The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-05-20

0af1esoee e The peopaes IL 4tofSre-
mctem .n - v vi he rsfesTso g " 3 ,pssr
law courts. and 80 laws uere insefpreted
~ onel4eaae0 stA&ueeo which Nd no boArs
ING On the NE Of the present time. He
ernment Of the United sfates was an evf-
0ence OF democracy. Tne 6rst Ameftcans
lsn England In search for liberty. and
even to-day people we're pouring into Amer
not 70 shoe that the cabinet system In
.n9iand was only made responsible by the
osrSsnt!aiity Of the En1iisn people
nd, we're dependent on the rica elAss:;
oos in America fhA people were fndtpend-
eat Of any tttis1 mobility. and would allow
no favored ciaesss to usurp their nbertisA
double auarsette 81 tie University ef wash
tn0ton. composed Of men and coedR sang
and recetved prolonged applause.
Ana1ysis - Constitutions.
The next speaker Of the evening vas
Inomas W. Mitchell. OF the University Of
ana comparison Of the two constitutions.
The American government. he Aid. II
one OF checks and balances. He went into
detailed discussion OF the organtsation
government was carried out. The primary
system and its defective management.
which political cliques had every chance
e oS sSnse and p.evsnt the people e.pres
Amsr!can government With 1T three main
branches with their different methods Of
election. procedure. etc. The committee
removing legislation from the control 81
the people to which they were not respon-
stble. were dealt with by the speaker. who
.nen took up the supreme court. which. he
legislative powers Of the people. 70 whom
they were In no way reaponeible, being ap-
pointed for life. and Indirectly. Thus the
american government was in no way re-
sponAbie to the people. and q party. no
matter how much It forgot and disreg arded
its platform. held Once until its term was
csrved out The English cabinet system.
Deep airssy responsible to the
and the house OF lords TO the house Of
commons. we're rapidly reviewed by Mr..
Mitchell. who was frequently interrupted
the supreme branch Of the government.
said Mr.. Mitchell, and was directly respon-
sible to the people, who could change the
Ray IN Declared WHEN M n ;nss - desired
the road to pure democracy: the future
was Americas The speaker closed with
2 brilliant peroration which aroused pro-
The next speaker was Mr.. n. A. Nader.
Of Pullman. He laid down as his first
proposition the difference between the cleo
a aion OF the ruler Of England ana the presi-
SAID the monarch had Tremendous powers,
which. II the ruler % desired, could shaIc
ne government to IT, foundation. The
right of heritage: the people had no power
IN the matter. The case OF James l.. who
vas We. not wanted by the English people, he
p pa,a Mas a. ood 1,e example Of this Tn.
ca; was the mere figurehead OF state. and
ned whatever power he possessed from
a tns people p.:., who elected him. The prea-
years. and had the continual fear 10 Of the ne
next election over him. Thus ne was com. .
ps.lea % obey the public. opinion OF the
vac ins c,onsrory the English ruler
ing to fear. Thus In the executive depart
msn.s OF the two countries. the American
nnu Urhsstnm men, was the most responsible to
pupnc opinion. He then took up the house
Of lords. which. he declared, was free and
independent OF all public opinion. and could
NOT easily be forced to do anything.
SafeguaPded ~ Castor.
the powers Of the house OF lords. which
sn sse ssa,, e ny custom, were strong
directly IN the path Of the people Glad
stones unsuccessful home rule bill. and
numerous other cases. were quoted by Mr..
lords. On the other hand. he said. the Her,-
a.e was elected. and changed every six
years ana was democratic body. Again.
20 great az the lords. ana thew were rs-
9ponsfbie to the people for their acts. The
house or commons he declared was not 40
Responsible TO public opinion as the house
OF representatives. as the English system
vote. MI; Nader was loudly appiauded az, as
After Mr.. Nalder's address music was
fasnished by the Y, ~ &; 4. auar,et,e.
After the music the third speaker FOR
the affirmative, y. L. Reese. OF the Uni
gumant The most democratic govern>
ment, said Mr. Reese, was that which
responded most readily to public opir-
ION. Such government, he said.
The speaker briefly reviewed the progress
q democracy from the earliest days In
England. The yielding OF the house OF
lords IN 1Ss9, at the time OF the great re-
FORM bill. TO the house OF commons put
England on democratic basis The En-
siish municipal system was a democratic
one. The control OF monopolies ard trusts
oy the English government in the inter.
ests of the people. not ct franchise grah.
oers. was another evidence said Mr..
Reese. OF democracy. The English cab
met system and the direct control OF the
ns Ssss f ss oe ss
government, resting on = constitution over
hundred years old. was not on a demo
cratic basis. as was shown by the case
OF the income tax law. which was a good
exampis q the blocking OF the public
opinion OF the people by their officials.
The granger laws. the Interstate come
merce act. etc. and the action OF the SUI
pretne court In respect TO them. was an
other case. the speaker declared OF pub
lie opinion a. expressed In legtsia ton be-,
ing defeated by public officials. Caiifor
Mas troubles over her railroads Furnished
many other examples OF q simiIar nature
The influence of the trusts on legislation