always determine in advance whether a proposed law will receive its support or not. We may not be able to tell what public opinion will do, but there are several things we may confidently predict it will not do:

(1) It will not support laws that require for their enforcement a much higher average of morality than that which already exists. A member of a State legislature introduced a bill enacting the ten commandments and the golden rule into laws. If the people of the State at the time were generally obeying the commandments and the golden rule his bill was not altogether absurd, but if they were considerably below this grade of morality his bill was as preposterous as it would have been if it had provided that all men should be happy, and that rivers should flow with milk and honey. Legislation may punish law-breakers, but it cannot make men good.

(2) It will not support laws that provide for a wide departure from present habits and customs. Men are creatures of habit, they are prone to act to-day as they acted yesterday; and when a law demands a sudden and radical change in deeply rooted customs it does violence to human nature. Englishmen are accustomed to say that there is nothing which their Parliament cannot do. There is doubtless one thing it cannot do: it cannot make the people of England abandon their clumsy custom of reckoning money in pounds, shillings and pence.

(3) It will not support ideal schemes of government. Society is a mixture of good and evil, and while the majority of men in a state are never utterly base, neither is the majority ever supremely good. Laws, therefore, which are framed upon the assumption that men are ideal creatures will not secure the support of public opinion. Here is where well-meaning people often err. They plan for a state in which there is no selfishness or injustice or wrongdoing. They construct ideal commonwealths, apparently forgetful of the fact that they themselves would not be willing to live for six months under one of their

own creations. Many ideal commonwealths have been proposed, but no sane man ever yearned to live in one of them. Public opinion will support laws that make for the betterment of social conditions-it is constantly doing this-but it will ruthlessly shatter the fabrications of dreamers.

(4) It will not support arbitrary or whimsical laws. Very often the law has attempted to regulate things that ought to be left to regulate themselves. Thus laws have been passed limiting the number of dishes to be served at a dinner, and prescribing the kind of jewelry that might be worn. A Scottish parliament was rash enough to attempt to regulate the amount of money that women should spend for dress. Regulations of this kind are called sumptuary laws. They have nearly always failed to receive the support of public opinion.

Obedience to Law. Laws which do not receive the support of public opinion are sure to be violated, while the violators go unpunished. This is the great mischief of such laws. A law is made to be obeyed. We may not like a law, we may think a law foolish or harsh or unjust, yet as long as it is a law we should obey it. To obey a bad law might work some temporary inconveniences, but these would not be so regrettable as would be the habit of violating the law with impunity. Obedience to the law is an essential feature of good citizenship under any form of government. Especially is this true in a democracy, where all laws flow from the people, and where the citizen looks to law and not to a monarch, not to a person, for the protection of his rights. When citizens in a democracy begin to lose their respect and reverence for the law and to disregard its commands they are preparing a way for anarchy, and anarchy leads to despotism. Society can exist only where the laws are obeyed, and it is sure society must and will exist. If the people will not obey their own laws the tyrant will come forward and impose his laws upon them and compel

obedience. The man on horseback, the man of blood and iron, is better than social chaos.

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT

1. What is a law? Define private law; public law.

2. Classify the laws with respect to the sources from which they have emanated. What is the common law?

3. What are the several characteristic features of a law?

4. What connection is there between voting and law-making?

5. Define "public opinion."

6. Name the kinds of laws public opinion is not likely to support. 7. What would be the result of a general disregard of the laws?

SUGGESTIVE QUESTIONS AND EXERCISES

1. Name some new inventions which will be likely to call forth new laws.

2. "A law passed to-day ought not to bind future generations. A law ought to repeal itself after it has been in force for twenty-five years. What would be the disadvantages of limiting the binding force of all laws to a brief period?

3. Would you vote for a law which provided that no child under twelve years of age should appear on the streets alone after nine o'clock in the evening? for a law which forbade ladies to wear the feathers of birds in their hats? for a law which forbade boys to smoke cigarettes? for a law which forbade girls to chew gum? for a law which compelled street-car companies to furnish seats to all passengers? for a law which forbade the ringing of church bells? for a law which provided that pupils should always know their lessons? Give reasons for each of your answers.

Is

4. "The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it." it better for judges to enforce a bad law and thus hasten its formal repeal by a legislature or to allow violators of it to go unpunished?

5. Name a few of the social and intellectual forces which go to make up public opinion.

6. What will be the course of a true statesman who finds that his opinion does not agree with public opinion?

7. Define statute, by-law, ordinance, constitution.

8. Watch the proceedings of the State legislature and of Congress and report important legislation. (Your representative in Congress will furnish you with the Congressional Record. '')

9. Does the constitution of this State say anything about the common law?

Topic for Special Work.-How Public Opinion Rules in America: 2, 486-498.

XXXIII

DEFENSE

A

Defense an Indispensable Function of Government. nation must provide a defense against public foes. Here is a function of government that is indispensable. Every nation has its enemies, external and internal. A foreign power impelled by avarice or ambition or revenge or envy may wage war upon us, or a lawless element at home may threaten the security of life and property. The principle of self-preservation requires that a nation be prepared to resist the attacks of both these classes of foes, and selfrespect demands that resistance be actually offered when offense is given. The doctrine that we should passively fold our arms and not resist an attack upon our persons or an invasion of our country is contrary to the teachings of experience and to the facts of human nature. Haste the day when war and lawlessness shall cease, but until they shall cease nations must be prepared to meet force with force.

National Defense. The defense of a nation is complete when it can hurl its entire strength against an enemy. In order to secure the strength which comes from unity and harmony the Constitution gives to the federal government the power of raising and supporting armies and navies (56, 57), and of making rules for their control (58). A State may not engage in war with a foreign power, except in case of actual invasion (77). The responsibility of declaring war rests with Congress (55). In giving to Con

gress the power to declare war instead of vesting the power with the President, the framers departed from the usual practice of governments. The declaration of war hitherto had been a prerogative of the executive, but the members of the Convention of 1787 were not disposed to make the executive strong at the expense of the legislature. The instruments of national defense are the army and

navy.

I. The Army. The Department of War and the office of the Secretary of War were created by an act of Congress in 1789. The regular army established by the new government consisted of only a few thousand men-a force just sufficient to keep the Indians in order. The policy of maintaining a small standing army, inaugurated in the beginning of our history, has been continued to the present time.1 In time of war we have put into the field as many as a million of men, but in times of peace our army has always been small, ridiculously small when compared with the standing armies of the great powers of Europe.

The policy of supporting a regular army no larger than is consistent with national safety is undoubtedly sound. The army is always under the control of the executive (92), and if it were overwhelmingly large it might be used -as in the history of nations it often has been used-to crush out popular rights and establish a tyranny. Moreover, a large standing army is maintained at an enormous cost. The army of Russia consists of more than a million of men. These men produce nothing themselves, yet they consume a large portion of that which is produced by others. Congress may provide for a large army or a small one as it sees fit, but this provision cannot last longer than two years (56). In placing this limitation upon Congress the Constitution makes it impossible for a large

1 Under the Act of 1901 the regular army of the United States is to consist of not less than 57,000 nor more than 100,000 soldiers. The regular army of France is more than 500,000; of Germany nearly 600,000; of Austria-Hungary nearly 400,000; of Italy nearly 300,000; of Great Britain, 250,000.