The advocate. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1901-1913, 1912-03-21

speech to criticism OF this proposition.
iHe says that It 'lis utterly without
merit or utility. and instead of being
= In the interest OF all the peo-
pie and OF the stability OF popular gov
ernp1spt -is sowing the seeds of. confu.
sion and tyranny (By this he, Of
course, means ~hie tyranny of the ma.
}erity that, n, thas tyranny ct the
American people as a whble.) He also
says that my PROPOSAL (Which, as he
rightly sees. 10 merely q proposal to
give the people a reai instead Of only a
nomtnai chance to eonstrue and amend
h,.State constitution with reasonable
rapidity) would make such amendment
and interpretation depend. on the fe-
yerish, uncertain and, unstable determi.
nation of successive. votes on different
laws by temporary and changing ma
joritfes' and that 1T lays the AK at
sheFroot Of the tree Of well ordered
freedom and subjects the guarantees Of
life, liberty and property without rem
coy to the ftful impulse Of q temporary
majority Of IN electorate"
This criticism. is really less a criti.
eism Of my proposal than criticism of
ALL popular government. 1t is wholly
unfohnded unless it is founded on the
belief that the people are fundamental
~ untrustwort thy. If the, supreme
courts definition of due process in re-
lation to the police power is sound,
then an act of the legislature to pro-
mote the collective interests Of the
community must be. valid ii it embod-
les a policy held by the prevailing mo-
rality or q ,preponderant opinion to be
necessary to the public welfare II This
Is the question that rtpropose to sub
nit to the people. How can the pre-
vailing morality Or a preponderant
opinion be better and more exactly as
certained than by a vote Of the people?
The people must know better than the
court what their, own morality and
their own opinion are =. -.
The object i have in view could prob
ably be- accomplished : by an amend
ment Of The states constitution taking
away from the Courts the power to
review the legislatures determination
Of policy Of social Justice. by defining
due process OF law in accordance with
the views expressed by Justice Holmes
for the supreme, court. But my pro-
posal seems to, me more democratic
and, / may add, less radical. for un-
der the method I suggest the people
may sustain 'the%court as against the
legislature, whereas If due process were
defined in the constitution the decision
OF the legislature would be final.
Dfstrust of Popular Government.
Mr. Taft's position Is tho position
that has been, held from the beginning
Of our government, although not, al
ways SO openly held by large num-
Der of~repHtable- and honorable men
who down at bottom distrust popular
government and. when they must ac-
cept it, accept it with reluctance and
hedge 1t around with every species of
restriction and check and balance. so
as to make the power Of the people as
limited and as ineffective as possible.
Mr.. Taft fairly defines the issue when
he says that. our government is and
should be q government Of all the peo-
pie by representative part Of the pee.
pie. This Is an, excellent and moderate
description OF an, oligarchy., 1t de:.ues
our government as government Of All
OF the. people by a few, Of the people.
Mr.. Taft in his able speech has made
what is probably the best possible
presentation Of the case for those who
feel In this manner. Essentially this
view differs only in its expression from
the view markedly. set forth by one of
his supporters. Congressman Campbell.
Congressman Campbell, in public
speech in New Hampshire, in oppos-
ing the proposition to give the people
real and effective control over all their
servants, including the judges. stated
that this was equivalent to allowing an
appeal from the umpire to the bleach
ers. Doubtless Congressman Campbell
was not himself aware Of the cynical
truthfulness with which he was put
ting the real attitude OF those for whom
he spoke. But it unquestionably is
their real attitude. MIR. Campbells con-
ception Of the part the American peo->
pie should play in self government is
that they should sit on the bleachers
and pay the price Of admission, but
should have nothing to say as to the
contest which is waged in the arena by
the professional politicians.
l am not speaking jokingly nor do
mean to be unllind. for l repeat that
many honorable and we'll meaning men
Of high character take this view and
have taken 1t from the time Of the fol-
nation Of the nation. Essentially this
view Is that the constitution is q strait
jacket to be used for the control Of an
unruly patient-the people. Now, l
hold that this view Is not only false,
but mischievods; that our constitutions
are instruments designed to secure JUS
tice- by securing the deliberate but eff
fective expression Of the popular will
that the checks and balances are valu-
able as far and only so far as they ac-