The government of the United States

Front matter

TWENTIETH CENTURY TEXT-BOOKS

EDITED BY

A. F. NIGHTINGALE, Ph.D., LL.D.

Preface

The main purpose of this book is to show what the Gov-

■+-ernment of the United States is, by giving a sketch of its

I organization and the general methods of its working. It

_y deals not only with the central, or Federal government, but

I also with the State, Territorial, and local governments; and

^ all of these taken together make up the Government of the

United States. Students who undertake the study of this

Government should keep in mind the fact that each of the

governments, local. State, and Federal, exercises some part

of the political power of the nation. This is the territorial

; distribution of power. He should also keep in mind the fact

. \ that in the town or city government, as well as in the State

\j or Federal government, the power which each holds is

divided among the legislative, the executive, and the judicial

departments. This is a distribution according to the kind

of power to be exercised. Thus, in order to understand how

this nation is governed, one must give attention to both of

these forms of distribution.

>J^ The topics here treated, concerning the organization and

vi powers of the Government, constitute a general subject by

^ themselves. If properly comprehended, they show us what

Tjthe Government is. They are sufficient to occupy the student

^^uring the time usually allotted to this study, and they must iV.

iv PREFACE

be understood before he can give his attention most profit^ ably to the questions that arise in the course of the Government's practical work.

It will be observed that the book is divided into a series of numbered sections. In each of these sections a more or less distinct subject is treated, and it is believed that from this discussion of the various institutions of the Government a knowledge of the whole as well as of the individual parts will be easily acquired. The formal topics following each section are intended to assist the student in analyzing the text, and in finding out what are the essential points. Then by making use of the references to parts of other books, which are printed immediately below the topics, the student will, it is expected, acquire the habit of getting information from many sources. Through this practice he may, moreover, gradually prepare himself for investigating the subjects that are placed at the end of the several chapters. By reading carefully the documents and passages cited, the student may acquire a broader view than any single volume wull convey; and under proper guidance he may receive, by the use of this material, training in the process of verifying statements concerning historical and political affairs. It will be generally expedient, however, for him to omit these subjects for advanced study until after thoroughly mastering the rest of the volume. Bernard Moses.

University of California, January, 1906.

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

I. — The Colonies 1

II. — Union and Independence 21

Chapter I

I. The English Colonies in America.— The fact that several nations exist in the world is almost as apparent as the existence of the human race itself. Frenchmen learn very early that they are not Englishmen; the Japanese, that they are not Russians; and the Spaniards, that they are not Germans. Our traditions, our love of country, and our reading in history tend to keep clear in our minds the fact that the members of our nation constitute a large group by themselves, and that they are in some respects separate and distinct from those of other nations. The nation may be defined as a large independent group of persons possessing a definite territory and a supreme government. By a supreme government is meant a government that is not under any other government. The government of a city in the United States is under the State government. The government of a State is limited by the authority which the Constitution of the United States confers upon the Federal Government. The City of New York is a large group of persons and has a definite territory — that is to say, we know its boundaries; but it is under the government of the State of New York. It is therefore not a nation. The State of New York has also a definite territory; but it is not a nation, because its government is under the superior authority of the United States. The United States has a definite territory, but its Government is not under any superior power; hence we call the United States a nation. For the same reasons we call France, Italy, or Japan a nation.

The colonies that were united to form the United States were at first under the government of England. They did not then constitute a separate nation; they were rather a part of the English nation. After they had declared their independence and maintained it, and formed a government for themselves that was not under any other government, then they became the nation that we call the United States of America.

The English Government granted, in large measure, to its American colonies the right to govern themselves. These colonies were often small in the beginning, but they grew strong by being compelled to rely upon themselves. The colonists found along the Atlantic coast only a sparse population of savages, who they expected would disappear, and who have almost entirely disappeared. From these Indians they kept aloof. They drove them back into the wilderness, and maintained the European standard of civilization. The Spaniards, who settled Mexico and South America intermarried with the Indians, and as a consequence their descendants fell below the European standard. The colonies of Spain were more completely dependent upon the mother country than were the colonies of England. The most noticeable points of contrast between the relations of these two nations with their colonies are the following:

1. The Spanish colonists might not trade with the merchants of foreign nations. The English colonists were free to trade in certain wares with any nation.

2. For a long time Spain required all trade with America to pass through a single Spanish port. England allowed all her ports to have equal privileges with reference to the trade with America.

3. Spanish colonies might not trade with one another. English colonies enjoyed full freedom in their intercolonial trade.

4. Spain laid special stress on getting gold and silver from America. England laid special stress on getting raw material for her manufactures.

5. Spain excluded from her colonies all foreign manufactures. England excluded from her colonial markets such foreign manufactures as were in competition with her home manufactures.

6. The traditions of the Spanish nation and the state of Spanish society in America favored the application of the principles of absolutism in the government of the Spanish colonies. The traditions of the English nation and the state of English society in America encouraged in the English colonies the development of popular rule.

Topics. — Definition of a nation. — Why the State of New York may not be called a nation. — How a colony may become a nation. — Attitude of the English Government toward its colonists. — Spanish system contrasted '^vith the English sj-stem.

References. — Hinsdale, American Government, 2C-7G; Frothingham, Rise of the Republic, 1-157.

2. The Supremacy of the King.— The settlers in America and their descendants, whether English, French, or Spanish, regarded the king as the sole possessor of the supreme power over them; and all the colonizing nations in Europe participated in the view that American colonies were possessions of the king. This view was so firmly fixed in the minds of the Spanish-Americans that they considered themselves no longer bound to Spain after Napoleon had set aside the legitimate Spanish king. The French colonists. as the subjects of an absolute monarch, recognized, of necessity, the supremacy of the king alone. The EngUsh colonists also recognized no supreme authority over them but that of the king.

The rapid growth of the power and prestige of the Parliament, however, led to a modification of this idea in England, Yet the Americans adhered to the thought that, as they were not represented in this body, it had no power over them. While, therefore, it was consistent with the later English view that the Parliament should have part in the government of the colonies, the colonists themselves protested against parliamentary interference in their affairs.

Topics. — American settlers' view of the king, — Attitude of the English settlers toward the Parliament. — English opinion as to the Parliament's relation to colonial affairs.

References. — Miller, Lectures on the Constitution, 36, 75.

3. The Colonial Governments. — At the close of the period of dependence, there were three classes of English colonies: (1) The republican colonies; those whose governors, as well as other officers, were elected by the people, Connecticut and Rhode Island belonged to this class, (2) The proprietary colonies; those whose governors were appointed by hereditary proprietors, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Delaware belonged to this class, (3) The royal colonies; those whose governors were appointed by the crown. This class embraced Georgia, the two Carolinas, Virginia, New Jersey, New York, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts after 1692. During the colonial period many changes were made in the governments of the colonies. Some of these governments belonged to different classes at difTerent times. Massachusetts, for example, prior to 1692, elected her governor, deputy governor, the assistants, and the members of the house of deputies. After 1692, under the new charter, the governor and the lieutenant governor were appointed by the crown, while the members of the general court continued to be elected by the people.

In spite of the observed differences relating to the governor, the several colonies were in many respects similar. They were all subordinate to the English crown and were dependent parts of the English nation. They all had representative legislative assemblies, and these assemblies controlled the pubHc funds and directed their expenditure. In each colony there was a small body, called the council, the assistants, or the magistrates, which in relation to the assembly was an upper house, and in relation to the governor was a cabinet or ministry. It did not take part in legislation in some of the colonies. In Pennsylvania, it performed only executive duties. In some cases the members of this council were elected by the people; in others, by the assembly; in still others, they were appointed by the king or the lords proprietary.

It thus appears that the form of most of the colonial governments resembled that of the Government of England. The king, the lords, and the commons were reproduced on a small scale in the governor, the council, and the assembly. The powers of the commons in England and the powers of the assembly in the colonies were derived from the people. The king in England received his power by hereditary right, and the governor in the colonics received his power in most cases by royal appointment. These facts helped to make the assemblies antagonistic to the governors appointed by the king, as the House of Commons was antagonistic to the crown. It was the antagonism, in both cases, between royal power and popular power.

Although the government in England determined what the colonial governments might or might not do, yet "practically each colony was a self-governing commonwealth, left to manage its own affairs with scarcely any interference from home."^ Through their representatives the colonists made their laws and voted their taxes; but the British Parliament " could overrule such laws as the colonies might make." The colonies insisted, however, that they should be free from all taxes except those levied by their own authority. Still, in comparison with the Spanish colonists, the English colonists in this respect enjoyed a large measure of freedom.

Topics. — The classes of English colonies. — The assembly and council, assistants, or magistrates. — General form of colonial governments.— Relation of royal to popular power. — Self-government in the colonics.

References. — Fiske, Civil Government, 146-165; Hart, Actual Government, 41-45; Macy, Our Government, 28.

4. Local Government in New England. — The primary local organizations in the governments of the New England colonies were towns or townships. The early New England town was a subordinate political society within a colony. It was a little republic, but limited in its action by the superior authority of the colony of which it was a part. The territory of the colony was divided up into townships. This was a revival of the condition of early England, when "the whole country was cut up into vills or towns," and " the law assumed that every acre of land lay in some town, some villa." ^

The most important feature of the political organization of the town was the assembly of freemen, or qualified voters, in a town meeting. This meeting, embracing all the voters of the town, was held at least once a year, in the spring. It might be called at other times by the selectmen, and must be called by them on the demand of ten voters. This assembly performed the functions of both the electors and

' Bryce, Am.erican Commonwealth, i, 16. ' Maitland, Township and Borough, 8.

the legislature in a representative republic: (1) It elected the officers of the township. (2) It made the laws, voted the taxes, and appropriated to various purposes the sums raised by taxation. The assembly was convened in the central village of the township, and hold its sessions in the town hall, the church, or the schoolhouse. The officers elected by the town meeting were the selectmen, a town clerk, a treasurer, assessors, a collector, a constable, and several minor officers. The number of the selectmen was three, five, seven, or nine, depending upon the size of the town and the amount of its public business. The selectmen constituted the executive of the town. The town clerk kept the town's public records of whatever sort. The treasurer received all money gathered from the taxpayers, or obtained by the town from other sources; and from these public funds he paid the public expenses of the town. The constable's functions in relation to the town were in some respects similar to the functions of a sheriff in relation to the county. Among the other officers were the assessors of the taxes and the overseers of the poor. The overseers of the poor superintended whatever public provision was made for the maintenance of the paupers of the town. There were also school committees, surveyors of highways, poundkeepers, inspectors of lumber, measurers of wood, and sealers of weights and measures.

The county, as a political entity larger than the town, came into existence through the cooperation of several causes:

1. The county had existed in England, and the conception and traditions of it were brought to America by the English colonists.

2. It was a convenient organization for supplementing both the work of the town and the work of the central government of the colony.

3. It was the result of the first step in the normal process of social growth, by which the primary poHtical bodies were united and finally amalgamated into the nation.

The shire, or county, in England was not one of a number of units into which the nation had been divided; it was, instead, but one of the constituent elements that were brought together to form the nation. Through the shiremote, or county court, it exercised both legislative and judicial power. The most important single officer of the county was the sheriff. At first he was elected by the people, but later he was appointed by the king. He was the agent of the central government in the county. He was the executive officer of the courts; he summoned juries and executed judicial decrees. Other officers of the county in England were the coroners and the justices of the peace. A coroner formerly exercised extensive powers, but later his most prominent function was to summon a jury for determining the cause and manner of mysterious deaths. He held and exercised, also, certain police powers. Justices of the peace were administrative and judicial officers. After 13G2, they were required, in an English county, to hold four meetings a year. When they were organized in these meetings, they constituted the Court of Quarter Sessions.

These essential features of the county were brought to New England by the settlers of Massachusetts. The four groups into which the towns of Massachusetts were gathered became in 1643 the counties of Suffolk, Norfolk, Essex, and Middlesex. They were organized as judicial districts, with the sheriff as the chief executive officer, and with a jail and a court-house as the principal public buildings. The office of the justice of the peace had already been established, and before the close of the seventeenth century these officers were organized in a body known as the Court of General Sessions. This court could try both civil and criminal cases; namely, civil cases involving not less than forty shillings, and criminal cases not involving a penalty of death or banishment. The sheriff and the justices were appointed by the governor. In addition to this judicial organization, the county had also a military organization. Each town furnished a company, and the several companies were united and formed a county regiment.

In New England, the county was less important than the town. It was in the town that the inhabitants were trained for self-government. It was the towns, moreover, that maintained and developed the public schools. By a general law of Massachusetts, passed in 1647, it was ordered, "that every township in this jurisdiction, after the Lord hath increased them to the number of fifty householders, shall then forthwith appoint one within their town to teach all such children as shall resort to him, to write and read." The wages of the teachers were paid either by the p^irents or masters of the children, or by the inhabitants in general, as iinight be determined by the authorities of the town. And it was further ordered, "that when any town shall increase to the number of one hundred families or householders, they shall set up a grammar school, the master thereof being able to instruct youth so far as they may be fitted for the university." The New England town elicited the admiration of Jefferson. "Those wards," he said, "called townships in New England are the vital principle of their governments, and have proved themselves the wisest invention ever devised by the wit of man for the perfect exercise of self-government, and for its preservation."

Topics. — Character of the town in New England. — The assembly of freemen. — Officers of the town. — The county and its origin in New England. — Origin and status of the county in England. — Officers of the English county. — The first counties in Massachusetts. — The Court of General Sessions.— Military affairs of the county. — Public schools in Massachusetts.

References. — Maitland, Township and Borough, 8; Freeman, Growth of the English Constitution, Chap. I; Fiske, Civil Government, 2

16-47; Ford, American Citizen's Manual, Part I, 56-61; Hart, Practical Essays, 133-147; Hart, Actual Government, 4:4:; Hinsdale, American Government, 38-40; Macy, Our Government, 10-14; De Toqueville, Democracy in America, i, 73-103; Bryce, American Commonvoealth, i, 561-592; Levermore, The Town and City Government of New Haven, in Johns Hopkins University Studies, Fourth Series; Channing, The Town and County in Massachusetts.

5. Local Government in the Southern Colonies. — In

studying local government in the United States, one should keep in mind the meaning of the terms used to designate the various local divisions or institutions. He should remember that a parish was originally a certain district in which an ecclesiastic had charge of the spiritual interests of the inhabitants. At first, in New England, the parish was the same as the town. When the inhabitants of the district in question were acting in civil or political matters, they were thought of as comprising a town; when they were acting as a body in religious matters, they were thought of as comprising a parish. In some places districts of this kind became generally known as parishes; in other places, as towns. In Louisiana, a district for merely civil and political purposes came to be designated a parish.

A hundred was composed of a number of townships, and formed part of a shire or county. In early England every freeman was required to be enrolled in a hundred; and the members of a hundred, or the inhabitants of a district known as a hundred, held meetings at times determined by custom or law. And the term court, as applied to early local institutions in the United States, does not always mean a judicial body. It is sometimes applied to a body having power to make laws as well as to try persons for the violation of law.

In the southern colonies the county overshadowed the parish, the hundred, and the town. In 1634, eight shires were created in Virginia. After 1G43, they were called counties; and at this date they were thirteen in number. Their officers were Heutenants, sheriffs, sergeants, and baihffs. Under these officers it was proposed to make the government of a colonial county like that of a shire in England. In Virginia the counties were original groups, while in New England they were formed by the union of towns. The lieutenant was chief of the militia in the Virginia county, and in this position he became especially prominent by the long-continued hostilities with the Indians and by his duty of directing the police supervi-sion of the slaves. The chief judicial authority in the county was exercised by the commissioners of the county courts. These commissioners, later called justices and magistrates, varied in number at different periods. From the county court certain cases might be appealed to the general court. This latter body at first met in March, June, September, and November, when it was called the quarterly court. Between 1659 and 1684 there was no June session, and the name "quarterly court" appeared to be inappropriate. It was then called the general court. After 1684, it met in April and October. An important function of the county court was levying the county taxes. The sheriff was the executive officer of the county court, and at the same time the executive officer of the county. He was appointed by the governor from a list of three persons nominated by the justices. His duties ranged from ducking a witch to carrying out the decrees of the governor.

In Maryland the local government was nearly like that of Virginia. The hundred was recognized at one time in the election of members of the assembly. Later, the assembly was composed of representatives of the counties. The hundred was employed in the fiscal and the military administration of the colonies. Taxes were levied and collected in the hundred; and the hundreds were the fiscal districts in the counties. They were also military districts, in which the "trained bands" of the local mihtia were organized. Several hundreds were sometimes united to constitute a parish in Maryland, but in old England the hundred in many cases embraced several parishes. In the course of time the boundaries of hundreds throughout Maryland, "by vacating old roads, opening new ones, and other causes, were in a great measure obliterated and forgotten"; and the hundred ceased to be recognized in the administration of public affairs. The term "county" appears to have been used for the first time in Maryland in 1638. The first district of Maryland to receive this designation and to exercise the powers indicated by it was St. Mary's County. The county here was at first a judicial district in which taxes were levied and elections were held. It was from the counties that burgesses, or members of the local legislature, were sent to serve in the assembly, the number to be sent from each county varying from one to four. The central feature of the county organization was a judicial body called the county court. It was composed of commissioners appointed by the governor. The county court was therefore not a representative body; nor was it a democratic assembly; and its functions were never legislative. The sheriff was the most important single officer of the county in Maryland as well as in Virginia. He was appointed by the governor; but his original independence was ultimately lost, and he fell under the direction of the assembly, although he continued to be appointed by the governor. The sheriff's duties were similar to those performed by the sheriffs of the English shire. The county had other officers in addition to the sheriff and the commissioners who made up the county court. The most conspicuous of these were the coroner and the commander of the militia.

These were the typical local institutions of the southern colonies. The county was the effective unit. The inhabitants lived scattered on large plantations. The extent of the plantations, and the comparatively few persons occupying a considerable area, made it necessary that a portion of territory very much larger than a New England township should belong to the political unit; otherwise, the political body would contain only a very few persons, too few to render it a proper political organization. The Congregational Church, moreover, was wanting, and there was no centralizing influence to draw the inhabitants together as the church had drawn them together in New England. There were no manufactures to induce the people to live in towns rather than on the great plantations. On the plantations there were gatiiered nvimbers of dependents, and this condition of things threw the management of public affairs into the hands of an aristocratic minority. A few men thus became very well trained for the business of government; and their special fitness and their opportunity of continuing in office gave them an extraordinary influence in the government of the colonies to which they belonged, and, later, in the government of the nation.

Topics. — Officers of the southern county. — The county court. — The general court. — The sheriff. — Local government in Maryland. — The hundred. — The county in Maryland.— The assembly. — Contrast between the social conditions of New England and those of the southern colonies.

References. — Fiske, Civil Government, 57-74; Hart, Practical Essays, 147-161; Hart, Actual Government, 45; Hinsdale, American Government, 40-42; Macy, Our Government, 17, 18.

6. Local Government in the Middle Colonies. — In the middle colonies the local government differed from that of New England as well as from that of the southern colonies. It embraced the principal features of the local government in both of these regions. Both towns and counties were recognized as parts of the political organization. The begiunings of New York are found in the charter granted, in 1614, to the United New Netherland Company, by the States- General of Holland. This company was established to trade with the Indians, not to found colonies. The charter of the United New Netherland Company expired in 1618. The privileges it had enjoyed were granted to the West India Company in 1621. The general government of this company was vested in a board or assembly of nineteen delegates, who elected a director general and a council. The director general and the council held "all powers, judicial, legislative, and executive," under the permanent authority of the resolutions and customs of the Fatherland. The West India Company established certain proprietors called "Patroons." Each "Patroon" received a grant of land extending sixteen miles on one side of the Hudson River, or eight miles on both sides, " and as far into the country as the situation of the occupiers will permit." It was required of the persons receiving these grants that each should plant a colony of fifty persons over fifteen years of age. Each should undertake also to support a schoolmaster and a minister of religion. Manufacturing was prohibited. The "Patroon" was permitted to receive the services of the colonists, whose position under the " Patroon " was similar to that of the vassals with reference to their lords under European feudalism.

More liberal provisions for governing the Dutch settlements were made later. Municipal governments were framed under the authority of the West India Company. A representative government was granted to Brooklyn in 1646; and a form of municipal government was obtained for New Amsterdam in 1652. In 1653, moreover, " the present city of Albany was released from feudal jurisdiction." In the course of time other towns acquired municipal self-government, and under English rule the feudal privileges of the landed aristocracy tended to disappear. In New

York, after 1664, the county became an important factor in the local government; more important, in fact, than the county in New England, but less important than the county in Virginia. The town, however, as a vigorous inheritance from the Dutch, continued to maintain itself within the county, and to share with the county the control of the affairs of the local government. In Pennsylvania, William Penn established the county as the largest political division, and also carried out the provisions of his charter from Charles II, which permitted him " to erect and incorporate towns into boroughs, and boroughs into cities." In Massachusetts, the town was more important than the county; in Virginia, the county was more important than the town; but in the middle colonies the counties and the towns preserved a more nearly even balance of importance.

Topics. — General character of local government in the middle colonies. — Feudalism. — The beginnings of New York. — The West India Company. — "Patroons. " — Later municipal governments under the Dutch. — The release of Albany from feudal jurisdiction. — The county in the middle colonies. — Penn's influence in Pennsylvania.