New-York tribune., 1907-06-28
THE NEW FEDERALISM"

The address of Senator Knox, OF Pennsyl-
vania 10 the graduating class OF the 1aIe I"'W
School and that of Circuit Judge George Gray
IN ,he PENNSYLVANIA Bar Association have been
coupled by certain critics as slgnlncahI altdchs
on what is popularIy known as the new 1ed-
eralism." This new federalism Is Fasueiy
represented as "a recrudescence of the old led
..eralism, which had lis only legitimate place
..before the adoption of the Constitution, ard
which now seeks to override in the interest OF
federal sovereignty the restraints put on that
sovereignty by the founders of the government.
But such a definition of the new movement IS
confusing and unsatisfactory for the advocates
of the enlargement of the federal power do not
admit that they are seeking TO evade or subvert
the Constitution or are trying to unsettle the
balance established by that instrument between
the states and the nation. Nor is it clear from
reading the speeches of Senator knox and
Judge Gray that there is any definite agreement
between them as TO the limit at which the
federal power must be halted lest it invade the
reserved rights of the states.
1t is hard to find in Mr.. KnoXs discussion %
the development Of the federal power to regu
late commerce any noteworthy "anti-federa!is-
tie tendency; for the junior Senator from
Pennsylvania explicitly says that 'over the sun
'ject of commerce among the states and for
'eign nations and its instrumentantes the
power Of Congress is plenary." He holds that
Congress may prevent the arteries Of inter
'state commerce from being employed as con
"dlits for articles hurtful to the public health,
safety or morals, and may remove distractions
from the highways Of commerce whether they
''be physical or economic, whether they may
"be sandbarS, mObs or monopolies.' This is
highly federallstic assertion of the nations
power to control commerce, and in no wise
weakened by the proviso that the federal aIl-
thority does not extend to the regulation Of
production within state lines, when such pro
duction is manifestly lawful and in harmony
with the states domestic policies Judge Gray
insists vigorously the advantages of MAIN
tanning unimpaired our dual system, with its
divided powers. But he is not In the real sense
'anti-federalistic" when he says that only an
honest natural and rational construction or
the Constitution is needed to check the new
federalism" and that the distinction between
strict construction and loose construction" has
happily disappeared.
The fact is that the conditions which gave
vitality TO the strife between strict construction
and broad construction, between state rights
and national authority, no longer exist Jeff"r-
sons doctrines of decentralization and weak
government hourished because the South found
It could use them 10 defend its threatened prop
erty interests "Anti-federalsm" had from 1920
TO 1860 an ulterior purpose. and attracted the
devotion of a great party and solidifed sec
ton. Federal aggrandizenent was real men
ace 10 the Southern States, and the antagoniSm
between state and national interests was clear
and vital It is harder to arouse ant-federalist
apprehension nowadays because the states ana
the nation have become one and have no Oppos-
ing interests. Federalism is not the weapon of
section or a faction, and clashes over consu-
1utional construction no longer set two portions
of the nation by the ears. We are all for state
rights and all for federalism, and the only
practical problem for us is to give such scope,
under the Constitution, to both elements in cur
governmental scheme as will insure the best
results and make the nation most efficient most
contented and most self-reliant