bought and so solemnly declared, the Third Article established one Supreme Court and vested it with judicial power over all cases arising under the Constitution. It is that court which has stood as the guardian and protector of our form of government, the guarantee of the perpetuity of the Constitution, and above all the great champion of the freedom and the liberty of the people. No other known tribunal has ever been devised in which the people could put their faith and confidence, to which they could entrust their choicest treasure, with a like assurance that there it would be secure and safe. There is no power, no influence, great enough to sway its judgments. There is no petitioner humble enough to be denied the full protection of its great authority. This court is human, and, therefore, not infallible, but in the more than one hundred and thirty years of its existence its decisions which have not withstood the questioning of criticism could almost be counted upon one hand. In it the people have the warrant of stability, of progress, and of humanity. Wherever there is a final authority it must be vested in mortal men. There has not been discovered a more worthy lodging place for such authority than the Supreme Court of the United States.

Such is the legislative and judicial power that the people have estab lished in their government. Recognizing the latent forces of the Constitu tion, which in accordance with the spirit of the times have been drawn on for the purpose of promoting the public welfare, it has been very seldom that the court has been compelled to find that any humanitarian legislation was beyond the power which the people had granted to the Congress. When such a decision has been made, as in the recent case of the Child Labor Law, it does not mean that the court or nation wants child labor, but it simply means that the Congress has gone outside of the limitations prescribed for it by the people in their Constitution and attempted to legislate on a subject which the several states, and the people themselves, have chosen to keep under their own control.

Should the people desire to have the Congress pass laws relating to that over which they have not yet granted to it any jurisdiction, the way is open and plain to proceed in the same method that was taken in relation to income taxes, direct election of Senators, equal suffrage, or prohibition, by an amendment to the Constitution.

One of the proposals for enlarging the present field of legislation has been to give the Congress authority to make valid a proposed law which the Supreme Court had declared was outside the authority granted by the people, by the simple device of re-enacting it. Such a provision would make the Congress finally supreme. In the last resort its powers practically would be unlimited. This would be to do away with the great main principle of our written Constitution, which regards the people as sovereign, and the government as their agent, and would tend to make the legislative body sovereign and the people its subjects. It would to an extent, substitute for the will of the people, definitely and permanently expressed in their written Constitution, the changing and uncertain will of the Congress. That would radically alter our form of government and take from it its chief guarantee of freedom.

This enlarging magnitude of legislation, these continual proposals for changes under which law might become very excessive, whether they result from the praiseworthy motive of promoting general reform or whether they reflect the raising of the general standard of human relationship, require a new attitude on the part of the people towards their government. Our country has adopted this course. The choice has been made. It could not withdraw now if it would. But it makes it necessary to guard against the dangers which arise from this new position. It makes it necessary to keep in mind the limitation of what can be accomplished by law. It makes it necessary to adopt a new vigilance. It is not sufficient to secure legislation of this nature and leave it to go alone. It cannot execute itself. Oftentimes it will not be competently administered without the assistance of vigorous support. There must not be permitted any substitution of private will for public authority. There is required a renewed and enlarged determination to secure the observance and enforcement of the law.

So long as the national government confined itself to providing those fundamentals of liberty, order and Justice for which it was primarily established, its course was reasonably clear and plain. No large amount of revenue was required. No great swarms of public employees were necessary. There was little clash of special interests or different sections, and what there was of this nature consisted not of petty details but of broad principles. There was time for the consideration of great questions of policy. There was an opportunity for mature deliberation. What the government undertook to do it could perform with a fair degree of accuracy and precision.

But this has all been changed by embarking on a policy of a general exercise of police powers, by the public control of much private enterprise and private conduct, and of furnishing a public supply for much private need. Here are these enormous obligations which the people found they themselves were imperfectly discharging. They therefore undertook to lay their burdens on the national government. Under this weight the former accuracy of administration breaks down. The government has not at its disposal a supply of ability, honesty and character, necessary for the solu tion of all these problems, or an executive capacity great enough for their perfect administration. Nor is it in the possession of a wisdom which enables it to take great enterprises and manage them with no ground for criticism. We cannot rid ourselves of the human element in our affairs by an act of legislation which places them under the jurisdiction of a public commission.

The same limit of the law is manifest in the exercise of the police authority. There can be no perfect control of personal conduct by national legislation. Its attempt must be accompanied with the full expectation of very many failures. The problem of preventing vice and crime, and of restraining personal and organized selfishness is as old as human experience. We shall not find for it an immediate and complete solution in an amendment to the federal Constitution, an act of Congress, or in the findings of a new board or commission. There is no magic in government not possessed

by the public at large, by which these things can be done. The people cannot divest themselves of their really great burdens by undertaking to provide that they shall hereafter be borne by the government.

When provision is made for far-reaching action by public authority, whether it be in the nature of an expenditure of a large sum from the treasury, or the participation in a great moral reform, it all means the imposing of large additional obligations upon the people. In the last resort it is the people who must respond. They are the military power, they are the financial power, they are the moral power of the government. There is and can be no other. When a broad rule of action is laid down by law it is they who must perform.

If this conclusion be sound it becomes necessary to avoid the danger of asking of the people more than they can do. The times are not without evidence of a deep-seated discontent not confined to any one locality or walk of life, but shared in generally by those who contribute by the toil of their hand and brain to the carrying on of American enterprise. This is not the muttering of agitators, it is the conviction of the intelligence, industry and character of the nation. There is a state of alarm, however unwarranted, on the part of many people lest they be unable to maintain themselves in their present positions. There is an apparent fear of loss of wages, loss of profits and loss of place. There is a discernible physical and nervous exhaustion which leaves the country with little elasticity to adjust itself to the strain of events.

As the standard of civilization rises there is necessity for a larger and larger outlay to maintain the cost of existence. As the activities of govern. ment increase, as it extends its field of operations, the initial tax which it requires becomes manifolded many times when it is finally paid by the ultimate consumer. When there is added to this aggravated financial condition an increasing amount of regulation and police control, the burden of it all becomes very great.

Behind very many of these enlarging activities lies the untenable theory that there is some short-cut to perfection. It is conceived that there can be a horizontal elevation of the standards of the nation, immediate and perceptible, by the simple device of new laws. This has never been the case in human experience. Progress is slow and the result of a long and arduous process of self-discipline. It is not conferred upon the people, it comes from the people. In a republic the law reflects rather than makes the standard of conduct and the state of public opinion. Real reform does not begin with a law, it ends with a law. The attempt to dragoon the body when the need is to convince the soul will end only in revolt.

Under the attempt to perform the impossible there sets in a general disintegration. When legislation fails those who look upon it as a sovereign remedy simply cry out for more legislation. A sound and wise statesmanship which recognizes and attempts to abide by its limitations will undoubtedly find itself displaced by that type of public official who promises much, talks much, legislates much, expends much, but accomplishes little. The deliberate, sound judgment of the country is likely to find it has been

superseded by a popular whim. The independence of the legislator is broken down. The enforcement of the law becomes uncertain. The courts fail in their function of speedy and accurate justice, their judgments are questioned and their independence is threatened. The law, changed and changeable on slight provocation, loses its sanctity and authority. A continuation of this condition opens the road to chaos.

These dangers must be recognized. These limits must be observed. Having embarked the government upon the enterprise of reform and regulation it must be realized that unaided and alone it can accomplish very little. It is only one element, and that not the most powerful, in the promotion of progress. When it goes into this broad field it can furnish to the people only what the people furnish to it. Its measure of success is limited by the measure of their service.

This is very far from being a conclusion of discouragement. It is very far from being a conclusion that what legislation cannot do for the people they cannot do for themselves. The limit of what can be done by the law is soon reached, but the limit of what can be done by an aroused and vigorous citizenship has never been exhausted. In undertaking to bear these burdens and solve these problems the government needs the continuing indulgence, co-operation and support of the people. When the public understands that there must be an increased and increasing effort, such effort will be forthcoming. They are not ignorant of the personal equation in the administration of their affairs. When trouble arises in any quarter they do not inquire what sort of a law they have there, but they inquire what sort of a governor and sheriff they have there. They will not long fail to observe that what kind of government they have depends upon what kind of citizens they have.

It is time to supplement the appeal to law, which is limited, with an appeal to the spirit of the people, which is unlimited. Some unsettlements disturb, but they are temporary. Some factious elements exist, but they are small. No assessment of the material conditions of Americans can warrant anything but the highest courage and the deepest faith. No reliance upon the national character has ever been betrayed. No survey which goes be low the surface can fail to discover a solid and substantial foundation for satisfaction. But our countrymen must remember that they have and can have no dependence save themselves. Our institutions are their institutions. Our government is their government. Our laws are their laws. It is for them to enforce, support and obey. If in this they fail, there are none who can succeed. The sanctity of duly constituted tribunals must be maintained. Undivided allegiance to public authority must be required. With a citizenship which voluntarily establishes and defends these, the cause of America is secure. Without that all else is of little avail.

The first charter for colonization in North America was granted to Sir Walter Raleigh by Queen Elizabeth on March 25, 1584. By it there was granted to him, his heirs and assigns, the right to dispose of lands in fee simple according to the laws of England.

By F. C. Hackman, of the Seattle, Washington, Bar.

(Continued from the August issue.)

In a minority of the states where the issue has been decided, it is the rule that, as between the grantee, mortgagee or other party to an instrument whose duty it was to have it recorded, and a subsequent bona fide purchaser or incumbrancer, any injury resulting from a material error on the part of the recorder in recording the instrument, or from his failure to record it, falls upon the subsequent purchaser or incumbrancer, and not upon the grantee or mortgagee who filed the instrument.

It is said that no matter how an issue of this kind may be decided, "it must operate to the injury of innocent parties; there is, therefore, no equitable consideration favoring a preference of the parties on one side over those on the other. The point in issue between them must be determined by an application of the provisions of the registration laws to the facts of the case. When this is done, there cannot be the slightest doubt as to a correct decision.' Throckmorton v. Price, 28 Tex. 606, 91 Amer. D. 334.

It is true that the above stated rule, in those jurisdictions where it prevails, is based almost wholly upon the provisions of the registration laws as construed and applied to the facts of cases of the kind under consideration.

In making such applications statutes which provide that certain instruments shall be void as to all creditors and subsequent purchasers for a valuable consideration, without notice, unless they shall be lodged with the recorder to be recorded; or which provide that an instrument shall impart notice, or shall be considered or be operative as a record, from the time it is delivered to the recording officer for recordation, are held to make an instrument effective as a record and to impart constructive notice as soon as it is left with, or delivered to, the recording officer for record. Consequently, according to this holding, the filing or delivery of an instrument to the registrar, while it necessarily antedates the recordation of the instrument, is, nevertheless, equivalent thereto; and the record, when made, has relation back to the time the instrument was left with the recording officer. From that time an instrument is constructive notice of what it contains, and not of what the recording officer may make it show upon the record. It is notice although the recorder may fail to conform to