CHAPTER XI.

THE GUARANTY OF REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT TO THE STATES.

The Constitution. -It is imposed as a duty upon the United States to guarantee to every State in the Union a republican form of government.1 The requirement sprang from a conviction that governments of dissimilar principles and forms were less adapted to a federal union than those which were substantially alike, and that the superintending government ought to possess authority to defend the system agreed upon against innovations which would bring with them discordant and antagonistic principles.2 The terms of this provision " presuppose a pre-existing government of the form that is to be guaranteed. As long, therefore, as the existing republican forms are continued by the States, they are guaranteed by the federal Constitution. Whenever the States may choose to substitute other republican forms, they have a right to do so, and to claim the federal guaranty for the latter. The only restriction imposed on them is, that they shall not exchange republican for anti-republican constitutions."

What is Republican. - By republican government is understood a government by representatives chosen by the people; and it contrasts on one side with a democracy, in which the people or community as an organized whole wield sovereign powers of government, and on the other

1 Const., Art. IV. § 4.

8 Federalist, No. 43.

2 Federalist, Nos. 21 and 43.

with the rule of one man, as king, emperor, czar, or sultan, or with that of one class of men, as an aristocracy. In strictness a republican government is by no means inconsistent with monarchical forms, for a king may be merely an hereditary or elective executive while the powers of legislation are left exclusively to a representative body freely chosen by the people. It is to be observed, however, that it is a republican form of government that is to be guaranteed; and in the light of the undoubted fact that by the Revolution it was expected and intended to throw off monarchical and aristocratic forms, there can be no question but that by a republican form of government was intended a government in which not only would the people's representatives make the laws, and their agents administer them, but the people would also, directly or indirectly, choose the executive. But it would by no means follow that the whole body of the people, or even the whole body of adult and competent persons, would be admitted to political privileges; and in any republican State the law must determine the qualifications for admission to the elective franchise.

As the original States must be understood to have had the proper form of government when the Constitution was adopted, so the subsequent admission of a State to the Union by Congress must be received as a decision that its constitution is not objectionable.

Changes in Government. A republican government once established in a State may be endangered or set aside, so as to demand the action of Congress under this provision, in the following several ways:

First. By the hostile action of some foreign power, in taking military possession of the territory of a State and setting up some government therein not established by the people themselves. Such a government would not be republican, whatever its form, because not expressing the

will of the people governed, but of the foreign power establishing it.

Second. By the revolutionary action of the people themselves in forcibly rising against the constituted authorities, and setting the government aside, or attempting to do so, for some other. In this case the United States would be called upon to act, whatever the form of the government proposed. Adequate provision having been made for changes in constitutions under regular and peaceful forms, and without resort to revolution, it is not contemplated that revolution by force shall ever be suffered. The theory that the people at will may change their institutions is for the time subordinated to their constitution, which they provide may be changed in a certain specified mode, but by implication agree shall not be changed otherwise.

When an attempt is made to change institutions in either of the modes above specified, it will become the duty of the federal government to interpose and protect the people of the State in their existing government by the employment of the military force, to the full extent, if need be, of the national power.1

Third. In strict observance of the forms prescribed by a state constitution for revising or amending it, it would be possible for the people of the State to effect such changes as would deprive it of its republican character. Thus they might in that manner set up a monarchy, or so restrict suffrage as to deprive representation altogether of its popular character, and thereby establish an aristocracy ; and it would then become the duty of Congress to interfere. But first the question would present itself, whether the changes made are so radical in their nature as to render the government unrepublican; and a decision by Congress in the negative would be final and conclusive against interference.

1 Texas v. White, 7 Wall. 700; Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 1.

It is always possible that Congress may assume changes in state government to be unwarranted when they are not, and thereupon interfere to overturn institutions with which they have no right to meddle. This is only saying that any power, however necessary and however well guarded, may be abused; but in every State there must be some final tribunal for the determination of all probable controversies; and as Congress is made the final judge in this case, there can be no appeal from its decision except to forcible resistance.

Reconstruction. Whenever a state government has been displaced by rebellion or other force, it will become necessary for some existing authority to institute proceedings for restoring it. The proper authority for this purpose would seem to be the legislature of the Union. As in the case of Territories, if the people of the State by spontaneous action should originate an unexceptionable government for themselves, it might be recognized, and the State admitted to representation under it. But to prevent confusion some enabling action would generally be found advisable, if not absolutely essential.

Conflicting Claims to Government. When a dispute arises respecting whether a particular instrument has become established as the constitution of a State, and there are parties claiming under and in opposition to it, or when the executive or legislative offices of a State are the subject of contest, it is always supposed that there exists within the State itself proper, legitimate, and effectual authority for determining the contest. It is not the business of the federal authority to interfere in such cases, unless regularly called upon to give protection against violence. Such contests must be settled by the state judicial tribunals when the case is such as to admit of it, or by the legislature, or even by the acquiescence of the people in the claims of one of the parties; and the federal government

The federal author

should accept the settlement as final. ities can have no concern with questions of regularity in state proceedings, or with questions of what is proper or just in state affairs. Nevertheless in the case of a disputed state government it may become necessary for the political departments of the United States government, in the performance of their own duties, to recognize one of the two as rightful; and when this takes place the recognition will bind the government of the United States in all its departments, and also the people.1

Invasion and Insurrection. - The United States are also required to protect each State against invasion, and, on application of the legislature, or of the executive when the legislature cannot be convened, against domestic violence.2 This article, as has been truly said, becomes an immense acquisition of strength and additional force to the aid of any state government in case of internal rebellion or insurrection against lawful authority; while, on the other hand, by the requirement of a demand for aid every pretext for intermeddling with the internal concerns of any State, under color of protecting her against unlawful violence, is taken away. 3

Titles of Nobility. The States are prohibited, as Congress is, from bringing an anti-republican feature into American institutions by the grant of titles of nobility.* The prohibition executes itself, as the titles, should a grant be attempted, would be simply void.

1 Luther v. Borden, 7 How. 1.

2 Const., Art. IV. § 4; Federalist, No. 43.

8 1 Tuck. Bl., App. 367.

4 Const., Art. I. § 10, cl. 1.