The Birmingham age-herald., 1903-10-25

The economic agitation, which MT. Jo- seph Chamberlain is now so ably and so courageous1y conducting. almost single handed in England against the historic free-trade system of that country and in favor of what we may justly call our own protective system, as a substitute for it, is a phase of British politics exceedingly interesting to all Americans. not alone from one, but several points of view. They are worthy of general consideration.
 If MT. Chamberlain can convince the British people that the great policy Of which Cobden was the father, and to which all parties in England during half a century and more, have adhered is, under present conditions, undermining Engand's prosperity, threatening her f. nancial supremacy, and inaddition, men acing the very existence of the empire, it can be and unquestionably will be re- versed within a period of time that is almost incredible to us under our slower processes of constitutional procedure. Suppose, as a basis of argument that the great Birmingham statesman and his political friends in the tory cabinet, from which he resigned together with those outside of it, and not even of the party which it represents, should become con- vinced tomorrow, or three months hence, that England is ready for the fiscal revo- tuition which he proposes, how long would it take to accomplish it? With us, and under our forms, a similar struggle in the interest of minority, might, if they were so disposed, be protracted for years and even in certain contingencies almost de- feated altogether. In Great Britain, on the other hand, it could not be impeded, at the outside, more than six months, and perhaps, not even so long. Under the ex- ceedingly elastic parliamentary system of Great Britain, the popular branch of her legislature can be dissolved in twenty four hours, and the ministry put out of office. The moment it loses control of the majority, it must resign and appeal to the people. If sustained at the polls it returns to power. If rejected the scep- tre of authority passes over to what was the opposition but now become the su- preme legislative power In the nation.
 Under our Constitution the people have no direct or indirect control over the pop ular branch of congress during the two years for which it was elected, and their control over the senate Is so remote that it may be said to have no existence what ever. This rigidity in our system as com- pared with the lexbility of the British one is not accidental, so to say. The framers of the Constitution had not, the majority of them. the most profound faith in the wisdom of the people, and so they fenced in the governmental fabric they erected with all the devices possible against the effects of sudden or transit tory waves of popular passion. They aimed at protecting the people against themselves, more especially in the organ ization of the senate, which one of "the fathers termed 'the great anchor of the Constitution" At the end of the cen- tury and a quarter of it's existence, the senate is found to be the "anchor" of many other things beside the Constitu- ton. things which that great instrument was intended primarily to make impossi- ble of existence in the government.
 As a result of these multiplied checks and balances in the organic law, the ele- ment of popular control is more quickly