New-York tribune., 1901-09-03
THE JyuGUR4TIOy DAY PROBLEM.

Some weeks ago we called attention to the
agitation started In Washington for an end-of-
April Presidential inauguration. The idea OF
pushing forward by practically two months the
date Of the Presidents installation in office
in no sense a novel one. The desirabity OF
recasting our political calendar so as TO make
its most notable and impressive celebration fall
not amid the rigors Of early March but amid
the beguiling charms of early May had been
urged before on an Indifferent Congress and an
Indifferent public. But never in other efforts 10
effect the change of date had practical means
been taken to arouse that sentiment and create
that pressure by which alone the two houses
can be driven TO give their sanction TO projects
however simple and however advantageous
which lie beyond the beaten paths of politics.
1t is gratifying TO find that the inauguratio
committee of 1901, which has now undertaken
TO secure from Congress the legislation neces-
sary TO shift the Inauguration ceremony from
March to April, is enlisting or has already en-
listed In its movement influences IN the various
States through which Il can hope to command
a cordial hearing in both House and Senate.
From a collection of opinions made recently
10y THE Chicago Post it appears that in the
view OF many public men the change of date
will be Of vastly greater national benefit in
lengthening the shorter term Of Congress by two
months than in redeeming the inauguration cere-
mony from frs present dangers and discomforts.
Both Senator Allison and Senator Ellsins who
wrote opinions in favor of a later Inauguration
Day, counted the extension of the crowded sec
ond session by nine ten weeks as one of the
essential arguments for revised calendar. The
history Of the Congress which expired on March
4 last would certainly give point 10 the cOnten-
ton that the time has gone when the two houses
can compress a years necessary legislative work
into the three scant months now allowed for the
closing session. Some public men advocate an
even greater extension of the second years sit
ting than nine or ten weeks; for Senator Hanna
is quoted by THE Post" as favOring May 80 as
the new date for the Presidential inauguration
Senator Elkins preferred the first Tuesday after
the first Monday in May-whch in some years
would prolonG the short session until May s.
Senator Allison held that historical associations
should govern in fixing the new date, and he
therefore, in common with most of the others
who contributed opinions chose April 3O-the
day on which the first American President took
the oath OF office.
As 10 the legislation needed to strike March 4
from the political calendar experts differ widely.
Many hold that a constitutional amendment
must be passed TO lengthen the term Of some
President actually In Office before the new
arrangement can be legalized. Others seem to
think that the present dates for the inaugu-
ration Of the President and for the beginning
and ending Of the life of each Congress are set
or can be changed by statute. Congress may by
| its own power shift or alter them. The consti-
tutional amendment method offers more OBJ
stacles, but will, doubt be accepted as the
more direct and satisfactory means of bridging
over the interregnum which must,be created by