characteristics of his fellow delegates, and some important documents disclosing the work of the Committee of Detail in different stages of its progress. The author has very wisely chosen not to set forth these various diaries or records successively, one after the other, as that would have left the reader's task in comparing them almost as troublesome as before, but he has adopted the plan of gathering together all of the material from all of the records bearing upon each day's session of the convention, and of allowing each record for that day to remain complete by itself. An important part of the author's task (indeed he states it to have been his "first purpose") was to bring back the texts from a state of corruption, through successive revisions and emendations, to the state of their original purity, by an exact reprint of the original manuscripts. It is evident that he has performed this undertaking with all of the historian's care for unimpeachable accuracy,-one had almost said with meticulous particularity, since he offers something like an apology for the failure to use superior letters in the abbreviations. That such care and precision in the editing of the materials was badly needed, in the interests of historical correctness, is apparent from his statement that "it has been found that most printed texts of the more important records cannot be accepted implicitly, because of the liberties that have been taken with the manuscripts in preparing them for publication. Furthermore, in the case of the most important record of all, Madison's Debates, it is easily proved that, over thirty years after the convention, the author revised the manuscript and made many changes upon insufficient data, which seriously impaired the value of his notes. This is also true of other records." The third volume contains supplementary matter, the importance of which could hardly be exaggerated, and which is necessary to any exhaustive study of the subject. It consists of a mass of documents (403 in number), chiefly extracts from the correspondand of a few other well-informed perence of the delegates to the convention sons, contributions to the press, public addresses, and opinions expressed in the state legislatures and ratifying conventions, and, later, in the debates of Congress, in which those best qualified to know the facts explained the action or the intention of the constitutional convention in respect to particular subjects. It would be difficult to pick and choose among this rich repository of information, but it may be mentioned that it includes a great number of letters passing between the members of the convention, or written by them to the leading and influential men in their states, much of the defense of the Constitution by Madison and Hamilton in "The Federalist," the important parts of the proceedings and speeches in the state conventions, the whole of Luther Martin's "Genuine Information" communicated to the legislature of Maryland, and three very interesting letters or reports by the French chargé d'affaires to his Minister for Foreign Affairs, which show how anxiously the proceedings of the convention were watched abroad. The whole of the material is made easily accessible by two well-prepared indices, the first arranged according to the clauses of the Constitution, the second a general index to the three volumes. And no small measure of praise should be accorded to the Yale University Press for the mechanical execution of the work, which is excellent in every particular. We THE FRAMING OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. By Max Farrand, Professor of History in Yale University. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1913. Pp. 281. Drawing on the rich store of materials in his "Records of the Federal Convention," Professor Farrand here presents the story of the making of the Constitution in narrative form. think he does himself less than justice in describing it as "a brief presentation of the author's personal interpretation of what took place in the federal convention, merely a sketch in outline, the details of which each student must fill out according to his own needs." It is of course not the final word on the subject. It may be that the definitive history of the convention of 1787 will never be written. None the less, this volume is a valuable contribution to American historical literature. It is comprehensive without being diffuse, it contains all that is essential for the general reader, it is accurate in all details and free from any bias, and it is embellished by a clear, pleasant, and graphic style. It is, moreover, of absorbing interest, not only as a recital of momentous events, but from the manner in which the personal characteristics and the political opinions of the members of the convention are exhibited. Here we have a "close up" view of the fathers of the Republic, as they labored through the long weeks of an unusually hot summer, not at all harmonious in their thoughts upon the formation of the new government, not free from spirited and even acrimonious debate, but all earnestly bent upon the accomplishment of their tremendous task, and finally uniting in the composition of the most important of all political instruments. Here we see the august Washington, carefully abstaining from participation in the debates, even when the convention sat in committee of the whole, lest his immense influence should overawe the other delegates, yet unable wholly to suppress his smiles or frowns as he favored or disapproved the proposals brought forward. Here also we have pictures of the venerable and philosophic Franklin, casting counsels of moderation upon the stormy waters of debate; of Madison, the methodical, learned, and industrious, the scholar in politics, yet more than anyone else the father of the Constitution; of the small and tense frame of Hamilton, the aristocrat, as he delivered his one great speech in the convention; of Luther Martin, able and (as some thought) unscrupulous, inconceivably tedious and prolix, and yet the author of the "supreme law of the land" clause; of the brilliant and slightly presumptuous youth from South Carolina, Charles Pinckney; of William Pierce of Georgia, that most excellent "mixer," blessed with a sense of humor, who placed posterity under an obligation by recording in familiar phrases his personal impressions of all his fellow delegates; and of those gifted men and solid citizens Mason, King, Ellsworth, Sherman, Gerry, Wilson, Randolph and the two Morrises. In these days, perhaps more than at any other time, it is important that American citizens should acquaint themselves with their Constitution. This cannot be done by a mere perusal of its text. A knowledge of its spirit, its great purposes, its historical bases, can be gathered only from a study of why and how it came to be made. To all who value the institutions of our country and desire an intelligent appreciation of their worth and the reasons for their existence Professor Farrand's excellent work is highly commended. WOMAN'S SUFFRAGE BY CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. By Henry St. George Tucker. New Haven: Yale University Press. London: Humphrey Milford; Oxford University Press, 1916, pp. 204. The author of this work carefully avoids a discussion of the question of the right of women to vote and refrains from expressing any opinion whatever on the subject, but assumes as his task that of showing that the attempt to bring about the right of suffrage for women by an amendment to the Constitution of the United States is opposed to the genius of that instrument, and subversive of one of the most important principles incorporated in it. His line of argument is that the Constitution itself (citing Article I, Section 2; Article II, Section 2; and the Certain States, however, have found it expedient to grant the right or privilege of suffrage to women. Other States, believing it inexpedient for them to adopt the system, have denied the right to women for reasons which concern the people of those States only. Is there, then, warrant or justification, or is it consonant with the genius and spirit of our system of Government, our ideas of freedom of action and of local self-government, for a group of States to force upon another group a system of suffrage not believed by the latter to be adapted to their social, ethnic, and political needs and conditions? It cannot be denied that there are varying conditions of suffrage in the different States and that these have a of mind of the people toward the quesprofound influence upon the attitude tion of suffrage. The people of the United States having agreed in their Fundamental Law to leave to the individual States this important feature of local self-government, and local selfgovernment being one of the greatest bulwarks of a free people, why should it be abridged by the action of even the constitutional three-fourths of the States, when no advantage results to the majority States, and the minority are forced to accept that which is conlieve? Such a course does not work trary to their best interests, as they befor "the promotion of the general welfare" called for by the Constitution, but tends to destroy the equilibrium of power existing between the States and the Federal Government, established by the Constitution. The principle of State control of suffrage has been recognized and maintained for one hundred and twentythree years, and the people very recently made recognition of it anew in the seventeenth amendment. But if the proposed amendment for suffrage of women were to be adopted and the power taken from the States and given to the Federal Government, "the balancing of powers will be destroyed and an unjust inequality of power established that must result in the destruction of our present form of government." The work contains a clear, logical, fresh re-statement of the meaning, and significance to the individual citizen, of the term "local self-government.” These three words, he says, “are not, as supposed by many, mere words to conjure with; oftentimes invoked by politicians, because of their hoary and honorable lineage, to lead the people the into devious and slippery paths. These words had their origin in the profoundest political philosophy. They are the answer which free government makes to the oppressed. They are response that liberty makes to tyranny. They are the guaranty of the safety of the home, the recognition of the trusteeship of man as the defender of the home, and the guardian of its sacred precincts." Throughout the book there is a frankness and reasonableness that is refreshing. One finishes the reading of it with a regret that it is not longer, and with a purpose to re-read it, for it is stimulating to the mind, and gives one a firmer conviction of the soundness of the principles of government which our forefathers adopted as best suited to perpetuate liberty and justice. CHAS. RAY DEAN. Preparedness, A National Function A bill is pending in the legislature of New York, proposing an amendment to the constitution of that state, by which the state would surrender to the federal government all of its constitutionally reserved authority to provide for the training of its militia and to appoint their officers. The bill recites that the organization, arming, and discipline of the people of the United States for military purposes, as well as the command and government of the forces in case of war or invasion, are national functions, affecting the security and prosperity of the entire country, and therefore the amendment proposed would declare that all laws, regulations, and constitutional provisions of the state relating to the militia are subordinate to the power of the federal government. It will be remembered that the Constitution of the United States, although it grants to Congress power to "provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions," and to "provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States," yet reserves "to the states respectively the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress. Even this limited measure of control by the national government over the military forces of the states was not obtained without decided and even impassioned resistance in some of the state conventions called for the ratification of the Constitution; and it was then felt that the reservation of the authority to appoint the officers and train the militia was the only safeguard which protected the states against an oppressive and tyrannical employment of their armed forces, possibly against themselves, by the United States. The change of sentiment in this regard is of course a matter of gradual evolution, and not a sudden growth. But the measure under consideration in New York marks the farthest advance in the direction of nationalizing the military strength of the country, or giving to Congress the authority to do so. Concentration of control over all the fighting potentiality of the nation may become an absolute necessity in the event of war with any important foreign power. But aside from this, But aside from this, if the proposed constitutional amendment should be submitted to the people of New York and adopted by them, it will be interesting as the first instance in which a state has voluntarily surrendered to the United States a power specifically reserved to it, although the people of the states generally have tacitly acquiesced in an ever widening assumption of functions and activities by the central government, in so much that some of the duties resting primarily upon the states seem now to be but imperfectly performed unless by the aid of federal laws and federal officers, and some of the powers of the states appear to be in danger of becoming atrophied from disuse. At the same time, New York has taken measures for the more efficient organization and mobilization of its militia forces. Chapter 568 of the Laws of 1916 provides that the militia of the state shall be divided into two parts, the active and the reserve militia, the active corps to consist of the organized and uniformed military force known as the "National Guard," and of the naval militia, and the reserve militia to consist of all those liable for service in the militia but not serving in the National Guard or in the naval militia of the state. The law also declares that "whenever it shall be necessary to call out any portion of the reserve militia for active duty in case of insurrection, invasion, tumult, riot, or breach of the peace, or imminent danger thereof, or when called forth for service under the Constitution and laws of the United States, the Governor may call for and accept as many volunteers as are required for such service, or he may direct his order to the mayor of any city or the supervisor of any town, who, upon the receipt of the same, shall forthwith proceed to draft as many of the reserve militia in his city or town, or accept as many volunteers, as are required by the Governor, and shall forthwith forward to the Governor a list of the persons so drafted or accepted as volunteers." |