and the movements taking place according to it in the starry heavens. A fact as usually observed is only a partial truth. It is a little glimpse of the true reality. Such a fact becomes truth only when it is seen in its scientific principle. Then we see the great whole of which the fact is a partial manifestation. The swine (the animal senses alone, of whatever animal you please), does not see the truth, but only a little glimpse of it, as inadequate as the particular grass-blade under your feet would be if you were to offer it as the reality of the whole vegetable world. All facts depend on other facts; each fact depends on other surrounding facts. So, when you come to investigate what this fact really is you see extending on all sides of it long series of relations. The fact taken out of these relations would be no fact at all.

The principle, the law of the fact, states what is true under all circumstances. Midway between facts and principles are typical facts; these are what art uses. The typical fact is one so complete that it illustrates almost all of the phases of the law or principle. Each fact gives some phases of the law, but not all, and is therefore defective. The typical fact should contain all phases.

Art in giving to facts the form of types makes for us a series of permanent facts. These facts of art do not have such historic reality as the particular events or individuals have, but a deeper one, inasmuch as they present for us a more correct general impression. Shakspere's historical plays give us an account of the development and growth of the English nation from a mere dependency of France and Rome to a mighty nation, with Protestantism and a powerful House of Commons. No history yet written shows us the essentials-the typical facts-like these historical plays of Shakspere. So, too, a novel of Charles Kingsley, or of Walter Scott, may give us the true picture of an historic epoch, while the historian may be far from adequate.

The principle of matter is gravity. In the pyramid, one sees a structure in which gravity has done its work. The material has assumed the form of a heap. Proportion and harmony-rational principles-have a very faint adumbration in the pyramid or tumulus. In the proper architecture of the Egyptians, in their temples, with the rows of sphinxes, in their Memnon statues, one discovers a sublime grandeur but no clearness of self-conscious reason. Christ has not revealed to that nation the divine-human nature of God, and the Egyptian worships animal forms for gods. His architecture suggests the wandering of the human soul through the gate of death, upward to association with deities, or downward to the animal forms in which it will be born again if it does not use aright the present life.

In India we find architecture struggling under the load of a bewildering variety which it can not subordinate to a unity without destroying its individuality-the general form of the temple having no harmony with the elements of which it is composed. The temples excavated from the rock under the mountain fill the beholder with the oppressive feeling which the spectacle of human nature, crushed to the earth, inspires. Man seems to be nothing and nature everything.

With the Greeks, there prevails an extravagant thirst for individual freedom, which may be expressed by freedom in the body. Freedom of body takes the form of gracefulness. Greek architecture celebrates the same principle of freedom. The ideal within attains mastery over matter, and matter, instead of oppressing it, yields to it and is its instrument or vehicle for adequate expression.

The tendency upwards symbolizes the spiritual. The counter-tendency is that of gravity which would reduce all to the level of the ground. The temple exhibits the struggle between these two tendencies. In order that the struggle may become visible, the support must be isolated and not be merely a solid wall: thus the column makes its appearance. The Doric, Ionic, or Corinthian column will have a capital on its top showing by its swelling or yield

Referring to the classification of the special arts, we remember that architecture stands at the basis-being the lowest when we consider power of expressing what is spiritual in its nature. Above it stand sculpture, painting, music and poetry. Architecture is the least ideal of the arts, for it requires actual greatness of extent in space to produce its effect, while sculpture can produce powerful effects with comparatively small magnitudes, and painting can represent much greater space-magnitudes by perspective, without requiring more than an insignificant bit of mere surface. A Mont Blanc could be painted on one's thumb nail. Music uses no space, but only time, for its material, and becomes more ideal than painting. Finally, poetry uses the word for its material. The word is the product of reason; mere sound is invested with meaning and the meaning is not a mere appeal to feeling, as is the case with musical tones, but each word is such only for the activity of thought. Unless the meaning of the word is conceived in the mind it remains only a sound.

We must also refer to the distinction already made between the Oriental, Classic, and Christian phases of artcalled Symbolic, Classic and Romantic. These distinctions will make themselves valid within the sphere of each one the special arts.

Symbolic architecture presents us the spectacle of a struggle in which the principle of form, of freedom, of spiritual aspiration is suppressed and subordinated by matter.

superincumbent roof, and also its strength, which is sufficient to bear up the roof without losing its proportion and harmony. It tells us that the roof is no crushing weight, but only an occasion of graceful curves, in which it preserves symmetry and self-poise. It is everywhere the same in Greek art; serenity is expressed by a so-called "classic repose," which is this exhibition of calmness and self-control under opposing weight or power. There appears an equipoise, resulting from this capacity to use opposition as an occasion for the display of spiritual might. The obstacle seems to be there solely for the purpose of aiding the expression of the spiritual.

In Romantic architecture we find the overpowering importance of what is spiritual expressed. Boundless aspiration, the struggle for the immaterial and invisible, as in the "Transfiguration" of Raphael, is the dominant principle.

The basilica was the court of justice for the Greek or the Roman, and the first Christian churches were modified basilicas. What formed a colonnade around a court-yard was made a colonnade supporting a lofty roof which covered the court entirely, and thus formed what is called the nave of the church. At the end, or near it, was the transept which made the ground-plan of the church a cross, the symbol of the Savior. At first the churches used a style which employed the Roman arch resting upon the columns, and over the intersection of the nave and transept built up a dome, and sometimes repeated the dome over two or more of the arms of the cross. The dome is nothing but a completed arch. Turn the arch on all sides and it forms a dome. The arch and its complete form in the dome consti

tutes the peculiarly Roman principle in architecture, as the columns supporting a low-pitched roof constitute the Greek principle. The Pantheon is the Roman type, while the Parthenon, or the temple of Theseus, is the Greek type of architecture. The dome is peculiarly a structure which symbolizes the subordination of the members of the community to the state. Each stone in the arch supports all the others, and is in turn supported by all the others. Each stone is thus relatively the keystone for the rest. It is so in the dome; and, besides, the dome symbolizes the sky which is over all, and sheds its rain alike on all, and on all lets fall its golden sunshine. The Pantheon at Rome furnished room for all the gods alike. There should be no supreme god, but all should be honored alike.

Now, this principle of indifference which treats all alike, is a proper principle for the state, but not for religion. Christianity, at the height of its expression of its peculiar principle in architecture, therefore, developed a form of architecture that more adequately bodied forth its principle, and, indeed, offered almost a complete contrast to the classic principle of Greece and Rome.

In the Gothic, or pointed style of architecture, we have a purely Romantic type of soul expressed. Boundless aspiration for what was above, contempt for the flesh, belief in the nugatoriness of material things, and faith in the substantiality of spiritual things, all this is portrayed by every line of Gothic architecture. While Greek architecture manifests the fact that matter possesses gravity, and that the earth furnishes support for all, Gothic tells us that the support is above. It is not the floor that supports the pillars, but the pillars support the floor and draw it up-they pull instead of push. The pillars seem to depend from the roof rather than to support the roof. The roof seems drawn up by the attractions from the heavens. The sharp points over the windows and doors, the sharp roofs, and, above all, the steeples ascending like holy flames from altars toward the sky-all that pertains to the Gothic cathedral gives the lie to Greek art and to Oriental art which exhibits the earth as the substantial and upholding. The ground-plan of a cross was formed by the nave and transept, and the altar was placed at the junction of the two arms of the cross; this, too, symbolizes the two-fold nature of man as revealed by Christianity: there is the earthly, fleshly nature, crossed by the other, the spiritual nature. We must crucify our finite natures and thereby realize our spiritual natures. So we have a cross within us, in fact human nature is symbolized by a cross. Then this idea presented in the cross as the ground-plan is repeated over and over throughout the entire structure of the Gothic cathedral. In front there points to the sky a spire, giving to the façade the appearance of an index finger-pointing to the heavens. Or, if there are two spires, they remind us of the two hands as elevated in prayer. Then there is the suggestion of the Trinity; the three crosses on Calvary, the three doors or portals in the façade, the three parts to each window, the three aisles (the nave and two side-aisles, sometimes with duplicated sideaisles, making five), the peaked roof with its two side-spires making the same symbol. The form called the baldichino, or canopy, placed over the altar, with its three pointed rooflets, is the type of all the ornamentation of the pure Gothic. On every point above there is a cross, made usually in the form of the cross-flower, or finial. All along the sloping sides of the pointed arch there is the ornamental foliage of the cross, and within the windows and over the doors the trefoil appears, itself a symbol of the Trinity and of the cross. The tracery in relief which covers the walls and pillars is in this form. The flying buttresses of the more noble specimens of Gothic cathedrals are manifestations of the upward tendency of the outer walls which not only indicate that tendency by their tracery and pointed arch windows,

but by streaming up like aspiring flames or plants, and joining the upward tendency of the central walls.

For the study of Gothic architecture, get some views of the Cologne Cathedral, outside and interior. The Amiens cathedral is very much like it. The two furnish the most perfect types of Gothic. Get pictures of the cathedrals at Rheims, Chartres. For a less advanced type, take Notre Dame, of Paris, and Westminster Abbey. Take York and Canterbury and Chester cathedrals for the English style. Take St. Paul's, of London, and St. Peter's, of Rome, for the later phase of transition from Roman to Gothic. The Romanesque and the Norman style is more under the influence of the Classic, in that it uses the arch without pointing it. The Pantheon of Paris gives further illustration of this Roman influence. The Madeleine of Paris is good for the outside arrangement of a Greek temple. But get pictures of the Parthenon and temple of Jupiter Olympus; of the Pantheon at Rome. Get Saint Sophia at Constantinople, and Saint Marks of Venice, for the earlier stages of Christian modification of Roman architecture. One should own the pictures of the cathedral at Rouen and the cathedral at Burgos.

[See John P. Soule's catalogue, 338 Washington street, Boston, for excellent views of these cathedrals, and at moderate prices.]

THE BOOK OF GOVERNMENT.

I.

Government is an institution of God.

"The powers that be are ordained of God; " that is to say, it is God's will that man should have government. It is God's will that man should live in a social civilized state. To this end government is necessary.

The object of government is to secure justice to the governed. Men are under obligation to have the kind of government best adapted to secure that end.

Governments are usually classed as Monarchies, Aristocracies, and Republics.

A monarchy may be absolute, when all power is possessed by the monarch, or limited, when the power of the monarch is limited by constitution or usages.

Monarchy may be hereditary, or elective. Experience has shown that the former is preferable to the latter. Aristocracy, a government in the hands of nobles, has been found to be the worst form of government.

A republican government receives its powers from the people, and is responsible to the people for the exercise of those powers.

That is the best form of government which is best adapted to secure justice to a people. The same form is not adapted to every state of society. A people may be in such an intellectual and moral condition as to render an absolute monarchy-despotism-necessary. For them despotism would

be the best government. Such a people would be under obligation to have despotism.

Men living in civil society constitute the state. Government is the organ of the state, and derives its powers from the state; that is, from the people. The people are under obligation to give the government such powers as are best adapted to secure justice-good government. The people can not confer upon government the power to do that which is unjust-wrong. Justice is the grand constitutional law of the universe. It is the fundamental principle of all governments-divine and human.

Government, as has been said, is a divine institution. It does not originate with man. It is not a voluntary institution. Men are not subjects of government because they have agreed to be subjects. They were created subjects of government, and they are under obligations to have such

September 4, 1774. They published a Declaration of Rights, and addresses to the people of England and the King, setting forth their grievances and their claims for redress. The second Colonial Congress assembled in Philadelphia,

into a law; but it is iniquity still. Human legislation can not change the physical laws of nature; much less can it change the moral laws of God.

Who is to judge whether a law is in conflict with the law of God? Every man must decide for himself, as every man mnst give an account of himself unto God.

One

It may be asked, "Will not this lead to anarchy? man might think that one law was in conflict with the law of God, and refuse to obey it; and another might think the same of another law, and refuse to obey it. Would there not be an end to all obedience, and an end to government?" By no means. Suppose government lays a tax for what you regard as an unlawful object-a war-tax. You think it is contrary to God's will. You refuse to pay the tax. The collector seizes and sells some of your property. You make no resistance, but suffer what you regard as a wrong.

Again, suppose that government commands you to worship an idol. You refuse, and are cast into prison. You do not shoot down the officer who arrests you: you submit to the penalty. There is nothing in your conduct in either case that leads to anarchy.

If every one made forcible resistance to every law that he deemed wrong, the case would be different. The difficulty

which has arisen in some men's minds is the result of confounding forcible resistance to the government with a refusal to render obedience.

There may be circumstances justifying forcible resistance to government, and the overthrow of the government. There is what is called the right of revolution. To justify a resort to revolution, the oppression must be very great, wellnigh intolerable, and the prospect of success must be good. An unsuccessful attempt at revolution would only increase the evils sought to be removed.

Liberty is the result of law. Man is a moral being, and has under no circumstances a right to do wrong. If a law forbids him to do wrong, it does not abridge his liberty. All the liberty a man can ask is liberty to do right. If laws forbid him to do wrong, and allow him to do right, they do not interfere with his liberty. He needs one thing more: he needs to be protected from wrong doing on the part of others. A perfectly wise system of law would forbid that which is wrong, and permit that which is right. Such a system perfectly executed would protect every one from wrong doing on the part of others. Every one would thus have freedom to do right, and security against wrong. This would be the perfection of liberty. The perfection of law would result in the perfection of liberty.

II.

Previous to the Revolution, all the colonies had governments consisting of a Governor, usually appointed by the King; a Council appointed by the royal authority; and Representatives chosen by the people. The colonial governments were thus modeled after the English government, which consists of the King, Lords, and Commons. The colonial legislators had very limited powers. The Governor had a veto on all their proceedings. The English government thought to content the colonists with the forms of legislation while it retained in its own hands all real power. They wrought better than they knew. They edu cated the people in the use of legislative forms, which was of great service when, after the Declaration of Independence, power came into their hands.

The first Continental Congress consisted of delegates from the different colonies. They met in Philadelphia,

army, and appointed Washington Commander-in-Chief; and on the 4th of July, 1776, declared independence of Great Britain. This Congress assumed the powers of a national government. The necessities of the case justified the assumption, and it was sanctioned by the tacit consent and cordial coöperation of the people of the states. It assumed such powers as were necessary to the carrying on of the war. Its acts took the form of recommendations to the states, which immediately after the Declaration of Independence formed state governments.

This assumption of power by Congress was intended to be temporary. A committee was appointed to prepare “Articles of Confederation" which, when adopted by the legislatures of all the states, should form a bond of union between the states.

It was some time before the articles prepared by the committee were agreed upon in Congress, and still longer before all the state legislatures authorized their Delegates in Congress to ratify them in behalf of the state. Thus the articles did not become binding till March, 1781, nearly five years after the Declaration of Independence. The government exercised by the Continental Congress up to that time was the Revolutionary Government.

By the Articles of Confederation each state was to retain all powers except those "expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled." Each state could send not fewer than two nor more than seven delegates to Congresseach state to maintain its own delegates, and to have one vote in Congress. Very inadequate powers were given to Congress. It could neither lay taxes nor raise troops. It could simply agree that certain sums were needed, and that a certain number of troops ought to be raised, and could apportion the sums and the troops among the states. If the states did not see fit to furnish the money or the troops, Congress had no coercive power in the matter. To exercise these and similar powers the assent of nine states was necessary.

The grand defect of the government of the Confederation was its want of power. After some years' experience of its defects, Washington wrote: "The Confederation seems to me to be little more than a shadow without a substance; and Congress a nugatory body, their ordinances being little attended to."

The defects of the Confederation were more fully developed after the war had closed-the stimulus of danger being removed. The treaties made by Congress were disregarded by some of the states, the requisition for money received no attention; public credit was prostrated; dissensions sprang up between the states, and the acts of Congress were treated with utter neglect. In view of the discouraging prospect, Washington was led to express his fear lest it should be a subject for "regret that so much blood and treasure have been lavished for no purpose, that so many sufferings have been encountered without compensation, and that so many sacrifices have been made in vain."

III.

Many of the leading patriots of the day saw the necessity of a stronger government. Most prominent among those who led the way to the formation of the present Constitution were Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. Owing to the efforts of these and other patriots, a convention of delegates from all the states assembled in Philadelphia. This convention, known as the Federal Convention, opened May 25, 1787. The whole number of delegates was fifty-five.

Rhode Island was not represented. The ablest men of the country were there-Washington, Hamilton, Madison, Franklin, King, Sherman, Ellsworth, Wilson, Pinckney, Livingston, Morris, Dickinson, and others scarcely less distinguished for talents and public services. No convention in ancient or modern times embodied a larger amount of talent, patriotism, and wisdom.

Washington was chosen President. It was voted that the debates should be kept secret. Madison, at the close of each day, made a record of the proceedings of the Convention. After his death the record was published by order of Congress, and thus we have a full and accurate account of the proceedings of the Convention in forming the Constitution. The majority of the members of the Convention came together with the purpose of amending the Articles of Con- | federation, which was confessedly a league between the states. Under the lead of Madison, Hamilton, and of those whose views agreed with theirs, the opinions of the majority were changed, and the first resolution adopted was: "Resolved, That a national government ought to be established, with a supreme legislative, executive, and judiciary.” They then proceeded to the work of forming such a government; but it was a work of great difficulty. There were those who thought that the Convention in so doing was transcending its powers. On the 15th of June, Mr. Patterson, of New Jersey, proposed a plan for a revision of the Articles of Confederation. The two plans were now fairly before the Convention. The one proposed the establishment of a National Government, the other proposed the amendment of the Articles of Confederation. After a debate of four days, it was voted to adhere to the plan for forming a National Government. Seven states-Massachusetts, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, voted for the National plan. Three states, New York, New Jersey, and Delaware, voted for the league plan. The vote of Maryland was divided. Yates and Lansing, delegates with Hamilton from New York, cast the vote of the State. Hamilton was strongly for the National plan.

From this time onward the Convention gave their time to the formation of the Constitution. The difficulties were great, so great that Washington said in a letter to a friend, "I almost despair of seeing a favorable issue to the proceedings of the Convention, and do therefore regret that I have had any agency in the business."

But the patriots persevered, and on the 17th of September, 1787, the Constitution was finished, and received the signatures of all the members of the Convention except Randolph, Mason, and Gerry. Probably not a single member was fully satisfied with it; yet, with the above-named exceptions, it received their signatures and support as the best that could be obtained.

When the Constitution was published, it was attacked by many, and by some of the purest patriots of the day—among them Patrick Henry. Messrs. Hamilton, Jay, and Madison wrote a series of articles explaining and defending the Constitution. These newspaper articles were subsequently published in a volume called "The Federalist." It constitutes a very valuable commentary on the Constitution. One of the most prominent objections urged was that the members of the Federal Convention had transcended their powersthat instead of amending the league, they had formed the plan of the National Government. This objection was strongly urged by Patrick Henry. He especially objected to the expression of the preamble, “We, the people of the United States," instead of "We, the States."

The defenders of the Constitution admitted the fact that they had departed from the league system, and insisted on the necessity of a National Government.

The Constitution was laid before conventions chosen by the

people of each state to ratify or to reject it. Delaware, New Jersey, and Georgia adopted it unanimously; Pennsylvania, Maryland and South Carolina, by large majorities; Massachusetts, New York and Virginia, by small majorities; North Carolina rejected it, and Rhode Island refused to call a convention to consider the question of adoption.

In 1788 Washington was unanimously elected President, and John Adams Vice-President. Congress assembled at New York. As soon as provision was made by law for the appointment of heads of departments, Jefferson was appointed Secretary of State; Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury; Knox, Secretary of War, and John Randolph, Attorney General. The Government was thus fully organized, and its beneficial effects were seen in the increasing pros-perity of the country.

IV.

Experience has shown that every government should have three departments, one to make laws, another to interpret and apply them, and another to execute them. The division of the powers of government into legislative, judicial, and executive, is favorable to good government.

The legislative power of the United States Government is vested in Congress, which is composed of the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Congress of the Confederation consisted of one house. Two are better, as a question is likely to be more thoroughly considered when it is discussed by two separate bodies. The hasty act of one house may be corrected by the other house.

Representatives are chosen by the people of the several states. The number chosen is in proportion to the population of the state, though, by a provision of the Constitution, each state must have at least one Representative, however small may be its population.

A Representative must be twenty-five years old, and an inhabitant of the state from which he is chosen. If of foreign birth, he must have been by naturalization a citizen of the United States for seven years. Representatives are chosen for two years.

In case a vacancy occurs in the representation of any state, the Governor of that state may order an election to be held to fill the vacancy.

The states are divided into districts, and custom requires that the Representative be a resident of the district for which he is chosen; but the Constitution simply requires that he be an inhabitant of the state.

The House of Representatives chooses the Speaker or presiding officer, and makes its own rules of proceeding. When two or more persons claim to be elected from the same district, the House decides who is entitled to a seat.

The Senate is composed of two Senators chosen from each state, chosen by the Legislatures of the states. A Senator must be thirty years old, and a resident of the state for which he is chosen, and must have been for nine years a citizen of the United States. The Senators are chosen for six years.

That the Senate may always have Senators of experience in it, the members of the first Senate chosen were divided by lot into three classes-the first class to go out of office at the end of two years, the second class at the end of four years, and the third class at the end of six years. In case of a vacancy, the Governor of the state appoints one to act as Senator till the legislature meets. The Senate shares with the House of Representatives the law-making powers, and besides has other important duties to perform. Treaties made by the President require to be approved by the Senate-also his appointments to office. The Vice-President is the presiding officer of the Senate, and when there is a tie, has the casting vote.

The power of impeachment is vested in the House of Rep

resentatives; the power of trying persons impeached is vested in the Senate. Impeachment by the House of Representatives is similar to an indictment by the Grand Jury. It is an affirmation that there is sufficient evidence against a man to justify his trial.

When the President is impeached, the Chief-Justice presides, as the Vice-President may be supposed to have an interest in the conviction and removal of the President.

If impeached and convicted, the subject may be removed from office, and may be declared incapable of holding any office of profit or trust under the United States; but one can not be imprisoned or put to death for political offences. If the impeached person has violated the laws of the land, he may be tried by the courts, and, if convicted, must suffer the legal penalty.

V.

The Congress of the United States was modelled after the Parliament of Great Britain. The legislative power of Great Britain is vested in the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The members of the House of Commons are elected by the people, and serve for seven years unless Parliament is sooner dissolved by the King. The House of Lords consists of the hereditary peers of England, certain representative peers of Scotland and Ireland, and the English Bishops. Hence the expression, "The Lords temporal and spiritual."

The Commons choose the Speaker subject to the approval of the King. The Lord Chancellor presides in the House of Lords. His seat is called the Woolsack. Hence "to be elevated to the Woolsack" is to be appointed Lord High Chancellor of England.

All bills for revenue must originate in the House of Commons. The Lords can not amend such bills, but must pass or reject them as they come from the Commons. It is thus in the power of the Commons to extort concessions from the Lords by a rider on a money bill. The Lords must pass or reject both the bill and the rider. To reject it may be to cut off supplies, and stop the wheels of government.

Members of the House of Commons seldom serve for seven years. When a majority of the Commons are opposed to the policy of the ministers, either a dissolution of Parliament or the resignation of the ministers takes place. If in the opinion of the ministers the public sentiment of the nation is in their favor, they will advise the King to dis'solve Parliament, and order a new election. If the new Parliament is found to be opposed to their views, they resign, and new ministers take their places.

New members may be added to the House of Lords by the King. By the English Constitution, the King is the fountain of honor. He can raise a Commoner to any grade of the nobility.

In former times, titles of nobility were conferred on the favorites of the King. Now they are usually conferred as the reward of eminent services.

It often happens that measures approved by the Commons are thrown out by the Lords. In extreme cases, the government has resorted to the creation of additional peers sufficient to carry the measure. Usually the threat of so doing has caused the Lords to allow the measure to pass.

The mode of passing laws in Parliament and in Congress is similar. In both cases, bills for revenue must originate in the Lower House. With this exception, bills may be introduced into either House. If a bill has been read three times in one House, and passed by that House, it is sent to the other House. If passed in like manner by that House, it is sent to the President. If he gives it his signature, it becomes a law. If he disapproves it, he returns it with his objections to the House in which it originated. If afterwards the bill is passed by two-thirds of both Houses, it

becomes a law without the signature of the President. The President has thus a qualified veto. The King of England has an absolute veto; but the power has not been exercised for more than one hundred years.

Congress has power to lay and collect taxes for the payment of debts, and to provide for the public defence and general welfare. It has power to lay direct and indirect taxes. It may lay a tax on imported goods, and on goods manufactured in the country, or it may lay a tax on each person in proportion to the property he possesses. The taxes are termed direct and indirect. A direct tax is the most just: an indirect tax is more willingly paid because it forms a part of the price of the article purchased. The people know when they pay a direct tax: they do not know when they pay an indirect tax.

A tax on imports is called a tariff. A tariff may have revenue for its object, or it may have for its object the protection of domestic industry against foreign competition. The question has been raised: "Has Congress power to lay a tax for protection?" The question has been decided in the affirmative. The wisdom of so doing is another and open question.

The power to declare war is vested in Congress. The power to make peace is given to the President and Senate. In England the King has power to declare war and to make peace; but he can have no means of carrying on war unless the means are furnished by Parliament, and a bill for that purpose must originate in the House of Commons. The King will not declare war unless he is sure of the support of Parliament, and when the Commons wish a war to end, they can, by withdrawing supplies, compel the King to make peace. The war power is thus really in the House of Com

mons.

VI.

Congress has power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states. The want of this power by the Congress of the Confederation prevented uniform regulations. If each state could make such regulations as to foreign trade as it chose, regulations would differ, and the country as a whole would not be able to maintain its rightful position among commercial nations.

As it is the recognized policy of the country to admit immigrants to the rights of citizenship, it was proper to confer on Congress the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.

Congress has power to pass bankrupt laws--that is, laws absolving the debtor from the legal obligation to pay his debts. If such laws are proper, they should be uniform throughout the United States, which could not be the case if the power was not confined to Congress.

The states pass insolvent laws; but they can release the debtor from the payment of those debts only which were contracted subsequently to the passage of the law.

Congress has power to coin money, and regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and to fix the standard of weights and measures.

The power to establish postoffices and post-roads is necessary to a uniform system throughout the states, and is hence vested in Congress.

The framers of the Constitution were careful to withhold powers the exercise of which might prove injurious to liberty. The suspension of the writ of habeas corpus is forbidden, except in cases of rebellion and invasion. The Constitution does not say by whom it may be suspended in case of rebellion. President Lincoln suspended it during the late rebellion, and Congress subsequently sanctioned the act.

No money can be drawn from the treasury of the United States, except in accordance with appropriations made by Congress. No tax can be laid on articles exported from any