The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-04-08
THE RUSSELL PAMPHLET.

1t will be remembered that when th,
Utah Legislature had before IT the
proposition to ratify the proposed Con
Istitutional amendment allowing the cleo
tion of L. S. Senators by the pcopl,
of each State, there was q sentiment
expressed by members that there wal
danger in such ratification, since il
might destroy the equality Of states
and there appeared to be ha2y no
tlon that in some way the dignity OF
the state would not be as well repre-
seuted by the people at large as it is
now bv the Legislature. 1t appears
| that those notions originated in the
: mind of Mr.. Samuel Russell of this city
at least in part, and that Mr.. Russell
has put them into a pamphlet. \ copy
OF that pamphlet has got into the edi.
torial rooms of the ST. Louis Globe
Democrat, which paper makes the fol
lowing comment thereon;
Before a rising tide which has swept
ments. a pamphlet coming just now out
OF Salt Lake City, written by one Samuel
Russell. can be but a straw. The main
argument Is that the Senate. being or
ganized 10 represent the States as con-
tradlstipguished from the people, will
lose It's distinctive charlc when the
people of a State elect their Senators
directly. instead Of by legislative proxies.
The plth OF such an argument Is that the
legislature OF "A State. and not its citizens,
constitutes the State itself; that the SOW
ereignty Of a State is not inherent In its
people who elect the legislators. but is
vested In the legislators by the fact of
their election; that the people of State,
who can elect all other State officials.
should not elect Senators. who, although
accredited as the representatives Of
States. are not 10 be understood as
representing the people Of their
States but only the States themselves
There Is nothing in the thought of Samuel
Russell OF Salt Lake 10 weaken the con-
viction that this amendment will be a
part OF the Federal Constitution within
a year.
The idea that the people Of the State
do not represent the sovereignty Of the
State, but that the Legislature does, is
one Of those sophisms that every once
in n while crop up in American public
discussion, We ar6 all glib enough in
saying that all authority rests with the
people; but when we come practically to
apply various propositions we balk, and
want the dignity, sovereignty, and au-
thority Of the State to be lodged some
where else than with the people. And
yet in our theory Of government there
is no possibility Of representing the SOW
ereignty, the dignity. and the entity of
the State itself so thoroughly and so
satisfactorily as in lodging these with
the people. AS matter Of fact, with
the people is where the States sover-
eighty, authority, and actual power must
necessarily be lodged. The Legislature
is merely an agency Of the popular will
II is an agency through which the peo.
pie exercise their sovereignty in their
legislative capacity. In the executive
they represent their authority
through the Governor. In their judicial
capacity they represent their authority
through the courts, the judges of which
hey elect. And so, at bottom. the peo-
pie arc the responsible power, the All.
.hority, the sovereign source for all. No
me Of the three general functions Of
government can represent the people as
IN entirety. 1t is only the people them
elves, az a whole, that can do this.
Therefore, the argument that the
States sovereignty, power. dignity, or
majesty can be represented better by
IN agency 9f the people which is only
me Of three functions than by the
,nop1e Themselves The nIiimafa courco
nd supreme authority over all, must
necessarily be fallacy. The proposed |
mendment to the Constitution can be
airly attacked as being wholly un-
.ecessary, since the people can do pre-.
isely what is proposed under that
mendment without any amendment at |
II. But to oppose it on such grounds |
S is done in this Russell pamphlet is
10Th fallacious and rebellious