The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
JGXm DISCUSSIOH AT ECONOMIC CLUB, SPRINGFIELD,
Monday evening, February u, 1 0 .
9?
. ADDRESS OP CHARLES S. HAMLIN.
IS
THE PRESENT TENDENCY TOWARDS NATIONAL CENTRALIZATION
FOR THE BEST INTERESTS OP THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES.
The s u b je c t o f the d is c u s s io n t h i s evening i s whether or
not the tendency toward* n a tio n a l c e n t r a li s a t i o n # -s o much in e v i donee o f l a t e , - i s f o r the heat in t e r e s t s t>f the people o f the
U nited S t a t c » .
The Economic Club has shown wisdom in in v it in g
d is c u s s io n o f t h i s q u e s tio n , e s p e c ia lly a t the p rese n t tim e, and
I s h a l l endeavor very b r i e f l y to p resent c e r ta in view s oh t h i s
question in a calm, temperate warmer, entirely devoid of partisan^
also j
s h ip ,
and, I t r u s t
aux wxoaxkyxd«*w^ at* ^oocxidte o f p e r s o n a lit ie s *
In c o n sid e rin g a s u b je c t o f such g rea t im portance, calm ness
o f d is c u s s io n i s an a l l e s s e n t i a l r e q u i s i t e .
the custom, o f l a t e ,
I t has been to o nuch
to "brand everyone who r a is e s h i s v o ic e in
p r o t e s t a g a in st c e n t r a li s a t io n as owe im p elled by some s e l f i s h
m o tiv e ,
as alm ost in f a c t ,
a t r a i t o r to h is co u n try .
Such a sp er
s io n s , however, cannot be counted as argument and have no p la ce in
th e d e lib e r a t io n o f ?*ny q u e stio n worthy o f c o n s id e r a tio n .
X remember so w e l l , on ly a few y e a rs ag o, when th o se who
opposed the talcing ami r e te n t io n o f the P h ilip p in e I s la n d s were
denounced w ith f e r v id r h e t o r ic as t r a i t o r s .
Who can fo r g e t the
o r a to r y poured f o r t h as to the advantages o f the P h ilip p in e I s
la n d s as a naval b ass and as fu r n is h in g the key to our fu tu re
p ro g re ss in the P a c if ic ?
Who can ever fo r g o t th e w ith e rin g swtsasm
and d en u n ciatio n v i s i t e d upon th o se who fa v o red the s o - c a l l e d
•ap o lic y o f * # c tt t tle » in the P h i l i p p i n e *
Y e t , only the oth er day
preoo on tta ^ h ig h
it
was announced in the p u b lic
a u th o r ity ," th a t th e g e n e ra l s t a f f a t Washington
had prepared i t a piano f o r th e d efen ce o f our in t e r e s t s on and
o r e r the P a c i f i c Ocean in the u n lik e ly event o f war w ith ,f&pa«,
n e v e r, X t r u s t ,
s e r io u s ly con sid ered f o r a moment as imminent*
And what were th ese plana o f defen ce?
The paper
I rimd announced
them &# fo llo w s : w
•In b r i e f ,
it
1# th a t at the f i r i n g o f th e f i r s t
f l e e t sh ip s a t M anila w i l l l i f t
pun our
anchor and plow eastward under f u l l
steam , le a v in g the P h ilip p in e # , f o r th e time b e in g , a t the mercy
o f the invad er#1 •
1
Those estim a b le c i t i z e n s who a&voctitod and s t i l l advocate
a p e a c e fu l withdrawal from the P h ilip p in e Isla n d # w ith honor, were,
in the excitem ent o f the moment, c a ll e d tr a ito r # * a n d when theee
m isguided people p oin ted out th a t the P h ilip p in e Is la n d # would be
r a th e r a burden than a b e n e f it to u# in time o f war, t h e i r word#
were r e je c t e d w ith contempt and th e y were h e ld tip to p u b lic scorn
and r i d i c u l e .
I f the above p ress rep o rt la tru**wfe*t a sad ending o f a l l
t h i s P h ilip p in e b u s in e s s ; t h e i r valu e a s a naval base and a# a key
tc the P a c i f i c i s so g r e a t that a t the f i r s t gun we are to " s c u t t l e *
and le a v e t h e ir people to t h e ir f a t e r e g a r d le s s o f t h i s grea t
m oral duty o f which *f« heard so much in the p a s t .
If,
with l a such a sh o rt apace o f tim e what was once tensed,
tre a so n ha# now been merged in l o f t y p a t r io tis m ,
s u r e ly th ere i s
hope even f o r th o se who q u estion th e wisdom as v e i l as the l e g a l i t y
M ^ N
o f p resen t and proponed n a tio n a l c e n t r a li s a t i o n , -a t In ant we can
a l l a f fo r d to d iso u sa the m atter calm ly and With an open mind,
of
We should f i r s t ^a i l re»«m b«r th a t we are not now d is c u s s *
in s
the c r e a tio n o f a new n a tio n a l governments
xm
are,
on the non -
t r a r y , c o n sid e rin g the government a» i t v w e s t a b lis h e d by our
r&
fa t h e r s and as we hope i t w i l l continu e f o r a l l tim e,
To co n sid e r t h i s q u e stio n p r o p e r ly , ws m ist boar in mind
the
^origin
;f the
>
n a tio n a l govorntaent
and
i t s com plete se p a ra tio n
from the governments o f the in d iv id u a l S ta te s *
A fte r th e D ecla ratio n o f Independence the C o lo n ic s became
independent o f Great B r itia n and v e rs,a e w ell,In d ep en d en t o f one
a n o th er,
th ey wore so v ereig n com m unities.
Then came the A r t i c l e s
o f C on fed eration by vrhioh a kind o f n a tio n a l government was c r e a t
ed#
tie
Thin government had no s x e c u tlv o Head,
so v ere ig n power.
I t hud a ls o very l i t -
I t had not even the power o f m a in ta in in g i t *
s e l f by means o f t a x a t io n .
The p eop le re ta in e d f o r them selves
through t h e ir S ta te governments alm ost a l l arm re ig n power.
Jfext cams the C o n s titu tio n a l Convention and th* ad op tion
o f thft C o n s t it u t io n , when, f o r the f i r s t tim e , an independent power
f u l n a tio n a l govw rm ent was er«a t(3 d ,»a government which h^d the
means and the power to m aintain i t s e l f and was independent o f the
S ta te governments as to i i «
n a tio n a l l i f e ,
T his n a tio n a l govern
ment, however, was not supreme ovor the s t a t e s , excep t as to the
power
granted i t under the C o n s t it u tio n ,
Over evory su b je c t g r a n i
te it
ed i t hud th e f u l l e s t a u t h o r it y , whether th a t a u th o r ity was ex
p re sse d in so many words in the C o n s t it u t io n , o r was neceeaatljry
im p lie d as groining out o f some expressed g r a n t.
Withim the l i m i t * o f the po war granted under the n a tio n a l
C o n stitu tio n *
the Federal government i s a b s o lu t e ly supremo.
can execu te i t s c o n s t it u t io n a l laws in <*vary part
o f the land*
So fa r no n a tio n a l powers go, the t e r r i t o r y embraced
S ta te s is *
It
by the United
in e f f e c t , but. a o in g le State absolutely s u b je c t to the
w i l l o f C ongress,
The powers, however, o f th e n a tio n a l government are s t r i c t
l y lim ite d * a l l powers not granted by th e c o n s t i t u t io n remain in
th e S ta te s or in
the
p eople
thereof
an i s
expressly
provided in
th e C o n s t it u tio n ,
I t io a f « a i l i a r p r in c ip le
of
law th at the l e g i s l a t u r e
of
a S ta te government has presumably a l l the power o f so v e r e ig n ty
i t s p eople p o s s e s s except where such poster In o:<proeely H a l t e d
by th e S ta te C o n stitu tio n *
whereas i t i s c le a r th a t the n a tio n a l
government i s one o f enumerated powers s t r i c t l y
lim ite d by
ih<s
g r a n ts contain ed in the C o n s t it u tio n .
It
le g is la tio n
i s always p e r t in e n t , t h e r e f o r e ,
in d is c u s s in g n a tio n a l
to in lu ire whether th e re i s a u th o r ity f o r such l e g i s
lation in the C o n s t it u tio n , and i f the t in e should over come when
it
i s co n sid ered u n p a tr io t ic to in q u ir e in to th e iiueotion o f the
n a tio n a l a u th o r ity on any s u b je c t ,
i t w i l l in d ic a te th a t the people
have become b lin d ed to th e b e n e f it s o f fr e e c o n s t i t u t io n a l govern
ment and have \n e,n i8cicu sly
la p sed in to a c o n d itio n dangerous to
the fu tu re w e lfa r e o f cur government.
toe xtooexto Die in d iv id u a l c i t i a e n
x * oomoe in to co n ta ct
w ith h i s S ta te government much more c i o c o ly and in tim a te ly than
w ith the n a tio n a l government.
He lo o k s to h ie S ta te government
f o r p r o t e c tio n o f h i s p ro p e r ty , f o r enforcement o f a l l r i g h t s o f
co n tra st,
f o r tho ed u cation o f h io c h ild r e n , f o r the re ru l& tio ii o f
th e descent o f p ro p e r ty , f o r the d e ta ilie h m e n t o f laws governing
m arriage, d iv o r c e , and many othwr s u b je c t s o f v i t a l importance to
him as an individual*
excepting for the postal service,
. ot
:
would
' m l| fo r the M s d p art*
the c i t i s e n h a rd ly
r e a l i s t s from p erso n a l experien ce that th e re i s a n a tio n a l govern**
« c n t at a l l .
W hile he knew* that the n a tio n a l government l e v i e s it
ta x e s from him f o r i t *
p a rt,
su p p o rt,
thtJBO ta x e s b e i n g ,f o r the most
i n d i r e c t vhe docs not pay them to the T
1 government, and
some even deny that they arc p aid a t a l l .
The o i t l a s s o f the United S t a t e s owes a lle g ia n c e to no
p erson al so v ere ig n or r u le r * he owes the h ig h e s t a l le g i a n c e , ho*-*
e v e r , to th e government* R a tio n a l and S t a t e , which h i s fa t h e r s
cre a te d fo r h is b e n e f i t .
There i s thus a t w o -fo ld a lle g ia n c e which
is
reco g n ised and a ffir m e d in the U nited S ta te s C o n s titu tio n *
It
is
t h i s r e la t io n of the n a tio n a l government to the S ta te govern
ment which c a l l s f o r t h the d is c u s s io n o f t h i s ev en in g.
At d if f e r e n t tim es o f our N a tion al l i f e ,
pop u lar a t t e n t io n
h&« been co n cen tra ted , even fo r lo n g p e rio d s o f t i n e , upon one o f
th e se dual system s o f Government to the p a r t i a l or the alm ost t o t a l
e c lip s e ,
in the popular i n t e r e s t ,
a t le a n t , o f the o th e r .
At the
fo u n d a tio n o f the Government under the C o n s t it u tio n , the N a tio n a l
id e a , o f n e c e s s it y ,
had been c r e a t e d .
come to the f r o n t ,
fo r
a
N a tio n a l Government
The peop le o f the S overeign S t a t e s surrendered
w ith much re lu c ta n c e a p a rt o f t h e ir sov ereign power.
The g r e a t
b u ild e r s o f the C o n s titu tio n cre a te d a new N ation and under the
in t e r p r e t a t io n o f the grout J u r i s t s , W ilso n , M a r s h a ll, W ebster and
6
o t h e r s , i t * growth has been stead y and su re .
V?hiie at tim e* the n a tio n a l idea* * o - o a l l e d f has "been ob~
•cured,
an a whole i t ha* s t e a d i ly broadened and d evelop ed .
fin a lly
&me
It
in to c o n f l i c t w ith th e extreme f’ t a te a r i g h t s id e a ,
and out o f th a t c o l l i s i o n oam© the U i v i l War from whioh the N ation
a l idea emerged trium phant,
The s o - c a l l e d S ta te s r ig h t s d o c tr in e
no lo n g e r , as once, marks the l i n e o f d iv is io n between th e two grea *
p o lit ic a l p a r tie s .
In f a c t , today i t
servos,
i f the p r e v a ilin g
popular ex p ressio n can be t r u s t e d , but a s a kind o f pound to h old
in r e s t r a in t or to fu r n is h s h e lt e r to a few k n ig h ts erra n t who have
stra y e d from the ranks o f th e h o s ts o f triumphant n a tio n a lis m .
A s t r ik in g example o f t h i s growth o f the n a tio n a l id ea i s
a ffo r d e d by the uae o f the terra rtthe U nited S t a t e * 1 •
1
In the e a r ly
year* o f the H vUon th e se word* war© always fo llo w e d by the p l u r a l ;
MOflxx in modern t i u e s , however, the word* are alm ost in e v it a b ly
fo llo w e d by the e i ^ g u l a r .xsofe.
For exam ple, A r t i c le Kir.* o f the
T reaty o f Pe%ee w ith Oraat B r i t a in ,
Xkatai th a t
concluded in 1 8 1 4 , provided
**Fhe U nited S t a t e * o f America engage
to put an end***
to h o st i li t ; i« a * * * w it h the Indian * w ith whom they m
ay be a t t a r .
On the e th er hand, A r t i c le f i v e o f the T reaty o f Pc^cc be
tween the United S t a t e * and S p ain , concluded in December, 1 6 9 8 ,
p rovia^d V a t .:- *The United S ta te * w ill* * * o e n d back to Spain at
i t * Qv.n c o s t ,
‘.he
Sptznt&h
s o ld ie r * 1•
1
T lu * rutftblo change in the visage o f the v/ord* serv e s to
i l l u s t r a t e w e ll the change in the s p i r i t o f the p e o p le ,
W hear much at the p resen t tita* *■ t o the need o f in
a
.*
crea sed F ed eral power, such in crea se to be accompanied n e c e s s a r ily
w ith a correspondin g d ecrease in power • x i 0 t in fft qr supposed to
e x is t,
in th e in d iv id u a l S t a t e s .
Some e a r n e s t , p u b lic s p i r i t e d
c i t i z e n s b e lic v ® th a t F ed eral power under th e C o n s titu tio n has been
exhausted w ith th e enactment o f p rese n t laws and th a t a mors cow*
p r e h e n s ile grant o f power i s needed.
O thers b e li e v e th a t th e power
a lr e a d y p o ssesse d by th e n a tio n a l Government i s ample f o r p resen t
and fu tu r e problem s and th a t fu r th e r e x o r c is e o f t h i s power i s
sim ply a q u estion o f n a tio n a l exp ed ien cy.
O thers seem to wish
S ta te powers to be c u r t a ile d in s p it e o f C o n s t it u tio n a l l i m i t a*
t i o n s , i f any th e re b e .
I t i s not my purpose to n ig h t to d is c u s s th e scope e f the
commerce c la u se o f th e C io n ctitu tio n , nor the laws passed to ca rry
out the purposes o f th a t c la u s e ,
I*et i t
as in te r p r e te d by the co u rts*
s u f f i c e to say th a t wherever th e re e x i s t s in f a c t in t e r s t a t e
commerce, th a t commerce i s s u b je c t to th e c o n s t i t u t io n a l c o n tr o l
o f the F ederal Government.
t i o n o f M onopolies,
m
Furtherm ore, the p r in c ip le o f re g u la
o ft e n advanced as th e j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r
F ed era l c o n tr o l over r a ilr o a d s in i n t e r s t a t e commerce should be
a p p lie d e q u a lly t o a l l m onopolies gran ted by the N a tio n a l Govern
ment*
to
t h i s end, in
my
judgm ent, the time ought soon to come
when m onopolies in the form o f p a te n ts gran ted by th e N a tion al
Government s h a l l co n ta in c o n d itio n s p r e s c r ib in g reason ab le p r ic e s
f o r t h e i r s a le o r u s e .
8or i s i t my purpose to d is c u s s here to n ig h t th e le g a l
p r o p o s it io n whether
» r not Congress has the p rese n t power to de
v e lo p alon g the l i n o s o f in c r e a s in g c e n t r a li s a t i o n , ap p aren tly so
dear to the h e a r ts o f m a y p e o p le .
The theme I wish to d is c u s s i s
th e a d v i s a b i l i t y o f oxtending N a tion al c o n tr o l to s u b je c t * over
which i t has no p resen t
yov/er*
Such c e n t r a li s a t i o n ,
in my o p in io n ,
even i f node la w f u l, as to co n crete in s ta n c e s , vvoulu n o t,
i f ap
p l i e d g e n e r a lly , enure to the w elfare o f the p e o p le , hut would in
e v it a b ly r e s u lt in r a d i c a l,
re v o lu tio n a ry changes in our Govern
ment*
There are many today who demand Government c o n tr o l over
In su ran ce; o th er p lead f o r a N a tio n a l d ivorce law ; o th ers clam or
t o have the N a tio n a l O ovem aent take over the c o n tr o l o f a l l forms
o f co rp ora te a c t i v i t y u lt im a t e ly r e s u lt in g in i n t e r s t a t e coursercef
•veil to the p o in t o f c o n t r o llin g p rod u ction w ith in the S t a t e s , thus
in t e r f e r i n g w ith the moot im portant dom estic r e la t io n s between
tho S ta te s and the in d iv id u a l citi& e n tu
In s h o r t , to many estim a b le c i t i z e n s th e re seems to be
vox
e t e r n a l, h o p e le ss c o n f l i c t between tho N a tio n a l and the S ta te Go
vernments which
cm
be abated
only
by reducing th e S ta te s to a
c o n d itio n o f su b o rd in atio n s c a r c e ly c o n s is te n t w ith
r ig h ts *
my
so v e re ig n
I s such r a d ic a l c e n t r o lia a t io n n ecessa ry f o r th e w e lfa re
o f the p c o p le f
I s i t n ecessary to our s a lv a tio n th a t power should
be given to or e x e r c is e d by the F ed eral Government to la y down
uniform r a le s as to N a tio n a l condu ct, c o n t r o llin g even the m inutest
d e t a i l s o f the l i f e
o f the in d iv id u a l c l t i s e n ?
At the o u t s e t , we must
recognize
that. laws which might be
h ig h ly a d v isa b le f o r o l d , s e t t l e d com m unities, might prove alm ost
d is a s tr o u s to young, growing nt&tea*
it
Kven in th e in d iv id u a l S ta te s
la d i f f i c u l t enough to f i x any standard which may not be ar
s e v e r e ly upon one s e c tio n a t the expense o f the o t h e r .
On alm ost
«Q
»h
a l l quotation® a f f e c t i n g the p eople as a whole th ere ia the w idest
d i v e r s i t y o f op inion and o f in d iv id u a l need among th e s e v e r a l
S tates.
Tot the f a c t must ho recogn ised th a t a p p a re n tly many would
welcome alm ost an o b li t e r a t i o n o f S t .to iin e s ^ c r e a t in g one S ta te
in s te a d o f f o r t y - f i v e #
Such a change might indeed he co n v en ien t!
alon g the li n e s o f u n ifo r m ity ! hut i t would a b s o lu t e ly overthrow
the e x i s t i n g form o f Oovermwnt*
Lot ua b r i e f l y c o n sid er where the mpp H e a t ion o f t h i »
sp e c io u s ru le o f u n ifo rm ity would c a rry ua*
W should have to tak e away from the S ta te s th e r ig h t to
e
f i x th e q u a li f i c a t i o n s o f th o se who v o te fo r N a tio n a l R epresenta
t i v e s and f o r P r e s id e n t ia l e le c t o r s *
The C o n s titu tio n g iv e s to
the p eop le in the S t a t e s tho r ig h t to p r e s c r ib e theno q u a l i f i c a
t io n s and they have e x e r c is e d i t
s u ffr a g e d i f f e r s r a d ic a lly *
in such manner th at th e b a s is o f
In some S ta te s a lie n s who have de
c la r e d t h e i r in te n tio n to become c i t i z e n s can v o te f o r N a tio n a l
R e p re se n ta tiv e s and f o r P r e s id e n t ia l e l e c t o r s ;
th e y are excluded from the s u ffr a g e *
in most o f the S t a t e s
In some S t a t e s women can and
do vo td in e l e c t i o n s f o r Congress and f o r P r e s id e n t ia l e l e c t o r s ;
in most S ta te s t h i s o b lig a t io n has not y e t been imposed upon them*
We should a ls o have to enact N a tio n a l laws co v erin g a l l
r e la t i o n s o f co n tra ct between c i t i z e n s o f d i f f e r e n t S ta te n , w iping
out a l l c o n f l i c t s o f law which now g iv e the c o u r ts so much d i f f i
c u lty #
'?« should have to p rovid e f o r the s e r v ic e o f le g a l p ro
c e s s o f any cou rt throughout the U nited S t a t e s .
-I0<
We should have to frame a National cod© o f criminal law
to supercede the law© of the individual State.
We should have 3 J K to take under national control all pro**
st
duction, whether corporate or private, in any way contemplating in
terstate commerce, and to do this effectively, every 3*ind of pro
duction would have to he taken over regulated and supervised by
the federal Government,
W t should have to regulate the private lives of the people
e
of the United States by enacting national marriage and divorce lawa
We should have to enact a Tf&ti rml law regulating the de
scent of property, as to which there is a great lack of uniformity
among the several States.
finally, we should have to enact laws reserving to the
National Government the right of imposing all taxation, direct and
indirect, in order to do away with the painful lack of uniformity
now existing, giving hack to tho States such portions o f the taxes
collected as in the wisdom of our National legislators is deemed
necessary for their purely local needs and purposes*
If this uniformity should b© secured by Constitutional
changes we would secure \hat, apparently, many would like,-a
single Government, in effect, over the whole extent of the United
States.
Would such < Government be for the best interests of our
i
people?
I believe not.
On the contrary, to quote the words of
that eminent expounder of the Constitution, James Wilson, Whose
words have lately been quoted by the highest authority,**
XX
"To support with vigor a single Government over the whole
extent of the United State*, would demand & eyetew of the moot
unqualified and the most unrenitted despotism*1.
Ivery citizen should consider carefully whether Modern
tcndwnojres are not along thin path declared to he so dangerous to
the future of our (Joverment by this great expounder of the Con
stitution#
I f , however, such an extraordinary in c r e a s e of power should
he granted bv the people to the federal Gavernnent by Constitution
al change#* where could such power safely he reposed?
While Con
gress could enact the necessary laws, thews laws mist he left to
the Executive Departments for administration and execution*
Can
it be that these Departments are so idle at the prenent moment that
such extraordinary,new duties could properly he imposed upon them?
Juwt the contrary is the truth.
The War Department, engrossed with the management of the
A m y , with Hlver and Harbor improvements and with other public
works, is fairly staggering under the additional burdens of the
Philippines, the Canal Zone and Cuba,-not to mention Santo Domingo*
The Interior Department huo all it can do to manage the
public matters now assigned to it, among which are Pensions, Indian
Affairs, Patents, Alaska and the other Territories, not to mention
the public land system, with the vast fraud and corruption recent
ly unearthed.
The Department of Commerce S Labor Is well occupied with
c
the Census, Bureau of Navigation, Lighthouse, Coast Survey, fish
eries, Immigration, Chinese exclusion, the Bureau of Labor, th® In
vestigation of corporations and other important branches.
-1 2
The Treasury Department , almost broken down with work, ha*
only roocmtly had to he relieved by giving many of it* duties to
the new Department of Commerce & Labor*
The Stat* Department seen© fairly well occupied in raon&f;inr the foreign affair* of the country.
It may be replied that new Depart?‘
'ents could be created*
A little reflection, however, must surely satisfy one that &ucii
new Department*, necessitating the employment of perhaps thousand*
of Ifation&l Officer* and inspector*, would not be, in the long
run, for the best interests of our people*
It should not be forgotten that there may be almost as
much danger to the Republic from national centralisation carried
to the extr a s limit* a* from the oxtreme expression of the State*
Right* doctrine which so nearly overthrew the Republic,
Tfh&X guarantee, moreover, is there that such a vast in
crease in federal Rower would result in more efficacious control
than is today afforded or could be afforded by the individual
To ny mind, in the long run, National cont rol is bound
States?
to be lean effective than State control*
Influence* are more
easily evoked to delay a c t i o n at the Capital of the Nation, per
haps thousands of miles from the locality affected, than in the
homo State.
be, to my
The gain from the point of view of u n if o r m ity would
iind, more than overcone
by the loss o f local re
sponsibility and State control, always more speedy and effective
when called into action in reoponao to public sentiment,
I have abaoute faith in the ability and patriotism of the
m
people of the United States, whether they are conoicU.'red xx xkfciottaxx
&» eltlssns of the United States or of the respective States in
which they lire.
I cannot see what is to be gained in the long
run by transferring power and responsibility from the people of
Massachusetts to the Congress in Washington*
lature of m a s s e
I believe the Legis
hotter be depended upon to u a d t needed
legislation than to transfer this rasps risibility to Washington
vh«re v s can be represented by, at the most, t> few Kepreesntatlveg
and by only two Senators, and where the local needs of our ft-ate
may be sacrificed to political expediency or to that spirit of com
promise which enters so largely into ail legislation of Congress.
Bor should we forgot that if by changes in the Constitu
tion or by new constructtone of the Constitution the National go
vernment is given power to legislate concerning matters new within
the jurisdiction of the individual rotates, all such Katie ui laws
will be supremo and all State legislation will become void.
Can it be imagined for a moment that tht Congress of the
United States could be expected to enact life 1 r.surancs laws which
for efficiency and high standard could compare with the laws of
our own State?
On the contrary, would it not be likely to happen
that out of some spirit of compromise a law much lose stringent
than that of our own fftats would be adopted as the law of the land.
The same reasoning could be applied to many other proposed laws.
If we analyse these suggestions for increased National
power, I think they will be found to rest upon a distrust of the
people of the United states and upon the doubt of their ability to
maintain the government,
ror if a people are not fit. to govern
themselves in a State, it would certainly seen to follow that they
14
are not fit to govern themselves &o a National government.
Moreover, whenever responsibility is taken front the people
at home and transfer red to the National Capital another danger will
arise, r;.tnely*- the people will lose all snnso of responsibility
wnd
ill lie passive trust in® to trie government at Washington to do
for t.-ien what they ou^it to do for thorn*«*Xv«».
At uhe present time public critic xaia xe not confined to the
failure of the people to act through the State government*.
The
action and inaction of Congress is subjected to .'slnost &s fierce
criticism.
It ;ould teea almost curtain that when we take power
from the people in the states and transfer it to Washington, it
will really b# transferred net ao auch to Congress &a to the Kxecut ive T* part went* under the President,
)
should thoughtfully
consider whether it i* prudent or wise to increase In this extra
ordinary manner the power of the Chief Executive of the nation.
In this disc use ion I trust it *?ill he understood that I
leaking no personal reference whatever*
When we discuss the povert
present, or prospective, of the President of the United iltatcs, w©
are referring to tho office as it h&a existed since the found at ion
of the '0y u rament and uu v e trust it will exist for ail time,
{
/
-c-
gardleos of the citizen honored at any particular lists by election
to this great office.
The statement 1& often made that the President of the
United States is ths representative, the only representative of
ih ^ whole American people ana that accordingly it is fitting to
place in his hands the almost illimitable powers which increased
centralisvtIon would entail*
The claim that President Jackson was
“ IS
the repreaentativ* of the whole American people wan thus answered
by Daniel Webster in a speech delivered in Hew York CityJ***
«Xn addition to the e»t*hliohwent of this power of u*limit
ed a»d oaUfielceo removal, appA.nur doc •
rxtnvJ m n h
* l&
QXV
Yafuo it is truet
,uH*Qkir; j *j^i t J >
. ;r - o L
»«,.* f ■■ —■
•.£,t .■*&
like h^.'iro»in rc-gtB,
-}»„**9vW. .ot f .jjaa& ^ i U V c ,
.
J u* f
.
th e ^ r i i 1
h ity
VsertQ'Afl W tC P le * »' u
c a U e r f> *• r? * jrA xsrr*r, a > -ye . r l ...l l l £ y'hftl s ----------•
u
< ■! .Vu..a ■ h xde;v?If »» t!tf tiftttfrtittlY ,A n .U .USit.'h jal i»
'■■*
,M
f
dctr;niv:,tod h- h ."
i reside < ■■auuHfUC.
?
•
.
AALill&j Acts for 'nioh no
apse.if lc authority haa be e a found either i» the Constitution or
r
iaufi, have been 4**et ifled on the ground that the iYnai^at is the
repre seutskt ivc o C the ehulc .vsioricfiii p<sopl.t#• Certui" ly Au*o is
.
net constitutional ianga ■■g •
■>o
^, ,^au , u nr t,. 11 l.i*
jy .
.
l
iu i S—n Qi >v.ro*— .
.;
. .
c u l l s h . ■ Preai&S.iAt t-;e .
'
:
The oo a,tAt * i Q - - > a i I-JaL l;.■W
.•
'
■
t — ih. rn.
.
.
oi h
,^.o,
- t G r e r s . - ^ ^ f i - l lf f *
gccg
dent is an e?:acin:ivo officer,
CUrtlf i r »n, T .Aa»
iU
riHi
clothed wxdi areaftri^ed U m i sm, .
HasatEfri
'
great co.-senueocQ* that . h Pyp^y^pt nhouxd^cai.L^hiiLM if ^-.t
.*
. fr.
tH -
o ■ ..-ig.-r;i
bin* .- S I M m l ft m m » * O f c « « ■ ■ > ? ■ » *
„
aliv.yj.?h ho h-'q no quc,h aw el.latioit .og-Cffi--r-H’•9f ia.'ii' nn»--'t. u m >*
.
t
if
i
* v t.
i n " th ffa c M a f U r f l . , • iT f r a ’ T i . l ifcU g f t* .
It
h 0 1 * th<; T e o j 'l e 0
reureesentatlve, cad ae such m y exercise pov.or, it)*out any a Anar
ground, - at le the limit to that power? tart what way net an u r «
i
limited representative of the people do? hhon the Constitution exprtssiy created representatives-, ua sinber& of Centre*,®a, it re**
gulatee, defines and limits their authority* But if the Executive
Chief Mugiotr a t e , merely because he i s the Executive Chief^Magi#t rate | nay assume* to himedl* another character, tutd call hi wo elf
the reprcs»o:-*?-ative of the whole people, what is to U n i t or ra~
strain this representative power in his hand®?1
*
X cannot believe that there e x i s t s any present necessity
for further centr&lixation of power*
exists,
I f , however, ouch necessity
i t should be met by Constitutional methods and the Con
s t i t u t i o n should be changed in the manner provided in that instru
ment »
Bo far I have considered centralisatloa resulting from Con
stitutional change* to be effected in a legal mtu\nor*
There is,
however, another tendency towards cent roll station man *foisted in at
tempted or proponed extension* of existing national pov*ers, es
pecially the power to regulate interetate commerce.
X have little sympathy for the opinion expressed that Con**
gross has power to prohibit nil l»t»;
ratate commerce; t a , out of
ht
this prohibition any law m y bo justified which m y seem expedient
to the rulers at Washington.
When power w . « given in the Count it ut ion to the* yet Ar eal
r.
£ cy ?rm**ent to regulate interstate rind foreign commerce, that power
a . \he tine w&a in fact U n i t e d * o regulation of commerce in ves
t
sels, A'agon roade, canals and ferries.
‘
?hile with the growth of
the country the commerce clause h&a necessarily expanded i . 'n~
r
tcr^retatio#, until today the entire subject is within the supreme
po>/er of Congress, yet I c&nno* believe that Congress can do more
than regulate that commerce.
If Congress has the power,
e he.S
b&en intimated by one mother of tha Oupreiae Court, absolutely to
prohibit int*?rat£te commerce, it could i n effect surround * ch
r t *te with a Chinese wall, preventing even inierocurse of persons
,
as well s c traffic between the States*
*
I do not believe that it
will «v*r be held that any such power is vented in the ^atiouel
government.
I consequently can h&ve no sympathy with Nationel
3^gislntioat which, under the threat to suspend ceratere 1*1 rela
tions between the Status, Justifies the action o f Federal officers
in exercising control over aoaimree and even over mmafoeture end
reduction which hae not yet, in fact, bocoiie interstate commerce.
The meet that Congress should do, is ny Judgment, should be, ev«n
if it has such absolute power as is? contended for, to place the
responsibility for action upon the States under penrlty of ex
clusion from interstate comr-jerce, and not invade the domain of 8tat*
jurisdiction.
17
Thile ve all abhor filth in »uch business enterprise*,
t « earning, neat packing, «tc,, arid while v o admit the propriety
.
i
of the end in view,-purification and ol*iMftliiiou*,**yet X haliev*
that the people of Wawoaohuaette and of
he other sovereign States
of this Union when aroused to the necessity ‘
"or such action, are
competent and able to ataiqp out such filth and to purify their
food s u p p lie r .
If I did not b a lie v e t h i s , X should d, ubt the
a b i l i t y o f th e people o f the? United B ta ta s to r a ln ia iit our go v ern n e a t , S ta te or n a tio n a l*
S im ila r ly , each S t a t e ,
I b e l i e v e , when
aroused to a c tio n i s competent to imke l&vrs p u trin g the c i t i z e n s
o f a l l oth er .ft a t on on a p a r ity v it h i t is own ;w la p o lic e
s
re g u la
tion ® f o r the y u h lie h e a lth and o th e r b u sin e ss m attere cone :ruing
which the -t .te iCgial ' . e a » to ita o n cltisomt*
-te ;
To cut* up, when our National government faces a foreign
> v unspent it has all *h© attributes of ooviireirnty usually pur
to
trifling to a eovorcigw rro?"T:vuent*
'r
ovaver, it f;<ces a "tats
it* power* are strictly enumerated and defined by the Constitu
t i o n and it. cnimct l e g a l l y exceed those powers.
_
...
We should not, forgot, however, Imt each State should carry
out faithfully it* duties *uid responsibilities under pur dual fora
o f g o v u ra re s t,
It m y be well for n time to coanc talking o f ntatr-s1
right* and to’talk of Statue* duties; to a<ms* diac inning individual
righto i*nd to take up the subject of individual obligation &» let
ffuch 5 tats enaot Ouesiti^u^iouai laws for the greatest good ci the
r
greatest number of ir o people; if nbooe laws are found to conflict
with the laws of other fttutos, it will be, f o r the most part, borom
OCii
cause different condition* prevail which no uniformity
without could effectually control*
"hat then is tho duty of the citizen in the present state
o f affair*?
He should stren g th en in every a y the Gcv* rm ;ent o f his
8 t a t * to r e s to r e to iz the balance of p *wor whloh uadi?r the con
s t i t u t i o n belongs to i t .
He should respect and render obodienoe to the laws of the
land*
He should have sympathy for public officer* and respect
for authority*
•*18'
He {should attend the primaries with the sane Inter eat with
which he attends to his private business.
He should see that hir? vote is recorded at elections us
an almost oaered duty.
Ke should faithfully diecharge the obligation imposed upon
him of jury service,
He should never forget that the tso-*oalled right of suffrage
la not a political right at all; it is a duty imposed for the pub*
lie good rather th^n for M s private benefit.
Tot % see m n v men at the present time who deliberately
m
excel to 3ceep aloof from all participation In civic affaire; many
there are who n^ver attend a primary
rtd with whom failure to vote
at Mentions is the rule rather v-un the exception*
no citizen has a right tt refuse to p o r f o r u his civic
duties.
Such refusal should he visited with indignation and con*
tempt; he should be lashed, to the Polls wit) the indignant voice
of public opinion.
If t State should refuse to participate in Constitutional
*
Government It would amount to secession;
ho duty imposed upon the
State is of no greater obligation than "hat imposed upon the in
dividual citizen.
The citizen also* at this time of increasing national
centralisation, should insist that all Bopreoentatives of the
people should be elected directly by the people% and to this end
we should insist that United States Senators b« elected directly
by popular vote, the necessary constitutional changes being made
for this purpose.
This method of election *ma advocated by J . t e
T ita
Wilson and thoughtful people will ho forced to the conviction that
such
change at the present time would he beneficial.
There are army sign® today t at there haw been an awakeiilnr
popular Interest in civic duties wue never keener*
The oitlaen
realise® mom and nore keenly the n^ceeeity for personal partici
pation in civic matter® and out of this aroused public oentiraont
will on roly fellow inc -eased civic prosperity hath to the individ
ual States and to our great national Republic.
@FedFRASER