Arizona republican., 1920-02-05

IT In 17S7, when New York state was debating whether to join the federal government or not, Alexander Hamil ton asked advice of Chief Justice Mar shall upon the following
 could a state once adopt the con- stiution and then withdraw from the Union if not satisfied?"
 MarshalPs reply was prompt and de- cisive, no! Such a thing could never be done. A state which had once
 ratified was in the federal bond forever. The constitution could not provide for, nor contemplate, its own overthrow; 1 the answer therefore to those who are now attempting to clothe the treaty making power of the government with the assumed authority to change the form of our government is the same now as it was then-no, Such thing could never be done. The constitution could not provide for nor contemplate, c, it's own overthrow,
 We have seen that a constitutional amendment is the only power that legally can change the form of our government, and that a two thirds af- firmative vote of the peoples repre-
 sentatives in both the house of repre- sentative sand the senate is first re- quired and in addition thereto the con- tcurrence of three-fourths of all the states is required, and that the presi- dent shall have no function therein.
 
 most significant provision imposed by | the framers of our constitution, viz: l that a change in the form of our gov | ernment requires first a two-thirds affirmative vote of the congress (houSe and senate) and in addition thereto a | eefourths affirmative vote of all the Lstates (and through them the people, 1 and that it is the only one function of all the government machinery that does require a three -fourthS affirma- | tive vote.
 All of our legislation requires simply a majority vote of congress.
 All Vetoes require a two thirds af- firmative vote of the congress (house and senate, but
 | A change in the form of our govern ment requires a two-thirds vote of the | congress thouse and senate), a three l fCurths affirmative vote of all the states, and not only requires a three 1 fourths affirmative vote of all the states but in addition thereto eliminates the president and prohibits him from having anything whatsoever to do l herewith.
 Now, why did our forefathers of all the representatives of the people pro- hibit only the president of the United States from having anything to do with change in our constitution. and why of all the functions of the machinery O fthe government, did they require for this one thing only a three -foGrths affirmative vote of all the states Cor the peOple)? Because of the one great controlling fear that possessed their souls, namely-that it might be to the presidents interest and advantage to change the form of our government and thereby remove the peoples safeguards that they had placed in their constitu- ton, and by such change make it pos sJble for dictator, an emperor or king to rule over our republic; so they de- veloped an effective check upon any such possible ambition of the president and removed any such possible tempta- tion, by prohibiting the president from having anything to do with or function ing in a change of their form of gov by requiring for this one thing only a hree-fourths affirmative vote of all the states of the Union.
 Yet notwithstanding this intended elimination of the president. and not withstanding the special requirements of a two thirds vote of the congress. and of a three -fourths affirma tive vote of all the states Gall made purposely and expressly for the safeguarding Of the very life of our beloved republic) the president of the United States is now endeavoring through an entirely different instrumentality (which avoids referring this vital matter to any of che states at all. even to the people, representatives in the house), namely z, treaty, to illegally change the form Of. our government. which he other wise could not possibly do.
 If any man, even with the consent of the senate, cane hange the form of our government, in direct opposition to the method provided for by our fore fathers in the constitution, then one man can also change the form of our government in other respects and the death knell of the great American re- public-i is sounded
 Our forefathers' great efforts and carefully developed safeguards will then have availed us nothing, and in spite of all their safeguards and their truly wonderful constitution, it would be possible then that we may one day see a dictator, an emperor or king ruling over our great liberty loving republic"
 A short consideration of. the manner in which this un-American treaty was framed might be enlightening. From all accounts the American draft of the treaty was never seriously considered | at Versailles. From authentic accounts | the treaty was drawn mainly by the English general and legal adviser, Gen eral Shuts, by Lloyd George, Presi- | dent Wilson and his adviser, Colonel | House. That Lloyd George and Gen eral Shuts should desire the great |
 
 up England's present territorial ip- tegrity in all corers of the earth. and for all time, is not to be wondered at, | and one must admire them for their astuteness in endeavoring to bring to | their support this great wealthy re- public with it's money and with it's manhood wherewith to defend, for all time, their territorial integrity
 In view of the significant fact, that the Versailles peace treaty threatens the continued existence of our consti tutional government itself it might be well for the public to know the atti- tude of the presidents adviser, Colonel House. on the constitution of the United States.
 Senator Sherman, in his remarks on the floor of the senate on June 6, 1919, made the following statement:
 The man who writes a book to DOT tray a new and perfect government he assures us he has invented, sufficient for the salvation of the entire earth. Is more dangerous to his country than the anarchist who seeks to usher in kI~< 1<, ,f 1xyv, fo f<xx-i l