Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1881-08-03
AMERICAN GOVERNMENT
ITS FORM THAT OF THE BRITISH Ut
THE l..ST CENTURY,
With Hereditary Succession Left out-Dlt'
ference Between the Legislature
and Executive Mode Of the
Two Countries.
PROPOSED CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT.

is matter OF no consequence whence
they derived their institutions-in what
ancient quarry their forefathers digged.
The popular Fourth-oi.July conception
is that they were Invented, made out OF
the whole cloth, struck out at heat;
that they sprang into existence Minerva
like, without CESSATION or heridity. 1t
needs no profession OF evolution to tell us
that this Kind. of birth fora government
as for an individual is impossible. Histor'
ically the American form OF government
is the British government OF
the last century with heridi-
itary succession left out. am
speaking now OF the form ofgovernment,
and not OF the machinery by which it is
kept going; of the Legislative, Execu-
tive, and Judicial processes, not OF the
distribution OF the suffrage or the serv-
ices of power. The form Of King, Lords,
and Commons, was adopted not only
for the Federal Government, but for
each OF the thirteen original States, and
has been copied in regular succession
by twenty five additional States ing,
Lords and Commons without hereditary
succession and of limited tenure. Since
the adoption OF this form OF government
far greater changes OF substance have
taken place in England than America.
The powers vested in the President,
Senate and House OF Representatives,
and in each OF them, are not one whit
less now than they were under George
Washington. Those OF the crown and
the Lords are vastly less than they were
under George III. So attenuated have
they become that it is matter OF dis
pute whether they have any direct
powers left that can be successfully as
serted against the Commons. Indirect
mower they have undoubtedly, OF con-
siderable. magnitude and import-the
greatest being the influences
exercised by the Lords upon the elec-
tions OF the Commons. This, however,
is the influence of land-ownership rath:
er than OF lordship. The House OF
Lords some time since rejected meas
ure known as the Irish Volunteer bill
after it's passage by the Commons. Pos
sibly they may reject it second time,
for it will surely come up again. But
after its third passage by the Commons
the Lords will pass it also-not because
they will like it any better than be-
fore, but because they must. And
- it would be with any other
bill about which the Commons
should show any decided purpose and
determination. The Senate OF the Uni
ted States would reject any bill from
the House which the majority OF the
members didn't like-would reject
thirty times as easily as once. On the
other hand the House, finding its meas
ure rejected once, would not pass il a
second time until changes in the per-
sonnel of the Senate should give indica.
tions OF change in its temper. The
difference between the executive modes
OF the two countries is still more mark
ed. ANY measure which passes the
Commons is supposed to have received
the Royal sanction in advance
at the hands OF Her Majesty's
Ministers, or, failing that. at the hands
of Her Majesty's opposition, who
straightway become ministers. Hence,
the subsequent approval OF the bill is
matter of form, and matter OF course.
But the Presldent OF the United States
would veto bill without hesitation as
many times, and under as many different
forms and guises as Congress should
pass it-as President Hayes did during
session oil Congress under his term; and
in so doing, he would be sustained by
public opinion as exercising a lawful
discretion. The country might
think the discretion enormously
exercised, but the right to exercise it
would never be questioned. The veto
power is conservative force, which
has nothing corresponding to it under
existing English practice. The unqual-
fled power OF restraint which the Up
per House exercises over the Lower in
the United States is also one of the lost
arts of government in the United King
dom; and suppose very few desire,
and none expect, to see it restored. The
question whether the United States
might usefully engrait upon their sys-
tenn OF government the principal lm-
proyement wrought in the English sys-
TEN since the separation OF the two
countries. has been good deal discussed
| in pamphlets and on the rostrum OF late
wears. Reduced to its simplest terms.
| the question is, whether it would be
wise for the United States to have one
government like the House oil Commons,
upon which public opinion can impinge
and concentrate readily and effectively,
| or three governments, to-wlt: Presl'
dent, Senate and House OF Representa-
tives, upon which public opinion is dis
persed and unable to act effectively, ex-
cept at certain periods fixed in the
almanac, and even then not simultane.
ously upon all three-a question not 30
easily answered as this statement OF IT
would seem to imply.
To accomplish such a change, it would
be necessary to give the members oil the
cabinet seats on the floor OF Congress,
TO conficle 10 them the initiative OF the
principal measures of legislation to hold
them collectively responsible for every
thing, and to send them adrift whenever
for any reason they should fail oil tile
support of a majority OF the popular
brancn of the legislature. Very consld'
erable mechanical difficulties are IN the
wav of such an arrangement, but have
not the space at present TO dwell up
on them. An initial step has been
proposed in the form Of a bill in Con-
press by Senator Pendleton, OF Ohi",
which presents no difficulties at all,
except the difficulty Of getting a major,
itv to agree to it. One advantage would
be, the establishment OF harmony be-
tween the legislature and the executive,
so that they might always be pulling IN
harmony together, instead OF contrary
wise, as now too often happens. Under
existing arrangements Republican
President can usually be relied upon TO
be at cross.purposes with a Democratic
Congress all the time, and with a Re'
publican Congress half the time. Pres
ident Johnson's administration Was q
continued scene OF conflict between the
executive and Legislative branches, grow
ing out OF differences respecting the re-
construction of the Southern states !;
and the fact that both the President
and Congress belonged to the same
political party served rather to intensity
than mitigate the bitterness between
4 a.,x, r,aonaad his