and not definable range of legislative power and choice, for that wide margin of considerations which address themselves only to the practical judgment of a legislative body. Within that margin, as among all these legislative considerations, the constitutional lawmakers must be allowed a free foot. In so far as legislative choice, ranging here unfettered, may select one form of action or another, the judges must not interfere, since their question is a naked judicial one.

Moreover, such is the nature of this particular judicial question that the preliminary determination by the legislature is a fact of very great importance, since the constitutions expressly entrust to the legislature this determination; they cannot act without making it.

And he makes the following quotation from 5 Mass. 524, 533:

It is true that the legislature, in consequence of their construction of the constitution, cannot make laws repugnant to it. But every department of government, invested with certain constitutional powers, must, in the first instance, but not exclusively, be the judge of its powers, or it could not act. And certainly the construction of the constitution by the legislature ought to have great weight, and not be overruled, unless manifestly erroneous.

Roosevelt was particularly impressed by the following quotation from an opinion by Mr. Chief Justice Tilghman, of Pennsylvania, in 1811:

For weighty reasons, it has been assumed as a principle in constitutional construction by the Supreme Court of the United States, by this court, and every other court of reputation in the United States, that an act of the legislature is not to be declared void unless the violation of the constitution is so manifest as to leave no room for reasonable doubt.

And also by the following quotation from an opinion by Mr. Justice Charlton, in Georgia, in 1808, upon the manner in which this power should be exercised by the court:

No nice doubts, no critical exposition of words, no abstract rules of interpretation, suitable in a contest between individuals, ought to be resorted to in deciding on the constitutional operation of a statute. This violation of a constitutional right ought to be as obvious to the comprehension of every one as an axiomatic truth, as that the parts are equal to the whole. I shall endeavor to illustrate this: the first section of the second article of the constitution declares that the executive function shall be vested in the governor. Now, if the legislature were to vest the executive power in a standing committee of the House of Representatives, every mind would at once perceive the unconstitutionality of the statute. The judiciary would be authorized without hesitation to declare the act unconstitutional. But when it remains doubtful whether the legislature have or have not trespassed on the constitution, a conflict ought to be

avoided, because there is a possibility in such a case of the constitution being with the legislature.

And again by the following quotation from an opinion by Chancellor Waties, of South Carolina, in 1812, who said upon this subject:—

... The interference of the judiciary with legislative acts, if frequent or on dubious grounds, might occasion so great a jealousy of this power and so general a prejudice against it as to lead to measures ending in the total overthrow of the independence of the judges, and so of the best preservative of their constitution. The validity of the law ought not, then, to be questioned unless it is so obviously repugnant to the constitution that, when pointed out by the judges, all men of sense and reflection in the community may perceive the repugnancy. By such a cautious exercise of this judicial check, no jealousy of it will be excited, the public confidence in it will be promoted, and its salutary effects be justly and fully appreciated.

I am not contending that Roosevelt was right in his conclusions, with which I did not agree, but am merely reciting the processes through which his mind passed in reaching them, and attempting to make clear the fact that they were the result of long reflection and careful investigation.

CHAPTER V

ROOSEVELT'S PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS

CONCLUSION

N what I have written, I have sought to

IN

lay the foundation for certain conclusions in regard to the character and accomplishments of Theodore Roosevelt, to which I will add the reasons as I see them for his great popularity and extraordinary success in so many distinct fields of human endeavor. In tracing his history, I think I have demonstrated that his political advancement was in no way due to anything he consciously did with that end in view.

He was never an extreme party man. I think that "Harper's Weekly," which I have quoted, stated his position correctly, in 1883, when it said:

Mr. Roosevelt holds the soundest views upon public questions with the feeling that the Republican party is the organization which, from its traditional principles and the character of its membership, is more likely wisely to secure the public welfare.

Roosevelt has always regarded a party as a