Weekly journal-miner., 1911-03-01

 the Athenian or purely direct an' democratic form of government.
 After some years of trial Jeffer son, concededly one of the greates statesmen of his time, referring t, the difference between ours and tn, monarcnical form of government said
 ''Let us, then, with courage
 and confidence pursue our own
 federal and representative prin-
 ciples, our attachment to our
 Union and representative form
 of government
 That document, embodying th' eoneensus of the wisdom and matureC reflection of the ablest men of theil country and time, was primarily in tended as a bulwark for the protec tion of the life, liberty and property of the minority against the aggres siOns of the mob and the brutal and temporarily inflamed passions of the majority. Again. in this connection Jefferson said:
 "AIl, too, will bear in mind
 the sacred principle, that though
 the will of the majority is
 in all cases to prevail, that will,
 to be rightful, must be reason
 able; that the minority possess
 their equal rights, which equal
 rights must protect, and to vio-
 late which would be oppres-
 sion.''
 It was believed by its framers that in the light of human experience there were certain fundamental, na- tural, inherent and inalienable rights vested in the individual which it was essential should, under no cir eumstanees, be intrenehed upon by the whim or mere will of the tenn porary majority; and they, therefore, incorporated in that instrument cer- tain fundamental principles or re- strictions which could not easily or soon be violated by the temporary or minimizing majority. Subseuent to the adoption of the constitution, in a message to congress, said:
 "Toward the preservation of
 your Government and the per
 maneney of your present happy
 state, it is requisite not only
 that you steadily discOuntenanee
 irregular oppositions to its ack-
 nowledged authority, but also
 that you resist with care the
 spirit of innovation upon its
 principles. however spacious the
 pretexts. One method of as
 sault may be to effect in the
 forms of the Constitution alter
 ations which will impair the energy
 of the system, and thus to un-
 dermine what cannot be directly
 overthrown. In all the changes
 to which you may be invited
 remember that time and habit
 are at least as necessary to fix
 the true character of govern
 ments as of other human insti-
 tutions: that experience is the
 surest standard by which to
 test the real tendency of the
 existing constitution of a eoun-
 try; that facility in changes
 upon the credit of mere hypo-
 thesis and opinion exposes to
 perpetual change, from the end
 less variety of hypothesis and
 opinion.'
 Departing from the theories of government entertained by the fram- ars of our national constitution, there has recently been framed in this territory a proposed sO-ealled consti- tuition permitting of an easy and axpeditious change or abrogatiOn of any or all of its provisions at the ,aprieious will of any temporary ma ioritv of the electors; and, although in obedience to the expressed re uuirements of the enabling act, 1t declares the constitution of the Unit ed States the supreme law in so far as applicable in any of the states. vet so far as it's own provisions stand. it would leave us in exactly the same condition as though no per nanent provision were attempted to- be established for the protection of the fundamental rights of the indlv- idual or the minority.
 If it be the part of wisdom for Arizona to make the existence and of its only attempt at protection of the rights of the minority against the invasion of the temporary majority dependent upon the will of such majority, does it not logically follow that 1t would be equally wise for the nation to make it's constitution equally easy Of amendment to meet the will of any temporary majority in the nation? And if it be wise to leave the rights of the minority dependent upon the will of the majority, why is it not A part of wisdom for us to revert to the condition of the primitive man and only restrict the right of the strong by the measure of his desires and the extent of his neighbor's pos sessions. The original advocates of anarchy believed in the abolition of all forms of compulsory government, upon the theory that all men might be brought by education to the un- selfish condition of loving their fel- low man as themselves, and, there fore. devoid of eoveting their neigh bor's goods. but the average man sol far distrusts himself as to believe such entire trust in his neighbor jus tifiable in the immediate present, and, hence. our opposition to anarchy.
 The statesman and leaders ot public thought and opinion in the