Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-01-22

y y
NJ. Charnay cites Victor Considerant.
Renouvier, Fauvety. Coignet. Emile de
Girardin and Ledru Rollin
nooma of in support of the asser-
ton that 1.-The sovereignty
UsuIPeIs. of the people is a dogma
upon which all usurpers support their
usurpations.' He opposes the delegation
OF the powers Of the people. n. Charnay
is a cynic and gives one the idea that he
has a sorry opinion of even the very best
OF governments.
The author cites Considerant. who.
speaking in hooking tones to the MEM
bers of the provisional government CT
February "a. 1913, said:
"Frenchmen, the revolution has swept
away your political past Sovereigns.
you are about to name 300 citizens to
represent you. Your sovereignty will
takes to drop a piece Of paper In a box"
And the author descants upon the IL
lusory and hypocritical character of the
delegation OF powers. which opinion OF
Considerant he adopts as his own.
He cites Rousseau as saying: 1.-The
instant that a people gives itself repre-
sentatives, 1t is no longer free. Aud
further that national representation is
fiction: the delegate represents him
self and votes according TO his own will.
and not according to the will OF the
people. The assertion is susceptible OF con-
tradiction certainly. for any one familiar
with the duties of the deputy In France
is aware of the fact that he is held to
return to his district at least once a
month to render a public account of his
votes and action in the chamber. If his
constituents are dissatisfied with him
they meet ard pass resolution request
ing his resignation.
NJ. Charnay would suppress the delegate.
and consequently the parliament. This
is the ideal, and yet he makes reserva-
tons. and confesses that the ideal is i'm
possible. He would initiate Switzerland.
which possesses direct legislation in the
walden. termed 'landsgemeine." There
the referendum is obligatory, and the
law Of the initiative belongs to every
citizen According to the author. the
republic should be q government OF all
for all: parliamentarism is government
of all for a few.
NJ. Charnay sees in the parliament a
republic Of the bourgeois class, which in
his opinion had attained
BOURGEOIS power I'm coalition with
p.,L1;. parliament array d
against the king in ap-
pearance, but dividing
with the king the right to live upon
the people. The bourgeois class. how
ever. he asserts. if driven out, would be
replaced by a new bourgeoisie. no better
than it's predecessor. 1t is thus with all
oligarchies. In France there were par
liamentary socialists and anti-parliamen-
tary socialists. But all of these would
"a l.,
health or sense or utility whatever In
socialism, according to this Singular in
terpreter.
The referendum in England is being
discussed by various writer's at this mo-
ment. One Of these in the London Times
of recent date declared that the general
election had left the two great parties In
that country numerically equal, which
raised a question of constitutional change
The liberal party. aided by nationalist
and socialist groups, proposed to carry
out the plan of a single chamber. a prop
osition by government contained in
bill submitted several months ago.
The unionists agreed to the necessity of
a change and submitted program of
the reform of the house of lords and re-
adjustment by the introduction of the
referendum.
The Lansdowne resolution gave gravity
to the referendum in matters affecting
the people. Money bills were to be ex
cluded. Mr.. Balfour at Albert Hall. Of
fered to submit tariff reform to the ref
erendum. He challenged Mr.. Asquith to
do the same with the question Of home
rule.
). x
The writer in the Times confesses that
the referendum has come to be per-
manent factor in practical
Permanent politics. If the single
chamber bill, however,
Factor. should become a law the
house could decide questions without ap-
peal to the people, who thus would lose
the security provided by the referendum.
The Times writer takes the ground that
the house consists, not Of two parties.
but of four groups. Nationalist and So
cialist groups are separate and indie
pendent Of each other. Neither is a re-
sponsible group, neither expects to be
called upon to undertake government or
consider its general interests. These
xroups determine the course Of legfsla-
tion often by threats. They represent no