Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1908-06-18
EXTENSION OF FEDERAL POWER.
Proposed Move Is Directly Opposed to
the Constitution.

The extension Of congressional and
presidential authority in cases Of
doubtful constitutionality, as suggest
ed by Secretary Root in his address
before the conference of governors,
raises a question of vast Importance to
the states and the nation. The Root
idea is, as we understand it, that n
or more states, having an interest in
legislation by congress not authorized
by the constitution of the United
| States, may, through their legislatures,
ask congress to enact such legislation,
and thereby preclude any judicial in
quiry as to the power of congress in
the premises. In other words, the idea
is that particular states may singly or
in combination, enter into treaties
with the federal government, whereby
they may obtain special advantages
from the latter, without the concur
renee of other states.
This idea seems also to have the ap-
probation of the president, and that of
certain governors whose appetite for
a mess of pottage outweighs their re-
spect for the birthrights of their states.
Never was a more insidious suggestion
made by mortal man. g.
1t is interesting to recall some OF
the provisions of the constitution
which bear upon this subject:
mo state shall enter into any treaty,
alliance or confederation"
mo new state shall be formed or
erected within the jurisdiction of an
other state"
"Three-fourths of the legislatures of
the states, or conventions of three
fourths of the states, as congress shall
prescribe, may ratify amendments to
the constitution"
when the choice of a president
shall be devolved upon the house OF
representatives, the vote shall be taken
by states"
Now, suppose those states which are
eager for an appropriation from con
gress for the establishment of the APP
palachian forest reserve at the expense
of their %nelghbors, should each invite
congress to pass such a law as it de-
sires ON that subject, though more
than three-fourths of the states should
oppose it; and suppose five or six
states should, combine or confederate,
with a view to securing such legisla-
ton, and should agree that in case the
election of a president were thrown
into the house of representatives, their
representatives should vote as a unit
for the candidate of that national party
which should agree to enact such leg
islation in spite of all constitutional
limitations-would not this amount to
a revolution? Is there no ground for
%suspecting that the insidious sugges-
ton of MI. Root was made in view OF
the possibility that the election of a
president may, as a result of the next
campaign, be thrown into the house of
representatives? To bride those
states which have a deep special inter
est in waterways, forest reserves and
conservation of certain national re-
sources, at the expense of other states,
would be the surest method Of destroy
ing the federal constitution and set
ting up without fear of successful re-
~sistance an absolute central govern
ment at Washington. Is it not pos
sible that this end is concealed be-
hind the means proposed? Why should
anyone suggest unconstitutional and
revolutionary means, unless he has u n
constitutional and revolutionary ends
in view?
In the fifth article of the constitu-
ton, a method is prescribed for ex-
tending or curtailing the limits OF
federal authority; and heretofore that
method has been pursued. Any devia'
ton from it now would be quite as I'm
justifiable and far more dangerous
than ever before. For it seems that
even the governors of some of the
southern states, where states rights
9 have had their citadel from the be
9 ginning, are willing to play the role
of Esau.