The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-06-27
THE AMERICAN AND THE FRENCH
WAY.

On the morning after the assassination Of
Abraham Lincoln, Gen. James A. Garfield,
in a speech of singular power and elo-
quence. delivered before an excited audi
ence of people in New York, struck the
keynote of popular confidence in the sem
tence. 1.-THE Lord reigns and the govern
ment at Washington still lives" Fifteen
years later, when President Garfield died
at the hand of an assassin, the people still
remembered his words and mitigated their
mourning at his death with the reflection
that nothing could disturb the stability of
the government or the peaceable succession
to the presidency.
1t is only one Of many proofs of the mar
velous wisdom of the trainers of the Con-
stitution that they provided for the contin-
gency of the Presidents removal from
Office or his death, resignation or inability
from any cause. to discharge the duties of
the Office by devolving them on the Vice
President; and. having done this, they au-
thorized Congress to provide by law for the
case OF the removal. death, resignation or
inability of both the President and Vice
President, and Congress has done So 1t
is the more remarkable that the trainers
of the Constitution should have provided
for these remote contingencies since they
had no precedent or model for their guild
ance. They had recently passed from I'M
der a monarchical form of government
which recognized no other right of success
sion to the chief executive office but divine
right. Yet they saw that it would never do
for the office of chief executive to become
vacant. The principle which, in hereditary
monarchies. on the death of the sovereign
instantly devolves the executive power
upon him who stands next in a fixed or
der of succession, must, in some degree,
be initiated i'm a purely elective govern
ment, If great mischiefs were to be avoided
Popular sovereignty must not be allowed TO
lapse from lack of assertion. Hence. the
further line of succession to insure con-
tinuousness and perpetuity in the govern
ment
The present situation in France shows
the superiority of the American over the
French Constitution. Having been formed
nearly a hundred years later, the latter
should nave been an improvement on the
former but it is not The President of
the French republic is elected by the ma
tional assembly, and there is no Vice Presi-
dent nor any provision for the succession
to the Office of President in case of the
death of its incumbent, except an election
by the Assembly and to do this requires a
majority of the votes of both chambers.
The French Constitution provides for a re-
sponsible ministry so that. without any
express provision on the subject, the
death of the President devolves executive
power on the Cabinet. Still. there is no re-
sponsble head. and. strictly speaking,
there is a hiatus in the government. Al
though executive power devolves on the
Cabinet the Cabinet itself is very insecure
being subject to change on every adverse
vote of the chambers. Although President
Carnot had only been in office since De-
cember. 1887, he had had no less than thirty
Cabinets up to the time of his death. Some
of the Ministers retained their portfolios
through various Cabinets, but the numbe-
of reorganzations was as stated. Any.
thing like that number of Cabinet changes
during the administration of an American
President would cause the people to lose
all respect for it and almost to doubt the
stability of the government itself. although
under our Constitution the permanence oil
the Cabinet has nothing to do with that OF
the government. The French Constitution
is an outgrowth of French ideas and meth
DDS, and. perhaps, i, is the best for the
French people. but the American Sonstitu
ton seems much better calculated to in
sure stability OF government Americans
like to feel that, no matter what may hap
pen. the government at Washington still
lives.
THE LATEST LABOR STRIKE.