CH. XIII.]
PRESIDENT'S NEGATIVE.
353
Judges should not only be pure, but be believed to be so. The moral influence of their judgments is weakened, if not destroyed, whenever there is a general, even though it be an unfounded distrust, that they are guided by other motives in the discharge of their duties than the law and the testimony. A free people have no security for their liberties, when an appeal to the judicial department becomes either illusory, or questionable.[1]
§ 887. The other point of inquiry is, as to the extent of the legislative check upon the negative of the executive. It has been seen, that it was originally proposed, that a concurrence of two thirds of each house should be required; that this was subsequently altered to three fourths; and was finally brought back again to the original number.[2] One reason against the three fourths seems to have been, that it would afford little security for any effectual exercise of the power. The larger the number required to overrule the executive negative, the more easy it would be for him to exert a silent and secret influence to detach the requisite number in order to carry his object. Another reason was, that even, supposing no such influence to be exerted, still, in a great variety of cases of a political nature, and especially such, as touched local or sectional interests, the pride or the power of states, it would be easy to defeat the most salutary measures, if a combination of a few states- ↑ It is a remarkable circumstance in the history of Mr. Jefferson's opinions, that he was decidedly in favour of associating the judiciary with the executive in the exercise of the negative on laws, or of investing it separately with a similar power.[a 1] At a subsequent period his opinion respecting the value and importance seems to have undergone extraordinary changes.
- ↑ Journal of the Convention, p. 220, 208, 254, 256.
- ↑ 2 Jefferson's Corresp. 274; 2 Pitk. 283.
vol. ii.45
