main features, but differ in the detail with which these features are elaborated. The features which are uniformly treated include (1) a statement of the general organization of the governing bodies, (2) the distribution of governmental powers among the various departments, (3) a determination of the various agencies of government with a description of the nature and extent of the authority of each, (4) the method of selection or appointment of officials, and (5) the composition of the electorate.

In its treatment of these features, the constitution of the United States is a model. It does not attempt to cover all the details of the organization of the government. It states that there shall be a Congress with legislative powers, and it indicates to some extent the organization of this Congress; that there shall be a President to execute the laws passed by the Congress; and that there shall be a Supreme Court to determine the legality under the constitution of laws passed by Congress and of acts of individuals, commonwealth governments, and federal officials. What the constitution does not do is to state in detail how Congress shall do its legislative work, and how the President shall perform his functions, and how the Supreme Court shall exercise its powers. These things were wisely left to the process of ordinary law.

3. Matter Relating to Amendment.-A third and very important part of the constitution deals with the methods by which the document can be amended. The importance of this amending provision rests in the fact that in it lies the possibility of the adjustment of the constitution to the development of the state.

(a) Constitutions with no Provision for Amendment.-The constitutions of some states, as Italy, do not contain specific provisions for amendment. The result in such cases is that the power of amendment has been presumed to reside in the legislative and executive bodies as one of their ordinary functions, and the state, so far as changing or amending its constitution is concerned, is exactly on a level with England. Any

law passed by the legislature and approved by the executive becomes legal and constitutional, just as in England a measure passed by Parliament and signed by the executive is legal and constitutional. Hence, although Italy possesses a written constitution its government is practically on the basis of an unwritten constitution.

(b) Constitutions Denying the Power of Amendment.In other cases, constitutions have a provision denying to any body in the state the power of amendment. Examples of such constitutions are rare. Theoretically, however, in such cases the power to amend the constitution could reside only in the body which originally created it. Logically, such a constitution could hardly endure, for the political, social, and economic development of states always involves sooner or later a change in fundamental conditions which can be adequately met only by a corresponding change in the fundamental organization of government. A constitution which denied to any body the right to introduce and bring about such necessary changes would ultimately become so unfitted for its purposes that it would induce revolution.

(c) Constitutions with Amendment Provisions: the United States Constitution.-In written constitutions having the amendment provisions, these provisions differ widely. In the United States amendments may be proposed in one of two ways: (1) Congress may by a two-thirds vote in each house. propose an amendment; or (2) the legislatures of two-thirds of the states may petition Congress to call a general convention for the purpose of proposing an amendment. After an amendment has been proposed, it may be adopted by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three-fourths thereof, as the one or other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress.

Under these provisions it has been very difficult in the United States to amend the constitution. More than eighteen hundred amendments have been offered, but, with the exception of the ten amendments passed shortly after the adoption of the

constitution, which may rightly be considered as an integral part of the original document, only nine have been adopted, and four of these (providing for the income tax, the direct election of senators, woman suffrage, and prohibition) have been adopted within the last few years.

Amendment Provisions in Constitutions of European States. In European states the method of amendment to the constitution is commonly such as to render such amendments relatively easy. In France amendments may be passed by a process of ordinary legislation by a National Assembly made up of the members of the two houses of the legislature in joint session. In the German federation amendments to the constitution are passed in the same way as ordinary legislation, with the following provisos, however: two-thirds of the legal membership of the Reichstag must be present when the amendment is voted upon; a two-thirds majority of those present is necessary for adoption; and a two-thirds vote in the upper house (Reichsrat) is necessary for approval. If the upper house rejects the amendment, it may within two weeks demand a referendum in which the question will be settled by popular vote. If it fails to exercise this right, the amendment is promulgated without its consent. In addition to this method of amendment, provision is made whereby the people at large may initiate an amendment and have it voted upon by national referendum irrespective of the will of the legislature.

Criticism of Amendment Provisions in United States Constitution. -The comparative rigidity of the constitution of the United States has excited abundance of criticism. For one thing, it is possible for a very small minority of the people of this country to block the passage of an amendment favored by all the rest. The census of 1910 shows thirteen states, more than the necessary number to defeat an amendment, having a population of about one eighteenth of the entire population of the United States. The legislatures of these thirteen states, representing but one eighteenth of the population of the whole country, have the power under the consti

tution to defeat the wishes of the legislatures representing seventeen eighteenths of the total population. Furthermore, the power of amendment is placed in legislative bodies of the various states and of the central government and not in the hands of the people of the country at large. This fact has, it is asserted, resulted in undue conservatism and has created a condition at the present time in which the state has outgrown its constitution. In general, the machinery of amendment is very unwieldy. Washington rightly advised "to resist with care the spirit of innovation upon the principles of the constitution," but there is a limit to the degree of rigidity which is desirable. There is a real danger in a constitution which blocks the introduction of changes based on experience and long, careful deliberation.

Judicial Interpretation of the United States Constitution. -In the case of the constitution of the United States, however, another method has been used to adapt its provisions to the development of the country. The Supreme Court has interpreted the construction and application of various provisions of the constitution as necessity has arisen, and has established itself definitely over and above Congress in the right to determine whether or not laws are constitutional.

Its decisions and its "judicial interpretations" have played a very important part in the history of this country. The federal constitution is the supreme legal authority in the United States; hence the meaning of each provision, even of each separate word, is of the utmost significance. Although its general principles are simple and comprehensible, the increasing complexity of government and social conditions has given rise to grave problems concerning the particular meaning of clauses in the document, or concerning the relative scope of two apparently conflicting statements. In its task of final judgment as to the meaning and application of the constitution, the Supreme Court has taken extraordinary precautions. Only as specific cases are brought before it does the court attempt an interpretation, and judicial precedent is consulted wherever

possible. As a result of the court's decisions through many years, gradually a logical theory of the constitution and laws has been evolved, which can be developed from generation to generation. The Supreme Court in its decisions has formulated a fairly coherent body of doctrine with respect to the construction and application of the provisions of the federal constitution. In this manner the judiciary has played an important part in adapting our constitution to the development of the state.1

In conclusion, it is necessary for the student of government to take care not to place too much reliance upon the mere words of a written constitution. Just because this document is in existence, and prescribes a certain form of organization, certain types of functions, and certain methods of administration, it does not necessarily follow that the actual government in that state is carried on in accordance with these provisions. It is necessary in order to gain an accurate idea of the actual conditions of government for the student to have a far more intimate knowledge of general conditions in a country.

To illustrate this necessity, we may take some striking examples which are familiar to all of us. During the emergency caused by England's experience in the World War, the original cabinet system of government which had developed through age-long experience proved to be unsatisfactory. Too many men were involved in the difficult problems brought about by the crisis. Without any precedent in history, therefore, the Prime Minister took a very small group of four or five men associated with himself and by means of this small group prosecuted the war against the Central Powers. Such action was not in accordance with any previous ideas concerning his constitutional status or his powers, and could not be gained by the study of previous constitutional history in England. In our own country, too, under the stress of the World War, the President asked and received from Congress the most extensive and autocratic powers of action. Not only 'Cf. chapter on the Judiciary.