The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1911-02-24
PRESIDENT BROWNE on
s GOVERNMENTAL QUESTIONS
those provisions which had been pur-
poSely eliminated.

those provisions which had been pur-
posely eliminated.
Their Efforts Defeated.
Mr.. Jefferson. although In Paris
when the constitutional convention was
In session, wrote strong letters to his
friends giving his views on the pro-
posed draft, and had much to do with
defeating the efforts Of the absolutists
to extinguish the states, and on his re-
turn to America his masterful genius
so shaped public thought that it looked
as II tho balance Of power between the
states and the general government WIS
to be preserved tor an indefinite time.
In 1901, however. there occurred one
Of those circumstances to which have
referred as affecting the destinies OF
nations, which gave our government its
leaning towards absolutism. and since
then we have continued In that direc-
ton with certain. although at times
with hating steps This circumstance
was tho ascendency Of John Marshall
to the supreme bench Of the United
States. A recsnt historian, friendly to
him, says:
Jefferson had determined upon re-
stricting tho powers Of the national
government In the interest Of human
liberty. and Marshall was bent upon
enlargfng tho powers Of government N
the interest OF nationality
Those who were shocked 1t the doc
trine Of the so-called "nsw nation
alism" have only TO study the decisions
Of Chief Justice Marshall. and follow
their influences on the policy OF our
government for the past hundred
years. to SEQ that there II nothing new
In the doctrine. and that its propo-
Jurist. Mr.. Roosevelt differs from
many Of those who approve the doc
trines Of Marshall only In that he fol-
lows them to their logical conclusion,
and fearlessly advocates them and all
they lead to.
The same historian to whom I have
referred says that Marshall was bent
on the consolidation Of the government
through the judiciary department"
and that he had - marvellous instinct
Of what the law ought to ba." a quality
which befits the LEGISLATOR better than
the judge, who should be concerned
| only in what the law ia, and not what
1t should be.
These expressions Of the aims and
mental characteristics Of Marshall
greatly resemble the utterances Of the
propogandist Of the new nationalism.
This explosive individual says. Of tbs
granted and reserved rights Of the
| states in the constitution:
I believe in states' rights whenever
states rights mean the peoples rights.
On the other hand. believe in national
rights whenever national rights mean
the peoples rights"
Maintain Rights Of People.
The idea he means to convey II, that
maintaining the peopleS rights 10 the
great desideratum Of government. This
| like Lost abstract propositions, IL open
to the objection that its dominant
| thought Is not sufncsently clear, II We
| attempt to apply 1t to concrete condi-
| tons "The peoples xightst. What
are the peoples rishts"? VINO are
the peopIe7" Does bare majority
| constitute "the people"9 II 30, then
what are tho minority? Are they not
part Of the people,? and have they
no rights? Who ia the final arbiter
OF who are 'the people,? One great
ruler says me and Gott' and some OF
our present day statesmen, although
they may not SO openly proclaim 1t,
act on that hypothesis, although some-
times they eliminate the kaiser's dis
tinsuished companion, and stand alone
But this II no new question. Brave
men were living before Agamsmnon''
and great man studied these questions
calmly. and discussed them dispassion-
ately before this great Il Am was.
Safeguarding Libsrties.
That safeguarding the liberties Of the
people Is one Of the chief functions II
government, was better known by the
trainers Of our constitution than II Is
by this latest and loudest self-created
personal embodiment Of all virtues
governmental and domestic. They
knew. however, that Capitalization, OF
the destruction or absorption OF local
powers by the general government, was
bound to result ultimately In unuuali-
fed absolutism and that the first steps
| towards Capitalization was to make
the people owe direct allegiance to the
general government. without any inter
| vening power to safeguard their lib
critics, and unless there was soma
| strong body or organization to protect
eral government their liberty would
shortly be name only.
1t Is interesting and instructive t.
| study the close analogy between the
relation Of the states to the federal
government, and that Of the ancie NJ
barons Of England to the crown.
Under the first Norman kings two
| forces composed tho government, row
atty and the council Of barons. The
history Of England's chartered rights
reveals the struggles between these
two forces and at the foundation OF
our own government two similar forces
were at war-the general government
and the states. That such q thing a
government by the people-that is. a
government IN which the people direct
ly legislate and control It, cannot Ions
exist IL apparent to all students OF
government The Athenians tried Il
and great writer on government ha,
thus epitomised the result:
IF every Athenian had been q Soc
rates. every Athenian assembly would
still have been a mob"
Must be . Middle Ground.
There must be some power o. some