New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-09-10
NEW BOOKS.

NEW OVVA10s
POLITICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY
William o. Bateman, counsellor at-law,
st. Louis g. j. Jones a. Co.
In general the author of this work takes
very gloomy view of the constitutional
future of our country. In his dedication
he refers to "the system of political usurpa-
ton and official corruption now foreshadOw-
ing the coming empire" One more step in
the way of amendment, he says in the
preface, if sanctioned by the people, will
wholly divest them of their sovereign right
OF suffrage and election. The proposition
that the United States are q nation may be
the form Of the new amendment. The first
article of the Republican platform must
have seemed to him an indorsment of his
prophetic powers. Its Endorsement by the
people will render such an amendment I'M
necessary.
Considerable attention is paid to amend
ments in the body of the work. Referring
to the objections to the binding force of the
constitution because it "never had ratifi-
cation by the people," he asks, of what
greater force are amendments made by the
State Legislatures and never submitted to
the people! An amendment to the Federal
constitution may have Tor assume to have)
the effect to wholly divest the people Of each
State of the absolute sovereignty. the eu-
preme control of the right Of suffrage and
render it's further exercise permanently de-
pendent upon the will Of their Federal rep
resentatives, as in the case of the fifteenth
amendment. But he considers the limit to
this to be that "all power is inherent in the
people," though "three-fourths of the State
Legislatures, by way of amendment to the
Federal constitution, may wholly abolish
the State constitutions, the State govern.
ments and even the States themselves. The
late amendments he considers carried only
in the interest of dominant party, by party
vote, and recons truction of States by as.
sumed power; that another party will do
the same, and fears that the tyranny of
200 or 300 congressional despots, to-day of
one party, and tomorrow Of another, will
take the place of our constitutional govern
ment.
In discussing who "the people are he
claims the sovereignty of the States, that ia,
of the "body of electors of the States,
and that that Of the United States is mere
~ delegated authority. He Gays of the
Union that it may be dissolved by the
States, but not by single State; only by
the assent of all. If any State can be said
to have reserved power. the same must
be said of every other State. If the war
settled these questions. then the govern.
nent is one of force. Secession is nothing
at its foundation but the right of man to
violate the rights of his neighbors, usurp
their common liberties and destroy their
common peace. He thus ingsniously de-
tends the doctrine of State rights and at
quence.
He considers the existence of two parties
q necessity of our system:
Hence the necessity of the two great par
ties-the Nationals and Federais of l7S1
and the Republicans and Democrats of re
cent times; the one to preserve the Union
of the States, and the other to preserve the
| States themselves, and 90 prevent that
Union from wholly absorbing the States
| and becoming an imperial and absolute
power.
He believes in the Limitation of suffrage
but doubts if q practicable plan can be
adopted, and accepts the doctrine that only
the States can confer the right to vote
| Being a citizen of the United States does
| not include that among his privileges anG
immunities. Therefore the fifteenth amend
| ment is simply subversive of the sovereign
! ty OF the people. 1t either confers a new
| right or none. He considers this not (
question of negro voting" but whethe
the right of suffrage is conferred by Fedora
or State authority If any right to vote i
conferred q new political community i
created, and he concludes that if an,
| change is caused it is a radical and com
plete one, and the United States is changes
into single State. Through many page
this idea is discussed as the establishment
of the empire" and he changes ''all powe
is inherent in the people" Into "all powe
is vested in Cong ress."
The subject of "Imperialism" occupie
much more space than is given to an
other, and Pomeroy, who is styled the Primo
of Imperialists, and the Federalist ar
largely quoted. In fact, the work might b
said to have been wri item to refute the fo
mer's theories. The old arguments OF th
original parties to the constitution, the so,
ereignty of the States, that the Union is
government of the States, and not Of a bod
of individuals, are rehabilitated with SON
new ideas which do not seem to be {
practical value in the discussion. Tt
source and extent of powers the necessit
of boundary line between State and Fe,
eral governments, and the alienation I
State sovereignty, are carefully presente
in accordance with this view. Althoug
the author has presented his best argumel
against the unlimited power of Congress
yet he is jealous Of that of the executive
and especially as made commander-in-chi'
OF the militia, claiming that he can only
such, not when they are "called out" b'
altar they are mustered in" to the servi.
of the United States. He considers Co
gress has transcribed the limits of the CO.
st1tntion by making a State officer disob
dent to a cali liable to court martial. Hel
it may be noted that the only time treaso
is mentioned is in a note denying the pow
of the United States to punish it. That ia
collectors have not been made electi1
shows the anti-republican spirit of the time
These lew notes will show that the wo1
of Mr.. Bateman is unlikely to become
standard authority. The authors quote
| ara few. The "Federalist." 'EIliOtt's d