"" ii
-f?
."J
'APRIL 28,' 1911
The Commoner.
5
Tf , mvp'm,9 t. ir
lion 1815, explains .that this term 'republican'
jwas used In contrast with 'aristocratic' or
'monarchial.'
"Mr. Justice Cooley in 'Constitutional Limi
tations' explains the purpose of the guarantee
of republican form to protect the union against
'aristocratic and monarchial innovations.'
"In Hopkins vs. Duluth (81 Minn., 189) the
court said: 'We apprehend that a little reflec
tion must satisfy any one that the advantages
of providing local self-government by the voters
directly interested through a referendum is ab
stractly as well aB concretely more republican in
form than through representatives of the people
in the legislature.'
"The supreme court of the "United States
'(Luther vs. Borden, 7 Howard, 421) declared
that the republican character of a state, when
recognized by the proper constitutional
authority, is binding on every other department
of the government and it cannot be questioned
in a judicial tribunal.
"Fourteen of the states have actually adopted
the initiative and referendum by a popular Yoto
or act of the legislature.
"It was, however, a recognized doctrine of
the original states, the constitutions themselves
being adopted by the referendum, the initiative
being exercised In the right of instruction in
the town meetings of New England and the
county conventions of the south.
"The right of recall was also recognized by
the continental congress (Article V.), in which
tho states expressly reserved tho right to recall
their delegates to congress at will.
"The congress of the United States admitted
Oklahoma with the initiative and referendum
and as a state 'republican in form,' and
congress has recognized Oregon, Maine, Mon
tana, South Dakota, Missouri, Arkansas and
Oklahoma; and notwithstanding that these
states have the initiative and referendum as con
stitutional provisfons, their representatives are
not questioned in congress. Congress recognizes
these states as republican in form, and this
recognition is binding upon every other depart
ment of the government under the decisions of
the supremo court of tho United States. (Texas
vs. White, 7 Wallace, 700; Taylor vs. Beck
ham, 178 U. S. 546.)
"The rule of the people and their right to
rule is recognized in all the constitutions. See
tho bill of rights of North Carolina, Virginia,
.Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut,
Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Vermont, New
Jersey, Delaware, South Carolina and Georgia.
"The evidence is overwhelming, and the con
tention of Mr. Baker is so unsound as to not re
quire any further answer, although further evi
dence is abundant. "ROBERT L. OWEN."
"Washington, April 11."
FRANKLIN PIERCE'S REPLY
Franklin Pierce wrote to the World the
following letter: "Tothe Editor of tho World
In your editorial on the initiative and referen
dum you say that 'under our form of govern
ment constitutions are created to protect the
rights of the minority, not to protect the rights
of the majority. When legislation is
initiated by petition, enacted by referendum and
the judges are made subject to recall, constitu
tions might as well be torn up. Laws are then
made by the same authority that establishes
tho constitution, and hence must have equal
force with the constitution.'
"The constitutions of the state and of tho
United States are eaxm paramount to any law
coming into existence through the initiative and
referendum, in the same manner as such con
stitutions are now superior to statutes passed
by the legislatures of the states or of tho na
tional government.
"Again, you say, 'The power of the majority
thus becomes as absolute tjs the power of the
czar,' and this you attribute to the fact that
if the people can recall judges from office they
are masters of the situation.
"There is no reason why a judge should not
be recalled from office who disgraces his posi
tion and office any more than there is why a
legislative officer or administrative offi.er should
not bo recalled under like circumsances.
"No legislature ever acted with better judg
ment in passing laws than did the people of
Oregon in the last election in giving their ap
proval or disapproval to the proposition sub
mitted to them by the popular referndum.
"The greatest danger to the permanency of
our institutions today is the fact that public
questions are not discussed here as in olden
times by the voters. Conventions of parties
advise and approve liberal measures affecting
the welfare of the people, as did the democratic
party at Rochester last fall, and then go Into
tho campaign and say not a word about those
principles and afterward meet in logislativo as
sembly and pay no attention to putting those
principles into laws.
"Public questions will never bo discussed by
the people or understood except they are sub
mitted for their direct action by the referendum.
"You write 6f 'surrendering our old liberties
liberties that have been won by tho English
speaking people through long centuries only by
drenching tho land in blood.' This sounds well,
but you know, Mr. Editor, and every man
intelligent in public affairs knows, that the
people have been losing their liberties becauso
Bpecial interests and not tho people have con
trolled legislation and have stolen the people's
forests and water rights, and through protective
tariffs have brought into being a multitude of
trusts to rob them.
"The government of Great Britain is tho most
democratic in the world simply because the con
trol of government depends upon the opinion of
the masses as to specific principles of govern
ment and is made practical through the elec
tion of a single candidate to"parlJament, and tho
law of parliament resulting from such popular
election Is supreme and not oven subject to
tho test of any constitutional limitations.
"The voice of the people may not bo the voice
of God, but it is a million times nearer to It
than the voice of special interests enacting laws
for their own benefit. The power of the ma
jority using the referendum or recall may, as
you say, 'become as absolute as tho power of
the czar,' but it is harmless compared with the
arbitrary government of a Roosevelt advising
the violation of unjust laws which, are not re
pealed by the legislative assemblies, or the lobby
of special interests enacting legislation for their
own enrichment, and so long as pur representa
tives in state and national legislatures betray
tho people ours Is not a representative govern
ment but a mere perversion of the powers of
government for the benefit of the few at tho
expense of the many. "FRANKLIN PIERCE."
"New York, April 11."
Editorial in Denver News: "The' New York
World is making a determined attack on the
initiative and referendum, with a few side shots
at the recall.
"The World has earned, by arduous and in
telligent public service, the right to have Its
opinions soberly considered by the advocates of
any reform. The News will try to accord such
consideration.
"The objections of the World are two-fold.
"First: The Initiative and referendum is
contrary to that clause of the federal constitu
tion which guarantees to each state a republi
can form of government.
"Second: Even if constitutional, the initia
tive and referendum Is unwise; because it leads
to ill-considered legislation, puts every statute
passed in such manner on a par with the con
stitution of the state, and, coupled with the
recall, sweeps away the safeguards for the rights
of the minority, and makes tho. temporary ma
jority a czar.
"We will take these objections in their order.
"What constitutes a republican form of govern
ment? That question has been judicially de
termined by the supreme court of the United
States. In the case of Chisholm vs. Georgia, Mr.
Justice Wilson said:
"My short definition of such a government is,
one constructed on this principle, that the, su
preme power resides in the body of the people."
(2nd Dallas, 457.)
J'Unless the supremo court is willing to' re
verso itself, and give a contradictory definition of
a republican form of government, the initiative
and referendum cannot be held unconstitutional
on this ground. No one, not even our own Be
wildered Bonynge, who views all changes with
alarm and denies the existence of most of them,
can say that the initiative and referendum takes
the supreme power away from the body of the
people. It merely provides a different and more
direct way of exercising that power." Denver
News.
that establishes the constitution, and hence must
havo equal force with tho constitution.
Should judges persist in declaring initiative and
-referendum statutes invalid, tho judges would
bo subject to removal under the recall. Tho
power of tho majority thus becomes as ahsoluto
as tho power of tho czar.'
"Tho statement that all laws would stand on
an equality with the fundamental law Is not
truo, nor if true, is it "necessarily terrifying All
laws stand on such a theoretical equality in Eng
land; yet the broad principles of tho British con
stitution persist; and will porsist so long as
Englishmen retain a sincere desire for porsonal
llborty. Coming nearer homo, at least two states
havo already inado a difference between tho
passing of a now law and the passing of a con
stitutional amendment, making tho latter raoro
difficult, and requiring the co-operation of a
largor number of citizens than tho former.
"Tho World scorns to regard the 'numerical
majority' as a tyrannous and dangerous thing,
constantly seoklng to ovorrldo tho rights of tho
minority, and only restrained by courts and con
stitutions. " Such is not our own viow. Tho
tyranny of tho majority Is a very real thing;
but it has not often appeared in history, and
wo see no reason to apprehend It hero. Tho
tyranny of tho majority is found only In soasons
of Intense excitement; and usually in limited
areas, whoro the massing of great bodies of
people brings out tho ancient characteristics of
tho mob. Tho timo required for tho operation
of tho Initiative, referendum and recall gives
tlmo for passion to die out; and for that sober
second thought, of which we havo spoken be
fore, to assert Its sway.
"Lot us suppose a law brought up by petition
which, If passed, would seriously Infringe tho
rights of the minority. All tho timo that peti
tion was circulating, tho opponents of tho law
could present their arguments. Tho circulation
of the petition would occupy at least sixty days.
Even with a spoclal election, ninety days would
elapse between the filing of tho petition and the
counting of the votes. If tested in tho courts,
another ninety days at least would elapse be
fore a decision need bo rendered. If this de
cision were adverse, and tho advocates of tho
law tried tho recall, they would havo to circu
late their petition, say sixty days, and then con
duct a campaign, at least sixty days moro. All
told, it comes to ono year. If tho majority In
any American state can be kept adhering to an
unjust and unconstitutional proposition for that
length of time, then we havo misjudged our
countrymen; and free government of any sort
is doomed to perish among us.
"The Initiative and referendum is a chisol,
not a guillotine. We may cut our fingers with
it now and then; but we shall not cut off heads
with it. The World's alarm Is groundless."
Denver News,
AS TO THE UNWISDOM OF IT
"Coming now to the unwisdom of tho Initia
tive and referendum, tho New York World
declares:
" 'When legislation is initiated by petition,
enacted by referendum, and judges are subject
to the recall; constitutions might as well be torn
up. Laws are then made by tho same authority
MAINTAIN THE CONSTITUTION
"To the editor of tho World: In a recent
comment upon a' pamphlet issued by Fred " A.
Baker of Michigan you say that the initiative
and referendum would eliminate the delibera
tive assembly and hence disestablish republican
government.
"Tho first part of this statement is not very
important, even if it were true. One has but to
consult the files of the World for ample proof
that it is high time that something were dono
with our deliberative assemblies.- Tho recent
senatorial situation, which has made us the
laughing-stock of tho world, is a case in point.
Our deliberative assemblies have long since
ceased to promote republican government, and
if they were eliminated the loss would not be
very great. It is not true, however, that the
initiative and referendum would eliminate them
and no advocate of that reform thinks so. They
who make that chargo either do so In Ignorance
of what has been accomplished under the initia
tive and referendum or they deliberately ignore
the achievements in those political divisions of
our country where direct legislation has had
full and freo rein. We claim that the present
legislative system and Its advantages Its com
pactness, legal wisdom, experience and power
for work would be retained, while its evils
Its haste, complexity, opportunities for bribery
and corruption, overlegislation and legislation
against the wishes and will and interest of tho
people would bo eliminated. The legislature
would continue to do tho law-making as now,
but its power to do wrong or to impede pro
gress or to do as it pleased in spite of tho
people would be gone. It would involve no
denialof a republican form of government, but
on the contrary would promote this. In the
words of Jefferson, 'government is republican
'Z&lL&'Ai
&o&?iJiis&ftfei
fe&rf&Mfciiitiii m ml -.