decide, whether the changes proposed by it are in all respects for the better, or the worse.[1] In some respects it is a substantial improvement. In the first place, under the original mode, the senate was restrained from acting, until the house of representatives had made their selection, which, if parties ran high, might be considerably delayed. By the amendment the senate may proceed to a choice of the vice-president, immediately on ascertaining the returns of the votes.[2] In the next place, under the original mode, if no choice should be made of a president by the house of representatives until after the expiration of the term of the preceding officer, there would be no person to perform the functions of the office, and an interregnum would ensue, and a total suspension of the powers of government.[3] By the amendment, the new vice-president would in such case act as president. By the original mode, the senate are to elect the vice-president by ballot; by the amendment, the mode of choice is left open, so that it may be viva voce. Whether this be an improvement, or not, may be doubted.
§ 1463. On the other hand, the amendment has certainly greatly diminished the dignity and importance of the office of vice-president. Though the duties remain the same, he is no longer a competitor for the presidency, and selected, as possessing equal merit, talents, and qualifications, with the other candidate. As every state was originally compelled to vote for two candidates (one of whom did not belong to the state)- ↑ 1 Kent's Comm. Lect. 13, p. 262; Rawle on Const. ch. 5, p. 54, 55.
- ↑ Rawle on Const. ch. 5, p. 54; 1 Kent's Comm. Lect. 13, p. 260.
- ↑ Mr. Rawle is of opinion, that the old vice-president would, under the old mode, act as president in case of a non-election of president. I cannot find in the constitution any authority for such a position. Rawle on Const. ch. 5, p. 54. See also Act of Congress, 1st March, 1792, ch. 8.
