Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"He might betray his trust to foreign powers."
Spawned from this thread:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210312017
This is an excerpt from the debates of the 1787 Constitutional Convention. James Madison is arguing the need to include in the new constitution a means to remove the chief executive.
Direct link URL has issues. Try https://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwed.html, then navigate to Elliot's Debates, Volume 5, pg 341 (July 20).
...
...
Mr. MADISON thought it indispensable that some provision should be made for defending the community against the incapacity, negligence, or perfidy of the chief magistrate. The limitation of the period of his service was not a sufficient security. He might lose his capacity after his appointment. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers. The case of the executive magistracy was very distinguishable from that of the legislature, or any other public body holding offices of limited duration. It could not be presumed that all, or even the majority, of the members of an assembly would either lose their capacity for discharging, or be bribed to betray, their trust. Besides the restraints of their personal integrity and honor, the difficulty of acting in concert for purposes of corruption was a security to the public. And if one or a few members only should be seduced, the soundness of the remaining members would maintain the integrity and fidelity of the body. In the case of the executive magistracy, which was to be administered by a single man, loss of capacity, or corruption, was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the republic.
...
More at link.
Scan of Elliot's Debates, Volume 5, pg 341
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1246 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (10)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"He might betray his trust to foreign powers." (Original Post)
sl8
Mar 2018
OP
Gabi Hayes
(28,795 posts)1. The lack of some sort of parliamentary response to squatters like Bush and Trump is by far the
greatest flaw in our system of government
How were they to know....
He was with the Russians, too?
HIYYYAHHH!!!
ProudLib72
(17,984 posts)2. Restrained by honor and integrity sums up Congress in a nutshell, right?
And wasn't Madison a proponent of the electoral college? Oh, to live in a time when one could put their trust in those committed to the country!