, vlz. Each State shall appoint in such manner as it's Legislature may direct, a number of electors equal to the whole number of Senators, and members of the House of representatives, to which the State may be entitled in the Legislature. The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same State with themselves; and they shall make a list of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each, which list they shall sign and certify and transmit sealed to the Seat of the. Genl. Government, directed to the President of the Senate - The President of the Senate shall in that House open all the certificates; and the votes shall be then & there counted. The Person having the greatest number of votes shall be the President, if such number be a majority of that of the Electors; and if there be more than one, who have such majority, and have an equal number of votes, then the Senate shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President: but if no Person have a majority, then from the five highest on the list, the Senate shall choose by ballot the President. And in every case after the choice of the President, the person having the greatest number of votes shall be Vice President: but if there should remain two or more, who have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them the Vice President. The Legislature may determine the time of choosing and assembling the Electors, and the manner of certifying and transmitting their votes. This report from the committee would establish most of the final language of appointing the president that would eventually become the Electoral College. Vol.2, Pg 497-498.

Vice President. Nathaniel Gorham of Massachusetts did not like the appointment of the vice president simply as the next highest vote recipient leaving open the possibility they may not achieve a majority, as well as some "obscure man", could obtain the position. Vol.2, Pg 499.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Roger Sherman of Connecticut claimed the decision of the Third Committee of Eleven was designed to eliminate the question of reeligibility by the legislature and allow the president to be appointed independently of the legislature. In regard to Gorham's concerns, the choice from the top five candidates to receive electoral votes would eliminate obscure candidates. Vol.2, Pg 499.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. James Madison of Virginia expressed his hesitation in the method of creating a list of five candidates. The election process would then focus too much on nominating candidates instead of selecting one. This would give the power of selection to the Senate and the power of nominating to the largest states. In his words, "the election would in fact be consigned to the Senate altogether. It would have the effect at the same time, he observed, of giving the nomination of the candidates to the largest States." Gouverneur Morris concurred with Madison. Vol.2, Pg 500.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania concurred with Madison's opposition to the committee's method of the Senate appointing the president. Vol.2, Pg 500.

Edmund Randolph of Virginia and Charles Pinckney of South Carolina both requested an explanation on why the appointment method had been changed in committee. Vol.2, Pg 500.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania laid out six reasons (1) the danger of intrigue and faction by the legislature. (2) corruption by the legislature regarding eligibility for a second term is eliminated. (3) the difficulty of impeaching the president if appointed by the legislature. (4) an appointment by the legislature seems unpopular among the delegates. (5) delegates seem anxious about an appointment by a popular vote. (6) the need to make the president independent of the legislature. As the electors would vote separately at the same time, it will be difficult to corrupt them and cabal would be avoided. Vol.2, Pg 500.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. George Mason of Virginia generally supported the committee's proposal as it would remove the possibility of cabal and corruption. However, he believed the Electoral College would not choose a president by majority vote and "nineteen times in twenty the President would be chosen by the Senate." However, Mason felt the Senate was an improper body to make the selection of the president. Vol.2, Pg 500.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Legislature - Opposition. Peirce Butler of South Carolina did not think the committee's method was perfect but much improved on an appointment by the legislature method, which would be dominated by "elective monarchies, cabal, faction, and violence." Vol.2, Pg 501.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Charles Pinckney of South Carolina disapproved of the committee's Electoral College structure citing four reasons. The issue was that "it threw the whole appointment in fact into the hands of the Senate." Second, the electors would essentially be ignorant of the candidates. The last two issues centered on the influence of the legislature regarding reeligibility and impeachment. Vol.2, Pg 501.

Hugh Williamson of North Carolina doubted the effectiveness regarding reeligibility if the Senate would make the appointment. He also thought the Senate should be restrained to choosing between the two highest candidates. Vol.2, Pg 501.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania argued the principal advantage was to take away the opportunity of cabal. Vol.2, Pg 501.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Abraham Baldwin of Georgia suggested over time candidates would become more popular, enough to gain a majority of electoral votes, and negate the Senate's control over an appointment. Vol.2, Pg 501.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania made points in favor of the committee's system. It removes cabal and corruption and over time "Continental Characters" would develop for electors to properly judge. Wilson also adds to the discussion that perhaps the Legislature would be a better choice to make the selection instead of the Senate. Less than five candidates to choose from would also be favorable. He reasoned a smaller number of candidates would prevent cabal in the House "as it would be restrained to certain designated objects of choice." Also the House would constantly change so new characters would be free from corruption and faction whereas the Senate would likely have more permanent characters. Vol.2, Pg 501.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Edmund Randolph of Virginia was concerned over the appointment by the Senate but not by the House of Representatives. If the Senate held appointment powers, it may give an advantage to the states near the seat of government. Vol.2, Pg 502.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania preferred the Senate make the selection as it would mean the president is beholden to fewer people for their appointment. Vol.2, Pg 502.

Consideration of the report of the Third Committee of Eleven was postponed so state delegations may review it. Vol.2, Pg 502.

September 5th

After some debate over the powers of the executive, the discussion over the appointment of the president resumed.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Charles Pinckney of South Carolina began with the electors lacking knowledge of candidates and "will be swayed by an attachment to the eminent men of their respective States." Second, it would leave the selection in the hands of the Senate, making the president a creature and combining against the House of Representatives. Vol.2, Pg 511.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts did not object to the committee's plan to appoint the president. Vol.2, Pg 511.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Legislature - Advocation. John Rutledge of South Carolina was very opposed to the plan provided by the committee. He moved to postpone this method and reinstate the debate over appointment by the legislature through a joint ballot without reeligibility. Vol.2, Pg 511.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. George Mason of Virginia was not ready to express his approval but would go on to cite his objections to the committee's proposal. It was unlikely that any candidate would achieve a majority, thus "It puts the appointment in fact into the hands of the Senate." Regarding reappointment, the president would be among the five highest giving the Senate control. A likely coalition would exist between the president and senate, undermining the Constitution. Mason preferred the Senate not to have the eventual election. He moved to strike out the phrase "if such number be a majority of that of the electors" so that only a plurality of electors would be needed to appoint the president. Vol.2, Pg 512.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina preferred the candidate with the highest number of votes to become president without a majority requirement as an appointment by the Senate would lead to corruption & aristocracy. Vol.2, Pg 512.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania discussed the probabilities of electors voting twice. He assumed it was likely a majority would occur as 1/4 of the votes would achieve a majority. With each elector's second vote it is likely half "will fall on characters eminent & generally known." If the president performed to satisfaction, the electors may reappoint without the Senate. Vol.2, Pg 512.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Neutral. George Mason of Virginia made an unintelligible statement regarding the committee's proposed method. Vol.2, Pg 512.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Neutral. Roger Sherman of Connecticut pointed out the advantage of the large state in nominating candidates and the advantage of the small state in appointing the president. Vol.2, Pg 512.

Vote. Electors - Failed 2-9-0-0. For - MD, NC. Against - NH, MA, CT, NJ, PA, DE, VA, SC, GA. The 446th vote was held to remove the wording "if such number be a majority of that of the electors" and establish a plurality of electoral votes sufficient to appoint the president failed with two votes for and nine votes against. Vol.2, Pg 513.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Legislature (Electors, Legislature) - Advocation. James Wilson of Pennsylvania moved to strike the Senate from appointing the president and instead allow the Legislature to appoint the president. Vol.2, Pg 513.

Legislature (Electors, Legislature) - Opposition. Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. James Madison of Virginia responded against this change saying this would allow the large states to dominate the process. Having the final say in the Legislature, large states would not need to aim for a majority in the Electoral College. However, if the Senate controlled the appointment in the case of no majority, the large states in the Electoral College would be more motivated to form a decisive majority. Vol.2, Pg 513.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Edmund Randolph of Virginia spoke hyperbolically regarding the Senate selecting the president as a move towards aristocracy. Vol.2, Pg 513.

Legislature (Electors, Legislature) - Advocation. Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. John Dickinson of Delaware approved of the Legislature making the selection as a better alternative as the committee's method would place too much power in the Senate's hands. Vol.2, Pg 513.

Vote. Legislature (Electors, Legislature) - Failed 3-7-1-0. For - PA, VA, SC. Against - MA, CT, NJ, DE, MD, NC, GA. Divided - NH. The 447th vote was held to allow the legislature to choose from the five highest elector nominees instead of the Senate failed with three votes for, seven votes against, and one vote divided. Vol.2, Pg 513.

Electors - Advocation. James Madison of Virginia proposed removing the majority requirement in the Electoral College and allowing the candidate with the most votes and at least one-third to be appointed. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Electors - Advocation. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina concurred with Madison's proposal to remove the majority requirement in the Electoral College and allow the candidate with the most votes and at least one-third to be appointed. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Electors - Opposition. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts objected as this lower number would allow just three or four large states to make the selection. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina added that seven states do not constitute even one-third of the people meaning roughly one-sixth of the population could make the selection if the Senate holds the power of appointment. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Vote. Electors - Failed 2-9-0-0. For - VA, NC. Against - NH, MA, CT, NJ, PA, DE, MD, SC, GA. The 448th vote was held to appoint the president by electors with a plurality but a minimum of one-third of the electoral votes failed with two votes for and nine votes against. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Legislature (Committee) - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts proposed creating a committee of six senators and seven representatives chosen by a joint ballot to appoint the president from the list of five nominees. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Rufus King of Massachusetts noted that while the small states in the Senate held lots of influence, this would be balanced out by the large states nominating or "bringing forward the candidates." Vol.2, Pg 514.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Neutral. George Mason of Virginia moved to reduce the number of candidates the Senate would choose from five down to three. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Neutral. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts seconded Mason's move to reduce the Senate's choices down to three. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Neutral. Roger Sherman of Connecticut recommended seven or thirteen candidates for the Senate to choose from. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Vote. Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Failed 2-9-0-0. For - VA, NC. Against - NH, MA, CT, NJ, PA, DE, MD, SC, GA. The 449th vote was held to appoint the president by the Senate from a list of three candidates chosen by electors from the states but failed with two votes for and nine votes against. Vol.2, Pg 514.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Neutral. Richard Spaight of North Carolina moved to change the nominating list from five to thirteen candidates nominated by the electors of the several states for the Senate to choose from. Vol.2, Pg 515.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Neutral. John Rutledge of South Carolina concurred with Spaight's motion to change the nominating list from five to thirteen candidates nominated by the electors of the several states for the Senate to choose from. Vol.2, Pg 515.

Vote. Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Failed 2-9-0-0. For - NC, SC. Against - NH, MA, CT, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA, GA. The 450th vote was held to appoint the president by the Senate from a list of thirteen candidates chosen by electors from the states which failed with two votes for and nine votes against. Vol.2, Pg 515.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. George Mason of Virginia finished the day announcing he did not approve of the method from the committee as it would place power into the hands of seven or eight men (Senate) and fix an aristocracy in America. Vol.2, Pg 515.

September 6th

Legislature (Electors, Senate appoint, Legislature reappoint) - Advocation. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts proposed appointment by the Senate from a list of five, but added that reelections be handled by the House of Representatives should the incumbent president not receive a majority of electoral votes. Vol.2, Pg 522.

Legislature (Electors, Senate appoint, Legislature reappoint) - Advocation. Rufus King of Massachusetts supported the Senate appointment, and legislature reappointment idea although he predicted the method would be seldom used. Vol.2, Pg 522.

Legislature (Electors, Senate appoint, Legislature reappoint) - Opposition. George Read of Delaware opposed the Senate appointment, and legislature reappointment method complaining about the potential of indulging every member's personal alteration. Vol.2, Pg 522.

Legislature (Electors, Senate appoint, Legislature reappoint) - Advocation. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina found it to be a reasonable check against the Senate. Vol.2, Pg 522.

Legislature (Electors, Legislature voting by delegation) - Advocation. Roger Sherman of Connecticut approved of the general method however suggested the Legislature select the president with voting calculated by state delegation, one vote per state, to incorporate the concept of equitable voting in the Senate. Vol.2, Pg 522.

Legislature (Electors, Senate appoint, Legislature reappoint) - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania approved of Elbridge Gerry's alteration to give the Senate the appointment but reappointment to the Legislature. Vol.2, Pg 522.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. James Wilson of Pennsylvania disapproved of the committee's proposal as it would establish a dangerous aristocracy in American government as the Senate will have the power to appoint and thus the power to appoint the government and judicial offices, make laws, etc. The president will not be a man of the people, "but a minion of the Senate." Vol.2, Pg 522.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvania downplayed the influence of the Senate on many topics. Specific to the appointment of the president, he observed the Senate could only choose among five nominees presented to them and may even be left out of the appointment if the Electoral College produces a majority. Vol.2, Pg 523.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina pointed to the aristocratic nature of the process should the Senate control the appointment. Vol.2, Pg 524.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Opposition. George Clymer of Pennsylvania concurred with Williamson on the aristocratic influence of the Senate. Vol.2, Pg 524.

Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Advocation. Legislature - Opposition. Electors - Advocation. Alexander Hamilton of New York argued the division among the several states and their different interests would reduce the likelihood of states concentrating votes on a single majority winner. This would throw the decision of appointing the president into the hands of the Senate. Hamilton's preference was for an appointment by plurality from the Electoral College. If the Senate is granted powers to appoint from a list of five nominees, there is nothing saying they could not choose the nominee with the fewest electoral votes. Vol.2, Pg 524.

Electors - Advocation. Richard Spaight of North Carolina preferred electors meet in order to remove the Senate from the appointment process. He moved "That the Electors meet at the seat of the General Government." Vol.2, Pg 526.

Electors - Advocation. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina seconded Spaight's proposal of electors meeting as a body at the seat of government. Vol.2, Pg 526.

Vote. Electors - Failed 1-10-0-0. For - NC. Against - NH, MA, CT, NJ, PA, DE, MD, VA, SC, GA. The 458th vote was held to appoint the president through a body of electors meeting at the seat of government failed with one vote for and ten votes against. Vol.2, Pg 526.

Vote. Legislature (Electors, Senate) - Passed 8-3-0-0. For - NH, MA, CT, NJ, DE, MD, SC, GA. Against - PA, VA, NC. The 461st vote held to appoint the president by electors of the states "if such number be a majority of that of the electors" and passed with eight votes for and three votes against. Vol.2, Pg 526.

Legislature (Electors, Legislature delegation) - Advocation. Hugh Williamson of North Carolina suggested the selection of president be made by the legislature voting by state delegation. Vol.2, Pg 527.

Legislature (Electors, House delegation) - Advocation. Roger Sherman of Connecticut added instead that only the House of Representatives, voting by state delegation, appoint the president instead of both chambers. Vol.2, Pg 527.

Legislature (Electors, House delegation) - Advocation. George Mason of Virginia preferred this method of electors nominating and the House voting by state delegation to lessen the influence of an aristocratic Senate. Vol.2, Pg 527.

Vote. Legislature (Electors, House delegation) - Passed 10-1-0-0. For - NH, MA, CT, NJ, PA, MD, VA, NC, SC, GA. Against - DE. The 465th vote was held to strike out the words "The Senate shall immediately choose" and insert "The House of Representatives shall immediately choose by ballot one of them for President, the members from each State having one vote," passed with ten votes for and one vote against. Vol.2, Pg 527.

The convention amended the committee's report relating to the appointment of the president which would be the final language governing the presidential election process and the wording in the U.S. Constitution. No vote was taken on the final language and the convention adjourned for the day. Vol.2, Pg 528.