The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-02-13

the Term y singular noun.
. In the chapter on the Constitution. Gen. Har-
rison adduoes some cogent reasons for pro-
nouncing It fortunate that the powers given
by our Federal organic law to the ma
tional Government arc couched in compre-
hensive terms. "If," he says. there had
been an attempt TO particularize. the instrument
would not have adapted itself to the expansion
OF the country and to tho new phases which
invention has given to commerce. II, for In
stance, the trainers of tho instrument had been
required to express themselves upon the ques-
ton whether tho national Government should
DO invested with the power to regulate the
method Of coupling the wagons that were
then the vehicles of the limited inland
between the States. or to arrest
and punish any citizen who obstructed their
passage, the vote would probably have been in
the negative. But the railroads have demon
strated the reasonableness. and even the neces.
sity. OF such national regulations" In another
paragraph. after recalling the fact that It may
be said in o broad way that there are three CO.
ordinate and independent departments in our
Government, the Legislative, the Executive.
and the Judicial, Gen. Harrison notes that this
division Of powers is not strictly observed, in
asmuch as the President has something to do
with legislation, by virtue of his veto power.
and the Senate very much to do with Executive
appointments. It might be added that. in war
times. the President encroaches on the field of
tho Judiciary, by reason of his power to suspend
, the writ OF hdbeds corpus, and that tho House
OF Representatives can nullify q treaty by re-
fusing assent to the legislation needed to make a
treaty operative.
That the powers given to tho old Congress by
the Articles of Confederation were practically
nil is well known, but the ex-President directs
attention to a fact less familiar, namely, that
the nullity of the Continental Congress incom-
NODDED the States themselves in their individual
capacity. Under the Articles of Confederation
each State made its own tariff law. II one
State. however. with a view to raising money to
pay it's pressing debts. fixed a higher rate on
foreign goods imported. another would adopt a
lower rate to attract to it's ports.
Hence 1t was impossible for the States to
make q beneficial use Of the power to levy duties
on foreign goods. Moreover. between
the States was hindered and bad blood was en-
genderod by duties levied by one State on goods
coming from another. Thus New York laid a
duty on firewood coming down the Sound from
Connecticut and>upon garden truck crossing
the river from New Jersey. Such experiences
undoubtedly had much to do with persuading
the people of the States to surrender to the GEN
oral Government adequate national powers.
Comparing the British and the American
political systems, the ex-President does not fail
to lay his finger on the fundamental difference
when he reminds us that the exercise of powers
by State courts and Legislatures is restricted by
the Constitution Of the United states and by the
State Constitutions. and that Congress is. itself,
restricted by the Federal organic law. The
powers Of the British Parliament, on the other
hand, are not defined in any written instrument.
lint thera Ia anne dnuht yhathar tho additional
statement quoted from Mr.. Bryce is not open to
one or two exceptions. Mr.. Bryce says: "What
are called in England constitutional statutes.
such as Magma Charta, the Bill of Rights.
the Act of Settlement. the Acts of Union
with Scotland and Ireland. are merely
ordinary laws. which could be repealed by Par
lament at any moment in exactly the same
way as it can repeal IA highway act or lower the
duty on tobacco" This language seems to need
qualification. When the union between Eng
land and Scotland was effected tho two coun-
tries wero independent kingdoms. having moth
ing in common but the tic of allegiance to the
same sovereign. 1t is quito possible, therefore.
to contend that in the teeth of protests from
the Scottish members in both houses, the British
Parliament could not repeal the act OF union
with Scotland. II. on the other hand, the Brit
fish Parliament should. under similar circum-
stances. modify the Act Of Union in q manner
etrlmenLa TO bcOtland, III might ne plauSibly
argued that this kingdom would ipso Jucto
recover hor independence. That is to say.
the legislative acts by which. in the reign of
Anne. the English aud Scottish Parliaments
carried out the project of union, constituted,
collectively, n treaty which cannot be broken
by one of tho parties without replacing the
other in its original position. The same thing
may be said Of the act Of union between Great
Britain and Ireland.
We have said that Gen. Harrison is q Fed
eralist, or Nationalist. That Is brought out
clearly by his averment on page Is that "our
Government Is not u confederation Of States,
but as strictly a government of the people
Is is any State government" The principal
argument for this view is based not upon
the preamble of the Constitution, "We, the
people of the United States" &C., for but little
attention was paid to these words by the
State Conventions which discussed the instru-
ment. but upon the fact that. in the lower
house of Congress, and partly, also. in the
electoral colleges. representation is distributed
according to population, This ia not decisiye