Library References. Macy, chaps. xxiv-xxv, xxvii-xxxi; Macy, First Lessons, chap. xix; Dawes, chaps. viii-ix; Bryce, Vol. I. chap. ix; Fiske, pp. 244-250; Harrison, chaps. xi-xix; Wilson, §§ 11091120; Hinsdale, chap. xxxiii; Curtis, Vol. I, pp. 574-576; Congressional Directory; Wilson, Congressional Government, pp. 257-275, 277-293; Dole, chap. xiv; Lalor, Article on State Department, Treasury Department, etc.; Woodburn, pp. 189-193.

QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT

1. Was the cabinet contemplated by the Constitutional Convention or provided for in the Constitution? Discuss fully. 2. Name with their titles the persons composing the president's cabinet. How are the members of the cabinet chosen? 3. (a) Describe the parcel-post system. (b) How does it affect the express business?

4. Through what department does the United States conduct its business with other nations?

5. Describe the duties of the Adjutant-General; InspectorGeneral; Quartermaster-General.

6. How many classes of mail are there? What are the postal rates for each? In which class do letters belong?

7. What are the principal duties of the Department of the Interior? Mention the two ways of looking at the pension question as given by ex-President Harrison.

66

8. What is meant by "preëmption of public lands"? by a homestead claim"? by "a timber claim "?

9. What direct aid has the United States government given to education in the different states?

10. Mention two duties of the Commissioner of Education. 11. Upon what grounds has the federal government a right to interfere with a private business?

12. What department of the cabinet has charge of taking the national census? How often and in what years is it taken? 13. What is the civil service? What is the spoils system?

CHAPTER XXIV

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT: FEDERAL COURTS

Necessity of Federal Judiciary. "Laws are a dead letter without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation." Under the Confederation there existed no separate federal judiciary, and the judicial powers vested in Congress were very limited indeed. It had become clear that somewhere in the nation there must exist an authority empowered to interpret the laws and treaties of the United States and to determine whether or not acts passed by Congress harmonized with the fundamental law of the land as embodied in the Constitution in other words, to pass upon their constitutionality. It had become equally clear that such interpretation could not safely be intrusted to the state courts. In the first place, such an arrangement would be sure to result in a complete lack of uniformity. The same point might and probably would be decided in ways as various as the courts before which it was brought. In the second place, the state courts were unfitted for the work, both because of the nature of many of the matters in dispute and because of the character of the parties to federal suits. Matters of a quasiinternational character, such as admiralty jurisdiction, are obviously not matters to be properly adjudicated by the courts of any particular state; nor could state courts be completely trusted, because of local prejudices, to do full justice between citizens of their own states and citizens of

HOUSE (below)

President Washington selected the site of the White House and laid the corner stone, October 13, 1792. He lived to see it completed. It was partially destroyed by the British in 1814. After it was restored, the stone walls were painted white to obliterate the marks of the fire; whence the name

another, or between their own states and the federal government. Moreover, state courts, being authorities coördinate with and independent of one another, supplied no means for settling disputes between states. And since the Constitution and the federal laws made under it were to be applicable not to the states only but to the individual citizen as well, it was more than ever necessary that a federal judiciary be created to interpret and apply these laws.

The Federal Courts. The Supreme Court was created by the Constitution, and Congress was empowered to provide such inferior courts as might be necessary. Changes have been made in the system of inferior courts from time to time. At present the federal courts consist of a Supreme Court, created by the Constitution, and circuit courts of appeal, district courts, a Court of Claims, and a Court of Customs Appeal. For the District of Columbia Congress has provided a court of appeals, a supreme court, minor justice courts, a police court, and a juvenile court. Federal judges are appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate.

The Judges. If the judicial department of the government was to be made separate from and coördinate with the other two departments, it was necessary that the judges should be made as independent of them as possible. Moreover, the makers of the Constitution were particularly anxious to secure the independence of the judiciary, regarding this as the surest means of safeguarding the liberties of the people from the encroachments of the legislature and the executive. Accordingly, the Constitution provides that "the judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services a compensation which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office"; that

is, their tenure of office is life, and they are subject to removal only by impeachment, and that is a process rarely resorted to. Six times only since the adoption of the Constitution has it been employed against federal judges, and only three of these trials resulted in conviction. It is further provided by the Constitution that judges of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate; and though no distinct provision is made for the appointment of the inferior federal judges, the president appoints them under the provision of the Constitution which says that the president shall appoint all officers not otherwise provided for by the Constitution or by Congress.

Jurisdiction: One Class of Cases. The Constitution also defines very clearly the classes of cases over which the federal courts may exercise jurisdiction. Over some of these cases jurisdiction has been given to the federal courts because of the nature of the questions involved; over others, because of the nature of the parties to the suit. To the first class belong (1) all cases arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States; (2) all cases of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction; and (3) controversies between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states. Over cases arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States the jurisdiction of the federal courts is not exclusive; that is, such cases may be begun in the state courts, but if the decision of the state courts is adverse to federal authority, these cases can be finally adjudicated only by the federal courts. The reason for the rule is clear. The federal authority must be the final judge of the extent of federal powers. To give the state courts power to render final judgment in such cases would be to make them, and not the United