Hmmmm, except for the 'elected' bit sounds quite a bit like England's system of government with the higher offices serving for life. But you keep preaching sunshine....
If there is still any doubt, let us not forget the
following, also from Madison's notes on the Convention:
Monday June 18, 1787.
(Hamilton)the British Govt. was the best in the world: and that he doubted much whether any thing short of it would do in America.
(Hamilton)As to the Executive, it seemed to be admitted that no good one could be established on Republican principles. Was not this giving up the merits of the question: for can there be a good Govt. without a good Executive. The English model was the only good one on this subject. The Hereditary interest of the King was so interwoven with that of the Nation, and his personal emoluments so great, that he was placed above the danger of being corrupted from abroad-and at the same time was both sufficiently independent and sufficiently controuled, to answer the purpose of the institution at home.
Nope, no call for any type of "monarch", "king", or anything like that at all. < /sarcasm >
I don't know about you, billbears, but if I had been there and heard that fall out of Hamilton's sewer after fighting the very same government he wanted emulated, Aaron Burr would have had a much different place in history.