Origin of the cabinet in the

In the convention of 1787 it was several times proposed that United States the president should be given a council analogous to the Privy Council in England; but these suggestions were fortunately abandoned. Nevertheless, in the Constitution as it came from the framers there were two points from which such an advisory council might have developed. The first was the Senate, which with the president shared the executive power in making treaties and confirming appointments. But the early experience of Washington and the difficulties he encountered in dealing with that body checked the development along that line. A second and more likely element from which an advisory council might have developed was the heads of the executive departments. As has been shown, the power to create such departments was given to Congress, and the necessity of those close relations to the president was recognized by the provision that he might require their opinions. But it was left entirely to his discretion as to the form these relations should take, whether by formal reports, or whether the heads of the departments should sustain more intimate relations to their chief. The cabinet as council, that is, as a body of intimate, trusted political advisers, was not established by the Constitution, but owes its existence to unwritten law and custom.1

Constitu

tional provi

sions for the

formation of

the cabinet

Growth of departments

3

The constitutional provisions for the powers from which the cabinet has developed are found in the general grant of the executive power to the president,2 and the power expressly granted to him to consult the heads of the executive departments; while the fact that such departments are to be created is implied from the last quoted clause and also from the power given to Congress to make all laws necessary and proper to carry out the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States or in any department or officer thereof.4

Acting on this authority, Congress, at its first session in 1789, passed statutes creating three executive departments: the Department of Foreign Affairs (which was soon to become the Department of State), the Department of War, and the Treasury

1 M. L. Hinsdale, A History of the President's Cabinet, pp. 7–8.

2 The Constitution of the United States, Article II, Sect. i.

3 Ibid. Article II, Sect. ii, clause 1. 4 Ibid. Article I, Sect. vii, clause 18.

Department. A little later it created the office of AttorneyGeneral, which was organized as the Department of Justice in 1870. This process of congressional creation and division has continued until to-day there are ten principal departments.

Heads of

departments

become the

cabinet

Members of

cabinet are

from party of

the president

The chief officers of the three earliest departments, together with the Attorney-General, were consulted by Washington, and in 1793 were known unofficially as the cabinet, a title which was not recognized by law until 1907. The precedent established by Washington has been followed ever since, with the exception of a short period during the administration of Jackson, when he consulted other advisers than the heads of the departments. In recent years cabinet meetings have been held twice a week, on Tuesday and Friday, which are known in Washington as " Cabinet Days." 2 The principles governing the selection of the cabinet reflect the dual position of that body. The officials must be able to administer the affairs of the departments over which they preside; but they must also be suitable advisers for the president in the important policies of his administration. The first principle which has been followed ever since Washington's second administration is that the cabinet_officers must come from the same political party. The blurring of party lines, or the disintegration of parties, has produced a few exceptions, notably in the Exceptions administrations of Monroe, Tyler, and Lincoln, and certain cases of independence of party allegiance have accounted for some individual appointments. The appointment of Gresham as Secretary of State in 1893, after he had been a member of Arthur's cabinet and a strong candidate for the Republican nomination in 1888, is the most remarkable instance. In recent years, however, the claim of the Republican party to be a truly national one led both President Roosevelt and President Taft to include in their cabinets Southern Democrats for brief periods.

1 H. B. Learned, The President's Cabinet, pp. 157-158.

2 Twice during the administrations of President Wilson it has been reported hat the formal cabinet meetings were discontinued. This was probably for er reasons than those which actuated Jackson, for there is little evidence 'resident Wilson has preferred other advisers to the heads of departments, he has freely consulted a large number of unofficial advisers. It is ble that the complications of the war could best be handled by private vith the heads of the departments concerned.

Sections of country

selection

A second principle usually followed is a geographical one. It recognized in has been held advisable to give recognition to all sections of the country. Thus, President Wilson's original cabinet contained members from eight different states, but in making these appointments he violated another principle formerly insisted upon; namely, that no state should have more than one member. This was first most clearly violated by President Cleveland, who made two appointments from New York, which also furnished the president. Since 1884 there have been other cases of double appointments from the same state, and President Wilson's first cabinet contained three secretaries from New York, a fact which caused some unfavorable comment.

Three other motives for choice seem to be operative at present. The most obvious one is the necessity of gaining political support and strength for the administration. A striking instance was President Wilson's appointment of Mr. Bryan as Secretary of State, thereby winning for the administration the support of the more radical wing of the Democratic party. Personal friendship frequently plays a great part in some appointments. For example, President McKinley appointed his friend and neighbor, W. R. Day, Secretary of State, a choice which proved a not unhappy one. Perhaps also the promotion of Mr. Cortelyou from the position of secretary to the president to secretary of the Iments of Labor and Commerce, Post Office, and Treasury by Print Rosevelt was of the same sort, although in this instance, allude a tested political capacity were doubtless the most decisive Pouces

The third deney and the last to develop in point of time is the attempt to select niep who are distinguished for their skill in administering large professions or less interests. Harrison's appointment of Wanamaker is a casei peat, although the idea of rewarding a successful campaign manager may not have been absent. Clearer cases are seen in appointment eí Root † reorganize the War Department, and Lymen ag as Secr of the Treasury by McKinley, while success cademe istration is recognized by President Wilson, himself ar president, in the appointment of Secretary Hous* been the successful president of three instituti

The relation net to the president has varied. Du ing the admin statie Jackson the presidential power w almost military and the secretaries were treated like orderlic while during the last months of Buchanan's administration t presidentiary be said to have been in commission Between the " remes the more normal status is foun Legally teleieas of the secretaries to the president are w stated

Wha legal a presi 50

dent

t'

"

e cabinet is, therefore, a purely voluntary, ext: of the heads of the executive departments with t may be dispensed with at any moment by the pre resolutions do not legally bind the president in t They form a privy council but not a ministry.2

correctly states the legal and theoretical position a the cabinet to the president, political consideration of public business, and precedent greatly strength et's position and influence.

neetings are most informal, resembling the discussio ds of directors. No minutes are preserved and seldom a formal vote taken. Nevertheless, the subjects of the d on are of vital importance, not merely to the departmer to the legislative program with which Congress is dealin i for the political position and influence of the administratic It is the custom for each secretary to consult with the preside before introducing measures at a cabinet meeting and to foll the president's suggestion. No policy could be adopted with the approval of the president. Nevertheless, there is probably free interchange of opinion, and either in the cabinet meeting in private discussion compromises are arranged. While ea secretary is responsible for the administration of his departme questions involving important changes of policy are almost variably presented to the president and often for discussion at t cabinet meeting. Even the routine administration of the depa ment may sometimes produce a political crisis which necessita presidential interference or cabinet consultation.3

1 M. L. Hinsdale, A History of the President's Cabinet, pp. 333, 334.

is

the cadets as

cocative

At the meetings these of the president is hissed before it is presented to Congres, and the legs tive prog prepared. In this particular it sold seen as departing from the strictly functions of a and beginning to resemble the cabinets of England and Fr. L Such action, however, is entirely extra legal and forgn to the original conception of the duties of the beads of the departmers but finds its justification frohe fact that the prescent is directed to recommend measures to Congress for cons teration, and is vested with the power of cto. The caline: ac,ng no so much as heads of executive departmen's as confidential ad visers of the president, is therefore justin d in taking ! tive policies into consideration. Such action des ect. van please Congress, and the fact that during scent adil in tions bills have been frequently prepard cabinet of ial and presented after discussion in the ahiret was been rugroet by Congress as executive interference with the proper fupedon of the legislature.

But cabinet meetings serve another purpose. As has beer shown, the cabinet officers are sometimes chosen because of th.. political influence. As politicians they keep the president in formed concerning the public opinion of the administration. A leaders of local if not national importance they fregoertly explai and justify the policy of the administration through speeches it various parts of the country. And in their relation to Congres their political influence is often invaluable in bringing pressur to bear upon recalcitrant members of the party, thus facilitetin the legislative program of the administration.

The importance of the cabinet as a council has increased, bu there has been little development of its functions. The indivic a members are still subordinate officials chosen by the president a carry out his policies, and are still responsible to him. Thei influence with Congress still depends upon the political front of the administration exerted in an entirely extra-legal war, da no steps have been taken to develop their functions into the responsible ministries of foreign countries.