vided they can be regarded as a part of commerce "among the several states." Commerce of such a character is held to be commerce, as above described, which originates in one state and terminates in another, as well as commerce which originates and terminates in the same state, provided the regulation of such commerce is necessary to the effective regulation by Congress of what is recognized as commerce among the several states.

The word regulate is given an equally wide meaning. Thus it is held that the power to regulate commerce includes the powers:

First to construct, or provide, even by the chartering of companies, for the construction of routes by land or water over which commerce among the several states is possible, and to lay down the rules to be observed by those making use of such routes.

Second, the power to regulate includes the power to determine the private legal relations which shall exist among those persons engaged in commerce among the several states, so far as those legal relations may affect the carrying on of commerce. Thus Congress may regulate the contracts and liabilities between shippers and carriers, between carriers and their employees, between sellers and between purchasers, and between sellers and purchasers.

Finally, the power to regulate includes the power to prohibit commerce in certain articles and certain methods of carrying on commerce and to license those engaged in commerce.

The enormous extension which has been given to the power of Congress to regulate the commerce among the several states is causing the old distinction between a

commerce among the several states which is subject to Congressional regulation and commerce within the limits of a single state which is subject to state regulation, almost to disappear and to subject all commerce to the power of Congress. This distinction has disappeared with regard to commerce carried on by water, which is spoken of as navigation.

The extension of the power of Congress has also brought within the regulatory power of Congress many subjects such as the private legal relations between employer and employed, and between purchaser and seller which were formerly regarded as exclusively within the jurisdiction of the states.

Another power which is possessed by the United States Congress, and which has been considerably expanded since the Civil War, has been the power to "lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States." This clause has been interpreted as giving to Congress the power to expend money in cases in which it has no power of regulation. Thus Congress may expend money to further the development of agriculture, though it may not regulate agriculture. It may finance irrigation schemes, though it may not regulate in the states the waters used for irrigation purposes.

In this way the powers actually exercised by the national government are vastly greater than they once were, and they are exercised with the general approval of the American people, although occasionally there is a protest against the increasing centralization, as it is called, on the part of the believers in states' rights, many of whom still exist.

But the constitutional theory of the American Union remains as it was in 1789. The central government is still a government of enumerated powers. The actual powers which it exercises are, however, much more numerous and much broader in their extent than would have been deemed possible in the days before the Civil War. The states are also still recognized as possessing, subject to the limitations of the Constitution, all powers not granted to the central government; but the powers which the states may actually exercise are fewer and narrower in extent than they were once believed to be. This change in the conception of state powers is due to the extension of the activity of the central government and to the more frequent application of the original idea that the central government is supreme in its constitutional sphere of action.

In other words, the positions of the central government and of the state governments are not really the same in this, the twentieth century, that they were in the eighteenth century. This is true, although there have not been many formal amendments to the Constitution. It must be admitted, however, that most of the formal amendments which have been made have been in the direction of enlarging the powers of the central government, or of imposing limitations on those of the states. The most important of such amendments is the Fourteenth Amendment, which has placed the civil liberty of the individual under the protection of the United States national government.

We must therefore conclude that the history of the United States would seem to show that, in a developing country whose economic conditions are changing, it is impossible to fix in detail, and beyond the possibility

of change, the position of either the central government or the state governments. The enumerated powers of the United States national government have changed their meaning with the progressive changes in the social and economic conditions of the country. As the country has become economically and socially more closely united, more interests common to all parts of the country have developed, and its political institutions have had to be brought into accord with economic and social facts. The process of adjustment has been for the most part peaceful, and has been possible largely because of the broad and statesman-like views which have been held and expressed both by Congress and by the Supreme Court, the final and authoritative interpreter of the Constitution. We cannot, however, forget that one factor in the tremendous change which has taken place was the great Civil War, which ravaged a large section of the country during the momentous four years from 1861 to 1865.

4

V

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN CANADA

'HE next attempt, after the adoption of the Ameri

THE

can Constitution, to solve the problem involved in 'the determination of the relations between provinces or states, on the one hand, and a central government, on the other, was that made in Canada by the British North America Act of 1867, which provided for the organization of the present Dominion of Canada.

The conditions which existed in Canada at the time of the passage of the British North America Act were in many respects similar to those obtaining in the United States in 1789. There were in existence at that time a number of separated and almost independent political communities. The climatic differences between these, however, were not as great as was the case in the United States at the end of the eighteenth century. For all were situated in northerly latitudes and all, therefore, had a rather cold climate. The main obstacle to a firm union in the United States was thus not present in Canada.

Furthermore, the means of communication in Canada, in 1867, were much better and more abundant than was the case in the United States in 1789. The waterways to be found in the Atlantic Ocean and its embrasures, such as the Gulf of St. Lawrence and in the