The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1935-01-02
This is the third in a series on the Consti-
tuition.

This is the third in a series on the COnsti-
tuition.
THE United States is now in the midst Of its
Il fifth great revolutionary movement. The first
freed the nation from Great Britain. Although
1t had an economic tinge its motivating forces
we're largely social ard political.
Tn second was the writing and adoption of
the Constitution, which grew out Of the efforts
Of a minority of business men and creditors to
free themselves from the chaos that a majority
Of debtors and farmers had forced upon them.
Third was the War Between the States which
established the economio supremacy Of the in
dustrial North over the sla%ve-supported. agrarian
society of ne South.
The adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment
to the Constitution was the fourth. This change
in the basic law sharply curbed the powers of
the individual states over corporations doing
business within them.
Fifth is the New Deal which seeks reasonable
regulation of business enterprise, more equitable
distribution of wealth and the subjugation Of
property to human rights.
All but the first upheaval were distinctly eco
nomic. All but the first and fifth were almost
wholly engineered by privileged minoritieS.
Fortunately, the battle-ground of the
Roosevelt revolution is the aloof and rarefed
atmosphere of the United States Supreme Court,
which must decide at its present session whether
The wishes of the voters are in conflict with the
ConstituticI
The word voter" is used advisedlv rather
than people" Under the law a corporation is
a person" with all of the legal rights of a hu-
man being and the additional gifts of immortal
iy and legal immunity from imprisonment. One
Of the chief problems confronting the court is
the adjustment of the differences which have
grown up between flesh-and-blood persons and
these synthetic people-corporations.
n r n
CCHOOL, Textbooks 1sua11v o1oec ovo +ba
revolutionary and occasionally disreputable
aspects surrounding the adoption of the Con-
stitution. Those who wrote that magnificent
document gave no evidence at the time that
they realized they were erecting a great bulWark
for human rights.
On the contrary they were distressed business
men. Many of them were holders of Govern
ment securities which would be favorably
affected by the adoption of the Constitution,
which they called the New Plan" They sus-
pected the ordinary man and went as far as they
dared in curbing his political power.
In writing the document they acted without
any legal authority whatever. Martin Van
Buren, called 1t IAN heroic, but lawleSS act" Even
Alexander Hamilton, father of the Constitution.
admitted that its trainers will have to en-
counter the d~isrepute of having brought about
a revolution in Government"
After they had written the Constitution the
founders had to get it adopted. There was an
agreement among the thirteen states that no
change should be made in their basic govern
ment except by unanimous vote. The consti-
tutlonalistS evaded this by calmly announcing
that nine states could adopt.
Advocates of the New Plan never even pre-
tended that a majority Of the people of the new
nation were favorable to them. In order to cor
raj the necessary nine states some adroit and
not very creditable political jockeying was nee
eSSary.
The constitutionalists had organization. lead
ershlp and money. During their campaign for
ratification they even set up an expensive ponv
express which far outstripped the mails in
speed. Robert Morris, who was a heavy financial
hacker of the New Plan, complained bitterly
during the Virginia ratification convention of
the depredations on my purse" He did not ex-
plain just what he meant.
ID against the New Planners. or Fed
~ ~eralists, was the inert, uninterested ma
Jor1ty OF citizens who were we'll satisfied with
the existing decentralized Government. Only
Is per cent of the qualified voters of the coun-
try even took the trouble to 60 to the polls and
vote for delegates to the several state ratification
conventions. Charles Beard, historian, thinks
about one-SiXth of the voters favored the Con-
stitution.
From the first the Federalists were sure that
Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware and Georgia
would ratify. These states were without ade-
quate seaports and had been seriously crippled
by the commercial competition of their wealth.
Ter neighbours.
They had everything to gain and nothing to
lose by going along with the New Plan, since
they would be placed on a more equal business
footing with their competitors and would receive
equal representation in the Senate with the