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

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.

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 31 text:

THE RKDWGOD 15 All these events are but a natural sequence of such an organic change. And even if they were merely probable that probability alone would forbid us from deserting a tried and theoretically true system for a hypothetical. Now for the third point. If I can prove that the virtues of the amendment are not sufficient to counterbalance and justify the two great evils of it, I will have thrown around the constitution a breastworks which render it invulner- able to this amendment. For such a radical and such a serious constitutional change the opposing arguments must necessarily be superlatively grave and convincing. They are not. Our oppo- nents cry, First — It is the will of the people. If you do not ratify their will, you evidently mistrust them. To this we reply that the will of the people is not always justifiable or authoritative, lyook at the great popular errors with which history is sullied. lyincoln was abused, reviled, calumniated by the people. Washington, even Washing- ton, was bitterly opposed by certain classes in his day and at one time we know his command of the army was almost repealed. Socrates, a model to his countrymen, was driven to death by the will of the mistaken populace. Aye, and it was the insistent voice of the people that sent the Innocent Victim of Nazareth up to the heights of Calvary. The voice of the people is no argument. In this case the cry of the people will subside. Demagogues never yet floated a lasting enterprise. It is said that the defeat of this amendment would show that the people are distrusted. By no means. Not from distrust of the people is this amendment to be defeated but in order to maintain that system which can give us an independent dignified body, which may always act with a re- straining influence on the Popular House. The next plea of our oppo- nents is that the Senate has degenerated. I flatly and emphatically deny that the Senate is a degenerated society. The United States Senate has embraced for 120 years and embraces today the most brilliant public men of the nation. I repeat with all the earnestness of which I am capable that the Senate is not a degenerated society. There is one millionaire and Senator who was widely accused of buying his seat in the Senate. But whether he did or not it is an argument incontrovertable for the intrinsic incorruption of the Senate, that that very man with all his money and influence was a nonentity, a recluse, a Robinson Crusoe in our great House. For this, the greatest deliberative body in the world, (even tho ' by occasional cases of corruption a man is foisted on into its number) accepts no passport except that which every American is bound to respect and accept — ability. There may be and probably are individ- ual exceptions, where men have abused their trust, but who will dare accuse the twelve of perversion, because the unfortunate Judas was corrupted. The third reason ofi ' ered by the innovators is that under the present system abuse has crept in. Waiving any discussion as to whether these abuses are exag-