direction of direct popular sovereignty. There is still a legislature, but it is elected for so short a time and checked in so many ways that much of its power and dignity has departed. Supremacy is not with it, but with the people, who have fixed limits beyond which it cannot go, and who use it merely as a piece of machinery for carrying out their wishes and settling points of detail for them. The supremacy of their will is expressed in the existence of a Constitution placed above the legislature, although capable of alteration by a direct popular vote. The position of the representatives has been altered. They are conceived of, not as wise and strong men chosen to govern, but as delegates under specific orders to be renewed at short intervals.

227. Classification based on the spirit of government. Governments differ in the spirit that animates their actual working as well as in the nature of their organization.

In addition to a system of classification by form, however, there should be a supplementary classification emphasizing the spirit of government. The government may, for example, be characterized as despotic, autocratic or constitutional; as aristocratic or democratic; as conservative, liberal, or radical.

If emphasis be placed on the spirit of government, a practical system of classification can be obtained by noting the degree of democratic development in the nation. This may be indicated in several ways: (1) By noting the ratio of the electorate to the whole population. A system of unrestricted manhood suffrage would approximately give one voter to every four and one-half persons in the population. As the ratio rises, the government is presumably less democratic. (2) If the government is representative, the basis of representation in the membership of the lawmaking body may be noted. This basis may be hereditary right or a right based on officeholding or a right based on wealth; or localities irrespective of wealth or population may be represented equally; or equal masses of population may form the basis of representation. (3) Possibly the clearest idea of the spirit of government may be had by noting the body that has the legal right to alter at will the fundamental law of the land. Such a body may be called the "legal sovereign," and may be composed of the electorate, as in Switzerland, or of a lawmaking body, as in Great Britain; or may be in the hands of an hereditary ruler, as in Russia. Under such a classification the ancient Greek terms might again be found useful, and governments be classified as in spirit monarchical, aristocratic or democratic, according as the power of legal sovereignty is in the hands of one, few, or many.

228. Types of government. Giddings classifies governments from the sociological standpoint.1

The sovereign may govern directly, or may delegate the function of governing to authorized ministers or agents.

Direct government by a personal sovereign, or by a sovereign class, is rule by a minority of the population. Direct government by a sovereign mass is rule by a majority, or by a large and powerful plurality of the population. Direct self-government by a deliberating sovereign people is rule by a plurality or by a majority of the population.

Delegated authority to govern may be vested in either a minority or a majority.

Direct government by the sovereign is necessarily an absolute rule, since the will of the sovereign is the supreme will. A personal, or class, sovereign, governing directly, rules absolutely, and such government by such a sovereign may be described as absolute minority rule. A mass sovereign, governing directly, governs absolutely, and such government by such a sovereign may be described as absolute majority rule.

Indirect or delegated government may be an absolute or a limited rule, according to the extent of the authority delegated by the sovereign.

A personal, class, mass, or general sovereign may delegate to a minister, or to a ministerial body, authority to govern unconditionally. That is to say, either may institute absolute minority rule. A sovereign mass, or a sovereign people, may delegate to a majority authority to govern unconditionally. That is to say, either mass or people may institute absolute majority rule.

On the other hand, a personal, class, mass, or general sovereign may delegate to a minister, or to a ministerial body, authority to govern conditionally and within prescribed limits. That is to say, it may institute a limited minority rule. A sovereign mass, or a sovereign people, may delegate to a majority authority to govern conditionally and within limits. That is to say, either mass or people may institute a limited majority rule. There are, then, four fundamental types of government disclosed in the foregoing possibilities, and actually seen among men. They are, namely, Absolute Minority Rule, Limited Minority Rule, Absolute Majority Rule, and Limited Majority Rule.

229. Governments classified according to the character of the chief executive. The following classification is that of Gareis. Willoughby says that "though not completely satisfactory," it is one of the best."

1 Copyright, 1906, by The Macmillan Company.

(1) Those in which the chief executive organ is a nonresponsible single person or monarch; and he may be —

(a) without constitutional limitations upon his power; i.e. absolute or autocratic, as is the case in Russia, Turkey, Persia, etc. Or

(b) constitutionally limited; as, for examples, the other monarchies of Europe.

(2) Those in which the chief executive organ is a responsible single person; as, for example, the President of the United States or of France. Responsibility is here used, of course, not in the sense of parliamentary responsibility, but of amenability to law for all acts done in a private capacity, or in excess of delegated authority.

(3) Those in which there is a nonresponsible plural executive; as, for example, the Roman collegiate, or the joint regency in Japan before 1867. This is a comparatively rare type.

(4) Those in which there is a responsible plural executive; as, for examples, the French Directory, the Roman consuls, and the Swiss. Federal Council.

230. Forms of government. The following classification by Burgess is one of the most elaborate and logical systems of division:

I. My first canon of distinction will be the identity or nonidentity of the state with its government. From this standpoint government is either immediate or representative.

1. Immediate government is that form in which the state exercises directly the functions of government. This form of government must always be unlimited, no matter whether the state be monarchic, aristocratic or democratic; for the state alone can limit the government, and, therefore, where the state is the government, its limitations can only be self-limitations, i.e. no limitations in public law. . . .

Immediate government may be monarchic, aristocratic or democratic, according as the form of state with which it is identified is monarchic, aristocratic or democratic.

2. Representative government is, in general definition, that form in which the state vests the power of government in an organization or in organizations more or less distinct from its own organization.

Representative government may be limited or unlimited. If the state vests its whole power in the government, and reserves no sphere of autonomy for the individual, the government is unlimited. . . . If, on the other hand, the state confers upon the government less than its whole power either by enumerating the powers of government, or by defining and safeguarding individual liberty against them, the government is limited. . . .

Representative government may be monarchic, aristocratic or democratic, according as one or a few or the mass of the population of the state are made eligible by the state to hold office or mandate.

II. My second canon of distinction is the concentration or distribution of governmental power.

The first alternative which arises in the application of this canon is between the centralized and dual systems of government.

1. Centralized government is that form in which the state vests all governmental authority in a single organization. In this form there is no constitutional autonomy in the localities, no independent local government. The local government is only an agency of the central government, established, modified or displaced by the central government at its own will. . . .

2. Dual government is the form in which the state distributes the powers of government between two classes of organizations, which are so far independent of each other, that the one cannot destroy the other or limit the powers of the other or encroach upon the sphere of the other as determined by the state in the constitution. Both are completely subject to the state. Either may be changed or abolished at will by the state. Neither is in essence an agency of the other, although it is conceivable, and often true, that the one may and does employ the other as agent.

The dual form is subject to a subdivision. It may be confederate government or federal government. Confederate government is the form in which, as to territory and population, the state is coextensive in its own organization with the organization of the local government. Federal government is the form in which, as to territory and population, the state is coextensive in its own organization with the organization of the general government. In the confederate system there are several states, an equal number of local governments, and one central government. In the federal system we have one state, one central government and several local governments. . .

...

The second alternative arising from the application of my second canon of distinction is between what I will term consolidated government and coördinated government.

3. Consolidated government is the form in which the state confides all governmental power to a single body. If this body be a single natural person, then the government is monarchic. If it consist of a number of natural persons, then the government is aristocratic or democratic, according as the number of persons is narrower or wider, whom the state makes eligible to hold voice and vote in the governing body.

4. Coördinated government is that form in which the state distributes the powers of government, according to their nature, between separate departments or bodies, each created by the state in the constitution, and, therefore, each equally independent of, but coördinated with, the other or others.

...

III. My third canon of distinction is the tenure of the persons holding office or mandate. Viewed from this standpoint government is either hereditary or elective.

1. Hereditary government is the form in which the state confers the powers of government upon a person or upon an organization or organizations composed of persons, standing in a certain family relation to his or their immediate predecessors. The state determines, in the constitution, what the relation shall be. Four general solutions of this problem meet us in political practice, viz.; ancienneté, ancienneté in the male line, primogeniture, primogeniture in the male line. . ...

2. Elective government is that form in which the state confers the powers of government upon a person, or upon an organization or organizations composed of persons, chosen by the suffrage of other persons enfranchised by the state, and holding the powers thus conferred for a distinct term and under certain conditions.

Election may be direct or indirect; i.e. the suffrage holders may vote immediately for the person to hold power, or for another person or other persons who shall vote for the person to hold power.

Election may also be by general ticket or by district ticket; i.e. each suffrage holder may vote for a number of persons representing a larger division of territory and population, or for a single person representing a smaller division. . .

IV. My fourth and last canon of distinction is the relation of the legislature to the executive.

Viewed from this standpoint government is either presidential or parliamentary.

1. Presidential government is that form in which the state, the sovereign, makes the executive independent of the legislature, both in tenure and prerogative, and furnishes him with sufficient power to prevent the legislature from trenching upon the sphere marked out by the state as executive independence and prerogative. . . .

2. Parliamentary government is that form in which the state confers upon the legislature the complete control of the administration of law. Under this form the legislature originates the tenure of the real (though perhaps not the nominal) executive, and terminates it at pleasure; and under this form the exercise of no executive prerogative in any sense and manner unapproved by the legislature, can be successfully undertaken.