THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
I HE fact that Mr. Roosevelt succeeded to the office of I President of the United States through the tragedy of Mr. McKinley's murder, instead of being elected, has had many interesting and unexpected results. One of these is that the world is able to read an article from the pen of the President 1 imself describing the functions and duties of his high office. It happened that when Mr. McKinley was alive, and Mr. Roosevelt had, of course, not the remotest thought of succeeding to the Presidency, he wrote an article describing the functions of the President with a freedom and from a standpoint im- possible to an actual holder of that office. But before its publication could take place came the assassination of Mr. McKinley, and Mr. Roosevelt suddenly found himself the wielder of the tremendous powers he had been engaged in discussing. Mr. Roosevelt has now, after a reasonable interval, and as we hold most rightly, given his article to the world, and owing to the enterprise of the Morning Post. which is rapidly becoming one of the most thoughtful of 'our daily papers, English readers were enabled. on Thursday to study the full text of his striking political essay. Of the form of the article, we will only say that the President writes, as always, with great clearness and good sense. There is no rhetoric and no "tall talk, and yet there is nothing dull or barren in the presentment of the theme. We feel that the writer approaches his subject with that passion and intensity of purpose which alone can kindle the electric spark of interest between writer and reader. We feel that he knows exactly what he wants w sat, and that he is on fire to get in touch with other minds and to make them understand exactly what he means. When Mr. Roosevelt writes about the Presidency he is a missionary inspired with a burning zeal to give the world " the extreme characteristic impression of the thing written about." Nothing less than conversion to his exact view of the subject will serve. That is the true, the necessary stand- point of every good writer. What is the use of writing if the reader is approached in a half-hearted, perfunctory, and indifferent spirit? He ought, in Burke's phrase, if he fires at all, to hit us "between wind and water,' and not merely to send shots whistling through the rigging or splashing up the water in front or behind.
Mr. Roosevelt brings out with lively force the enormous direct powers wielded by the President of the United States. It is no exaggeration to say that he has far more direct power than the ordinary Constitutional Monarch, and that he is "one of the half-dozen persons through- out the whole world who have most power to affect the destinies of the world." That is a very exact statement of the President's position. He can come to decisions and take steps to carry out those decisions entirely on his own responsibility, and without having to consult any other person; and in the exercise of these powers it is not too much to say that he may affect the destinies of civilised mankind. It is true that the President has no power of legislation and that he does not hold the purse-strings, but he can by his personal act so irrevocably commit his country to certain courses of action that in practice those who legislate and those who control the Treasury —i.e., the men and bodies who might theoretically withhold from him legislative and financial aid—are bound to follow his call. Ar'President, for example, cannot formally make war on any other Power, but he can take executive action of a naval or military kind which may commit the nation to war or may force another Power to declare war. Mr. Roosevelt in a very striking passage compares the powers of the President of the Uuited States with those of a British Premier. The comparison is most interesting and curious. In certain ways the position of a Pr me Minister while he remains Prime Minister—i.e., has the confidence of a majority of the House of Commons—is one of greater power than that of the President. In th,, hands of a British Prime Minister while he keeps his majority in Parliament are literally clinched the whole might, majesty, and dominion of the State. He exercises, granted that he can carry his Cabinet with him, and if not he is hardly Prime Minister, without any possibility of challenge, the whole of the prerogatives of the Sovereign.—It is true that the Sovereign has to be consulted and to be informed, but he cannot veto, though he can sometimes delay, executive acts.—That is, the Prime Minister can appoint whom he pleases to all the great offices of State, can dispose of the armed forces of the nation, and can mould foreign policy to his will. By virtue of his majority in the Commons he can, as long as his majority holds, obtain from the House of Commons whatever legislative measures are necessary to complete his policy. Again, while he is the Minister chosen by the Commons he has the Treasury at his back, and can use the national resources in the way he thinks best for the nation. If he wants another million for this or that Service, he is certain not to be refused it. The whole of the machine, executive, legislative, and fiscal, moves forward evenly and together, and he directs its course. As soon as he cannot direct the machine, he ceases to be Prime Minister, for under our Constitutional usage the moment a request of the Prime Minister is refused by the House of Commons be resigns, and ceases to be Prime Minister. He either exercise,s the powers we have described or else he is not Prime Minister. The President of the United States, on the other hand, has no such power over the Legislature. As regards the great appointments he must obtain the consent of the Senate, which has a right of veto upon them. In the matter of making treaties the President can do nothing without the co-operation of the Senate. If the President wants to do something which involves the spending of money, he must secu re the agreement of the House of Representatives before he acts. Again, if legislation is required to carry out, his policy, he must nbtain the concurrence of both Houses of Congress. Thus In certain ways the President's action is far more limited .12(1 circumscribed than is that of a , Prime Minister. ae cannot say: "Either I obtain the money [or the legisla- tion] I demand, or I cease to direct public affairs." He is elected for four years, and practically cannot resign. If the Senate or the House of Representatives refuse even the most reasonable demands, he has no choice but to put up with their decisions. On the other hand, the Presi- dent's tenure is absolutely secure during his term. He cannot be turned out of office and deprived of all his power by a snap vote in the House of Commons obtained through the blunder of a subordinate. Congress may "resolute till the cows come home," but the President remains unmoved. He may not be able to compel them to support his policy, but they have no sort of right to alter it as long as he remains firm. If Congress deter- mined to legislate against another State in such a way as to provoke war, and the President did not wish for war, he would simply have to exercise the veto on legislation which he possesses. He could, that is, if he liked, reduce Congress to absolute impotence owing to his right to prevent Bills of which he disapproves becoming law. To put it shortly, a British Prime Minister when all goes well, and while he retains the full confidence of the House of Commons and has a loyal Cabinet, wields a power which is virtually unlimited, but its tenure is insecure. "A breath can unmake him as a. breath bath made." The tenure of the President is secure, and this gives his powers a certainty and reality. They are not fairy gifts which may vanish away the moment "the 'Ayes' have it" on a. vote of censure. Again, the President acts directly, and visibly uses his personal power. He is not always moving behind a veil and exercising powers which nominally are another's, as is the British Prime Minister. The Prime Minister, too, must explain his acts and the reasons for them to his colleagues. The President may come to a decision in the privacy of his own house, and announce it as a thing accomplished without any ex- planation or discussion. On the whole, then, and though the President is often cruelly hampered, while an English Prime Minister remains free and untrammelled, the greater power and responsibility must be admitted to remain with the President. He may not be able to do quite so much, or act so easily at any given moment, but what he does cannot be overridden, and no wave of unpopu- larity can suddenly drive him from power.
Which is the better system it is not very profitable to inquire. For ourselves, we should say that the Presi- dential system suits the Americans better, that of a Prime Minister the British. Each people will prefer their own system, and they will no doubt be right, for in each case they have learned to accommodate themselves to its work- ings. The Americans have the advantages of rigidity, we those of elasticity. Still, the fact remains that on the balance of consideration the greatest office of power in the Anglo-Saxon world is that of the President of the United States. Though his powers are limited, he has a security of tenure and an originating and independent authority of which no one can deprive him During his four years of office he can on many points say without an " if " : "I will do this or that." The British Prime Minister has always to say : "I will do this or that if I can keep the confidence of the majority of the House of Commons." The absence of that " if " gives to the President of the United States a sense of independent authority which does not belong to a Prime Minister.
Previous page
