“Law can do nothing without morals.”—Benjamin Franklin.

“Through the whole of life and the whole system of duties, much the strongest moral obligations are such as were never the results of our option.”—Edmund Burke.

“To do evil that good may come of it, is for the bungler in politics as well as in morals.”—Benjamin Franklin.

“Duty is not collective; it is personal.”—Calvin Coolidge.

“Ignorance of the law excuses no man.”—Selected.

“Knowledge is in every country the surest basis of public happiness.”—George Washington.

“The thorough education of all classes of people is the most efficacious means of promoting the prosperity of the Nation. The material interests of its citizens, as well as their moral and intellectual culture, depend upon its accomplishment.”—Robert E. Lee.

“In a Republic education is indispensable. A Republic without education is like the creature of imagination, a human being without a soul, living and moving blindly, with no just sense of the present or the future.”—Charles Sumner.

“Without popular education, no government which rests upon popular action can long endure. The people must be schooled in the knowledge, and if possible in the virtues, upon which the maintenance and success of free institutions depend.”—Woodrow Wilson.

“Government—Liberty—Authority—Law—the man or the woman who fails to appreciate the true meaning of these terms, lacks the training necessary to be a good citizen in a Republic.”—Abraham Lincoln.

“We need more of the office desk and less of the show-window in politics. Let men in office substitute the midnight oil for the lime-light.”—Calvin Coolidge.

“Government is the aggregate of authorities which rule a society.”

“Government is that institution or aggregate of institutions by which society makes and carries out those rules of action which are necessary to enable men to live in a social state, or which are imposed upon the people forming that society by those who possess the power or authority of prescribing them.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 891.

Government is the organized means and power that a State or Nation employs for the purpose of securing the rights of the people, and of perpetuating its own existence.

The real aim and purpose is well stated in the preamble to our Constitution when it says: “to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”.

Government can never rise higher than the ideals of the people who compose the government. Good governments are the products of good people. Good governments can only exist where the people are intelligent and upright in character, and where each citizen is willing to guard the rights and privileges of others as well as those of himself.

“This government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”—Abraham Lincoln.

The object of government is to protect the citizens of a country and to promote their general welfare, and it is composed of the officials who care for the public interests of the citizens.

Under republican government, the weakest citizen enjoys the same rights and privileges as do the strongest citizens, the poorest have the same protection given to the richest, the most humble man or woman has a chance to become the head of his or her government and to lead the Nation among the most powerful Nations in the world.

“Brains and character rule the world. There were scores of men a hundred years ago who had more intellect than Washington. He outlives and overrides them all by the influence of his character.”—Wendell Phillips.

“The true greatness of nations is in those qualities which constitute the greatness of the individual.”—Charles Sumner.

“There is always hope in a man that actually and honestly works. In idleness alone is there perpetual despair.”—Thomas Carlyle.

“He that hath a trade hath an estate, and he that hath a calling hath an office of profit and honor.”—Benjamin Franklin.

“If you have the great talents, industry will improve them; if moderate abilities, industry will supply their deficiencies.”—Joshua Reynolds.

“Other nations have received their laws from conquerors; some are indebted for a constitution to the suffering of their ancestors through revolving centuries. The people of this country, alone, have formally and deliberately chosen a government for themselves, and with open and uninfluenced consent bound themselves into a social compact. Here no man proclaims his birth or wealth as a title to honorable distinction, or to sanctify ignorance and vice with the name of hereditary authority. He who has most zeal and ability to promote public felicity, let him be the servant of the public.”—John Adams.

“The basis of our political system is the right of the people to make or alter their constitution of government.”—George Washington.

“Let us then, fellow citizens, unite with one heart and one mind and labor for the welfare of the country.”—Thomas Jefferson.

“The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States are parts of one consistent whole, founded upon one and the same theory of government,—that the people are the only legitimate source of power, and that all just powers of government are derived from the consent of the governed.”—John Quincy Adams.

When Jefferson wrote “all men are created equal”, he did not mean that all infant children have equal capacities for learning or accomplishment, but that all children ought to be given equal opportunities by the government of a republic. He meant that in a republic all children, whether rich or poor, whether of the aristocracy or of the common people, had great opportunities to be good and great men and women. He meant that a poor boy born in the Kentucky mountains and a rail splitter in the woods of Illinois had the opportunity to become President of the United States.

“The Declaration of Independence was not a mere temporary expedient, but is an enunciation of fundamental truths intended for all time.”—William J. Bryan.

“Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth upon this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”—Abraham Lincoln.

“Where slavery is, there liberty cannot be and where liberty is, slavery cannot be.”—Abraham Lincoln.

“Respect for its (the government's) authority, compliance with its laws, acquiesence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true Liberty.”—George Washington.

“Liberty—on its positive side, denotes the fulness of individual existence; on its negative side it denotes the necessary restraint on all, which is needed to promote the greatest possible amount of liberty for each.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I. p. 217.

“Civil liberty is the liberty belonging to men in organized society. It is liberty defined, regulated and protected by positive law of the State or recognized as existing under customary law.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. II, p. 347.

The American people are a peculiar people. They are peculiar in their origin, peculiar in their make-up, and due to their sufferings, their persecutions, and their enduring perseverance, they are still a peculiar people. From the first white man to steer his little wooden ship westward across the great Atlantic ocean to the latest arrival among the most recent immigrants, the people coming to America have been different from those people remaining in their European homes. The conditions surrounding the lives of those people in Europe who left their homes and first settled in America were not materially different from the conditions surrounding the lives of thousands of other people who were satisfied and content to remain on their European shores. Many men thought the earth was round long before Christopher Columbus sailed away from that little seaport town in Spain to test his own ideas of finding a shorter route to India. Many people believed in religious liberty long before the Pilgrims and Puritans landed on the bleak New England shores and suffered the hardships of first settlers in a new country in order to worship God as they pleased. Many people seriously and intelligently doubted the divine right of kings, and believed in the rights of the people to govern themselves long before the American colonists adopted the Declaration of Independence. But it was left for these people—these coming Americans—to demonstrate to all the world that America was to be peopled by men and women of different ideals, different hopes, and different ambitions from all the other nations of the world.

A pure democracy would be that form of government in which all people of the age of twenty-one years could actually take part in making the laws and administering the government. A country would need be very small indeed, if all the people above twenty-one years of age could assemble in any one place and organize and conduct a meeting in which all could take part in law-making. No building would be large enough to accommodate all the people and even if all the people assembled out of doors, the number would be so large that those standing or sitting near the outer edge of the assembly would be so far from the speaker that they could not hear what he said when he spoke to them. A pure democracy is a physical impossibility. The nearest form of government to a pure democracy is a representative democracy, or one in which groups of people choose one or more persons to represent them. Then these representatives make laws and carry on the government in the name of all the people whom they represent. Therefore a democracy is that form of government in which all people have equal opportunities, and in which all may take part in the government through their chosen representatives.

“No matter how widely democracy may be extended, if it is not accompanied by a certain equality of opportunity among the members of the political society, it is not democracy.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. I, p. 561.

“Democracy is that form of government in which the people rule. The basis of democracy is equality, as that of the aristocracy is privilege.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 540.

“The beginnings of democracy were best observed in the townships of New England, where the Puritans from England settled and organized towns which were centers of democracy.”—Peter Roberts.

In an absolute monarchy, the ruler is supreme; in a limited monarchy, the parliament or congress sets a limit to the powers of the ruler; in a democracy, the people rule.

“It is almost impossible that all the people will exactly agree on any proposition, either political or social. Therefore the rule of government in a democracy is, that all the people shall accept and obey those laws and regulations that are pleasing to the majority.”

“The basis of our political system is the right of the people to make or alter their constitution of government.”—George Washington.

“No man is good enough to govern another man without that other man's consent.”—Abraham Lincoln.

“This country, with all its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it.”—Abraham Lincoln.

“I believe that the American people accept, as one just definition of democracy, Napoleon's phrase, 'Every career is open to talent'.”—Charles William Eliot.

Lincoln defined a democracy as “A government of the people, by the people, and for the people”.

“A Republic may be defined as a state in which the sovereign power rests in the people as a whole but is exercised by representatives chosen by a popular vote.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. III, p. 188.

“A Republic, in the modern sense of the term, is a government which derives all its powers directly, or indirectly, from the great body of the people, i. e. the majority—and is administered by persons holding their offices for a limited period.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. III, p. 188.

“Republican government is a government of the people; a government by representatives chosen by the people.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary.

The Constitution of the United States in Art. IV, Sec. 4 guarantees to every State a republican form of government, but it does not define what is republican government. It is generally assumed that if for any reason the representative government of a State should be destroyed or temporarily set aside, it would be the duty of the Federal government, acting through the President as chief executive, to use whatever force was necessary (including the army and navy) to overcome such agency and to restore to the people of that State its former representative government.

“It is left to Congress to decide what constitutes a republican form of government, and Congress also has the right to say which government in a state is the legal government. This necessarily follows because before Congress can decide whether the government is Republican it must decide which government is in force.”—Luther vs. Borden, 7 Howard 1.

“It is Congress and not the President who decides what is Republican government in a state.”—Martin vs. Mott, 12 Wheaton 19.

Initiative means the right of the people to initiate or commence the process of lawmaking. It is done by circulating a petition asking that a certain provision be enacted into law. If the petition receives the signatures of a certain percentage of qualified voters, the legislature is required to enact the provision into law, or submit it to the voters to determine whether it shall become law.

Referendum means that the qualified voters through the process of balloting may determine whether a measure proposed either through the action of the legislature, or through the initiative, shall become law.

Recall is the method by which the qualified voters may remove an undesirable officer from office before the expiration of his term. It is done through a petition requiring a certain percentage of signers from among the qualified voters. If the petition is sufficient an election is called at which time the officer may appear for continuation in office and others may appear as candidates for that office. The one receiving the largest vote is duly chosen.

Law has been defined as: “The aggregate of those laws and principles of conduct which the governing power in a community recognizes as the rules and principles which it will enforce or sanction, and according to which it will regulate, limit, or protect the conduct of its members.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. II, p. 144.

“Law consists of the rules and methods by which society compels or restrains the actions of its members.”

In the legal sense—A law is a rule which the courts will enforce. The courts will not enforce all rules, and therefore there are many rules which are not law in the legal sense.

“Law might be defined as the aggregate of those rules and principles promulgated by legislative authority or established by local custom, and our laws are the resultant derived from a combination of the divine or moral laws, the laws of nature and human experience, as such resultant has been evolved by human intellect, influenced by the virtue of the ages.”—Words and Phrases, p. 33.

“Law has her seat in the bosom of God; her voice in the harmony of the world.”—Hooker.

“Laws are the very bulwark of liberty. They define every man's rights, and stand between and defend individual liberties of all.”—J. G. Holland.

“Laws exist in vain for those who do not have the courage and the means to defend them.”—Thomas B. Macauley.

“Laws, written, if not on stone tablets, yet on the azure of infinitude, in the inner heart of God's creation, certain as life, certain as death, are they, and thou shalt not disobey them.”—Thomas Carlyle.

“A rule of civil conduct prescribed by the supreme power in a state.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary.

“A child, an apprentice, a pupil, a mariner, and a soldier owe respectively obedience to the lawful commands of the parent, the master, the teacher, the captain of the ship, and the military officer having command: and in case of disobedience submission may be enforced by correction.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. II, p. 531.

“To obey is better than sacrifice.”

“Children, obey your parents in all things; for this is well pleasing unto the Lord.”

“Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye service, as men pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God.”

“Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also must be obedient.”—Quotations from The Bible.

“The capacity of the people for self government, and their willingness, ... to submit to all needful restraints, and exactions of municipal law, have been favorably exemplified in the history of the American States.”—Martin Van Buren.

“Let us have faith that right makes might and in that faith let us to the end dare do our duty as we understand it.”—Abraham Lincoln.

“Surely I do not misinterpret the spirit of the occasion when I assume that the whole body of the people convenant with me today to support and defend the Constitution and ... to yield a willing obedience to all the laws, and each to every other citizen his equal civil and political liberty.”—Benj. Harrison.

“Patriotism calls for the faithful performance of all the duties of citizenship in small matters as well as great, at home as well as on tented fields.”—William J. Bryan.

There are four general theories as to the origin of the Constitution of the United States: (1) That it was an entirely new document. This theory was inspired by the statement of Gladstone. People who heard Mr. Gladstone or read of his comment on the Constitution misinterpreted his saying and came to believe he meant that that great Constitution was the work of the moment as conceived by the men in the convention at Philadelphia. No one knew better than Mr. Gladstone himself that such was not true. (2) That it was copied almost entirely after the English constitution of that time. This was the theory of Sir Henry Maine, and it was just as erroneous as was the common acceptance of Gladstone's statement. There are many things in the Constitution of the United States that were not in the English constitution of that time. (3) That it was based entirely upon the experience of the colonists themselves. This theory is also incorrect as the facts show that many fundamentals of the Constitution were copied directly from the governments of European countries. (4) That it was due to all the above influences taken together, but that they were worked out by the colonists and the Constitution makers in their many years of experience in making Constitutions for the States after their independence from England, and during the time of the Confederation.

A careful study of the debates in the convention at Philadelphia will reveal the fact that the different governments, institutions, rulers, and statesmen of Europe were referred to in the making of the Constitution.

During the discussions in the convention one hundred and thirty allusions were made to the government and institutions of England. The allusions made to France numbered nineteen. Those made to the German States were seventeen. Those made to Holland were nineteen. Greece was referred to thirteen times; Switzerland was alluded to five times; and Rome was alluded to sixteen times.

The English government and institutions were held up as a model to be imitated fifty times; as an example to be avoided, twenty-four times. France was held up as a model three times, and as a warning five times. Rome was cited five times as a model and seven times as a warning.

From the standpoint of training, experience, and general qualifications for constitution makers, the delegates who sat in the Federal convention at Philadelphia were the most remarkable group of statesmen the world has ever seen. Sixty-five delegates were chosen, of whom fifty-five attended the convention and of these thirty-nine signed the Constitution, three were present but refused to sign, and thirteen were absent on the last day. Of the fifty-five who sat in the convention, twenty-five were from northern States and thirty from southern States. Of the thirty-nine signers, nineteen were from the North and twenty from the South.

Of the fifty-five men thirty were college men, twenty-six had degrees, forty-seven were afterwards prominent in public life; of the remaining eight, at least four died soon after the close of the convention. The most noted men were: Washington, Franklin, Hamilton, Madison, Wilson, Patterson, Gerry, Sherman, Pinckney, and Randolph. Six men who signed the Constitution had also signed the Declaration of Independence—Benjamin Franklin, James Wilson, Robert Morris, and George Clymer of Pennsylvania, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, and George Read of Delaware.—Meyerholz's The Federal Convention.

George Washington expressed the vast importance of this thought when he said: “The basis of our political system is the right of the people to make or alter their constitution of government.”

“The Constitution is itself in every rational sense and to every useful purpose a bill of rights.”—Alexander Hamilton.

“Much of the strength and efficiency of any government in procuring and securing happiness to the people depends on opinion, on the general opinion of the goodness of the government, as well as of the wisdom and integrity of its governors. I hope, therefore, for our own sakes, as a part of the people and for the sake of our posterity, that we shall act heartily and unanimously in recommending this Constitution wherever our influence may extend, and turn our future thoughts and endeavors to the means of having it well administered.”—Benjamin Franklin.

“In the fullness of time a Republic rose up in the wilderness of America. Thousands of years had passed away before this child of the ages could be born. From whatever there was of good in the systems of former centuries, she drew her nourishment; the wrecks of the past were her warnings. The wisdom which had passed from India through Greece, with what Greece had added of her own, the jurisprudence of Rome, the mediaeval municipalities, the Teutonic method of representation, the political experience of England, the benignant wisdom of the expositors of the law of nature and of nations in France and Holland, all shed on her their selectest influence. Out of all the discoveries of statesmen and sages, out of all the experience of past human life, she compiled a perennial political philosophy, the primordial principles of national ethics—she sought the vital elements of social forms and blended them harmoniously in the free commonwealth which comes nearest to the illustration of the natural equality of all men. She entrusted the guardianship of established rights to law; the movement of reform to the spirit of the people and drew her force from the happy reconciliation of both.”—George Bancroft.

“In spite of its supposed precision, and its subjection to judicial construction, our constitution has always been indirectly made to serve the turn of that sort of legislation which its friends call progressive, and its enemies call revolutionary, quite as effectively as though Congress had the omnipotence of parliament. The theory of the latent powers to carry out those granted has been found elastic enough to satisfy almost any party demands in time of peace, to say nothing of its enormous extensions in time of war.”—The Nation, November 7, 1872, No. 384, p. 300.

“Our fathers by an almost divine prescience, struck the golden mean.”—Pomeroy's An Introduction to the Constitutional History of the United States, p. 102.

“It (the United States Constitution) ranks above every other written Constitution for the intrinsic excellence of its scheme, its adaptation to the circumstances of the people, the simplicity, brevity and precision of its language, its judicious mixture of definition in principle with elasticity in details. One is induced to ask, to what causes, over and above the capacity of its authors and the patient toil they bestowed upon it, these merits are due, or in other words, what were the materials at the command of the Philadelphia Convention for the achievement of so great an enterprise as the creation of a nation by means of an instrument of government. The American Constitution is no exception to the rule that everything which has power to win the obedience and respect of men must have its roots deep in the past, and that the more slowly every institution has grown, so much the more enduring it is likely to prove. There is little in this Constitution that is absolutely new. There is much that is as old as Magna Charta.”—James Bryce, author of The American Commonwealth.

“Let reverence for the law be breathed by every mother to the lisping babe that prattles on her lap; let it be taught in schools, seminaries, and colleges; let it be written in primers, spelling books and almanacs; let it be preached from pulpits, and proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice; let it become the political religion of the nation.”—Abraham Lincoln.

“The Constitution, which may at first be confounded with the Federal Constitutions which have preceded it, rests in truth upon a wholly novel theory—a great discovery in modern political science. In all the Confederations which have preceded the American Constitution of 1787, the Allied States ... agreed to obey the injunctions of a federal government; but they reserved to themselves the right of ordaining and enforcing the laws of the Union....” (The American government, he explains, claims directly the allegiance of every citizen, and acts upon each directly through its own courts and officers.) “This difference has produced the most momentous consequences.”—Tocqueville's Democracy in America.

“It will be the wonder and admiration of all future generations and the model of all future constitutions.”—William Pitt, after reading the Constitution of the United States.

“The Constitution of the United States is by far the most important production of its kind in human history. It created, without historic precedent, a federal-national government It combined national strength with individual liberty in a degree so remarkable as to attract the world's admiration. Never before in the history of man had a government struck so fine a balance between liberty and union, between state rights national sovereignty. The world had labored for ages to solve this greatest of all governmental problems, but it had labored in vain. Greece in her mad clamor for liberty had forgotten the need of the strength that union brings, and she perished. Rome fostered union, nationality, for its strength, until it became a tyrant and strangled the child liberty. It was left for our own Revolutionary fathers to strike the balance between these opposing forces to join them in a perpetual wedlock in such a way as to secure the benefits of both. They selected the best things that had been tried and proved. Hence their great success, hence the fact that 132 years after its signing, this same Constitution is still the supreme law of the land and more deeply imbedded in the American heart than ever.”—Henry William Elson.

“The Constitution is not an arbitrary, unchangeable document, but can be adapted to meet new conditions whenever the people decide. It should be upheld because under its wise provisions the United States has developed into a great nation of happy and prosperous people; because it contains sacred guarantees of protection for the individual; and because it affords freedom and opportunity for every citizen, whether native-born or naturalized. American citizenship securely rests upon its firm foundation.”—Henry Litchfield West.

“The Federal Constitution, the whole of it, is nothing but a code of the people's liberties, political and civil. The Constitution is not a mass of rules, but the very substance of our freedom, not obsolete; but in every part alive; more needful now than ever, and as fitted to our needs.”—Stimson's The American Constitution.

“No other country in the world possesses the guarantees of individual liberty and inherent rights that are accorded by the Constitution of the United States.”—David Jayne Hill's The People's Government.

“We need not view with apprehension or even regret the gradual adaptation of the Constitution to the ever-changing needs from generation to generation of the most progressive nation in the world. The Constitution is not a static institution. It is neither, on the one hand, a sandy beach, which is quickly destroyed by the erosion of the waves, nor, on the other hand, is it a Gibralter rock which wholly resists the ceaseless washing of time and circumstances. Its strength lies in its adaptability to slow and progressive change. While the necessity of change may be recognised in the non-essentials, yet the Constitution was based upon certain fundamental principles which were not thus changeable. These times should not wither nor custom stale. While the great compact apparently dealt only with very concrete and practical details of government in the very simplest language, and carefully avoided anything that savored of visionary doctrinarism, yet, behind these simply but wonderfully phrased delegations of power, was a broad and accurate political philosophy, which constitutes the true doctrine of American Government. Its principles are of eternal verity. They are founded upon the inalienable rights of man. They are not the thing of the day or temporary circumstance. If they are destroyed, then the spirit of our government is gone, even if the form survive.”—James M. Beck.

“The Constitution remains the surest and safest foundation for a free government that the wit of man has yet devised.”—Nicholas Murray Butler.

“I believe there is no finer form of government than the one under which we live, and that I ought to be willing to live or die, as God decrees, that it may not perish from the earth through treachery within or through assault without.”—Thomas R. Marshall.

“Although not a citizen of your great country, I am heart and soul with you and your associates in the glorious fight you are making for the preservation of your peerless Constitution, which has made your country what it is, and which is today the brightest hope of mankind.”—Baron Rosen, formerly Russian Ambassador to the United States of America.

“Under the American Constitution was realized the sublime conception of a nation in which every citizen lives under two complete and well-rounded systems of laws,—the state law and the federal law—each with its legislature, its executive, and its judiciary moving one within the other, noiselessly, and without friction. It was one of the longest reaches of constructive statesmanship ever known in the world. There never was anything quite like it before, and in Europe it needs much explanation even for educated statesmen who have never seen its workings. Yet to America it has become so much a matter of course that they, too, sometimes need to be told how much it signifies. In 1787 it was the substitution of law for violence between states that were partly sovereign. In some future still grander convention we trust the same thing will be done between states that have been wholly sovereign, whereby peace may gain and violence be diminished over other lands than this which has set the example.”—John Fiske, in 1888.

The English government forced laws upon the colonies to restrict trade and manufactures, to place a standing army in America, and to raise taxes. The tax laws were denounced as illegal by the colonists, who argued that they were not represented in Parliament.

Read the charges made against the king and the government of England in the Declaration of Independence.

The following were the fundamental defects of the Articles of Confederation.

a. They did not provide for a central executive, and there was no supreme executive to enforce the laws.

b. No provision was made for a central judiciary, and each State interpreted the Federal laws as it saw fit.

c. They permitted concurrent legislation on vital subjects: i. e. each State could legislate as it pleased on such subjects as tariff, foreign treaties, currency, etc.

d. They permitted each State to regulate its own coinage and there were at one time at least fourteen different kinds of coins in the thirteen States. This greatly interfered with trade.

e. They gave Congress no power to enforce the observance of treaties. Congress could pass laws but could not enforce them.

f. They gave Congress no power to coerce a State—it could only recommend to the States.

g. They required a two-thirds vote on all questions in Congress, and votes were cast by States. Most bills may pass the present Congress by a majority vote.

h. Congress could not reach the individual to punish him for crime committed against the Federal government, except through the State in which the crime was committed. Often the States refused to act.

i. The Articles could not be amended without the consent of all of the States. Several times one State defeated the amendment of the Articles.

The various States chose a total of sixty-five delegates to attend the Federal convention at Philadelphia. Of these, fifty-five actually sat in the convention. Of the entire number, forty-two were present on the last day and thirty-nine signed the Constitution.

Of the fifty-five who sat in the convention, twenty-five were from north of the Mason and Dixon Line, or from the northern States, and thirty were from the southern States. Of the thirty-nine signers, nineteen were from the North and twenty from the South. The three who refused to sign were Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts and Edmund Randolph and George Mason of Virginia. These three men thought the Constitution gave too much power to the central government and did not leave enough to the States.

Eight of the men who signed the Constitution were of foreign birth. They were Alexander Hamilton, William Patterson, James Wilson, Robert Morris, James McHenry, Thomas Fitzsimons, William R. Davie, and Pierce Butler. You will notice that Hamilton, Wilson, Patterson, and Morris were among the most influential men in the convention. Many of America's greatest men have been of foreign birth.

The oldest man in the convention was Benjamin Franklin who was eighty-one years of age. The youngest man was Jonathan Dayton of New Jersey who was only twenty-seven. Charles Pinckney was twenty-nine years old, and Alexander Hamilton was thirty. The average age of the entire membership in the convention was 43-2/5 years.

The membership in the convention included a remarkable group of men—in fact the most remarkable group of statesmen that ever assembled for the making of a constitution. They had gained their experience in five different ways: colonial legislatures, State legislatures, State conventions, Continental Congresses, and in the Congress of the Confederation. Six of them had the honor of having signed the Declaration of Independence—Benjamin Franklin, James Wilson, Robert Morris, Roger Sherman, George Read, and George Clymer. Thirty delegates were college men and twenty-six had degrees.

The Constitution in Article VII says, “The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.”

The first State to ratify was Delaware on December 7, 1787. New Hampshire, the ninth State, ratified on June 21, 1788, and Rhode Island, the last, on May 29, 1790.

Libel is defined as any statement printed, or written, or any picture or caricature that causes another person to be brought into hatred, contempt, or ridicule or to be shunned by his associates. Slander is any oral statement that causes another person to be brought into hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or to be shunned by his associates. In order to constitute either slander or libel the statement or utterance must be communicated to a third party.

“The right of citizens to petition the government to remove abuse was won in Europe only after many hard conflicts. It is not conceded in some European governments today, and men in those countries who lead in reforms and advocate democratic measures are often thrown into prison, banished, or exiled. This amendment to the Constitution was inserted to guard against the tyranny of officers, who might abuse the authority conferred upon them by the people.”

Constitution of the United States, 1st Amendment.

“The right of assembly is coupled with the guaranty of the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances; but it is not to be understood as limited to that object. Without doubt assemblages for social, political or religious purposes are protected by such against legislative prohibition unless attended with circumstances rendering the exercise of the right inimical to public peace, security or welfare.”—Emlin McClain, quoted in the Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. I, p. 85.

“The right to assemble may be restricted so far as necessary to prevent its being exercised to promote unlawful purposes or in such manner as to result in public inconvenience.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. I, p. 85.

“The provision to the amendment to the Federal Constitution is a limitation only on the powers of the Federal Government and does not apply to the several states. The states have largely copied the same provision into their constitutions.”

“The right of petition is important as recognizing a lawful occasion for the assembly of the people and in connection with the guaranty of freedom of speech and the press. The subject matter of a petition cannot be made the basis for a prosecution for public or private libel if it is kept within the limits of the privilege accorded.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. II, p. 675.

“Through the right of petition the people have a means of informing their lawmakers of their wishes and of guiding public opinion.”

“The rules of the national House of Representatives provide that members having petitions to present may deliver them to the clerk and the petition, except such as, in the judgment of the speaker, are of an obscene or insulting character, shall be entered upon the journal.”—Emlin McClain, quoted in the Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. II, p. 675.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment II.

“This right to keep and bear arms, although stated in connection with the militia, is held broad enough to cover the keeping and carrying of such weapons as are suitable for self-defense, or defense of the home. But the keeping of unusual weapons, or the carrying of unusual weapons in an unusual manner, as by having them concealed on the person, may be prohibited.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 165.

“This amendment, like the other eight amendments to the Federal Constitution, does not apply to the States, and a State may legislate as it pleases regarding the carrying and using of arms. Many states prevent the carrying of arms of any kind except with legal permission given through the proper officer for stated specific reasons.”

“The amendment means no more than that this right shall not be infringed by Congress. Police protection of the people is left to the States.”

Constitution of the United States, Amendment IV.

“One of the most serious grievances of the colonists was, the assertion and exercise of a prerogative of the crown to issue warrants for searching private premises in order to obtain evidence of political offenses. This had been the subject of controversy in England and was made the basis of a protest in Massachusetts by James Otis against the Writs of Assistance which were in effect, general warrants.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. III, p. 654.

“The privilege contended for was that the privacy of the dwelling house should not be invaded by public officers without the consent of the owner save for the purpose of making an arrest, and then only by an officer of the law—who carried a warrant giving him such authority.”—Emlin McClain, quoted in the Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. III, p. 654.

The protection afforded by the constitutional provision is against attempts made under the disguise of public process to pry into private affairs on mere suspicion that a crime has been committed or contemplated.

The principle of this guaranty is being violated if the postal authorities open sealed letters in the mail to discover whether improper use of the mail is being made. It is also violated by compelling the production of private papers of the defendant in a criminal prosecution.

A warrant is not always necessary to arrest an individual. For example, a police officer does not need a warrant in order to arrest a person who is violating a law in his presence, or a person whom he has good reason to think has committed a felony.—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. III, p. 655.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment V.

“A capital crime is such crime as the law declares punishable by death penalty.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol I, p. 284.

“An infamous crime is such crime as the law declares punishable by imprisonment in a state prison.”

A grand jury, or an indictment, or a presentment jury, or an inquest jury, is a jury (differing as to numbers in different States) for the purpose of investigating alleged crimes. If, upon investigation, the jury believes the accused person has either committed the act or has had a part in the crime, it will draw up a formal accusation in writing. This accusation is called an indictment and is presented to the court. In a few States a person may be brought to trial for violation of a law of the State upon information filed by the prosecuting attorney.

A petit jury, or trial jury, is a jury of twelve men selected by the court—according to a law determining the manner—to hear the accusation against the person charged along with the evidence submitted during the trial in court. After hearing the evidence and receiving from the judge instructions concerning the law governing the case, the jury will determine whether the accused person is guilty or not. The Federal government, and most of the States, require a unanimous verdict. If the jury disagrees they report such to the court (the judge) and they are dismissed and the case may be tried again with a different jury.

“Constitutional guaranties of the right of trial for crime only on indictment by a grand jury, imply a common law grand jury of whose number at least twelve men concur in finding the indictment, but by provision in state constitutions a smaller number of grand jurors than required by common law and concurrence of a smaller number than twelve in the finding of an indictment may be authorized.”

“A grand jury affords a safeguard against the unwarranted ignominy of being put on public trial for an offense which there is no reasonable ground to believe the accused has committed.”

“The grand jury is to investigate the cases of those who have been arrested and held under preliminary information on oath by private accusers; and it may also investigate cases of supposed crime of which it has knowledge or to which its attention may be called by the public prosecuting officer. Its proceedings are secret and its members are sworn not to subsequently divulge them.”—McClain's Constitutional Law.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment V.

“The rule of procedure generally recognized is that when an accused person has been put on trial under a valid indictment in a court having jurisdiction of the case, and a jury has been empaneled and sworn to try the case and give a verdict, and a verdict of not guilty is given—the accused cannot be again put on trial for the same crime, or any included crime for which he might have been convicted in that prosecution.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. II, p. 251.

“A verdict of not guilty is conclusive and the defendant must be discharged. If however he is convicted, he may in some instances appeal the case to a higher court for review and that is not being again put in jeopardy.”—Emlin McClain, quoted in the Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol II, p. 251.

“Jeopardy is complete when the court proceeds with a jury to ascertain the defendant's guilt.”

“As the criminal jurisdiction of the Federal Court extends only to offenses against the Federal laws, and no prosecution for such offenses can be entertained in the state courts—it follows that there can be no questions of former jeopardy as between a federal and a state court.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol II, p. 251.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment V.

In our own early colonies persons were frequently tortured to compel them to give evidence against themselves or against other people, but at that time the colonies were still under British authority.

An instance was recently reported of a man appearing before a sheriff and confessing to the commission of five different murders in as many different places in a western State. Upon investigation it was found that murders had been committed in these places about the time he confessed to having committed the crimes, so he was arrested and held by the sheriff. Upon further investigation it was discovered that he was mentally unbalanced and having read of all these crimes he imagined he had committed them. He was released from arrest and was committed to a hospital for the insane. In this instance an innocent man might have been executed if his own testimony had been sufficient to convict him.

If a person confesses to having committed a crime and the facts as stated are found to be correct, he may then be convicted of the crime, but the conviction is made on the basis of the evidence disclosed by his confession and not on the confession itself. Having made a confession the officers may then from the facts told by the accused find other facts sufficient to convict without offering the confession in evidence.

“A confession is not admissible in evidence where it is obtained by temporal inducement, by threats, promise or hope of favor held out to the party in respect of his escape from the charge against him, by a person in authority.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 387.

“When an inducement destroys a confession it must be held out by a person in authority.”

Constitution of the United States, Amendment V.

Eminent domain means the right and authority of the government to take private property for public purposes upon the payment of a just compensation.

“The superior right existing in a sovereign government by which private property may in certain cases be taken or its use controlled for the public benefit, without regard to the wishes of the owner.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 657.

“Eminent domain is said with more precision to be the right of the nation or the state, or of those to whom the power has been lawfully delegated, to condemn private property to public use, upon paying to the owner a due compensation, to be ascertained according to law.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 651.

Just compensation is generally arrived at by those whose duty it is to secure the land for the government, by offering a good fair price for the land. If the owner of the land refuses to accept the offer, the land may be seized by the proper authority and the matter settled according to law. The law generally provides that a body of appraisers be appointed who appraise the value of the land and this amount is offered to the owner. If he refuses, the matter is carried to the court for determination. A jury is summoned to assess the value of the land and from this the owner may usually appeal, but the government cannot appeal; it must pay the appraised valuation or allow the owner to keep his property. It must be remembered that private property may only be taken by the government for public purposes.

Some purposes for which the government may take private property are: forts and arsenals, army posts, or public parks. It may take food supplies for use of the army or navy in time of war. It may take over the railroads for the benefit of the people of the Nation, etc. In all cases it must give just compensation.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment VI.

“A speedy trial is, it appears, one that is brought on without unreasonable delay for preparation; and a public trial is not necessarily one to which every one may obtain admission but one sufficiently free and open to allow the friends of the accessed and others to watch the proceedings.”—Emlin McClain, quoted in the Cyclopedia of American Government.

“Criminal prosecution is the means adopted to bring a supposed offender to justice and punishment by due course of law.”

“The speedy trial to which a person charged with crime is entitled under the constitution is a trial at such a time, after the finding of the indictment, as shall afford the prosecution a reasonable opportunity, by the fair and honest exercise of reasonable diligence, to prepare for trial, and if the trial is delayed or postponed beyond such period, when there is a term of court at which the trial might be had, by reason of neglect of the prosecution in preparing for trial, such delay is a denial to the defendant of the right of a speedy trial, and in such case a person confined, upon application by habeas corpus, is entitled to a discharge from custody.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. II, p. 1023.

Every jury is sworn to decide according to the evidence presented, guided by instructions in the law given by the judge. Juries are therefore held to be impartial.

The entire United States is divided into judicial districts, of which there are about ninety-two. These districts are found within the States as judicial districts do not cut State boundaries. Where the population is more sparse a Federal district comprises an entire State. Where the population is more dense a State may contain two or more districts. There are four United States District Court districts in the State of New York, two in Iowa, and only one in Nevada, and some other western States.

Congress may by legislative act lay out Federal court districts. These districts were first established in the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789. As the population increases Congress may increase the number of districts.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment VI.

If one is not given a preliminary hearing shortly after his arrest, the right to a writ of habeas corpus (defined in another chapter), gives the accused an opportunity to know the exact nature of the charge against him and why he is held or detained in prison. Then he is faced by his accusers in court and bears the charge against him. In all criminal cases the accused is privileged to be present throughout the entire trial, in fact he is required to be present during the trial.

In early England, and in many other European countries in early times, the accused person was not even permitted to know the reason for his imprisonment, and furthermore was tried in court and found guilty without hearing the evidence or knowing who testified in court.

The right of trial upon indictment of a grand jury, and the privilege of confronting one's accusers in court, having witnesses in one's behalf, and having an attorney to defend one accused, is not yet allowed in certain parts of Russia and perhaps other countries in Europe and Asia. These privileges have been the recognized right of all people in the United States since our glorious Constitution was adopted and became the fundamental law of our country in 1789.

Teachers of civics in our schools ought to ask permission of the judge to take their classes to visit a session of the court. The judge is able to inform the teacher as to when certain cases of most value to pupils and other persons are to be tried. The trial of certain kinds of cases brings out many fundamental facts of rights and duties of citizenship that boys and girls, as well as many adult persons, ought to know.

“The accused is of all men the most miserable, unless the law gives him an equal chance to defend himself. Time was when the courts could hear privately the witnesses against the prisoner, and then call him into court to answer charges, which he never had heard of, made upon the testimony of witnesses he never had seen, without any legal means of compelling his own witnesses to come to court to testify for him and without any lawyer to speak for him against the trained counsel for the government. Many of these abuses had been weeded out before the Constitution was adopted.”—Bacon's American Plan of Government, p. 272.

“Almost all the reform needed to make criminal procedure humane and just, has been incorporated into the constitutions and laws of the states during the first era of independence; but the people of the United States bad no such safeguards.”—Bacon's American Plan of Government, p. 273.

“The charge to be answered by the defendant on trial in a criminal court must be clear, explicit, and definite. The prosecution has no right to compel the accused to show that he is a good member of society.”—7 Peters Rep. 138.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment VI.

“In judicial procedure a witness is one who is duly called upon to testify under oath as to matters within his knowledge. By rules of procedure some persons are disqualified from testifying on account of want of mental capacity as, for instance, idiots, insane persons, and infants who have not attained the age of discretion. Others who are qualified to testify may be of such character that their testimony is not entitled to the weight which should be given to some other witness. Furthermore, a witness may be so related to the subject matter or to the parties as that in the particular case his testimony should not be received, or should be received under limitations as to its credibility and weight. And finally the competency of testimony offered is regulated by rules of evidence fixed by law.”

“Under constitutional guaranties of religious freedom, the religious belief of a witness cannot be made a ground for his disqualification to testify.”

“As to criminal prosecution, it is usually provided in state constitutions as it is in the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Federal Constitution that the accused shall not be compelled to be a witness against himself and that he has a right to be confronted with the witnesses against him and to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor. These are privileges which the accused may waive.”—Emlin McClain, quoted in Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. III, p. 693.

“Compulsory process is the means of compelling a witness to appear before the court at the time of trial and, under oath, tell what he knows about the matter under consideration.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. II, p. 766.

A subpoena is an order issued in a court and given to a sheriff or other executive officer, to be served upon or read to a witness, compelling him to appear before the court at the time stated. He must lay aside all pretenses and excuses, and appear before the court or the magistrate at the time and place named in the subpoena, under a penalty therein cited for failure to appear. His failure to obey the order of the court, or subpoena, is known as contempt. Contempt is punishable in Federal courts, and in most States by the order of the judge, and is not subject to jury trial. (Oklahoma is an exception.)

“At common law a prisoner was not allowed counsel. In England this right was not granted in all cases before 1836.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. I, p. 487.

The United States was the earliest of nations to not only permit every person accused of crime and tried before a court to have counsel, but to furnish counsel for every person who was not himself able to get counsel or able to pay for counsel.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment VII.

“Common Law is that system of law or form of the science of jurisprudence which has prevailed in England and in the United States, in contradistinction from other great systems, such as Roman or civil law.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 370.

“Common law is used to distinguish the body of rules and of remedies administered by courts of law, technically so called, in contradistinction to those of equity administered by courts of chancery, and to the canon law, administered by ecclesiastical courts.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 370.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment VII.

“A jury is a body of men sworn to declare the facts of a case as they are proven from the evidence placed before them.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary.

The definition of a jury explains why the facts of a case are not open for re-examination after being declared by a jury. It is because a jury meets in a court in the place where the offense has been committed, and is therefore better able to know the whole truth, and to determine what the facts really are than would be possible for any other body of men who did not have such means of knowing. A higher court in reviewing a case on an appeal cannot usually go behind the facts as declared by a jury.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment VIII.

In criminal actions the matter of bail is determined by statute. Bail is often denied to those accused of committing serious crimes.

The term bail is used to designate a person who becomes a surety for the appearance of the defendant in court at the time called for. But in modern usage the term bail means the amount of money pledged by another person for the appearance of the defendant. If the defendant fails to appear the person going his bail must pay the stipulated amount into the court. The payment of the bail does not, however, relieve the delinquent defendant of further punishment. He may be again seized and punished as according to the charge, and furthermore may be given additional punishment for “jumping” his bail.

“The defendant usually binds himself as principal with two sureties; but sometimes the bail alone binds himself as principal, and sometimes one surety is accepted by the sheriff. The bail bond may be said to stand in the place of the defendant as far as the sheriff is concerned, and if properly taken, furnishes the sheriff a complete answer to the requirement of the writ, requiring him to take and produce the body of the defendant.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 211.

United States Constitution, Amendment VIII.

“The amount of fine is frequently left to the discretion of the court, who ought to proportion the fine to the offense.”—Cooley's Constitutional Limitations, p. 377.

“The object of punishment is to reform the offender, to deter him and others from committing like offenses, and to protect society.” “A state may provide a severer punishment for a second than for a first offense providing it is dealt out to all alike.”—159 U. S. 673.

“Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or a lingering death; but the punishment of death is not cruel, within the meaning of that word as used in the Constitution.”—136U. S. 436.

A warden of a State penitentiary was recently found guilty of inflicting cruel punishment because he punished a convict by suspending his body from chains placed around his wrists.

The British Museum contains several machines of torture used to punish criminals in early days. One is a machine in the form of a hollow case fitting a human form. This case is filled with sharp spikes driven through from the outside. The machine was so constructed that when a victim was placed inside, the sides could be gradually turned up to fit the body and press these spikes into the body of the victim so as to produce death.

Another machine is constructed much as a cross in form of the letter X. The victim was fastened in such manner as to bind his wrists and ankles to the ends of the bars. A horse was then hitched to either his arms or legs and they were torn from the body.

Many States in the United States have now adopted electrocution as the means of inflicting the death penalty because it is believed to be the most humane way.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment XIII, Sec. 1.

This amendment was submitted to the States by resolution of Congress in 1865 and by proclamation of the President of December 18th of that year was declared to have received the approval of the requisite number of States.

So far as the abolition of slavery is involved there has been no question as to the effect of the amendment, but as to what constitutes involuntary servitude important questions have arisen. While the primary object of the amendment was to free the colored race, the general purpose was to render impossible the existence within the jurisdiction of the United States of any legal or social institution imposing involuntary labor on any class of persons. The introduction here of the peonage system prevalent in Mexico, the coolie system of China, or the padrone system of Italy fall within the prohibition.

The amendment permits imprisonment and also involuntary servitude as a penalty for failure to pay a fine imposed as a punishment. Moreover the services of persons imprisoned for crime belong to the State and may be leased, subject of course to humanitarian regulations as to the method in which such services may be employed.

Under the enforcement clause Congress has legislated against peonage, that is, a condition of enforced servitude by which the servitor is restrained of his liberty and compelled to labor in liquidation of some contract, debt, or obligation. But without such legislation, State statutes imposing imprisonment or servitude for non-performance of contractual obligations are invalid as in conflict with the provisions of the amendment.—Emlin McClain, in the Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. III, p. 536.

In the early days many of the American colonies permitted imprisonment for debt, and one of the greatest patriots and philanthropists of colonial times, Robert Morris, was imprisoned for debt by the State of Pennsylvania.

Constitution of the United States, Amendment XIV. Sec. 1.

A person may attain to citizenship in the United States in any of seven different ways: 1. By birth—i.e. natural born. 2. By naturalization, which usually requires continuous residence for five years. 3. By treaty regulation. 4. By statute of Congress. 3. By annexation of territory. 6. By marriage—if a foreign woman marries an American citizen. 7. By honorable discharge from the army or navy, upon which the court admits to citizenship regardless of the time of residence in the United States.

In the United States we recognize a dual citizenship—citizenship in the United States, and citizenship in a State. Any person who is a citizen of the United States is also a citizen of the State wherein he or she resides. Nine different States grant the right of suffrage and State citizenship to such foreigners as take out their first naturalization papers. These States are Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Oregon, South Dakota, and Texas.

Citizenship must not be confused with the right of suffrage. Neither one necessarily includes the other. All citizens cannot vote—children for example. All voters are not necessarily citizens, those in the above nine States for example.

Aliens in the United States have practically all the civil rights that are enjoyed by citizens, but they do not have political rights. An alien may purchase, own, and convey property. He may sue and be sued in the courts.

“There can be no doubt that the minimum expectation of the framers of this amendment to the Constitution was that it would make the first eight amendments to the Constitution binding upon the states, as they already were upon the Federal Government, and that it should be susceptible not only of negative enforcement by the courts but also of direct positive enforcement by Congress.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. II, p. 41.

“By a series of decisions the most important of which were those in the Slaughter House cases (16 Wallace 36) and in the Civil Rights Cases (109 U.S. 3) the United States Supreme Court established the following principles: (1) that the prohibitions of the fourteenth amendment are addressed to the states as such and not to private individuals; (2) that these prohibitions contemplate only positive state acts and not acts of omission; (3) that the amendment recognizes a distinction between state citizenship and United States citizenship; (4) that it protects from state abridgement only ‘the privileges and immunities’ which the Constitution by its other provisions bestows upon ‘citizens of the United States’ as such.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. II, p. 41.

The nineteenth amendment which is now ratified by the States, provides that “the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.”—Constitution of the United States, Amendment XIX.

“The American Constitution is the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given moment by the brain and purpose of man.”—William E. Gladstone.

“It will be the wonder and admiration of all future generations and the model of all future constitutions.”—William Pitt.

“Our fathers by an almost divine prescience, struck the golden mean,” when they made the Constitution.—Pomeroy.

“It (The U. S. Constitution) ranks above every other written constitution for the intrinsic excellence of its scheme, its adaptation to the circumstances of the people, the simplicity, brevity and precision of its language, its judicious mixture of definition in principle with elasticity in details.”—James Bryce.

In 1861 Chief Justice Taney decided in the United States Circuit Court of Maryland that Congress alone possessed the power under the Constitution to suspend the writ.—American Law Register, 524.

The privilege of the writ is, however, necessarily suspended whenever martial law is declared in force; for martial law suspends all civil process.

“As a recognized legal remedy, resort to the proceeding by habeas corpus may be had where a person is imprisoned under pretended legal authority which in fact for any reason is absolutely void, as where the warrant of arrest or commitment is insufficient or the proceeding under which the warrant was issued was without legal authority.”

“A state court or judge cannot inquire by habeas corpus into the validity of arrest or detention of a person under federal authority. The right to redress in such cases, if any, must be sought in the Federal courts. But on the other hand Federal courts and judges may inquire into the cause of the restraint of liberty of any person by a state when the justification of Federal authority or immunity is set up for the act complained of.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. II, p. 106.

Constitution of the United States, Art. I, Sec. 9, Cl. 3.

“The effect of attainder upon a felon is, in general terms, that all his estate, real and personal, is forfeited; that his blood is corrupted, and so nothing passes by inheritance to, from or through him.”

“In the United States the doctrine of attainder is now scarcely known, although during and shortly after the Revolution acts of attainder were passed by several of the states. The passage of such bills is expressly forbidden by the Constitution.”—Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Vol. I, p. 190.

“A bill of attainder, as thought of in the United States to-day, would be such law as permitted a person charged with the commission of a crime, to be tried and found guilty and sentenced without being present at the trial.” It is one of the rules of procedure in court to-day that in all criminal cases the person charged with crime must be present during the entire trial. Another fundamental judicial fact is that all criminal punishment terminates with the death of the person found guilty; his children are exempt.

“An ex-post-facto law is a law which in its operation makes an act criminal which was not criminal at the time the act was committed, or provides a more severe punishment for criminal acts already committed, or changes the rules of procedure so as to make it more difficult for one accused of crime to defend in a prosecution of such crime.” “The prohibition relates to retroactive criminal statutes providing a punishment for an act previously committed or increasing the punishment making it more difficult for the accused to defend, but not to retroactive laws, even though criminal, which mitigate the punishment or merely change or regulate the procedure without imposing any additional substantial burden on the accused in making his defense.”—Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. I, p. 700.

We should keep in mind that both “bills of attainder” and “ex post facto” laws have only to do with crimes and their punishment. These laws do not relate to civil matters.

Constitution of the United States, Art. I, Sec. 8.

Titles of nobility as recognized in many European countries include the following: duke, earl, marquis, viscount, and baron. These titles were in part hereditary and in part acquired. They always conferred special privileges both in rank and in political preferment. Such titles cannot exist in a democracy because they in their very nature destroy equality before the law, and that is the fundamental principle of democratic government.

“The provisions prohibiting the granting of titles of nobility are designed, no doubt, first to preserve equality before the law, and second, to secure in perpetuity a republican form of government. Such provisions are not essential to theoretical equality before the law, for such equality is fundamental in the law of England notwithstanding the existence of titles of nobility. But the framers of the Constitution evidently contemplated a form of government in which there should be no special privileges conferred by rank or title. The additional provision in the Federal Constitution prohibiting the acceptance by any person holding any office of profit or trust under the United States of any present, emolument, office or title from any foreign sovereign or power without the consent of Congress, was probably intended to prevent the exercise of foreign influence in governmental affairs. These articles in the Constitution are substantially borrowed from the Articles of Confederation.”—Emlin McClain, quoted in the Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. II, p. 58.

Constitution of the United States, Art. III, Sec. 3, Cl. 1.

Treason is defined in this article of the Constitution and therefore Congress cannot define it in any other manner. Many people use the word “treason” very loosely. They often speak of a person committing treason when the act committed is not treasonable at all, but is some less severe crime. Treason consists only in levying war against the United States or in giving aid or comfort to enemies of the United States.

The meaning of “two witnesses to the same overt act” is that the Constitution requires that two persons will appear in court and swear to the fact that they personally saw the act committed. “Overt act” means “openly committed act”. Chief Justice John Marshall knew that in the trial of Aaron Burr it would be impossible to get two persons to swear to having seen Burr commit the conspiracy, so he took advantage of the technicality in the indictment and threw the case out of court. This trial was held at Richmond, Virginia.

“Confession in open court” is about the only instance in which such confession will convict a person charged with committing a crime. As a rule a person's own confession will not be accepted as evidence against him, in criminal prosecutions, because few confessions are made without some threat or inducement and under the guaranty (p. 99) that a person cannot be compelled to be a witness against himself they are excluded.

Constitution of the United States, Art. III, Sec. 2, Cl. 3.

Impeachment is the manner of trial fixed by the Constitution for the trial and removal of Federal officers who are accused of treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors. Congress alone has the power of conducting an impeachment of Federal officers. The legislature of a State has the power of impeaching State officers. Impeachment, as the word is commonly used, includes both accusation and trial. The “Impeachment” or accusation is brought by a two-thirds vote of the lower house, and the trial and conviction or acquittal is carried on by the upper house. Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, was impeached—i.e. he was formally accused, but he was acquitted in his trial in the Senate. Conviction in an impeachment proceeding causes an officer to be removed from office and disqualified from ever holding any office of honor or trust under the government again. A person may be convicted and not given the full penalty. He may be only removed from office, but not disqualified from again holding office.

It is possible that a crime may be committed on a river that forms State boundaries. Where a river forms a boundary the middle of the main channel is made the boundary line. It is often difficult to determine on which side of the line the crime was committed, and both States may then claim to have jurisdiction over the case. This must be decided as any other fact in the case.

The manner of the trial in use, before jury trial was established, was by ordeal or by battle. In trial either by ordeal or by battle the issue was left to God to decide and He was thought to perform a miracle to reveal the guilt or innocence of the accused person. One form of ordeal was to compel the accused to plunge his arm into boiling water and if innocent the Lord would protect him from being scalded. Another form of ordeal was to compel the accused to walk barefoot over hot plow shares. If innocent the Lord would again protect his feet from being burned.

The first form of jury to displace the old ordeal or battle as a means of deciding guilt or innocence was the “compurgators” or “oath bearers”. They comprised a group of men who would appear before the court and give oath that the accused was not a bad man and had committed no crime. They did not investigate the accusation, they only testified to the good character of the accused. If a man accused could not produce compurgators, he must undergo the ordeal. The duty of these oath bearers gradually became more extended until they became investigators, and finally became a grand jury.

Constitution of the United States, Art. IV, Sec. 2, Cl. 1.

“The right of a citizen of one state to pass through, or to reside in, any other state, for purposes of trade, agriculture, professional pursuits, or otherwise; to claim the benefit of habeas corpus; to institute and maintain actions of any kind in the courts of the state; to take, hold and dispose of property, either real or personal; and an exemption from higher taxes or impositions than are paid by the other citizens of the state; may be mentioned as some of the particular privileges and immunities of citizens, which are clearly embraced by the description”—Corfield vs. Coryell, Washington C. C. Rep. 380.

Constitution of the United States, Art. 6, Cl. 3.

While no religious test of any kind may ever be required from any officer of the United States as a condition of his being elected, or holding office, public sentiment nevertheless favors Christian character among the people. If a candidate for office were an atheist and made public confession as to his lack of belief in God, it would doubtless mitigate against his election.

“The general principle of equality of all persons before the law excludes discriminations made on account of religions belief, with the result that religious tests should not be made the basis of political rights or for determining qualifications for office or in general for the possession, exercise, or protection of civil rights.”—Emlin McClain, quoted in the Cyclopedia of American Government, Vol. III, p. 176.

“This clause was introduced for the double purpose of satisfying the scruples of many persons who feel an invincible repugnance to any religious test or affirmation, and to cut off forever every pretence of any alliance between church and state in the national government”—Story's Const. Sc. 1841.

A glance at the motives of Europeans in coming to America will reveal the fact that thousands of the best people of European countries left their homes to escape either religious or political persecution at the hands of the government or the king. Such was true of the Huguenots of France, the Pilgrims and Puritans of England, and only recently, the Jews of Russia.

The laws of “attainder” in England in the early times confiscated the property of persons, however innocent they themselves might be, if they were near relatives of other persons who had committed grave crimes.

Before the passage of the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679 in England, any person of royalty or high official standing in the government could falsely accuse another person of crime and cause that innocent person to languish in prison for years, or even for life, because he could not get before a court of justice to establish his innocence.

In many European countries the peasants were burdened with taxes to support kings and courts without the slightest representation in the tax levying authority. In France, just preceding the French Revolution, the peasants were obliged to purchase a certain number of barrels of salt each year, without having the slightest use for the salt, because the crown lands produced salt and the revenues went to the king.

In many European countries a state church was established and the people obliged to support it by taxes levied against their property, regardless of whether it represented their religious beliefs.

A comparison of the provisions of the Declaration of Independence with those of the Constitution will show the wrongs of the English king righted by the Constitution.

Declaration of Independence.—“He has refused assent to laws the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.”

Constitution of the United States.—A bill if vetoed by the President may be repassed by two-thirds of the senate and house of representatives.

Declaration of Independence.—“He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance.”

Constitution of the United States.—Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, etc. (See Const. Art. I, §. 8.)

Declaration of Independence.—“He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness, his invasions on the rights of the people.”

Constitution of the United States.—Congress shall meet at the seat of government—once each year.

Declaration of Independence.—“He has refused, for a long time after dissolution, to cause others to be elected.”

Constitution of the United States.—The time, place and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof.

Declaration of Independence.—“He has obstructed the administration of justice.”

Constitution of the United States.—Jurisdiction of Courts fixed by Constitution. Judges not responsible to the President, but to Congress, which represents the people.

Declaration of Independence.—“He has made judges dependent on his will alone.”

Constitution of United States.—Judges subject to removal only by impeachment by Congress.

Declaration of Independence.—“He has kept standing armies ... without consent of the legislature.”

Constitution of the United States.—“Congress shall have power to raise and support armies.” “To provide and maintain a navy.”

Declaration of Independence.—“For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses.”

Constitution of the United States.—“Such trial shall be held in the state where said crime shall have been committed.”

Declaration of Independence.—“For depriving us, in many cases, of the right of trial by jury.”

Constitution of the United States.—“The trial of all crimes, except in case of impeachment, shall be by jury.”

Declaration of Independence.—“For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us.”

Constitution of the United States.—“No soldier shall in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner.”

Declaration of Independence.—“For imposing taxes on us without our consent.”

Constitution of the United States.—“Congress shall have power to levy and collect taxes.”

On December 2, 1917, in New York City, in a meeting of men who called themselves Bolshevists and I. W. W.'s, the following paragraph was an introduction to a set of resolutions drawn up: “We are the Bolshevists of America. We denounce governments, institutions and society; we hail social revolution and the destruction of the existing order of things.”

In the preamble to the Constitution of the Independent Workers of the World (I. W. W.) we find this statement: “The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. Between these two classes the struggle must go on, until the workmen of the world organize as a class, take possession of the earth and the machinery of production, and abolish the wage system. Our motto is—The abolition of the wage system.”

How foolish is the above statement that the working class and the employing class have nothing in common. The truth of the matter is that they have everything in common. Every employer—almost without exception—was once a workman. He was a successful workman, therefore he became more than a workman—he became an employer. Furthermore, workmen cannot exist without employment. Neither can employers exist without the workmen. They are not only each concerned in the welfare of the other; neither can exist without the other.

The following is another passage taken from the resolutions drawn up by the Bolshevists in which they say the general strike is their weapon of defense: “We will strike for a six hour day, then for a four hour day, then for a two hour day, with increased wages all the time, and then we will be strong enough to take everything and work no more.”

We wonder how any sensible man can believe such logic as this. Was it not Saint Paul who said that if any man would not work neither should he eat.

The Socialist party platform of 1912 declared in favor of the abolition of the United States Senate, the amendment of the Constitution of the United States by a majority vote of the people, the election of judges for short terms of office, the denial of the right of the U. S. Supreme Court to declare the acts of Congress void.

The following suggestions have been made by good, honest people who have their country's welfare at heart. Thus far the people as a whole have not advocated their adoption, but some of them may be made part of the Constitution in time to come.

a. The direct popular election of President and Vice President of the United States.

b. The adoption of the initiative, referendum, and recall in the National government.

c. Federal legislation governing both marriage and divorce throughout the Nation.

d. Federal jurisdiction over all cases affecting foreigners—for example in instances like the Italian riot in New Orleans, or in the Japanese problem on the Pacific coast.

The following is a brief outline of the various attempts at union among the colonies.

(a) 1643-1684—New England Confederation: Massachusetts Bay; Plymouth; Connecticut; New Haven.
(b) 1684—Albany Council.
(c) 1690—First Colonial Congress.
(d) 1696—William Penn's Plan.
(e) 1701—Robert Livingston's Plan.
(f) 1722—Plan of Daniel Cox.
(g) 1754—Plan of Rev. Mr. Peters.
(h) 1754—Plan of the Lords of Trade.
(i) 1754—Albany Plan.
(j) 1765—Stamp Act Congress.
(k) 1774—First Continental Congress.
(l) 1775—Second Continental Congress.
(m) 1781—Congress of the Confederation.
(n) 1787—The Federal Convention.
(o) 1789—The New Government.

The chief reasons keeping the colonies apart were:

1. Natural geographical divisions—North, Middle, and South.
2. The great differences in size—Virginia many times larger than Rhode Island.
3. The instinct of local self government.
4. Character of settlers and the motives in making settlements.
5. The slave question, especially after 1750.
6. Their different forms of government—Royal, Proprietary, Charter.

The very first attempt at constitution making in the colonies was the Mayflower Compact, adopted on board the ship Mayflower before landing on December 20, 1620. It reads as follows: “We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dred soveraigne King James, by the grace of God, of Great Britain, France and Ireland King, defender of the faith, etc. having undertaken, for the glory of God, and advancement of Christian faith and honor of our king and country, a voyage to plant the first colony in northern parts of Virginia, do, by these presents, solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and of one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic, for, our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and, by virtue hereof, to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony. Unto which we promise all due submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder subscribed our names, at Cape Cod, the 11th of November, in the year of the reign of our sovereign lord, King James, of England, France and Ireland the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, Anno Domini.”

The first real attempt at formal constitution making was the “Fundamental Orders of Connecticut”, 1639. These “Orders” formed an elementary constitution with three departments of government and the duties and powers of each department fairly well set forth. The Fundamental Orders are frequently referred to as the first written constitution in America.

The Articles of Confederation were made by the thirteen States in the name of the States. The Constitution was made by the delegates of the people in the name of the people of the United States. The first was a compact or friendly agreement; the second was a contract or binding union.

One mark of good citizenship is the respect shown to emblems of authority. All good citizens rise to their feet and remain standing during the playing or singing of the National anthem. We ought to cultivate such habits until they become reflex: i. e. until we do them as a matter of course without being told by the teacher in school or by the leader of the choir or some other person.

Every school boy and girl ought to commit to memory the words of the Star Spangled Banner and of America. The teacher can make the singing of patriotic songs and the learning of patriotic poems and speeches a part of the opening exercises of the school. Poems and speeches learned in childhood will generally remain with us throughout life.

In colonial times in America there was nothing like universal manhood suffrage. One-half of all the colonies required church membership for a suffrage right. By about 1700 all colonies required ownership of property for voting. This was not entirely abolished until about 1850. The State of Rhode Island still requires property to the extent of $134 for voting in municipal elections.

The colony of Virginia required the holding of a freehold of fifty acres of land without a house, or twenty-five seres of land with a house at least twelve feet square. Pennsylvania required a freehold of fifty acres with twelve acres improved.

In most colonies a greater property qualification was required for voting for members of the upper house of the legislature than for members of the lower house.

Several colonies and early States limited office holding to Protestants.

The Constitution of the United States now declares that no State shall deny to any person the right to vote because of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, or because of sex. The Nineteenth Amendment enables women to vote on an equality with men.

A State may add further qualifications for voting, but no State may deny the right to vote for any of the above reasons. Several States have added literacy tests for voting, and others have denied the right to vote to such as are insane or who have been convicted of crime, unless pardoned by the Governor. A few States deny suffrage to those whose taxes are delinquent.

“The fundamental evil in this country is the lack of sufficiently general appreciation of the responsibility of citizenship.”—Theodore Roosevelt.

Teachers of children may well place greater emphasis on ideals, character, and personality as factors in the making of a Nation. Teachers ought to lay greater stress on biography in the teaching of history, civics, and citizenship. Teach children both to know and to love Washington, Lincoln, and Roosevelt. Teach older pupils and students to realize that the aims, ideals, and achievements of a Nation can never be higher than the aims, ideals, and achievements of the individuals comprising that Nation. To know the lives and characters of America's great men and women is to know American history, for they made American history what it is. Young people enjoy the study of great characters. We all retain a love for heroes and heroines however old we grow. Such study adds color and life to history and government and humanizes the entire subject. Teach lives and institutions rather than mere facts. Inculcate into the lives of boys and girls, and of men and women, a love for our country, for the men and women who made it, and for the institutions in which they have a part. Teach them that patriotism and loyalty are not duties only, but are rather the highest privileges given to the people of a republic.