scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers in "American Political Science Review in 1928"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is just fifty-five years since Bagehot wrote his Physics and Politics, a very suggestive book in its day as discussed by the authors, pointing out the various lines along which the advance in natural science seemed to suggest modifications in the old theories of the state and of government.
Abstract: It is just fifty-five years since Walter Bagehot wrote his Physics and Politics , a very suggestive book in its day. He began the first chapter of this book with a reference to “the sudden acquisition of much physical knowledge” which had marked the second half of the nineteenth century, and declared it his purpose to show the bearing of these new ideks upon the political conceptions of mankind. That purpose he, fulfilled with much ingenuity, pointing out the various lines along which the advance in natural science seemed to suggest modifications in the old theories of the state and of government. This was only a half-century ago; yet the new physics of Bagehot's day has already growh old. Its basic concepts have been turned inside out and upside down. Its laws relating to the indestructibility of mass and the conservation of energy have been radically amended. Even a generation ago the atom was held to be the ultimate and indivisible unit in the composition of the universe. It was the basis upon which the scientists of the nineteenth century built up an inclusive set of laws and principles relating to the structure of all creation. No one had ever seen an atom, but its existence could be postulated and its properties were held to be knowable.

34 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Fascism has been likened to a great river into which numerous tributaries have poured their waters as mentioned in this paper, such as Nationalism, Futurism, and Syndicalism.
Abstract: Attentive observers of conditions in Italy are well aware that Fascism is an exceedingly complicated phenomenon; that what seems to be simply a dictatorship of the upper classes in reality presents many surprising and apparently contradictory features. Fascism, indeed, has been likened to a great river into which numerous tributaries have poured their waters. Among these tributaries are such movements as Nationalism, Futurism, and Syndicalism. Besides, Fascism is more than a practical experiment in government. It has developed a theory and a philosophy, and, one may even add, an art, a mysticism, and a religion. “Fascism,” declares Mussolini, “has a doctrine, or, if you will, a philosophy with regard to all the questions which beset the human mind today.” And again he remarks, “We play upon every chord of the lyre, from violence to religion, from art to politics.”The stages in the outward history of Fascism need only be mentioned. The movement had humble and, its enemies say, even sordid beginnings. The first Fascio di Combattimento was formed in March, 1919, by Mussolini and other derelicts of the war. This organization, swollen by all sorts of unexpected accretions, was transformed into the National Fascist party in November, 1921. In October, 1922, occurred the sensational march on Rome, which placed the party exultantly, but none too securely, in the seat of power. The murder of Matteotti in May, 1924, precipitated a dangerous crisis in which Fascism appeared to be momentarily on the defensive, but from which it triumphantly emerged as complete master of the situation. Since then it has effectually quelled all opposition and has proceeded to the realization of its constructive program, of which the great Labor Charter of April, 1927, is thus far the most impressive item.

24 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, it is shown that such a proclamation may be followed by an extraordinary regime in which the military authority will issue regulations for the conduct of the civil population, troops may be called upon to take life, and perhaps the individuals accused of fomenting trouble will be held without authority of a court or in some cases may even be tried by a military tribunal.
Abstract: It is not in the least unusual, in newspaper accounts of a strike, riot, flood, or fire, to read that the governor has proclaimed martial law and summoned the militia to the threatened zone. However exaggerated such reports may be, they are evidence of a general belief that there exists some mysterious “martial law” which, when proclaimed, augments the powers of soldiers and paves the way for heroic measures. Nor are these notions wholly fanciful. For such a proclamation may indeed be followed by an extraordinary regime in which the military authority will issue regulations for the conduct of the civil population, troops may be called upon to take life, and perhaps the individuals accused of fomenting trouble will be held without authority of a court, or in some cases may even be tried by a military tribunal. Quite likely these severe measures will receive the approval of public opinion. Yet it is surprising that a people ordinarily rather legalistic should have evinced so little disposition to inquire what rules of law, if any, govern the exercise of these military powers. To answering that unasked query the present study is addressed.

12 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The notion of dynamic equilibrium was introduced by the authors of The Federalist as mentioned in this paper, who argued that the causes of faction could not be removed without abolishing the liberty which is essential to political life.
Abstract: “Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society.” Thus the authors of The Federalist defined the purposes of the government created by the Federal Convention. But they reached this definition as the conclusion to a discussion of the factious nature of mankind. Madison had already remarked that the causes of faction could not be removed without abolishing the liberty which is essential to political life. He believed, however, that the control of its effects was within human power. To the mind of the Virginian the vital political forces in the state should be tied up in a nice poise through the clauses of a written constitution. A government so contrived would, as Madison believed, “secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation.”The ideal which Madison envisaged was one of dynamic equilibrium. He thought that by deriving the various branches of the government from different sources all positive action to the detriment of established order and guaranteed rights would be checked from the outset. Every safeguard against “the mutability of public councils” was to be embodied in the interior structure of the government itself. It was not enough that government should have a dependence upon the people; “experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”The political experience to which Madison referred was fresh in the minds of all the men who assembled at Philadelphia in the summer of 1787. It was afforded by the thirteen states, in none of which did political practice square with the expressed provisions of its constitution.

8 citations


Journal ArticleDOI

7 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the Council of the League of Nations Twenty-seventh Monthly R eport relating to the period of January 15th to March 15th, 1925 has published a report about the problems which were discussed at Geneva between the Augean Governm ent and the Financial Committee.
Abstract: I have the honour to subm it to the Council of the League of Nations m y Twenty-seventh Monthly R eport relating to the period F eb ruary 15th to March 15th, 1925. In m y last R eport (C.102.1925.II ., pages 1-2), I indicated the problems which were discussed at Geneva between the A ustrian Governm ent and the Financial Committee. Among these problems the reform of the adm inistrative, financial and fiscal relations between the Federation and the autonom ous bodies engaged the special a tten tion of the Committee. The negotiations on this question between the Government and the representatives of the Provinces, which were broken off on February 18th, were resumed on March n t h last under the chairm anship of the Federal Chancellor, Dr. Ramek. The general lines along which the Chancellor considered the reforms should proceed were indicated in a series of d ra ft laws which were communicated to the Conference. The representa ­ tives of the Provinces, apart from the Commune of Vienna, then sta ted their position as follows:

7 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In fact, a bicameral legislature is generally held to be an unassailable and eternal verity, one of the few axioms of political science.
Abstract: When the problem of second chambers is discussed, we frequently find that interest is confined to the subsidiary question of technique, omitting the prior question, “Why have a second chamber?” It is in the main assumed that second chambers are universally valid, and therefore attention is centered on the varied methods of selection and the extent of functions. If the primary question is raised at all, it is invariably answered by an appeal to experience. It is claimed that almost all modern governments have for a considerable time had bicameral legislatures, and that it is hazardous to disregard a practice that is so nearly universal. Seldom is an attempt made to go beyond experience and to analyze critically this admittedly wide practice. In fact, a bicameral legislature is generally held to be an unassailable and eternal verity, one of the few axioms of political science.Nevertheless, among the more systematic writers on political science the validity of the bicameral theory is far from unanimously supported. Even a hasty reference to the history of political ideas shows recurrent dissent. Thus, during the period of democratic ferment inaugurated by the French and American revolutions we find unmistakable opposition. To mention some examples, Samuel Adams, Paine, Turgot, Sieyes, and Condorcet were in favor of the unicameral form. The basis of their hostility is well summarized in the famous dilemma of Sieyes. Sieyes has indeed indicated the broad outlines of the objections; and a succeeding century of bicameral experience shows how difficult it is to escape from his vexatious alternatives. To reconcile faith in democracy with the assumption of the value of an effective check is assuredly not an enviable task. At any rate, for our present purpose suffice it to say that bicameralism has frequently been rejected.

7 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The only systematic exposition of his political ideas is found in his famous Notes on Virginia as mentioned in this paper, however, this work was written in 1781-82 and deals but remotely with the issues which were to occupy the stage after 1789, and yet Jefferson never published anything other than very brief and inadequate discussions of the principles for which he stood.
Abstract: Few movements in the history of American politics and political thought have been of equal immediate or enduring importance with that associated with the name of Thomas Jefferson. And yet Jefferson never published anything other than very brief and inadequate discussions of the principles for which he stood. His only systematic exposition of his political ideas is found in his famous Notes on Virginia. This work, however, was written in 1781-82 and deals but remotely with the issues which were to occupy the stage after 1789. Neither in Jefferson's own writings nor in those of Madison and Monroe, his successors as official head of the Republican party and as president of the United States, do we find any adequate exposition of the theories associated with the era of Jeffersonian democracy. It is only in the extensive works of John Taylor of Caroline, a friend and associate of these men in the political battles of that period, that such an exposition is to be found. Jefferson wrote that “Colonel Taylor and myself have rarely, if ever, differed in any political principle of importance.” John Randolph said that Taylor's “disinterested principles” were “the only bond of union among Republicans.” And Timothy Pickering calls him “the Goliath of the party.” As Henry Adams has said, Taylor was regarded as a political thinker of the first rank by the Virginia school and by many other leaders of his time, but it is equally true that his writings have occupied a position of obscurity since his death. This obscurity, however, does not alter the fact that they were influential in their time and are today the best source of information concerning the principles of both the earlier and later phases of the movement initiated by Jefferson during the first years under the Constitution.

6 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this form, the conflict has left its mark everywhere on political thought since Aristotle as mentioned in this paper, and the competing claims of efficiency and control have often expressed themselves in the form of controversy concerning the comparative merits of government by discretion and govern-ment by law.
Abstract: When men reflect about government, whether practically or academically, they always turn up, if they think deeply enough, two central problems: first, how to ensure that government shall do what it is supposed to do, and secondly, how to ensure that it shall not do other things. One is the problem of efficiency, the other the problem of control; and around the two is built most, perhaps all, of the so-called science of politics. At some periods the need for control seems the more vital and pressing. It seemed so to Englishmen, for example, during the two centuries following the accession of the Stuarts. At other times and places the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction, and in fifteenth century Europe, as in contemporary Italy, the dominant desire was for government strong enough and untrammelled enough to stem successfully a rising tide of disorder. Each age strikes its own balance in favor of one principle or the other, and thereby touches the opposite principle into action to redress the balance at some new point of readjustment. The competing claims of efficiency and control have often expressed themselves in the form of controversy concerning the comparative merits of government by discretion and govern-ment by law—or, in Harrington's phrase, a government of laws and a government of men. In this form the conflict has left its mark everywhere on political thought since Aristotle. Discretion means freedom for government to choose among possible alternatives of action. As one judge has said, “In honest plain language it means ‘Do as you like.’” It is thus a condition of efficiency, but it is very apt to exact the price of arbitrariness. Law, on the other hand, requires that government shall act by set rule, shall limit itself to a particular way of acting in each particular situation. It seeks to eliminate choice in favor of certainty; it narrows the possible range of governmental action in order that such action may be predicted and controlled in advance.

6 citations







Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For instance, this paper pointed out that it is much easier to report political news between campaigns than it is during campaigns, because the audience is not sensitive between campaigns, and especially just after a campaign has been concluded there is a sort of feeling that the victorious candidate, the newly inaugurated President, newly introduced Congress, should have what we call popularly a square deal.
Abstract: First of all, let me say that there is no question on which you can develop more controversy than the reporting of political news. Within the profession, within the newspaper business, there is a great deal of controversy, and has been for many years, particularly as to whether political news is fairly reported, impartially reported. I have listened to a good deal of discussion on that point. I have recognized, as have others in the newspaper business, the trend of the times—the so-called decrease in the strength of the editorial page, for instance, and the increase in the amount of material of a semi-editorial flavor printed in the news columns. The first branch of this topic, namely, reporting political news as it affects our domestic politics, seems to me to require an understanding, first, of the pressure and the difficulties that newspaper men face in handling news of campaigns and, second, of some of the pitfalls which they encounter between campaigns. I make that division arbitrarily, because the subject seems to divide itself in my own mind into those two general fields. It is much easier to report political news between campaigns than it is during campaigns. For one thing, your audience is not sensitive between campaigns. Especially just after a campaign has been concluded there is a sort of feeling that the victorious candidate, the newly inaugurated President, the newly introduced Congress, should have what we call popularly a square deal—as if, by inference, they did not have a square deal before.


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: The elections which were held throughout Germany on May 20, 1928, are of considerable interest and importance not only to Germany but also to the rest of the world. These elections, to be sure, did not have the dramatic interest which attended the Reichstag elections of December, 1924. But they deserve attention for a number of reasons: first, because they are the first elections to be held in the Reich under what may be called normal conditions; second, because elections for five Landtags and several city councils were held at the same time; and third, because the elections gave a further test, and supplied additional evidence of the operation, of the German system of proportional representation.Despite the intensive work of the political parties, the people were not aroused to much enthusiasm during the campaign. The old Reichstag was dissolved before Easter, but not until the last week of the campaign could one detect any excitement. Never before had the electors been bombarded with so much printed matter, posters, and, last but not least, loud-speakers and films. All the modern methods of appealing to the voters were tried by the numerous political parties. There were lacking, however, the overpowering issues and the battlecries which were so effective in 1924. Parades, demonstrations, meetings, and all the rest were carried through successfully on the whole, but they were quite dull and uninteresting. Only the two extreme parties, the National Socialists or Hitlerites on the right, and the Communists on the left, could appear enthusiastic. Nevertheless, the lack of what the Germans call a “grosse Parole” and the lack of excitement are not to be deplored; their absence probably indicates progress toward social and political consolidation.


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The most important events in the field of public administration in the United States for a calendar year was summarized in this paper, where the authors made an initial attempt to summarize the most important public administration events.
Abstract: The following pages represent an experiment. They are devoted to an initial attempt to summarize the most important events in the field of public administration in the United States for a calendar year. A series of such summaries, if they could be made reasonably complete, would presumably be of substantial value, at least to the academic world; the present survey, incomplete and unsatisfactory from many points of view, may at least serve as a point of departure for later enlargements and improvements. I am indebted to many correspondents for assistance in gathering the materials on which it is based; and I acknowledge my gratitude to them, without implicating them in the result. Administrative Reorganization. Although the movement for reorganization of public administration has slowed down, significant steps were taken in 1927. Two large-scale state reorganizations were effected, in California and Virginia, the latter following a careful survey by the National Institute of Public Administration. In California the bulk of the state work is consolidated in nine departments, the directors of which comprise the governor's council. This is an interesting legal reconstruction of the governor's council inherited from the eighteenth century in Massachusetts, Maine, and New Hampshire. The department of finance (Chap. 251) is given general powers of supervision over all matters concerning financial and business policies of the state, including specifically authority to audit, to visit and inspect institutions, and with the governor to authorize expenditures in excess of appropriations.



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In the fifty-second session of the Diet, the Kenseikai cabinet reaped a harvest of unpopularity by an arrangement with the Seiyukai and Seiyuhonto which prevented a no-confidence vote.
Abstract: On February 20, the long expected parliamentary election was held. As the first expression of national opinion under the manhood suffrage law, its result was awaited with unusual interest. Dissolution of the House of Representatives had been demanded by the liberal press ever since the passage of the election law of 1925, but the old parties had been reluctant to appeal to the electorate. In the fifty-second session of the Diet, the Kenseikai cabinet reaped a harvest of unpopularity by an arrangement with the Seiyukai and Seiyuhonto which prevented a no-confidence vote. When the Seiyukai came into office in April, 1927, it was apparent that any ministry which postponed dissolution would forfeit popular esteem; and in any case the four-year term automatically required a general election before May, 1928. The Kenseikai and the Seiyuhonto made preparation for the coming election by amalgamating into a united opposition under the name of the Rikken Minseito. The Seiyukai prepared by dismissing the governors in twenty-four of the forty-seven prefectures and filling their places with adherents who would promote the party's interests at the polls.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In the article as discussed by the authors, the authors present an exposition and criticism of the juristic theories of Professor H. Krabbe, and the gist of his criticism is that, in common with the translators of his Modern Theory of the State and with Duguit, they fail to distinguish between ethical and legal validity.
Abstract: In the August, 1926, number of this journal, Professor W. W. Willoughby presented some conclusions regarding the conception of sovereignty and the range of its applicability in political science, together with some interesting suggestions for the clarification of political theory. His article is devoted primarily to an exposition and criticism of the juristic theories of Professor H. Krabbe, and the gist of his criticism is that Krabbe, in common with the translators of his Modern Theory of the State and with Duguit, fails to distinguish between ethical and legal validity. Krabbe's attack upon the conception of sovereignty is therefore due to a confusion: The legal supremacy which the analytical jurist attributes to the state for purely legal purposes is taken as including also an assertion of moral supremacy. Accordingly, the fact that a legally valid law may be criticized as opposed to moral sentiment or to public interest is turned into an objection against the view that the state, for juristic purposes, may be regarded as a legally sovereign will. Professor Willoughby implies that clarity can be introduced into the whole discussion simply by avoiding this confusion. The justice or utility of a law is a wholly proper question for the moralist, but it is quite irrelevant to the juristic problem, which concerns merely the legal competence of the agency enacting or enforcing the law. “We find in Krabbe, and also in his translators, …. that same mistaken idea which is to be discovered in Duguit, that an inquiry into the idealistic or utilitarian validity of law, as determined by its substantive provisions and purposes sought to be achieved by its enforcement, has a relevancy to, and that its conclusions can affect, the validity and usefulness of the purely formalistic concepts which the positive or analytic jurist employs.”

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Leguia was elected president in 1919, but apparently fearing that his political enemies might try to prevent him from taking office, he forstalled them by a coup d'etat of his own.
Abstract: On July 4, 1928, President Augusto B. Leguia will have served thirteen years as chief executive of Peru—the last nine of them consecutively—and will still have one year of his present five-year term ahead of him. This is a remarkable record not only in Peru but in all South America. In fact, in Peru only two other presidents have served two complete terms, and those not consecutive; while Senor Leguia has the honor of being the only man who has been elected three times to the first office in the land. However, the moment one commences to take note of the various accomplishments of this diminutive dynamo of Peruvian politics, the smashing of precedents appears to be a routine matter, of administrative efficiency. Leguia was elected president in 1919, but apparently fearing that his political enemies might try to prevent him from taking office, he forstalled them by a coup d'etat of his own. Less than a month after his installation, a presidential decree placed before the people a project for such a drastic reform of the constitution that it was apparent that what was really contemplated was a new constitution.



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A reading of the recent Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Act of July 29, 1927, raises the question whether this legislation marks a change in the English policy of fixing the rights of labor by legislative definition as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: One does not speak of the rights of American trade unions glibly or in off-hand fashion. Unlike the English policy of defining the rights of labor by legislative enactment, our legislatures, both federal and state, have been particularly slow to make such definition. Such predicability as the labor law has thus far assumed has been largely the work of the courts. Here, in other words, we discover the rights of trade unions in the opinions of the courts; in England, we have been accustomed to look to the statute-book rather than to judicial opinions. Comparatively, English labor law has at least enjoyed the merit of being reasonably predicable. The acts of 1859, 1871, 1875, 1906, and 1913 were all designed either to make the existing law more definite or to overturn a judicial interpretation of the law adverse to labor. Thus, by the year 1927 the law was rather definite. The statutes contained statements of what labor could or could not do. A reading of the recent Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Act of July 29, 1927, raises the question whether this legislation marks a change in the English policy of fixing the rights of labor by legislative definition.The immediate occasion for the recent act was the general strike of May, 1926. Introduced and rushed through Parliament by the present Conservative government, this measure failed to receive the preliminary study and consideration that preceded the introduction of the acts of 1871 and 1906.