University of Santa Clara - Redwood Yearbook (Santa Clara, CA)

Page 29 text:

THE REDWOOD 13 nature ' s does not cry out against the de- filing hand that would dare tamper with its pages. Listen to the prophetic words of Geo. Washington in his last public message to his countrymen: Resist with care the spirit of innova- tion upon the principles of our govern- ment. In all the changes to which you may be invited remember that facilities in changes upon the credit of mere hypothesis or popular passion exposes to perpetual change. ' Those empiricists who attempt to alter the constitution are clipping ofi pieces from our foundation with every stroke. Let them beware lest like Sampson of old they bring the whole structure down and they and all of us perish in the collapse. From this we see that a radical constitutional change hke the one proposed is an evil in any government, and particularly in ours. Let us proceed then to the second point. If I can show that the proposed change of system is unwise, dangerous and pernicious I prove my point. Whatever the faults of the present system, the most rabid agitator for this amendment must acknowledge that the system has given to us consistently for a century a great deliberative body, the best and most successful second body in the world. At best the innovation is an experiment. Moreover it is chang- ing the spirit and letter of the constitu- tion. Therefore if we pass this bill we forsake the certain for the uncertain, the tried for the hypothetical, which is rash and unwise. If the people de- mand this change they do so because they do not grasp the wisdom, the phil- osophy of the constitution. They are acting like the man who loosens a small stone on the mountain side. The amendment may appear small in itself but it is likely to precipitate a landslide, ' If we affect this change, says Senator Geo. F. Hoar, we encourage and open the door to revolution. The two components of our national government are the will of the people and the federal union of states sovereign. To represent the people directly the House of Representatives was formed which would spring directly from the people ' s hands. To represent the sov- ereign states in their corporate capacity the senate was devised and the election of this body must naturally spring from the legislatures which represent the states in their corporate capacity. Again it further entered into the original plan of government that one House should act as a check on the other. The neces- sity for two legislative bodies is proven by experience and intelligence. That one house should check the other, pre- venting hasty and injudicious action, is, too, an accepted and experience- tested fact. One body must of necessity be independent of the other. And the more the composite elements difi ' er from each other in the mode of choice and qualifications ,the more is this necessary independence of bodies enhanced and strengthened. If this amendment is passed it will lead directly to three seri- ous evils. First. It will cause a popu- lar demand for proportionate sufi ragism and thereby sound the death knell of

Page 28 text:

12 THE REDWOOD lie. The plan of government of a re- public seems to be best adapted to the principles of the equality of men and the rights of persons which God has written on the human heart. But for this very reason the evolving of such a system is extremely difficult, and the attainment of the lofty end of govern- ment is well nigh impossible. The problem of government is for a nation to preserve itself, to keep its forces united, and to direct all to the national good and common end. The common end of government is national prosperity sub- ordinated to public honesty and virtue. A difficult problem truly, an end hard indeed of attainment, as the htstory of nations too eloquently testifies. Con- sider Greece, that earliest of mighty re- pubUcs, what is left of Greece save only her own footprints on the sands of his- tory marking the path she trod into ob- livion? And Rome, that city of destiny that sat upon her seven hills and ruled the world? Naught of Rome is left but the poor broken fragments of a once powerful republic. And to come down to our own times what are we to think of the pitiful South American republics that spring into life in a night like a mushroom and have no more stability than a leaf in a cyclone? And France, poor, failing, tempest-tossed, decaying France, what are we to say of her? She who once sat among the rulers of the continent, now caught up in a whirlpool of religious strife, fast becoming a national suicide, an apostate to the faith of her fathers? Where is the strength of republics? The paths of time are strewn with the wreckage of the world ' s republics, and out of the desolation comes that cry, Where is the stability of nations? And yet the United States stands today and has stood for 115 years a power among her peers in the galaxy of nations. History tells her the story of the decay of others, around her she sees governments like herself slipping from their foundations of sand into the sea; while she grounded on a rock re- mains unshaken. Whence the differ- ence? Simply because our forefathers under divine inspiration have given us a constitution unique, rock ribbed, on on which to rear the bulwarks of a nation. Our government is builded upon our constitution and our constitu- tion was moulded and hammered on the anvil of affliction. In the words of our own Stephen M. White: ' Kvery scheme of government for every other nation in the world has failed and been changed in the last century. Our con- stitution alone has stood the test of time and has proved the most perfect system ever devised for a self governing peo- ple. The constitution was planned in troubled times; it bears about it the odor of honorable battle smoke; it is a wonderful instrument on which the success unparalelled of our first century ' s existence rests as a solemn seal of God ' s approval. V hen we consider this we must realize the sacredness of our con- stitution and how to tamper with it is betraying the confidence of the men who framed it. Our fathers purchased it with their lives; its clauses are written in their heart ' s blood. Which of our

Page 30 text:

14 THE REDWOOD state sovereignty which rests on the theory of equal representation. For it is patent that the millions of New York will not allow their senatorial power to be limited to that, for instance, of Rho de Island. As surely as this amendment is passed it will lead eventually to proportionate suffragisra and that one stroke will de- stroy our whole system of government. Second. The measure will violently re- move the very keystone of our legisla- tive system, that the Senate should act as a counter check on the Popular House. Few positions are more demonstrable than that there should be in every re- public some permanent independent body to correct the prejudices, the in- temperate passions, and fitful fluc- tuations of a popular assembly. But if the Senate too, is put into the hands of the people it too will become a popular house. The very differentiating dis- tinction between the two branches, their mode of election, will be annihi- lated and our Senate will lose its con- servatism and independence of popular passion, our Congress will be merged into one house, separated only by a name and a wall. But, our opponents urge, do what you will popular preju- dice will creep into the Senate. What? Are we then to alter our constitution to pander to these prejudices? Shall we confirm the distemper, allowing it full rein, or do what we can to remedy it by restriction? Third. By making our Legislature a direct unchecked popular body we are running into the gravest danger which can beset a republic — the tyranny of the majority. Tyranny is defined the placing of the powers of government into the same hands whether of one, or few, or many. To avoid that evil our fathers split the leg- islative body, giving the electoral power of one house to the people, of the other to the states as corporate bodies. We are directly incurring that danger by integrating our houses of legislature. The effects of the tyranny of one are shown in the guillotine and the axe, but the effects of the tyranny of the majority are shown in the chaos of revolution and socialism, twin children of ignorance. But by deputing all leg- islative power directly to the people we are placing in their hands the control of our executive and legislature. This is tearing down the barriers to socialism which our fathers erected; it is one step nearer to tyranny pure and simple. Therefore this move would propel us straight towards the rock against which the history of nations and the earnest pleadings of the masters who built our ship of state do so persistently warn us. This amendment must be defeated if we would avoid the risk of perishing miserably on the shoals of democracy. Thus we see that the change would precipitate on us great national misery. First, by leading to proportionate suf- fragism and thereby destroying state sovereignty. Second, by annihilating the theory of check and counter check on which our government is grounded. Third, by attracting the insidious danger of the tyranny of the majority.