The Kusko times., 1926-06-12

l VI IiSbL Aiio al uiHGII upOlI bIldA point is worth our consideration to- day, because it displays the remark able acumen of the man, his wonder fui wisdom, and his farsightedness in foreseeing conseuences.
 1 want to read you Hamilton's ar gument in the Eighty-fourth Federal ist He said
 'I go further and affirm that bill of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary III the proposed Constitution, but would even be dan gerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted, and on this vesy account would afford a colorable pretext to claim moro than were granted"
 Now, mark the keenuess of this req soning:
 'For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? ?"
 Continuing, he says;
 'I will not. contend that such pro- vision would confer a. regulating power. but it. is evident that it would furnish, to men diSposed to, usurp.. a plausible pretensce for claiming that power- They might urge with a sem ought not to be charged with, the ah- surdity of providing against the abuse of an authority which was not given. and that the provision against re- straining the liberty off the press af- forded clear implication that a power to prescribe proper regulations concerning it was intended to, be vest ed in the National Government. This may serve as a specimen of the nu- merous handles which would be given to the doctrine of constructive powers by the indulgence of an injudicious zeal for bill of rights" (The Federal ist, No. LXXXXIV,, D. l39, Mclean ed., New York, 1788)
 Notwithstanding Hamilton's argu- ment, the Bill off Rights was inserted in the Constitutions: Now observe what has happened There was no amendment introduced or adopted which threatened to,contifm or justify Hamilton's fears until we come down to the eighteenth amendment, the amendment which. embodics in it's terms the features ofEa sum ptuary act restraining individual liberty and pre- scribing the things that may not enter into the diet of the people.
 The old sumptuary laws of bar barrie days prescribed that the me chanc had to keep his place; he could not wear. brpadcloth or silver buckles on his shoes life he was carpenter he had to wear the insignia and ap parel of his trade. If he was shoe maker he had to adhere to that. He had to live within his means and keep his place-a good thing in itself, but bad thing when coerced by law. But those ideas of medieval days have passed into the darkness of oblivion. Civilized men have abandoned them, and no king or potentate, nor any government, by mere majority of mass, or power, or strength can ever successfully or for long survive them.
 The amendment was carried to the 1 Supreme Court of the United States and by a 8 to 2 opinion the amend ment itself and the Volstead law pred icated upon it were affirmed and held valid. But observe the import of this decision. The Supreme Court sub- stantially holds that a guaranty con- tained in the Bill of Righ can be superseded, nullified, or repealed. With this decision as precedent a constitutional amendment providing for the establishment of State reli- zion would be perfectly valid If Hamilton's advice had been followed and the Bill of Rights, precious as we have deemed it's guaranties in the past, had not been added to the Con I stitutian. the Supreme Court of the