pered and increased. They were bound to live, because they were
economically effective; they found means of carrying on immense
lines of business in an orderly manner; they supplied the demand.
Their profits were large, but they gave employment to multi-
tudes of every degree of skill.
Political organizations were on nearly the same basis as busi-
ness companies they also grew bigger and more powerful and
gathered into fewer groups. Nominally, parties are simply asso-
ciations of voters for common ends. Actually, they are armies
acting under commanding leaders who in many cases hold no
offices. The evils of this " invisible government " were apparent.
Many states and cities were badly governed by unscrupulous men
who were tools of the leaders, or by too competent men who
plundered their fellow citizens. The average voter was honest,
but stood by his party. Committees of voters, non-partisan
leagues and citizens' parties tried to organize the voters for
reform, but no permanent improvement was made. The political
philosophy of the Americans was based on the belief that man-
kind was steadily growing better. Hence a tendency to look to
laws and political devices to correct the ills of popular govern-
ment. Millions of voters believed that if tfiey could only get laws
enough, they could break the power of the " bosses " and chain
the corporations. They overlooked the fact that the real evil
was the party managed by men who made politics a business,
who were responsible for " getting out the vote," and always got
out the votes of their friends, who knew from long experience
that the weary and listless voter at last would cease to protest.
On the other hand, the pressure of the trusts on small corpora-
tions and individuals was felt by masses of voters who protested
against the corporations that felt strong enough to break the law
and defy the voters. There was a glacier-like force of public
opinion that could break down all opposition. What was most
needed was the leadership of bold and far-seeing men. Roosevelt,
a man of the type needed, retired to private life when President
Taft was inaugurated, March 4 1909.
Political Reform. When Roosevelt left the presidency the
position of President was at the highest point of authority that it
had ever known. Most Presidents are obliged to strive with Con-
gress in behalf of their policies, inasmuch as their only means of
officially proposing legislation is through public messages, and
their heads of departments work directly only through Congres-
sional committee hearings; American tradition is against the
framing of bills by the executive, and the President's initiative is
limited. Most Presidents have found their principal legislative
influence in the veto, by which they have the weight of one-sixth
of both Houses. President Roosevelt followed the McKinley
method of emphasizing his wishes by personal discussion with
members of Congress. He did more; he revived the Jacksonian
method of announcing a legislative plan, and if Congressmen
hung back, of appealing over their heads to the country at large.
This policy was adopted by President Taft, who was not afraid
of a fight and who saw the advantage of assuming that the Presi-
dent was the natural party leader. William H. Taft had many of
the qualities of leadership. He was large, happy, genial, fond of
his many friends; a cheerful, balanced man. He was also experi-
enced in the public service. Born in 1857, he graduated at Yale,
and became a lawyer and a state judge in Ohio. In 1890 he was
made solicitor-general of the United States and thus introduced
into the Federal service. He was then selected as a Federal circuit
judge and his decisions were valued. In 1891 he was appointed
chairman of the Philippine Commission and was the first civil
governor of the Islands. From 1904 to 1909 he was Secretary of
War in Roosevelt's Cabinet, and proved himself an excellent
executive. He made few enemies and had a most powerful friend
in the President, who selected him as his successor. Throughout
his career, including the presidency, he was an easy and popular
speaker, a head of the Government who worked well with his
associates and subordinates. Nevertheless, from the beginning
of his term he found obstacles in his way. As an avowed succes-
sor to Roosevelt's policies he drew upon himself the opposition
of Roosevelt's enemies. At the same time it soon became appar-
ent that he was not relying on Roosevelt's friends.
President Taft's Cabinet was as follows: Secretary of State,
Philander C. Knox of Pennsylvania, a man by experience and
temperament, allied with the " stand pat " element of the Republi-
can party; Secretary of the Treasury, Franklin MacVeagh, of
Illinois, a business man of large experience; Secretary of War,
Jacob M. Dickinson of Tennessee, succeeded in 1911 by
Henry L. Stimson of New York; Attorney-General, George W.
Wickersham of New York; Postmaster-General, Frank H.
Hitchcock of Massachusetts; Secretary of the Navy, George
vonLengerke Meyer of Massachusetts; Secretary of the Inte-
rior, Richard A. Ballinger of the state of Washington; Secretary
of Agriculture, James Wilson of Iowa, remaining from the time
of McKinley; Secretary of Commerce and Labor, Charles Nagel
of Missouri. In the building of the Panama Canal Colonel
Goethals continued as chief engineer. Maj.-Gen. Leonard
Wood, as chief of the general staff, urged reform in the organ-
ization of the army, and the training of additional officers.
Ballinger very soon involved himself in a bitter controversy
with Pinchot, a warm personal friend of Roosevelt, over alleged ir-
regularities in the disposal of public lands in Alaska. Ballinger
was sustained by the President and a committee of Congress; but
public pressure was such that he was obliged to resign, March 6
1911, and was succeeded by Walter L. Fisher of Illinois.
Taft's appointments were in the main good, including the
elevation of Justice White to the chief justiceship of the Supreme
Court, and the appointment as a justice of Charles E. Hughes,
previously governor of New York. Nevertheless, a few months
after the President's inauguration, his influence on Congress
declined and he lost his hold on two powerful elements in his
own party. The important business men capitalists, bankers,
managers of corporations, commonly called the " interests "
thought him disposed to interfere with them; while he found him-
self out of accord with the rising spirit of reform which aimed to
give better expression to the will of the voters as a whole as
against party leaders and. political organizations.
Here was a critical point in popular government; for in prac-
tice it was almost impossible to elect a candidate unless he was
on some party ticket. A small group of men, politely called the
" organization," or more harshly the " bosses," in many states
and cities had control of the machinery of the nominating con-
ventions. Where they could not dictate a candidate, they could
usually defeat the selection of any man whom they disliked or
distrusted. Their power extended to national nominating con-
ventions, particularly in the Republican party, because the Re-
publican delegates from southern states, which almost always
voted Democratic, were elected to national conventions by a
handful of Federal office-holders and other professional politi-
cians. Complaints were abundant everywhere of " hand-picked
conventions," of delegates who sat silently in their seats until
informed by their " organization " for what men they must vote.
The solidifying principle was that the bosses' candidate could
usually count upon the steady, regular members of the party.
A method of selecting candidates long practised in some parts
of the country now spread rapidly through the Union; this was
the primary, under which candidates were selected for each party
by the ballots of the members of the party. The primary under-
882
UNITED STATES
mined the convention system, which in some states was even
prohibited. From nominations for local officers it spread by 1911
to state officers in two-thirds of the states; and after 1910 began
to be applied to the choice of delegates to the national conven-
tions. For a time the system seemed a great success; it opened
opportunities to enter public life, and killed off unpopular lead-
ers. An unforeseen effect was that the official ballots were made
upon the basis of party nominations, with an opportunity for
independent voting. The primary was therefore a public and
effective election, which practically brought the party system
into the domain of public law, as a part of the Government.
The distrust of conventions and controlled elections extended
to the numerous and powerful bosses in city and state Legisla-
tures. Three new devices were set at work to curb them and to
interest the electors in public measures. The first of these, the
referendum, was by 1909 spreading rapidly through the western
states. It was a means of checking legislative action contrary to
public sentiment. The system, both in local and state govern-
ment, can be traced from colonial times; and most igth century
state constitutions were submitted to a popular vote, and also
many statutes, if the Legislatures so directed. The referendum
system furnished a mechanism, usually imbedded in state con-
stitutions, by which a statute on the demand of a sufficient num-
ber of voters could be held back from effect until submitted to a
vote of the electors. The state of Oregon was one of the earliest
and most thorough-going in this reform.
What was to be done if the Legislature refused to enact a
statute demanded by the people? How could this negative force
be overcome? By the initiative, through which a designated
number of voters could unite on a measure, which must then
be submitted to the electors for their suffrages. Both the initia-
tive and referendum were attacked on the ground that they were
contrary to republican government, inasmuch as they substi-
tuted direct action for representation. The referendum had been
so long and widely used that it was hard to make out a case
against it. The initiative was based on the general principle that
the ultimate source of authority is not the Legislature or any
public officer, but the people at large. In a test case (Feb. 1912)
the Federal Supreme Court declined to rule that the initiative
and referendum were contrary to a " republican form of govern-
ment "; and no further attempts were made to upset them on
constitutional grounds.
A third branch of this system of appeal tothe people was the
recall, under which a public officer chosen by popular vote, and
in a few cases those who were appointed in some other way, could
be subjected to an election; and, if the majority decided against
them, they would be thereby removed from office. The system
began in the far western states and never spread so widely as the
other two methods mentioned. In 1911-2 the recall came before
Congress in connexion with the proposed constitution of the new
state of Arizona, which included a provision for the recall of
judges. President Taft vetoed the Act of admission because of
this provision. The state therefore withdrew the clause, was
duly admitted in 1912, and thereupon proceeded to reinsert the
recall. In practice, recalls proved to be few, and recalls of judges
very few. A still wider application of the principle of responsi-
bility of functionaries to the voters was the recall of judicial
decisions, which was advocated by Roosevelt in 1912 and was
applied in one state, Colorado.
Popular elections were applied to the choice of Federal sen-
ators, first by an indirect method of pledging members of the Leg-
islature, invented in the state of Oregon. The Senate contained
some members who could never have passed the ordeal of popu-
lar election, yet were frequently re-elected by the Legislature.
The result was the I7th Amendment, submitted by Congress
June 12 1912, and added to the Constitution May 31 1913, under
which all elections to the Senate from that time were to be made
by direct popular vote. Another evidence of a rising feeling of
responsibility in Congress was a statute (Aug. 7 1911) requiring
candidates for the House and Senate to submit statements of-the
money raised and expended in their behalf and limiting the
amount that they might themselves spend. One purpose of both
these measures was to make it difficult for men to purchase their
way into the Senate. On July 13 1912 Senator Lorimer of Illi-
nois was practically expelled from the U.S. Senate for buying
legislative votes.
Experience has shown that the load of responsibility placed
upon the voters by these new measures was sometimes more than
they were willing to bear. The scanty primary votes, and the
inattention to some of the referendum and initiative questions
put on the ballots, were seized upon as showing that the voter
was interested only in men. On the other hand, the ballots of
most cities, towns and states were loaded down with long lists
of officers to be chosen at each election, so that the " vote for
men " was in many cases a vote in the dark. The result was
an agitation for the reform commonly known as the " short
ballot," by reducing the number of elective officers and increas-
ing the officers to be appointed by the few elective officials.
Working difficulties were found in many of these reforms, and it
was hard to keep the public keyed up to the necessary pitch of
thought and attention at every election. It was evident, however,
that the American people intended to free themselves from the
shackles of what Elihu Root styled " invisible government."
Social Questions. The spirit of discontent extended to many
questions outside of politics. Throughout Taft's administration
there was an increasing pressure for " equal suffrage " that is,
woman suffrage which was introduced in the territory of Wyo-
ming in 1869, gradually spread among the far western states, and
then worked its way eastward. Inasmuch as the voters for the
more numerous branch of the state Legislature are also voters
for members of Congress and for presidential electors, women
began to take part in national affairs, and one of them was a
delegate in the Republican National Convention of 1908. As the
number of suffrage states increased, it was natural to look for-
ward to a constitutional amendment which would abolish sex
distinction for voting and indirectly for office-holding.
Both state and national Governments were compelled to deal
with the question of alcoholic beverages. From the earliest times
there had been some restriction on liquor selling and liquor sellers
as well as punishment for undue use of intoxicants. By 1909 in
almost all states there was some form of general legal restriction:
prohibition or local option or high licence or a state dispensary
system. These laws were enforced more or less strictly within
the state or communities to which they applied. The question
became national, however, because the liquor trade transported
its wares from one state to another; and that brought it within
the Interstate Commerce clause of the Constitution and the Inter-
state Commerce Act. There was a long, running fight between
the opponents of the liquor trade, Congress, the state Legisla-
tures, and the Federal courts, which finally passed upon the
validity of various Acts passed by the Federal Government
regulating transportation. Eventually Congress adopted the
policy, by the Original Package Act of 1890, of prohibiting ship-
ments of liquor into prohibition states; and this law sustained
the test of the U.S. Supreme Court. Pure food laws in force be-
fore 1909 were supplemented by the Drug Label Act (Aug.
23 1912), which greatly aided in preventing the adulteration
of drugs.
Many questions arose out of immigration. The laws forbade
the entry of labourers under a contract to work in the United
States, of convicts, insane persons, and (after 1907) diseased per-
sons; but the execution of such laws was slack. The first statute
looking toward decided control of immigration was that of Feb.
1907, which increased the grounds of exclusion, and at the same
time provided a plan to help the immigrants to find work. It
also created an Immigration Commission, which in 1910 made a
report in 41 volumes, strongly recommending the sifting of
immigrants by testing their ability to read and write some
language; but bills to that effect were twice vetoed by President
Taft. Meanwhile, the number of immigrants rose in the decade
1901-10 to an average of a million a year. New machinery for
registering departures brought out the fact that from 300,000
to 500,000 annually returned to their old homes, so that the rate
of increase of population by immigration was no larger than it
UNITED STATES
883
had been for 50 years. The alarming fact was that the immigra-
tion from W. Europe fell off, while great numbers of ignorant
and unskilled people crowded in from Russia, Austria-Hungary,
and other parts of E. Europe. Still, the newcomers found work
and their employers found a profit in employing them.
Finances and the Tariff, 1908-13. Every growing unit in the
country from a small school district to New York State was
harassed by questions of taxation and expenditure. The U.S.
Government also searched for new resources, and found them in
the income-tax, a method familiar in European countries and
open to the individual American states. An income-tax had been
levied by Congress during the Civil War, and again in 1884, when
it was set aside by the odd decision of the U.S. Supreme Court
that it was a direct tax which could be levied among the states
only in proportion to their representation in Congress. Success-
ful agitation brought about, July 13 1909, the submission of a
i6th Amendment, to remove the restriction, and it was declared
adopted by the necessary three-fourths majority of states, Feb.
25 !Qi3-
June 25 1910 a postal deposit Act was passed which created a
vast savings bank, of which many post-offices were the local
branches. The new form of savings attracted foreigners who
were accustomed to a similar system in their own countries; and
in 1920 the deposits had risen to $157,276,322. Another new
resource of the Federal Government was a tax upon corporations
levied on net income (Aug. 5 1909). The immediate proceeds
were small only about $30,000,000 a year; but corporations
were obliged to file accounts which showed their net income, and
thus to'give access to facts about their profits and methods. The
more important question of reorganizing the national banking
system so as to furnish a strong national institution was debated
from 1908 to 1912, and was the subjett of an elaborate report by
a National Monetary Commission; but no action was taken at
that time. The net Federal debt was $1,000,000,000, which was
only about $11 per head of the population.
A financial resource as to which Congress had sole authority
was the tariff. Under strong pressure from members of the party
to carry out the promises of the Republican Convention of 1908,
President Taft, a few days after his inauguration, summoned
Congress to meet in special session, for a " revision." As usual
there was a long controversy which resulted, Aug. 5 1909, in the
Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act. The administrative features were
good. The act created a permanent court of customs appeals,
with power to determine finally all questions as to the value of
imports; and also a Tariff Board, expected to make investigations
and recommend specific measures which Congress would adopt.
As to rates, the Act was not very different from its predecessor,
except for a decided increase of duties on cotton and silk manu-
factures. There was a loud outcry that the " revision " called
for by the party platform was plainly a revision downward and
not upward. President Taft argued against the textile schedules,
but signed the bill and in a speech at Winona, Minn., Sept. 17
1909, surprised the country by declaring that it was the " best
tariff bill that the Republican party has ever passed." When in
the next Congress the Democrats had a majority of the House,
they passed a series of bills, covering a farmers' free list, woollens
and cottons, which were carried also in the Senate by the aid of
low-tariff Republicans; all these were vetoed by President Taft.
In the campaign of 1912 the tariff played very little part. It was
accepted that a considerable revenue must be raised by import
duties; and the large import trade showed that the existing tariff
was not prohibitive.
Trusts and Transportation. During the 20 years ending with
1910 it had become clear that the most difficult question before
the U.S. Government was the regulation of the vast aggregates
of capital, commonly called trusts, which were combined into
corporations and aimed at the control of particular lines of busi-
ness, and also of the railways, which, as general transportation
agencies, were of great importance in connexion with every kind
of industry and trade. For many years Congress had been strug-
gling with this question, and the result was two lines of restrictive
statutes, headed by the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 and
the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890. Upon these and the amend-
ments to the Interstate Commerce Act was built a structure of
decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court, sometimes annulling pro-
visions of the statutes, more often altering decisions by the Inter-
state Commerce Commission. Partly to carry out and partly to
avoid these decisions, the Mann-Elkins Act of June 18 1910
widely extended the Interstate Commerce Acts by including
telephones, telegraphs, express and sleeping-car companies, and
setting up a Commerce Court which was to hasten decisions on
transportation questions. Armed with these new powers the
Commission reduced some freight rates and raised others. De-
cember 2 1910, the Supreme Court dissolved the combination of
the Union Pacific and Southern Pacific railways as contrary to
the laws against mergers. The Commerce Court proved a failure;
its decisions were received by the public as an unreasonable
attempt to control the Commission; and in 1914 Congress refused
appropriations, and the President was obliged to abandon it.
Federal control of railways on the whole worked well. It
secured uniform appliances and a system of rates based on suc-
cessive decisions of the Interstate Commerce Commission. This
Commission was a striking example of disregard of the great
principle of separation of powers inasmuch as it was a rule-mak-
ing body, an executive body, and a court which interpreted its
own rules, subject as to some questions to appeal to the Federal
Courts. The great problem of the trusts was much farther from a
solution than that of the railways, because the large corporations
were linked together through the holding and manipulation of
stocks by capitalists and banks, and through the so-called " inter-
locking of interests." Furthermore, except for Treasury pro-
cesses for collecting taxes, there was no public agency other than
the Department of Justice to call into action the anti-trust laws
in specific cases and exact penalties for their violation.
The process of forming new and powerful corporations, fre-
quently by the union of previous companies or firms, grew more
active from year to year. Capital was abundant, vast riches lay
in the development of mines and oil-wells and in manufactures
and trade. The constant tendency was to combine and systema-
tize so that such large lines of business as the production and
manufacture of oil, the mining of iron ore and the manufacture
of steel, the weaving of cotton, woollen and other textiles, the
manufacture of tobacco, packing of meat, making of cordage,
were rolling up into larger and larger corporate units. Above all,
the railways which stretched throughout the country and were
indispensable to business of every kind had consolidated into
great systems which destroyed competition.
The only effective way of dealing with large corporations
whose activities extended from state to state was to bring suit
against them for monopolizing or conspiring to monopolize in
their lines of trade. These were difficult matters to prove against
corporations of great resources. Hence it was considered a tri-
umph when, May 9 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered
decisions against two of the most powerful trusts, the Standard
Oil Co. and the American Tobacco Co., the latter on an issue
which had been pending since 1906. The minds of a majority of