AMENDMENTS TO FEDERAL CONSTITU

TION.

There were wide differences of opinion concerning the new Constitution, and in many quarters its adoption was vigorously opposed. Several states ratified it with the express understanding that amendments should be immediately proposed by Congress to cure defects and supply omissions which were deemed vital to the success of the new government about to be established. In many cases the conventions proposed specific amendments, and instructed the representatives from such states in Congress to endeavor to procure their submission to the states for their consideration. So many states joined in this movement that its success, so far as Congress was concerned, was practically assured. The first Congress assembled on the 4th of March, 1789, and soon afterwards began the consideration of propositions to amend the Constitution. The subject was considered with great care, not only as to the substance of the amendments, but also as to their form and language. The result was a series of amendments, constituting, in substance, a national Bill of Rights, and which will long stand as models of constitutional expression.

On the 25th of September, 1789, Congress passed a resolution requesting the President to submit to the executives of the several states twelve amendments to the Constitution. All were ratified except two; one of these provided that "after the first enumeration, required by the first article of the Constitution,

there shall be one representative for every 30,000, until the number shall amount to 100; after which, the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress that there shall be not less than 100 representatives, nor less than one representative for every 40,000 persons, until the number of representatives shall amount to 200; after which, the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress that there shall not be less than 200 representatives, nor more than one representative for every 50,000 persons;" and the other, that "no law varying the compensation for the services of the senators and representatives shall take effect until an election of representatives shall have intervened."

February 27, 1790, the New York legislature ratified eleven of the amendments, including the first, relative to apportionment in the House of Representatives, but rejected the second, relating to the compensation of members of Congress. Virginia ratified the amendments on the 15th of December, 1791. This was the eleventh state, and made the three fourths required by the Constitution. The ratification was therefore complete, and the ten amendments were in effect from that date.

The following is the resolution proposing these amendments:

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES.

Begun and held at the city of New York on Wednesday, the 4th of March, 1789.

The convention of a number of states having, at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added; and, as extending the ground

of public confidence in the government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution:

Resolved, By the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, two thirds of both houses concurring, that the following articles be proposed to the legislatures of the several states as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution, namely:

ARTICLE I.

1. [Religious toleration; speech and press to be free; right of petition.]-Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Note. The prohibition against the establishment of a religion applies only to Congress, and does not affect the power of the states on this subject. Religious liberty in general, as enjoyed by the people of the states, is not protected by the national Constitution. Religious toleration is a matter of state regulation; but under the foregoing prohibition Congress can make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion. See Permoli v. New Orleans (1845) 3 How. 609, II L. ed. 748, in which it was held that the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to consider the validity of an ordinance adopted by Municipality No. 1 in the city of New Orleans, regulating the use of Catholic churches for funerals, and requiring funeral services to be held at the "obituary chapel situated in Rampart street." The court said the question was exclusively one of state cognizance.

State Constitutions and laws should be consulted for provisions relating to religious liberty.

Considering the scope and purpose of the foregoing prohibition, the Supreme Court in Davis v. Beason (1890) 133 U. S. 342, 33 L. ed. 640, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 299, said: "The Ist Amendment to the Constitution, in declaring that Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or forbidding the free exercise thereof, was intended to allow everyone under the jurisdiction of the United States to entertain such notions respecting his relations to his Maker and the duties they imposed as may be approved by his judgment and conscience, and to exhibit his sentiments in such form of worship as he may think proper, not injurious to the equal rights of others, and to prohibit legislation for the support of any religious tenets, or the modes of worship of any sect. The oppressive measures adopted, and the cruelties and punishments inflicted, by the governments of Europe for many ages, to compel parties to conform in their religious beliefs and modes of worship to the views of the most numerous sect, and the folly of attempting in that way to control the mental operations of persons, and enforce an outward conformity to a prescribed standard, led to the adoption of the Amendment in question. It was never intended or supposed that the Amendment could be invoked as a protection against legislation for the punishment of acts inimical to the peace, good order, and morals of society."

The provision securing the freedom of speech and of the press does not apply to aliens who are excluded from the country because they are anarchists. Congress has power to provide for such exclusion, and to deport persons found in the country contrary to the provisions of the immigration laws. An alien does not become one of the people to whom the constitutional guaranties are applicable, by an attempt to enter the country if forbidden by law. United States ex rel. Turner v. Williams (1904) 194 U. S. 292, 48 L. ed. 985, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 719.

Discussions in Congress by members of that body are protected under the provisions relating to freedom of speech. Kilbourn v. Thompson (1880) 103 U. S. 204, 26 L. ed. 392.

ARTICLE II.

1. [People may keep arms.]—A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

ARTICLE III.

I. [Quartering of soldiers limited.]-No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

ARTICLE IV.

1. [Unreasonable searches and seizures.]—The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.

Note. The provision against unreasonable searches and seizures is violated by the compulsory production of a man's private papers to establish a criminal charge against him, or to forfeit his property. Boyd v. United States (1886) 116 U. S. 634, 29 L. ed. 752, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 524.

ARTICLE V.

1. [Indictment; twice in jeopardy; personal and property rights.]-No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in