Arizona republican., 1911-11-07
The Oregon Case in the Supreme
 Court.

Within a few days, or weeks al
 court of the United States will an-
 nounce its decision in the oregon
 case"-the suit brought to test the
 validity of the provision in the Ore
 gon constitution for legislation by initiative and referendum. The case
 was argued and submitted last week,
 briefs having been filed many months ago. and the court ought to be ready
 with a decision shortly.
 The plaintiff sought to show that legislation by initiative and referen-
 dunn violates that clause of the fed
 eral constitution which guarantees to each state a government republican in
 form.
 Lawyers have indulged in much speculation, and not little cOntro- versy as to what the decision of the Americans of ordinary education are familiar with the difference between republican government and a demo- cratic government-under the tradi- tional definitions. A democratic gov ernment, in the strict sense, is such as prevailed in ancient Greece and in the early history of our New Eng land states; in Greece the people in great mass meetings discussed and ordained their laws, and the same was done in the New England town meet ings. A republican government is one in which the people. through dele gated uthority-members of a legis- lature, members of a town council, and so on-make the laws.
 Undoubtedly the makers of the fed eral constitution, when they guaran- teed to each state a government re publican in form" had in mind the form of government which they had just established and with which the country had been familiar for more than a century. Unquestionably also, government by initiative and refer endum is contrary to what the mak CTS of the constitution had in mind.
 But the supreme court has had frequent occasion to construe the con- stitutiOn to make it fit modern con- ditions A strong point. it seems to us, could have been made of the fact that the state of Oregon has not abandoned the representative principle but has merely enlarged the powers of the people by giving them as well as their representatives the power to make their laws. oregon, therefore, by retaining the legislature and the representative or republican principle, still has a government republican in form" It would be quite different if the legislature had been swept out of existence and the people had adopted ancient Greece-the form which the socialists in the country are working. Whether the attorneys for the state of Oregon raised this point in their arguments, we do not know.
 Courts often manifest a readiness to dodge the main issue when oppor- tunity is offered for a decision on a collateral question, and a fine opening has been given the supreme court in this case for an evasive decision by contention raised by one of the law yers for Oregon. This attorney, MT. George Fred Williams, of Massa- chusetts. contended in his oral argu- ment last week that the case before the court was improperly brought, and that the court is therefore without jurisdiction-his position being, that inasmuch as it is the state" to which the federal guarantee of a republican government is made. only the state" can be heard to complain.
 If, therefore, the supreme court takes MT Williams view of it, and says. in substance, that it is not with in the province of private citizen of state to complain but complaint must come from the state itself as to any failure of the federal govern ment to make good its guaranty of a republican government, the case will go off on one of the tangents which shrewd lawyers frequently suggest as means to enable a court to dodge the main issue.