Page images

ple the pups to death, wholesale. It seems strange that these scientific gentlemen should so easily forget the teachings of Darwin; but it will be much more strange if such novel and fanciful theories, based on nothing whatever in the domain of observed facts, should deceive the House of Representatives.

The fur seals greatly need a ten-year close season. They need immediate protection from the pup killers of the Bureau of Fisheries, and we hope that it will be accorded in the amendment to the Sulzer bill.

[graphic][merged small]

is an alumnus of the University of Virginia, and the author of the "Impolicy of the Proposed Income Tax Amendment," etc.



THE wave of superficial populism that has been running riot over the land has finally broken upon the Constitution of the United States. Not content with experimental legislation, the reformers would now change the foundation upon which the structure of the government has been builded, and upon which our civil institutions must rest for stability and perpetuity. The Federal and republican principles of the Constitution are especially attacked.

Expressing this contempt for the Constitution, a Senator of the United States recently said:

"For decades we have directed our efforts toward improving the shingles of the roof of our national superstructure without realizing that the foundation is absolutely rotten, because its cementation is one of selfishness instead of general welfare." (Senator Jonathan Bourne of Oregon, in 72 Central Law Journal, 354-May, 1911.)

Another bold advocate of reform recently said that the framers of the Constitution "put up a job" on three million hungry and weary people.

"We have had a very mockery of self-government. The fathers worked out this Constitution in secret session. They were not elected to draw up one at all, but only to amend the articles of confederation. The Constitution was drawn up for the benefit of property owners. It had taken eight years for three million people to drive out a handful of British soldiers, and then when their stomachs were empty and the spirit of Independence was low, they accepted this Constitution and we've been fighting the money power ever since." (Francis J. Heney, before a joint committee of the Legislature of California, February 3, 1911.)

How consonant all this is with the declarations of those who are seeking to introduce the doctrines of exotic proletarianism into our country, is shown by the following:

* * *

"The close of the Revolutionary War, however, found the new American bourgeoisie in full possession of the field and ready to develop their power. A government was needed to carry out the demands of this class and the form of the Confederation was too unwieldy and of too little value to be really effectual. In place of the loose agglomeration of the communities, which existed under the Articles of Confederation, a federal Constitution was necessary to the interests of the budding capi

talism. * * The upshot of the Constitutional Convention was that a document was formed which had the result that all who possessed estates, who were engaged in traffic, or held any of the final settlement and depreciation certificates, felt safe. The final result was a complete and unmistakable triumph for the merchants and financiers." (American

Proletarian, p. 79—1910.)

The agitator is a blind guide. Obsessed by a single idea he forthwith expands the same into a system for universal application. He can not see different principles in their proper political relation in the structure of government. There is a plenitude of democrats in these times who declaim about the rule of the people, but few who exhibit that statesmanship which is rather concerned with the establishment of justice, the security of the public peace, the promotion of the general welfare and the perpetuation of the blessings of liberty to all the people and as a heritage to posterity.

The controversy respecting the election of United States Senators by the people involves two principles which should be adjusted and should receive equal weight in the settlement of this question. The right of election by the people is an inherent principle of republican institutions. The right of the States to elect their Senators is a principle essential to the Federal character of the United States Senate and to the dignity and equality of the States in the Federal system.

The advocates of the republican principle have ignored the Federal principle and this has accounted for the recurring postponement of an adjustment of this controversy. The delay has been exasperating to the proponents of the amendment to the Constitution. While the question has been passed upon by partisan platform committees, it has not been settled in the political forum created by organic law for the determination as to whether or not the proposed amendment shall be sub mitted. What shall be done to compel Congress to act? A writer in the North American Review has made this quixotic suggestion:

"The form of remedy for compelling Congress to act would seem clearly to be a writ of mandamus. It is believed that such a proceeding could be instituted by any citizen. * * It would be necessary to commence this action in the courts of the District of Columbia. * ** From the decision there an appeal can be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States." (A Convention to Amend the Constitution.-Why needed.-How it may be obtained.-By Walter K. Tuller, North American Review, March, 1911.)

It would be a truly fatuous proceeding for a district court of the United States to issue its mandate to Congress. It

« PreviousContinue »