Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol II).djvu/85

was septennial.^[1] When, after the revolution, the states freely framed and adopted their own constitutions of government, a similar, though not so marked a diversity of opinion, was exhibited. In Connecticut, until her recent constitution, the representatives were chosen semi-annually; in Rhode-Island they are still chosen semi-annually; in South-Carolina, Tennessee, Missouri, Illinois, and Louisiana they are chosen biennially; and in the rest of the states annually.^[2] And it has been justly observed in the Federalist,^[3] that it would not be easy to show, that Connecticut or Rhode-Island is better governed, or enjoys a greater share of rational liberty, than South-Carolina, (or any of the other states having biennial elections;) or, that either die one or the other of these states is distinguished, in these respects, and by these causes, from the states, whose elections are different from both.

§ 596. These remarks are sufficient to establish the futility of the maxim alluded to, respecting the value of annual elections. The question, how frequent elections should be, and what should be the term of service of representatives, cannot be answered in any universal form, applicable to all times, and all nations.^[4] It is very complex in its nature, and must ultimately resolve itself into a question of policy and sound discretion, with reference to the particular condition and circumstances of each nation, to which it is sought to be applied. The same fundamental principles of government may require very different, if not entirely opposite practices in different states. There is great wis-

---

1. The Federalist, No. 52.
2. Dr. Lieber's Encycl. Americana, art. Constitutions of the United States; 3 Elliot's Debates, 200; 1 Kent. Comm. 215.
3. The Federalist, No. 53; 3 Elliot's Debates, 260.
4. 1 Elliot's Debates, 40, 41, 42.