The Real Danger

The American who has craveled about his country sufficiently to efface the bias of provincialisra must have observed the spirit of broad democracywhich pervades all classes and all conditions of people in all sections and all localities. It js a distinctive American feature. It seems to be indigenous to the soil. It is at once the wonder and the admiration of observers from other lands. Notwithstandingthephenomenal growth of population and the chaotic condition existing in many communities as an incident of rapid settlement, this feature of American life is constantly becoming stronger and is leading to a higher plañe of citizenship. In spite of the pessimistic forebodings of a certain school of reformers, the American people as a whole are better fitted by catión, by association, by habit and by inclination, for the duties of citizenship than ever before. The evolution of our political life has been one of progress, and the advance during this century has been almost immeasurable. To thosewho believe in the people this s a pleasant reflection. But on the other hand we must observe that the tendency of recent legislation has not been in the direction of a broader democracy, of a wider exercise by the people of the functions of popular government. The later changes in organic law have also been in the contrary direction. In the midst of this tide of reform which is pressing the limits of constitutional government on all sides, the thoughtful citizen may well stop to inquire where this clamor and clashing of factions, this craze for reform at anv cost, is leadèng. Are we sailing within safe constitutional limits? May we not be drifting dangerously close to shoals over which a free people cannot pass in safety? While they are, donbtless, had enough, the evils against which civic federations, committees of seventy and other social rei'ormers have directed their efforts are not those which threaten the personal liberty and the individuality oí the Citizen. Kxcessive taxation, extravagance in public affairs, corruption in high places, can all be remedied without infringing upon the prerogatives of the people. The history of local government in this country clearly establishes the principie that the closer touch between the people and the governing body secures the better administration. The real danger to American institution lies in the tendency of most reformers to subvert the fundamental principies of liberty, to narrow the functions of popular government and disregard the rights of the ority, for the purpose of effecting the reform of temporary evils. Reform which is effected at sucli a cost is dearly bought. The constitutions, state and federal, should stand between the individual rights and personal liberties of citizens and the despotism of unbridled majorities as Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights stand between the British subject and kingly prerogatives. Jefferson believed that government was most enduring, had the strongest hold upon the hearts of the people and could command greater sacrifices upon the altar o patriotism, which came in contac with the private concern, the socia and commercial life of the people a the fewest possible points, and ac corded, most completely the direction of local affairs to the people. Therein lies the true strength of democracy. But, since Jefferson's time, we have had a quarter of a century of paternal government. The domain of private enterprise las been invaded. The material welfare of a portion of the people ïas been made a charge upon the state. Centralization and class rule have jeen dominant. The legitímate result of this departure from early traditions has been a school o thinkers and agitators whose "isms' range all the way from populism and other mild forms of Iunacy to avowed socialism. One has but to glance over the dispatches from the various state capitals, this winter to see whole sessions of state legis latures given over to private bilis - to legislation for this or that inter est. Such reforms as have been effected, and the majority of those demanded, have been on lines cal culated to curb and control the popular will It is in this direction that the rea dangers of American institutions lie Every restriction upon personal lib erty is a step backwards. Every function removed from popular control is an additional menace to popular government. Nothing will undermine our political fabric so quickly nor so surely as a disregard of the rights of the individual. Within certain prescribed limits the majority must rule, but, when that majority in the arrogance of its strength oversteps those limits to the disparagement of the minority, its rule becomes despotism, and the despotisHi of a majority may become as onerous, as galling, and breed the same sentiment towards cpnstituted authority as the despotism of a czar. The future progress and prosperity of America lies not in the restriction but in the extensión of popular rights and popular privileges.