(Continued from third page.)

meaning. D. Secures responsibility. x. Ministers alone responsible for all legislative acts. y. Ministers cannot dodge party promises. z. Divided authorities of legislative and executive departments will be united. E. Lead to better legislation. x. Bills carefully considered. 1. Fortunes of ministry would depend upon success of bills. 2. Bills exposed to criticism and opposition. y. Harmony of one gov't bill with another. 1. Originate at same source. z. Prevent party juggling. 1. Party issues must be squarely faced. F. Best men get into office. x. Party must put forth its best leaders. 1. Party honor sustained in debate. G. Gives best government. 1. Will be elastic. x. Term of office will be longer. y. Emergencies will be met.

Brief for the Negative.H. SCHURZ '97 and H. B. MACKINTOSH '97.

Best general references: H. Sidgwick, The Elements of Politics, ch xxii; A. L. Lowell, Essays on Government, ch. 1; Freeman Snow in Am. Hist. Assn. Papers IV, 309; F. Snow in Annals of Acad. of Pol. Sci. III, 1.

The United States should not adopt a system of responsible cabinet government.

I. Such a form of government is unnecessary. A. Our present system is satisfactory. (1) It possesses all the lack of friction that is consistent with careful legislation. (2) It secures as much harmony between the departments as is consistent with their independence. (3) It represents the people in the best way. (a) Under it the majority can not oppress the minority. (x) The power of the majority is restrained by checks. (4) It trains many men in the functions of government. (a) Every member of Congress is represented on some committee. (b) These committees prepare the bills. (5) It gives great stability. (a) It can not be overturned by intrigues. (b) It can not be shaken by the formation of a third party.

II. The proposed system would present too great disadvantages. A It would cause a dangerous concentration of power. (1) There would be no department to watch and criticise the executive. (a) Under this system the legislative and executive would be one. (2) There would be no judicial. B. It would cause great instability of government. (1) Under it the government is likely to be shaken by demagogues. (x) They would work against the ministry in the House. (y) The honor of being a minister would tempt them to overthrow the ministry. (2) The formation of a third party renders the government likely to be overturned at any time. (x) If this party goes with the opposite side, the government is overthrown. (y) Its continuance depends upon the continued support of a majority. C. Under it, affairs would tend to be superficially administered. (1) The ministers could not give their whole time to legislation. (a) They must give careful attention to keeping their majority in the House (Sedgwick, p. 423). (b) Their administrative duties take time and attention. (2) They would not be the best to legislate. (a) Parliamentary tact and oratorical ability rather than administrative fitness becomes the ground for the choice of ministers. (x) Such men must be chosen as ministers who can best carry Parliament with them.