378 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



upon our constitutional conventions. The personnel of these conven- 

 tions is far superior to that of our state legislatures. "While many of the 

 latter have gained a reputation as fountains of political debauchery and 

 have declined in influence, the former have remained in high repute. A 

 seat in a constitutional convention is still an honor. 



The best men in the community are still willing to serve in it, no matter at 

 what cost to health or private affairs. I can not recall one convention which has 

 incurred either odium or contempt. ... In looking over the list of those who 

 have figured in the conventions of the State of New York since the Eevolution, 

 one finds the name of nearly every man of weight and prominence; and few lay 

 it down without thinking how happy we should be if we could secure such service 

 for our ordinary legislative bodies.23 



The demand for the referendum is the result of the deterioration which 

 our state legislatures have already undergone. 



Most of the objections to a larger measure of popular rule are merely 

 notes of caution. The proper metes and bounds can only be determined 

 in the light of further experience. In the mean time, it is the place of 

 every intelligent man to keep an open mind. No plan of government is 

 a finality. Our direct primary laws are still in the experimental stage. 

 Some of them have been enacted by machine politicians with a view to 

 discrediting them and are capable of great improvement. Even the 

 fundamental guaranties of our federal and state constitutions need to 

 be adapted to changing conditions either by interpretation or by formal 

 amendment. The constitutional prohibition in Pennsylvania which 

 prevents a law requiring wages to be paid in money may have once con- 

 served the liberty of the individual, but such a prohibition to-day 

 secures the form without the substance of liberty. 24 Whether a given 

 guaranty is fundamental or not is a matter upon which there may easily 

 be differences of opinion. To hold that constitutional guaranties are 

 immutable and that the majority after due deliberation has not the 

 moral right to change them is to take them outside the realm of reason 

 and discussion. 



On constitutional matters practically no one questions the refer- 

 endum. On local matters, such as the liquor question, increasing the 

 bonded debt of a city and granting franchises, where the issues are 

 "simple and familiar to the voters," it has an acknowledged field of 

 usefulness. The extension of the referendum to state-wide legislative 

 acts is at the present time the bone of controversy. A century ago, 

 however, the ratification of state constitutions by popular vote was 

 viewed with similar misgivings. It was not till 1840 that this practise 

 was generally recognized. At the outset, the state legislatures called 



23 Edwin L. Godkin, "Unforeseen Tendencies of Democracy," p. 142. 



24 "William Draper Lewis, ' ' A New Method of Constitutional Amendment by 

 Popular Vote," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 

 Vol. 43, 1912, pp. 315-316. 



