Evening journal., 1918-02-02

Regarding the War Cabinet proposal,
we observe with some interest that our
neiehhor the World. which for A fort
night or So has been denouncing the
measure as vicious and unconstitu-
tional." or as unconstitutional and
vicious" now describes it merely as
"eXtraconsiltutional"
our able contemporary is getting on
safa ground and we hope II VIII re-
main there. II Congress should enact
p law creating a War Cabinet the new
"Y"cutive establishment would b@ ir
fact eXtraconstltutional in the sense
that the Constitution has nothing to
say about such a body. That IS some
N'ha' different, however, from being
unconstitutional
Our friend the World will perhaps
no-mit nc 10 ev~ioin the d'~@~orce
The present Cabinet Of Presidential
advisers, consisting Of Mr. Lans n, Nj.
McAdoo Mr.. Baker. Mr.. Gregory, Mr..
p1rleson, Mr. Daniels, Mr.. Lane MIR.
Houston, Mr. Rcdleld and Mr.. BauchOp
Wilson. IS quite as extraconstilutional
a the new War Cabine. would be- The
word Cabinet does not occur in the
Constitution There is nothing in the
fundamental law recognizing or ex-
pressly authorizing the existence Of
such a body The Presidents Cabinet
has been built up by degrees In sue
cesslve acts Of CONGRESS. approved by
the President, creating the several exc
cutive departments and providing a
head executive officer, or Secretary as
he Is termed. for each new department
created.
But the fact Of its ext~aconstltution-
ality, as the World must perceive, by
nc means makes Mr. Wilson's present
Cabinet also unconstitutional Far from
that being the case, its legal status.
based on strictly con titutional legis-
latiou, Is unquestionable. Nobody at
tempts to question IT,
A War Cabinet, added to the existing
executive establishment and consisting
Of any number Of new departments
subject to the Presidents constltu-
-tlonal supremacy, would be no more
unconstitutional, and neither more nor
less "extraconstitutional," than the old
Cabinet with which we are familiar. 1t
would be erected by precisely the same
constitutions, process, and its legal
status would rest on the same solid
basis as in the case Of the Department
of the Interior. for example, or Of the
Department OF Labor We are confident
that the World will see, as soon as. 1t
gives its mind to the subject, that what
10 describes as "ext~aconstltutonality'
applies equally to the present Cabinet
and TO the proposed War Cabinet.
There is no taint in this 'extrac0nsti-
tutionallty": no such taint as was i'm
piled in our neighbOrs earlier and mis-
taken opinion that the new body would
be unconstitutional
Thus far the Worlds modification Of
view is highly salts ctory TO sound
ideas Of what constitutes constitutional
LEGISLATION. We are extremely sorry
that our able nelghhor does not stop
lust there But il goes on TO remark
that "a President true to himself and
his country would have no War Cab
met even if Congress undertook to im-
pose 10 over his veto
This is an exact citation OF thu
worlds astounding language. II can
scarcely be conscious Of what It is
saving Does our friend really appre
ciate the sieniflcance Of the propo j.
tion? a Pres'd dent "true 30 himself and
ais cour;ry" y"-tlat it, making himself
the sole judge of Adality TO duty to
himself and his couniry-would be
warranted in setting aside law Of his
country enacted as the Constitution
prescribes, passed over the Presden-
ilal veto as the Con titut'on prescr.bes?
A. President thus advised TO abiure his
oath Of fidelity to the laws OF his cOun-
t~y, TO nullify q const.tui onal law
which scrupulously recognizes his own
constitutional authority while proyid-
Ing him with additional and probably
more effective machinery for car ying
on the war, mach'nery alvavs subject
to his ecognizcd regular authority and