The Leavenworth echo. [volume] (Leavenworth, Wash.) 1904-current, 1913-03-14

$1,000
system had not yet permeated the
land, nor the influence OF the newspa-
per and magazine been felt. We sub
nit if the people Of this nation 100
years ago were fit under their then re-
stricted method to amend their own
constitution, then to-day by reason Of
this broadening influence of school and
press, evidenced in a concrete form by
the greater interest OF the people in
government, the citizens are fit by
more unrestricted process to amend
their constitution.
We must remember that the max
ers of our early constitution were then
considered radicals, that in breaking
away from the old monarchial order Of
things, they moved slowly, hence the
restrictions placed in the federal con-
stitution and those of the various East
ern states from which our constitutional
provision was copied.
In England they have never had any
written constitution, they had in place
of such written constitution, a king
and constitutional monarchy to act as
restriction on the people. This nation,
when founded, did away with the king
ship and substituted as a restriction on
the people the present provisions of our
constitutions, so that England had one
method of checking the so-called mob
and we had another method. The
point we make in this regard is:
England, heretofore bound by the
restrictions Of her monarchial form OF
government, has in recent years done
away with that restriction, although a
king in name sits on the throne of the
British people, Today in England
there is no restriction on the people
neither by the king nor by any written
constitution. If England has removed
her restrictions, why shall we not re-
move ours, and remove our kingship
which exists in that form of constitu-
tional provision which this bill No. 800
seeks to amend2
We have referred to the fact of there
being no constitution in England, but
we must not be misunderstood. Such
a reference is made not to show that
we shall do away with our constitution
but to combat the argument frequently
advanced, to the effect that this bill is
a radical measure that will open wide
the food gates Of mob rule. Our ar
gument is that we need not fear to
trust the people with their own con
stitution, because in England, most
conservative country, they have no
written constitution whatever. For ex-
ample, in the English house OF parlia-
ment, when member rises and says:
Mr.. Speaker, I am against this bill
because it is unconstitutional" what
he means by that is, that it is against,
not any fixed written instrument but
against the traditions and ideals of the
British citizens.
We turn now to the consideration of
matters nearer home. My fellow mem
hers, we are of but average political
clay; any one of our neighbors might
have been selected to come down
here, and if that be true, namely, that
we represent but an average, then we
ask, can you pass on question here
as soundly as when at homer Here in
this whirlpool of politics, men yanked
this way and that by lobbyists, night
letters and day messages poured in
upon them from interested parties; be-
set by political ambitions, by sectional
jealousy, cooped up here in the rotten
atmosphere OF this chamber refer TO
the air in the room and not to the po-
litical atmosphere can members un-
der such conditions give their best eff
forts and bring their minds to consider
all sides OF measure ? Why, it seems
to US here, as in most Legislatures, we
have been buffeted from Dan Beer
sheeba in order to get anything done.
We would rather trust the judgment of
the real lumber jacks in the forest
than that OF the political lumber jacks
engaged in log rolling here in this
capitol.
Let US turn from this forum to an
other-that OF the citizens themselves.