whole. Here, then, we have the perfection of federal or home rule in its fullest and greatest development. The success of the American Union proves that the freest self-government of the parts produces the strongest government of the whole.

Let us proceed to note, in the order of their importance, the various branches of the National Government. We begin, of course, with the

SUPREME COURT OF THE NATION.

Beyond and before, and higher than House, or Senate, or President, stands this final arbiter, sole umpire, judge of itself. More than once Lord Salisbury has said that he envied his transatlantic brethren their Supreme Court. Speaking at Edinburgh on November 23, 1882, he said: "I confess I do not often envy the United States, but there is one feature in their institutions which appears to me the subject of the greatest envy-their magnificent institution of a Supreme Court. In the United States, if Parliament passes any measure inconsistent with the Constitution of the country, there exists a court which will negative it at once, and that gives a stability to the institutions of the country which, under the system of vague and mysterious promises here, we look for in vain.' He is right, and as he becomes more conversant with the results of political institutions founded upon the equality of the citizen, as I trust he may do, he will, in my opinion, find reason to envy many other of these more highly developed and in reality deeply conservative institutions, as much as that which now excites his admiration. The powers of the Supreme Court seem at first sight almost too vast to intrust to any small body of men; but it is to be noted that these powers are limited by the fact that it can neither make nor execute laws, nor originate anything. It only decides disputes as to existing laws, should such be properly brought before it, and its judgments are in all cases confined rigorously to the points submitted. It cannot interfere beforehand with any act of the government, nor with any act of the President, but can decide only whether such acts or orders are or are not constitutional, and the reasons for such decision must be publicly stated. Thus limited, its decision is final. Unless and until

decided to be unconstitutional all acts of Congress or of the President are valid.

As may be inferred, the mere knowledge on the part of legislative bodies that their acts are subject to the decision of the Supreme Court, keeps them strictly within constitutional bounds. There is no use, even were there the disposition, to enact any law which is not reasonably certain to be sustained. Therefore the regulative power of the court upon great questions remains practically in abeyance. The power is there, which is all that is required. The questions bearing upon State relations, which it is called upon to decide, are few, and generally of minor importance. As, however, all causes which involve considerable sums between citizens of different States can be appealed to this court, it is kept busily engaged upon matters of large pecuniary interest, but of no political consequence.

The court consists of nine judges, who hold office during life, subject, however, to impeachment by Congress for misbehavior or removal for inability to serve. Vacancies are filled by nominations made by the President to the Senate for confirmation, no appointment being complete until confirmed by the Senate. The salary of the judges is $10,000 (£2,000) per annum, and the Chief Justice receives $500 (£100) more. They can retire at seventy years of age upon full pay during life. What pittances! I hear my monarchical friends exclaim. Perhaps so, but does any court in the world command greater respect than this Supreme Court? Are abler, purer lawyers, men clearer in their great office, to be found elsewhere? Certainly not. Even my Lord Salisbury regrets that there is not such a tribunal in Britain. When I see the quiet dignity of the Supreme Court Judges in Washington, their plain living, free from vulgar ostentation, their modest but refined homes, and think how far beyond pecuniary considerations their aspirations are, how foreign to their elevated natures are the coarser phases of position in modern society, I cannot but conclude that it would be most unfortunate if the emoluments of their positions should ever be made so great as in themselves to constitute a temptation, as they are in Britain. The American judge in the Supreme Court has no compeer. The pomp and parade which surround the entrance of a

The Supreme Court sits in Washington; but each of the nine judges visits for a part of the year one of the nine circuits into which the country is divided, and assists the circuit judges. The circuits are again divided into districts, each of which has its own court and judge. These are all national courts, the judges of which are approved by the Senate upon the nomination of the President, and hold office during life or good behavior. The whole forms the national judiciary, to which every citizen has the right of appeal in any cause involving the citizens or corporations of another State. We come next to the

LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT.

This consists of two Houses, a House of Representatives and a Senate, which meet at Washington twice a year upon fixed dates, March and December. The House is composed of three hundred and twenty-five Representatives. Every State sends members in exact proportion to its population as shown by each decadal census. The number of members is not regularly increased. The number of population to each Representative is raised; thus in 1870 every one hundred and thirty-eight thousand inhabitants returned a member; in 1880 it required one hundred and fifty-four thousand. After a census is taken the population is divided by number of members, the quota required to return a member being thus ascertained. Each State is then informed of the number due to it, and arranges its electoral districts accordingly. Thus every ten years electoral power is fairly, because equally, adjusted to the satisfaction of all. By so simple an automatic device the question of representation is removed from politics, and settled forever upon the rock of fair and equal representation. It never can be settled in a free

reached. Educated man demands equality, nor can he rest until he has obtained it. This secured, he becomes quiet and contented. Representatives hold office for two years, their term expiring with each Congress on the fourth of March of every second year. As members are always eligible for re-election, and as the practice is to return men of ability from term to term, the new House is always under the guidance of experienced legislators. Members are paid $5,000 (£1,000) per year and travelling expenses.

The power of the purse is as tenaciously held by the House in Washington as in London; all money bills originate in it by express provision of the Constitution. Alike in this, the two Houses present an entirely different appearance; on entering the House at Washington the visitor is struck by the contrast. Instead of the uncomfortable benches at Westminster and the lack of all facilities for reading or writing, the newer House presents its members all sitting in good easy chairs, at separate desks, like so many good boys at school; they are busily at work with their correspondence, or consulting books of reference. Pages answer their call. They attend to their legislative duties when fresh during the day. When a division is called, instead of wasting twenty minutes, and requiring every member to get up and walk past tellers, the business is done in a few minutes without disturbance; the clerk calls the roll of names alphabetically, and each member nods or shakes his head, or call out "no. A record is kept, and result announced, and business proceeds. How simple! Business is not often obstructed in the House. When an orator exhausts its patience he is made to sit down by the call for the question, and unless he gets a majority in favor of hearing him further, he is ruled out. Yet neither party complains that this rule has worked serious injury; no party seeks to change it. It has not prevented full discussion, and it has enabled the House to transact business properly.

66

aye or

Next in order follows that one American institution which has received the unqualified approval of every man who has given an opinion upon the subject. I never heard even a British Tory utter a word in its disparagement. I cannot im

agine what a man could say except in praise of the

UNITED STATES SENATE.

Proud, indeed, may the man be who can style himself Senator." To this august body each of the States sends two members, six years being the term of office. These are elected by the legislatures of the States, and hence reflect the popular desire. Senators are, of course, the adherents of one or other political party, as it obtains sway in the various States. As the terms of service are so arranged that only one-third of the Senators retire, unless re-elected, every two years, the tendency is for the Senate to respond somewhat less promptly than the Lower House to the changes of public opinion.

The Senate has large powers; all laws must be passed by it as well as by the House. No treaty with a foreign power is valid without its approval by a two-third vote; all ambassadors and agents to foreign powers must be approved by it. Much has been said about the patronage of the President; but he cannot appoint a postmaster unless the nominee is passed upon and confirmed by this august tribunal. It has been said by more than one political writer that the American Senate is the ideal second chamber of the world. Some assert that it is the only second chamber which possesses real power and is permanently fixed in the hearts of the masses. It is certainly regarded in America as a great promotion to be elevated from the House to the Senate, and it is none the less certain that the entire nation regards the Senate with pride and affection. All officials in America being paid, the salary of a Senator is the same as that of a Representative, $5,000 (£1,000) per year and travelling expenses.

Lord Salisbury will be envying this American institution as well as the Supreme Court ere long, mark you, for his own second chamber gives unmistakable evidence of decay, and in good time he may even come to see that an elected President is preferable to a hereditary ruler. We cannot despair of his reaching finally to the full measure of the political equality of the citizen, since he begins so well with the chief American institution, the Supreme Court.

Here is indeed a lucky hit. Since these words were written a member of Parliament sends me confirmation of this prophecy. This hopeful student of republican institutions, my Lord Salisbury, has said in a recent speech:

The Americans, as you know, have a Senate. I wish we could institute it in this country. Marvellous in efficiency and strength!"

So, another American institution envied ! Truly this former Saturday Reviewer is a more promising pupil than Mr. Gladstone himself, and almost equal to Lord Rosebery. Nothing easier, my lord, than to get a copy of the American Senate. The secret of its marvellous strength and efficiency is an open one. You know it well. The Senate springs from and rests upon the suffrages of the people. There is not a trace of hereditary poison in its veins to steal away its power. In an elective assembly such as this, a man of real power like Lord Salisbury would be twice the man he is when leading a set of hereditary accidents.

Having already obtained Lord Salisbury's endorsement of the Supreme Court and the Senate, I am encouraged to go a step further and commend for his approval the institution he should next endorse, a Parliament of duly paid members elected by equal electoral districts for a fixed term of two years. Until this is secured the government of Britain must remain exposed to every passing gust of popular emotion, and hence exercise no steadying effect in periods of excitement. A British ministry does not govern, but bows to the clamor it should withstand. And upon my British readers let me once more impress the truth that in all the elements of true conservatism, in all that goes to make up a strong government, a power competent to maintain justice and to defeat attacks upon the rights or property of others, and when necessary, to keep the ship of state with its head against the wildest hurricane, the American system, as I must compliment Lord Salisbury upon being one of the first European statesmen to discover, is infinitely beyond the monarchical. man who knows both well, and has property in both lands, may be trusted to tell his inquirers that his republican title gives him much the less uneasiness. This is further demonstrated by the highest

The

WAR AND TREATY-MAKING POWER.

In two vital respects the powers of the executives of the old and new English lands differ. First, no treaty with a foreign power is binding until ratified by the Senate. Indeed, as we have seen, no Minister can be appointed to a foreign power until approved by this chamber. This vote of the Senate has several times kept the administration from entering into injudicious arrangements. Even General Grant and his cabinet committed themselves to the acquisition of San Domingo. Recently the late administration was led into a very questionable treaty with Spain. The temptation for a few men, and especially for one man, to characterize his administration by some brilliant stroke calculated to dazzle the populace at the moment, or to appeal to the national vanity, is a source of real danger in all popular governments. Not what is permanently valuable, but what is presently telling, is apt to be considered. Against this danger, for which the monarchical system has no provision whatever, the republican opposes the cool, deliberate decision of an impersonal judge, the Senate. No man's glory is brightened or dimmed by the decision. What is for the lasting good of the nation is thought of-not what will bring temporary popularity to a cabinet or save a ministry. It must surely be a prejudiced mind which does not feel that the advantage is here upon the side of the younger land.

The second vital difference is even of deeper import than that just recited. In the Republic, war can be declared only by the two Houses of Congress, approved by the President. Before the sword can be drawn both branches of the legislature must be wrought up to the pitch of this extreme and momentous act. The House, the Senate, and the Executive in the person of the President, must consider, discuss, and decide the question under surroundings of the deepest solemnity, and with the nation-the world-anxiously looking on. Every Representative of the people, and every Senator, may speak in his place and record his vote for or against. Public attention is thus fixed and concentrated upon the crisis, and

Time, precious time, which ever cools the passions of men and works for peace, is thus gained, and every official, every member of the legislature, publicly assumes the fearful responsibility of engag ing in the slaughter of his fellow men. If ever war be proclaimed by the Republic, which God forbid, since all her paths are peace, it will not be the act of one branch or another of the government, but the solemn public act of all, legislative and executive. Contrast this with monarchical countries, in which a few excited partisans, sometimes only one or two real actors, who sit in a close cabinet chamber, commit the people to criminal war-sometimes to prolong their own tenure of office, or to promote some party end.

My American readers may not be aware of the fact that, while in Britain an act of Parliament is necessary before works for a supply of water or a mile of railway can be constructed, six or seven men can plunge the nation into war, or, what is perhaps equally disastrous, commit it to entangling alliances without consulting Parliament at all. This is the most pernicious, palpable effect flowing from the monarchical theory, for these men do this in the king's name," who is in theory still a real monarch, although in reality only a convenient puppet, to be used by the cabinet at pleasure to suit their own ends. Next to the sapping of the roots of true manhood in the masses, by decreeing their inferiority to other men at birth, this is the most potent evil which exists to-day in the British Constitution, and it is chargeable solely to the monarchical system. It does not rank with the first evil, however, being mainly material, while the other is of the spirit, injury to which is the gravest misfortune which can befall a nation. But this vital truth not one of the so-called "practical" statesmen of Britain sees or will consider, or, perhaps what is nearer the truth, will venture to tell. Not one of them, apparently, has a soul above cheap corn, which is worshipped as the highest good. Indignities to the spirit of the masses, by which manhood is impaired, they seem to argue, may safely pass unnoted, so long as their bodies are fed. And yet better, far better, for a nation that its food for the body should be dear, and equal citizenship be the birthright of the soul. "We have