.v
OCTOBER 18, 19 a7
The Commoner.
"V
juot returned from London to Washington,' de
clined today to talk politics, saying he had been
away too long to speak understanding. But
he did declare that It was absolutely certain that
no call for immediate tariff revision would ap
pear in the nex republican platform, nor if in
serted would be heeded by the next congress.
The president found much that was wise
and stimulating to say on the subject of internal
improvements and the preservation of our nat
ural resources. It was expected in Washington
when he took his departure that he would also
say something which would put an end to this
continuous third term talk.' His friends argued
to him that silence at this time would give re
newed life and vigor to the third term move
ment, an argument which the facts today are
abundantly justifying.'
Silent on tariff revision, the president givo3
the standpatters renewed hope.
Silent on the question of the third term,
he awakens the boomers to new activity and
noise.
It would seem, however, that as both of
these -subjects are of interest to the American
people, and the first of particular importance
to their pockets, the president might have lent
the great force of his voice and his influence
to clearing up the mystery which now encom
passes them.
What is to be expected of the two- con
ventions this year can not be determined thus
early. There js tremendous influence being
brought to bear upon Mr. Roosevelt to repudiate
his promise to not become again a candidate.
.It is fair to say that among people who are
interested in politics the belief is general that
he will forget his promise and become the can
didate of his party. There seems to be no con
viction that he is at all earnestly behind Taft.
Talking with one of his most intimate friends
two days ago I was told that it would be Roose
velt by acclamation. It is fair to say that my
informant said that he did not believe that
Roosevelt would be a party to this, but he did
believe that the convention wo,uld bo stampeded
by some sudden speech in Roosevelt's behalf.
That is really the opinion of official Wash
ington not merely the men who hold office
under Roosevelt, and who owing him their
places dislike him, n,or of the members of con
gress and of the senate who owing him nothing
dislike him more, but it is the general belie'
of the national politicians that if he wishes the
nomination he can hot be deprived of it.
None of them regard him as phenomenally
strong before the people in the states that must
be carried. They look back on his record in
New York and find that he fell far short of
men of less prominence than he when he was
a candidate for governor. They laugh when
the story is told of his tremendous popular
majority when ho was a candidate for presi
dent, because they know it was a majority won
not by personal or political popularity, but be
cause of the fact that his opponent was unable
to hold the democratic masses. In brief the
students of politics do not think that Mr. Roose
velt, if he yields to the appeals of his hlolators,
would be the strongest of all republican can
didates. WILLIS J. ABBOT.
AN INTERESTING PUBLICATION
Rev. Charles A. Ferguson, of Kansas City,
Mo, 1st issuing through the Municipal Univer
sity Press, Kansas City, a quarterly entitled
"The News Book." It is devoted to economic,
ociologlcal and religious movements, with
which Mr. Ferguson has been for years identi
fied. He discusses these subjects from the
standpoint of one who is interested in finding
a just solution of every problem. It is a
thoughtful publication for thoughtful people.
The last issue discusses the municipal
university, the citizens' lobby, tenants, the pur
pose of government, the mission of the church,
the position of the school, and a number of
other kindred subjects. t
oooo
A SPOOL OF THREAD
' The Textile World Record is in a quandary.
It finds that tHo American consumer pays six
cents for a two hundred yard spool of thread,
while the British consumer pays only three
cents for exactly the same spool. Both spools,
of course, are made from exactly the same Amer
ican cotton and, what makes the case most puz
zling, both are made by exactly the same trust.
Commentingr upon this fact the Saturday
Evening Post says:
"We must allow for higher wages In this
country. The tariff does allow for that, and the
framers of the Dingley schedules have never, so
far ,as wo are nwaro, boon accused of underesti
mating the difference between American and
foreign wages. The duty on the spool id ono
'cent, and unless we are to adopt tho startling
hypotliesis that the tariff-makers giiessod short,
we must accept that as amply covering the item
of higher wages on this side of tho sea. Why,
then, tho other two cents per spool? Upon
what theory docs tho thread trust, deriving its
raw material from tho United States, charge its
American patrons fifty per cent moro than Its
BritlBh patrons over and above tho increased
cost of manufacture hero duo to higher wages?
Well, wo recall an English trust which joyfully
followed approved American methods up to tho
time it began marketing its wares. Then there
was a radical departure, in tho form of so stren
uous a public protest that tho trust capitulated.
Possibly the answer to the conundrum which
baffles the Textile World Record Is that tho
American public doesn't mind being soaked,
while the British public does."
OOOO
HISTORY MAY REPEAT
The St. Louis Globe-Democrat (rep.) says
that the election of the republican candidate for
governor of Kentucky "will show that tho re
publican wave throughout the nation will still
be at high tide when tho big canvass takes
place twelve months from now." But in tho
same editorial the Globe-Democrat intimates
that a republican defeat in Kentucky would
mean nothing because "no democrat supposes
that they have tho faintest chance to carry tho
election a year hence."
That being true the republican wave will
certainly be at "high tide" In Kentucky this
year. Reports from Kentucky Indicate that the
"wave" will be at "high tide" in old Kentucky
just about as It was in young Oklahoma.
OOOO
THE CONSTITUTION
The following editorial appeared In tho
Philadelphia Public Ledger, a republican news
paper: Mr. Roosevelt makes so many speeches upon
so many subjects that it is not- always easy to
separate from them the central thought. For
some time tho prominent idea has been tho pun
ishment of wealthy malefactors. In his present
series of long addresses there appears to be
embodied a demand for greater powers for the
restraint and regulation of corporations, and es
pecially of the railroads. This does not seem
to contemplate legislation merely, for there has
been a great deal of legislation in this direction
lately, the most recent of which, enacted at tho
president's own Insistence, has not yet been fuljy
tested. His impatience appears to be directed
against what are commonly regarded as con
stitutional restraints upon the federal power.
The supreme court, and the other courts, have
constantly interpreted the constitution in the
spirit of the Tenth amendment:
"The powers not delegated to tho
United States by the constitution nor pro
hibited by it to the states are reserved to the
states, respectively, or to the people."
As lately as this past summer, in what Sen
ator Knox has referred to jlh "a great opinion,"
in the Kansas-Colorado case,, the supremo court
took occasion- to reiterate the doctrine It has
held from the first:
"It Is still true that no independent and
unmentioned power passes to the national
government or can rightfully be exercised
by congress."
It Is against this fundamental construction
that the president contends. Secretary Root, in
a notable speech in. 1906, formulated the idea
of constitutional change through elastic Inter
pretation, which the president has since dwelt
upon with increasing insistence. This was the
central thought In his speech at St. Louis. The
constitution must remain as it Is, but It must
be "interpreted as the interests of the whole
people demand," upon a theory that
"Allows to the nation that is, to the people
as a wholp when once It finds a subject
within the national cognizance, the widest
and freest choice of methods for national
control, and sustains" every exercise of na
tional power which has any reasonable rela
tion, to national objects."
-
By what mental process Mr. "Roosevelt asso
ciates the name of Marshall with this "theory"
is not apparent, nor is it important. He goes
on to say that if this theory shall prevail, "then
an Immense field of national power, now un-
usod, will be developed, which will be adequate
for dealing with many, if not all, of tho econ
quiIc problems which vox us."
No ono disputes that "tho pcoplo as a
whole" have rotalnod thoir right to "alter or
abolish" thoir form of government at thoir will.
Tho question Mr. Roosevelt raises Is botween
a written constitution, Ilko that of .tho United
States, ordalnod by tho pcoplo and unchango
ahlo except In tho way thoy havo expressly pro
vided, or a "flexiblo" constitution, Hko that of
Great Britain, formed by custom and precedent,
by legislation and Judicial interpretation, and
changing with tho changing exigencies of tho
timo or tho desires of tho majority In powor.
That tho European Idea of a constitution
has practical advantages and opens "a wide field
for national powor" may easily bo maintained.
It may be that we Americans havo made a fetich
of our written constitution, and that wo would
do well to abnndon it as something vo have out
grown. Or, wo still havo retained powers which
wo can confer upon the national government In
tho way providod, if that bo resolved upon. But
the theory of a constitution readily adjustable
by now construction to every desired exercise
of authority Is plainly incompatible with tho
theory which has hitherto prevailed. Tho "de
velopment" which tho president Is urging,
whether, for good or III, would bo essentially a
change In our form of government.
Tho opinions of Chief Justice Marshall aro
full of just such declarations as this:
"This government Is acknowledged by
all to bo ono of enumerated powers. Tho
principle that It can exercise only tho pow
ers granted to it would scorn too apparent
to havo required to bo enforced by all those
arguments which its enlightened friends
while it was ponding beforo tho pcoplo
found it necessary to urge. That princlplo
is now unlvorsally .admitted."
This was in an opinion relating to tho judi
cial powor, which tho constitution had vested in
tho supreme and other courts "all tho judicial
power which the nation was capable of exercis
ing" and which could not be limited by legis
lative or executive Interference, nor In any way
except as expressed by the constitution. Tho
president has no authority to determine how
tho judicial power shall be exercised, and tho
supremo court will have to reverse its wholo
view of tho constitution boforo It can accept his
present theory. It was, in fact, against this
very theory of Inherent powers, which was
argued on behalf of tho United States, that tho
supreme court directed its unanimous opinion
iii the Kansas-Colorado caso:
"This amendment (the tenth), which
was seemingly adopted with prescience of
just such contention ns the present, dis
closed the widespread fear that the national
government might, under the pressure of
.-supposed general welfare, attempt to exer
cise powers which had not been granted.
With equal determination the framers in
tended that no such assumption should over
find justification in the organic act, and that
if in the future further powers seemed ,nec
cssary they should be granted by tho peo-
pie In the manner they had provided for
amending that act."
Elsewhere in the same opinion it is said:
"The people who adopted the constitu
tion knew that In the nature of things they
could not foresee all the questions which
might arise In the future, all the circum
stances which might call for the oxerclso of
further national powers than those granted
to the United States, and after making pro
,, vision for an amendment to the constitution
by which any needed additional powers
would be granted, they reserved to them
selves all powers not so delegated'
This is so recent a deliverance, made since
the president has been arguing for amendment
by construction, that it presents very clearly
tho Issue between him and the supremo court,
or rather the issue between the two opposing
views of constitutional interpretation. In a
broad sense, some such difference of view has
divided parties from the beginning, but It has
never before reached so wide a difference as to
the essential nature of our constitutional forms.
The amendment of the constitution has been
frequently proposed. The president's Idea Is not
to change the form, but to leave the form and
change the meaning a method moro direct and.
certainly more far-reaching In its consequences.
But first it will be necessary to change tho su
preme court.
riUlU&a
rprfrrfn iiilyiVTMiini,,T.diiiliiMiMifi ifriMfiftriiiaw ., Mill1 ,.
V
1
5
4
i
a
1
i
i