ing words of wisdom to which we can refuse to listen only to our hurt. But if these Radicals would win us, they must inspire us, and inspiration, I verily believe, will be found only in sentiments professed by Conservatives, but too seldom adhered to by them in the more strenuous hours of their daily lives. It is an old maxim, as old indeed as Democritus, that " from nothing, nothing comes"; and the inspirations of man were never manufactured in a vacuum.

Let men despise the idealism of the past as much as they please, the best that is in them, and in all of us, has its root in that ennobling culture of the spirit which began so many ages ago. The person who believes firmly that man is spirit, and that man is here to grow, to develop, to unfold, in truth, beauty and goodness, can never be a Conservative of the baser sort. His opposition to what professes to be reform, if opposed to it he be, will be based upon the belief that the change desired would work harm, rather than good; for he has only the highest welfare of his race at heart. Thus his opposition will never be based upon his material self-interests, so called; for these interests he has learned to despise, whenever they are found to conflict with the higher interests of the species; his prejudices he has cast aside, for he has come to see that the interests of the individual and the interests of the race are, in reality, identical. He may oppose Socialism, but his opposition will be based upon no such miserable grounds as those upon which we are now only too well accustomed to hear them based; he will not desire to see the masses kept in subjection to the Capitalist. He, too, will desire to witness the growth of the masses in power, and in all that ennobles the individual being. If he oppose Socialism, it will be because he fears that Socialism will destroy, rather than enhance, the individual; that the individual will wither, while a harsh, tyrannical Government grows more and more. But if we may accept Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity as ideals imposed upon us by our larger selves, for humanity to realize in the now and here, the present should be for us a period of golden dreams. If life means nothing, if the universe means nothing, then reform is only an illusory word, which has come to confuse us upon the highway of Despair; but if in our high

est ideals we may find the real meaning of our personal lives, because they are the quintessence of the spiritual universe, whose avatars we should be, then there is nothing too glorious for the heart of man to conceive.

CONSTITUTIONAL CHAOS

CHARLES H. HAMILL

"To the end it may be a government of laws, and not of men."

"A frequent recurrence to the fundamental principles of civil government is absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty." +

R

ECALL of Decisions means amending State Constitu

tions so as to provide that they may thereafter be amended by a majority popular vote, adopting, not general provisions affecting all alike, but regulations which may be special and temporary. Not only would it be for many reasons a dangerous governmental device, but it would have exactly the opposite effect to that claimed by its advocates, giving less rather than more immediate control to the people over their political destinies and making our institutions after a little time less instead of more adaptable to changing needs.

Students of government must needs have their thoughts frequently directed to the source of law and do not need to be told that in this country the source of power and the only rightful justification for the exercise of power are in the people, but no one believes that this now means or ever has meant that all governmental functions are to be discharged by temporary majorities. On the contrary it is known that when our forbears gathered in that great convention a century and a quarter ago they did not permit their ardent love of liberty to deceive their judgment; they brought to bear upon the great problems that confronted them the results of diligent and prolonged study of history. They knew that pure democracy, while it might furnish a valuable campaign cry for votes, could never be a bulwark of liberty. With infinite patience and sagacity they developed a system of government, safe, but republican, though it gave to tiny Rhode Island the same representation as gigantic New York in the Upper Legislative Chamber. They provided for an ap

* Const. of Mass., Part I, Art. XXX.
Const. of Ill., Art. II, § 20.

pointive judiciary to hold office during good behavior and with the power of ultimate nullification.

So, when the States gathered their chosen sons together and bade them formulate fundamental law to govern and protect their citizens, they did not think themselves betrayed because their representatives perpetuated a system of checks and balances in gov

ernment.

Returning from the pursuit of beasts more ferocious but less dangerous than judges, Colonel Roosevelt began in 1910 a series of criticisms of the courts. It was not, however, till the Columbus speech, delivered just before the announcement of his candidacy, that he offered a remedy for the ills he deplored. Later, in the Carnegie Hall speech, he gave a more exact definition of his proposal. There, after disclaiming any intention with reference to the Supreme Court of the United States, or to ordinary civil or criminal proceedings or the recall of judges, he stated his position thus: "I am proposing merely that in a certain class of cases involving the police power, when a State court has set aside as unconstitutional a law passed by the legislature for the general welfare, the question of the validity of the law— which should depend, as Justice Holmes so well phrases it, upon the prevailing morality or preponderant opinion-be submitted for final determination to a vote of the people, taken after due time for consideration."

It does not appear that in any of his articles or speeches the Military Statesman has pointed out whether in his opinion the reform contemplated can be effectuated without constitutional amendment, but the implication of the Carnegie Hall speech is that it can be, for he there quotes from the remarks of Dean Lewis of the Law School of the University of Pennsylvania, thus:

"Constitutional amendments, designed to meet particular cases, run the danger of being so worded as to produce farreaching results not anticipated or desired by the people. Colonel Roosevelt's suggestion avoids this difficulty and danger. If a persistent majority of the people of New York State want a workmen's compensation act, they should have it, but in order to obtain it, they should not be driven to pass an amendment to their State constitution which may have effects which they do

not anticipate or desire. Let them pass on the act, as passed by the legislature, after a full knowledge that their highest court has unanimously expressed its opinion that the act is contrary to the constitution which the people at a prior election have declared to be their fundamental law."

This contemplates the reform without constitutional amendment. How is it to be done? Suppose the legislature should pass an act providing that hereafter when the Supreme Court shall have declared unconstitutional any act of the General Assembly purporting to be an exercise of the police power, the act shall be submitted at the next general election and, if ratified by the people, shall be the law, notwithstanding the opinion of the Supreme Court. If a case arose under an act so ratified, would the Supreme Court consider itself so bound? Would it not be obliged to say: "Under the constitution 'The judicial powers, except as in this article otherwise provided, shall be vested in one Supreme Court.'* The constitution does not provide that the decisions of the Supreme Court shall be subject to review. This court has held that act unconstitutional. The vote of the people alone does not change the constitution. The constitution itself provides how it may be amended "?

If, therefore, a constitutional amendment be required, there is still the difficulty of deciding what form such an amendment should take. Suppose by the means now provided each State constitution should be amended so that an article reading substantially as follows should be added:

"Whenever an act of the General Assembly purporting to be an exercise of the police power shall have been held by the Supreme Court obnoxious to any provision of the Bill of Rights of this constitution, there shall be submitted at the next general State election upon a separate ballot the question of sustaining such decision of the Supreme Court in form:

Shall the decision of the Supreme Yes.

Court holding invalid an act en