Full download ebooks at https://ebookmeta.

com

BENIRSCHKE S PATHOLOGY OF THE HUMAN PLACEN

7th Edition Baergen Rn Burton Gj Kaplan Cg

For dowload this book click link below

https://ebookmeta.com/product/benirschke-s-pathology-of-the-
human-placenta-7th-edition-baergen-rn-burton-gj-kaplan-cg/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD NOW
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Color Atlas of Human Gross Pathology Gamal Dawood

https://ebookmeta.com/product/color-atlas-of-human-gross-
pathology-gamal-dawood/

The Human Brainstem Anatomy and Pathology Schröder

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-human-brainstem-anatomy-and-
pathology-schroder/

Medical-Surgical Nursing 7th Edition Linton Phd Rn

Faan

https://ebookmeta.com/product/medical-surgical-nursing-7th-
edition-linton-phd-rn-faan/

Spontaneous Pathology of the Laboratory Non-human

Primate 1st Edition Alys Bradley (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/spontaneous-pathology-of-the-
laboratory-non-human-primate-1st-edition-alys-bradley-editor/
Diseases of the Human Body 7th Edition Carol D. Tamparo

https://ebookmeta.com/product/diseases-of-the-human-body-7th-
edition-carol-d-tamparo/

Theories of Human Learning Mrs Gribbin s Cat Ed 7 7th

Edition Lefrançois

https://ebookmeta.com/product/theories-of-human-learning-mrs-
gribbin-s-cat-ed-7-7th-edition-lefrancois/

Atlas of Human Anatomy 7th Edition Frank H. Netter

https://ebookmeta.com/product/atlas-of-human-anatomy-7th-edition-
frank-h-netter/

Our Human Variability A Conversation with Stephen

Scherer 1st Edition Howard Burton

https://ebookmeta.com/product/our-human-variability-a-
conversation-with-stephen-scherer-1st-edition-howard-burton/

Kaplan Sadock s Concise Textbook of Clinical Psychiatry

Fifth Edition Boland

https://ebookmeta.com/product/kaplan-sadock-s-concise-textbook-
of-clinical-psychiatry-fifth-edition-boland/
Rebecca N. Baergen
Graham J. Burton
Cynthia G. Kaplan
Editors

Benirschke’s
Pathology of the
Human Placenta
Seventh Edition
Benirschke's Pathology of the Human Placenta
Rebecca N. Baergen • Graham J. Burton
Cynthia G. Kaplan
Editors

Benirschke's Pathology of the

Human Placenta
Seventh Edition
Editors
Rebecca N. Baergen Graham J. Burton
Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Centre for Trophoblast Research
Weill Cornell Medicine, New York Presbyterian University of Cambridge
Hospital Cambridge, UK
New York, NY, USA

Cynthia G. Kaplan
Professor Emeritus of Pathology
State University of New York
Stony Brook, NY, USA

ISBN 978-3-030-84724-1    ISBN 978-3-030-84725-8 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84725-8

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2012, 2022

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is
concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction
on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation,
computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed
to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty,
express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
CGK “To my husband Marty and our family”
RNB “To my husband Steve and my family”
GJB “To my wife Hilary and our family”
Preface

It is with great sadness we relate the passing of Kurt Benirschke on September 10, 2014, at the
age of 94. In his memory, with the consent of his family, the seventh and all future editions will
be titled Benirschke’s Pathology of the Human Placenta.
This book had its beginning in 1967 when Shirley G. Driscoll and Kurt Benirschke wrote in
English the volume on placental pathology for the Henke-Lubarsch, the noted German
Handbook of Pathology. There seemed to be a need for wider distribution of the text and it was
reprinted by Springer Verlag, New York, essentially the only book available devoted just to the
human placenta. Dr. Benirschke authored five subsequent editions in collaboration with Peter
Kaufmann, Rebecca Baergen, and Graham Burton in 1990 (second edition), 1995 (third edi-
tion), 2000 (fourth edition), 2006 (fifth edition), and 2012 (sixth edition). In the early editions,
the most important material was in a larger font than the extensive review of exceptions and the
discussion in the literature. Since 1967, many other shorter placenta books have been pub-
lished in English, French, and German. None of these have included the breadth of discussion
or the voluminous references which includes details of many historic articles not readily
available.
Interest in the placenta has wildly expanded over the intervening more than 50 years with
the vast majority of pathologists, obstetricians, and pediatricians recognizing its value, as so
well stated by Ballantyne in 1892.
A diseased foetus without its placenta is an imperfect specimen, and a description of a foe-
tal malady, unless accompanied by a notice of the placental condition, is incomplete.
Deductions drawn from such a case cannot be considered as conclusive, for in the missing
placenta or cord may have existed the cause of the disease and death. During intrauterine life
the foetus, the membranes, the cord and the placenta form an organic whole, and disease of
any part must react upon and affect the others.
In addition, there are now quite a few new journals, societies, and meetings devoted to the
placenta in both clinical and research areas. The interest extends into areas of study well
beyond the realm of anatomic pathology.
The seventh edition will, of necessity, differ from the prior editions which Dr. Benirsche
wrote largely himself at first, and later with the help of the above noted co-authors. It will now
be an international multi-authored book with nearly 40 contributors revising one or more chap-
ters. The explosion of new information necessitated some reordering of chapters and addition
of completely new chapters, including Chaps. 31 and 32, “Innovations in Placental Pathology”
and “Imaging in Placental Pathology.” Dr. Burton’s part has been extensively edited, as detailed
below. The editors gave the new authors considerable latitude in how to write the new and/or
edited chapters. Many of the revised chapters retain much of Dr. Benirschke’s anecdotal infor-
mation as well as the voluminous references. Others are more modern in their approach. All
contain substantial new references and current information. It is our hope that Benirschke’s
Pathology of the Human Placenta will remain as a mainstay reference in placental pathology.
For GJB, it was a great honor to take over responsibility for the early chapters covering
placental development and structure in the sixth edition from the late Peter Kaufmann, and he

vii
viii Preface

wishes to acknowledge Peter’s enormous contribution to the text. In this new seventh edition,
the material has been updated, extended, and also significantly rearranged to render the
­presentation more coherent. In particular, the yolk sac is considered in more detail in Chap. 5
due to recent evidence of its likely importance during the first weeks post-implantation; villous
development and maldevelopment are brought together in Chap. 7; there is a new Chap. 8,
“The Placental Bed,” covering the decidua, extravillous trophoblast, and maternal-fetal
immune interactions; considerations of the maternal and fetal circulations to the placenta are
integrated in a new Chap. 9; and there is a new Chap. 10, “The Chorionic and Basal Plates,”
which describes formation of the two plates, the membranes, and deposition of fibrinoid mate-
rial. It is hoped that this new approach will make it easier for readers to gain a broad under-
standing of how placental architecture is shaped during normal development, with a view to
appreciating how this may be perturbed in complications of pregnancy.

New York, NY, USA Rebecca N. Baergen

Cambridge, UK Graham J. Burton
Stony Brook, NY, USA Cynthia G. Kaplan
Acknowledgments

RNB acknowledges the support of her husband and all the faculty, students, trainees, pathol-
ogy assistants, and technologists who have assisted her in this endeavor. She would like to give
special thanks to her co-editors, Graham Burton and Cynthia Kaplan, for assistance throughout
this journey.
GJB is most grateful to his co-authors Eric Jauniaux, Stephen Charnock-Jones, and Ashley
Moffett for their valuable authoritative input to the new chapters, and to the many academic
colleagues, postdoctoral fellows, and students who have shaped his thinking over the years
through inspirational discussions and penetrating questions. Finally, he wishes to express his
appreciation of Rebecca Baergen for all her hard work involved in overseeing preparation of
this seventh edition in its new format.
CGK is honored to be asked as an editor to the seventh edition and acknowledges the sup-
port of her husband and family during the preparation of this edition and in her lifelong devo-
tion to the placenta. Over the years, many faculty, trainees, pathology assistants, and dieners
have been immense help in many different ways. She would like to thank Dr. William Bradford,
pediatric pathologist at Duke who, in her first year of pathology training, introduced her to the
1967 edition to find what had been described in the placentas of infants born to mothers with
scleroderma. Her subsequent years of training at UCSD with Kurt and later interaction at
Stony Brook with Lauren Ackerman were irreplaceable experiences.

ix
Contents

1 Examination of the Placenta �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������   1

Rebecca N. Baergen
2 Macroscopic Features of the Delivered Placenta����������������������������������������������������� 11
Rebecca N. Baergen
3 Microscopic Survey����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 15
Graham J. Burton
4 Placental Types����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 23
Graham J. Burton
5 Early Development of the Human Placenta������������������������������������������������������������� 39
Graham J. Burton and Eric Jauniaux
6 Basic Structure of a Placental Villus������������������������������������������������������������������������� 59
Graham J. Burton
7 Architecture of the Villous Trees������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 111
Graham J. Burton
8 The Placental Bed������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 143
Ashley Moffett and Graham J. Burton
9 The Placental Circulations����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 171
D. Stephen Charnock-Jones, Eric Jauniaux, and Graham J. Burton
10 The Chorionic and Basal Plates��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 205
Graham J. Burton and Eric Jauniaux
11 Approach to Histologic Examination of the Placenta��������������������������������������������� 223
Cynthia G. Kaplan and Rebecca N. Baergen
12 Abortion and Chromosomal Anomalies������������������������������������������������������������������� 227
Adrian Charles and T. Yee Khong
13 Extrauterine Implantation and Involution of Implantation Site��������������������������� 259
T. Yee Khong and Adrian Charles
14 The Placenta Accreta Spectrum�������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 271
Debra S. Heller
15 Anatomy and Pathology of the Placental Membranes ������������������������������������������� 281
Marta C. Cohen, Irene Scheimberg, and J. Ciaran Hutchinson
16 Anatomy and Pathology of the Umbilical Cord������������������������������������������������������� 345
Cynthia G. Kaplan
17 Placental Shape Aberrations������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 403
Rebecca N. Baergen and Cathleen Matrai

xi
xii Contents

18 Multiple Pregnancies ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 413

Joanna Sue Yee Chan
19 Maternal Vascular Malperfusion and Associated Maternal Diseases ������������������� 507
Jane Esther Dahlstrom, Akila Subramaniam, and Ona Marie Faye-Petersen
20 Maternal Diabetes and Obesity��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 555
Jane Esther Dahlstrom, Christopher James Nolan, and Gernot Desoye
21 Other Maternal Disorders Complicating Pregnancy ��������������������������������������������� 577
Jane Esther Dahlstrom and Susan Arbuckle
22 Fetal Vascular Malperfusion ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 611
Marta C. Cohen, Irene Scheimberg, and J. Ciaran Hutchinson
23 Erythroblastosis Fetalis, Hydrops Fetalis, and Transplacental Hemorrhage������� 633
Amy Heerema-McKenney
24 Fetal Storage Disorders ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 669
Margaret J. Evans and T. Yee Khong
25 Infectious Diseases ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 679
Debra S. Heller
26 Placental Disorders of Uncertain Etiology��������������������������������������������������������������� 729
Philip J. Katzman
27 Placental Mesenchymal Dysplasia����������������������������������������������������������������������������� 753
Virginia E. Duncan, Raj P. Kapur, and Ona Marie Faye-Petersen
28 Molar Pregnancies ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 771
Debra S. Heller
29 Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasms����������������������������������������������������������������������� 791
Pei Hui
30 Chorangiotic Lesions, Benign Tumors, and Heterotopias��������������������������������������� 821
Rebecca N. Baergen and Cathleen Matrai
31 Innovations in Placental Pathology��������������������������������������������������������������������������� 837
Priyadarshini Pantham, Francesca Soncin, Kathy Zhang-­Rutledge,
Srimeenakshi Srinivasan, Leah M. Lamale-­Smith, Louise C. Laurent,
and Mana M. Parast
32 Imaging of Placental Pathology��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 869
Jelmer Riemer Prins, Neil Sebire, Asma Khalil, and Sanne Jehanne Gordijn
33 Assisted Reproductive Technologies������������������������������������������������������������������������� 887
Astrid E. P. Cantineau, Cato J. Vrouwenraets,
and Aafke P. A. van Montfoort
34 Legal Considerations ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 901
Rebecca N. Baergen and Cynthia G. Kaplan
Appendix ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 909
References ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 915
Index������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 917
Contributors

Susan Arbuckle, MBBS, FRCPA The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Department of

Histopathology, Westmead Sydney, Australia
Rebecca N. Baergen, MD Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Weill Cornell
Medicine, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA
Graham J. Burton, MD, DSc University of Cambridge, Centre for Trophoblast Research,
Cambridge, UK
Astrid E. P. Cantineau, MD, PhD University of Groningen, University Medical Center
Groningen, Center of Reproductive Medicine, Groningen, The Netherlands
Joanna Sue Yee Chan, MD Jefferson University Hospital, Pathology, Anatomy, and Cell
Biology, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Adrian Charles, MA, MD, FRCPath, FRCPA Sidra Medicine, Department of Pathology,
Doha, Qatar
D. Stephen Charnock-Jones, BSc, PhD University of Cambridge, Department of Obstetrics
and Gynaecology, The Rosie Hospital, Cambridge, UK
Marta C. Cohen, OBE, MD, FRCPath, DMJ Sheffield Children’s NHS FT, Department of
Histopathology, Western Bank, Sheffield, UK
Jane Esther Dahlstrom, MBBS (Hons), FRCPA, PhD, SFHEA The Canberra Hospital and
Australian National University Medical School, Department of Anatomical Pathology, ACT
Pathology, Woden, Australia
Gernot Desoye, PhD Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria
Virginia E. Duncan, MD, MS University of Alabama at Birmingham, Department of
Pathology, Birmingham, AL, USA
Margaret J. Evans, BSc. MBChB FRCPath (Paed) LLM Centre for Comparative
Pathology, University of Edinburgh, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Department of Pathology,
Scotland, UK
Ona Marie Faye-Petersen, MD University of Alabama at Birmingham, Department of
Pathology, Birmingham, AL, USA
Sanne Jehanne Gordijn, MD, PhD University Medical Center Groningen, Department of
Obstetrics and Gynecology, Groningen, The Netherlands
Amy Heerema-McKenney, MD Cleveland Clinic, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA
Debra S. Heller, MD Department of Pathology, Immunology & Laboratory Medicine,
Rutgers-New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ, USA

xiii
xiv Contributors

Pei Hui, MD, PhD Department of Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New
Haven, CT, USA
J. Ciaran Hutchinson, PhD, FRCPath Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS FT,
Histopathology. Camelia Botnar Laboratories, London, UK
Eric Jauniaux, MD, PhD EGA Institute for Women’s Health at University College London,
Obstetrics & Gynaecology, London, UK
Cynthia G. Kaplan, MD Department of Pathology, State University of New York,
Stony Brook, NY, USA
Raj P. Kapur, MD, PhD Seattle Children’s Hospital, Department of Pathology, Seattle, WA,
USA
Philip J. Katzman, MD Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of
Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA
Asma Khalil, MBBCh, MD(Res), MRCOG, MSc(Epi) St. George’s Hospital, University of
London, Fetal Medicine Unit, London, UK
T. Yee Khong, MD Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Department of Anatomical Pathology,
North Adelaide, SA, Australia
Leah M. Lamale-Smith, MD University of California San Diego, Department of Obstetrics,
Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, La Jolla, CA, USA
Louise C. Laurent, MD, PhD University of California San Diego, Department of Obstetrics,
Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, La Jolla, CA, USA
Cathleen Matrai, MD New York Presbyterian Hospital - Weill Cornell Medicine, Department
of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, New York, NY, USA
Ashley Moffett, MD, FRCOG, FMedSci University of Cambridge, Department of Pathology,
Cambridge, UK
Christopher James Nolan, BMedSci, MBBS, PhD, FRACP The Canberra Hospital and
Australian National University Medical School, Department of Endocrinology, Woden,
Australia
Priyadarshini Pantham, PhD University of California San Diego, Department of Obstetrics,
Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, La Jolla, CA, USA
Mana M. Parast, MD, PhD University of California San Diego, Department of Pathology,
La Jolla, CA, USA
Jelmer Riemer Prins, MD, PhD University Medical Center Groningen, Department of
Obstetrics and Gynecology, Groningen, The Netherlands
Irene Scheimberg, MD, FRCPath Retired Paediatric and Perinatal Pathologist, Barts and
the Royal London NHS Trust, London, UK
Bart’s NHS Trust, Department of Histopathology, London, UK
Neil Sebire, FCRPath Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, UK
Francesca Soncin, PhD University of California San Diego, Department of Pathology, La
Jolla, CA, USA
Srimeenakshi Srinivasan, PhD University of California San Diego, Department of
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, La Jolla, CA, USA
Contributors xv

Akila Subramaniam, MD, MPH University of Alabama at Birmingham Hospital, Obstetrics

and Gynecology/Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA
Aafke P. A. van Montfoort, PhD Maastricht University Medical Center, Department of
Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht, The Netherlands
Cato J. Vrouwenraets, MD, MSc Maastricht University Medical Center, Department of
Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht, The Netherlands
Kathy Zhang-Rutledge, MD University of California San Diego, Department of Obstetrics,
Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, La Jolla, CA, USA
 Examination of the Placenta
1
Rebecca N. Baergen

Storage The placenta loses some weight during storage. In part, the
loss is due to evaporation, but most weight is lost by leakage of
Some have advocated storing placentas. The practice of sav- blood and serum occasioned by the mass of placental tissue
ing unexamined placentas for a week will enable examina- resting on other portions. The amount of weight loss depends
tion of most of the placentas likely to show pathology and on the length of storage and the degree of edema, but it is not
allow for examination in neonates who develop problems great in the normal placenta. It is most significant in the edema-
after delivery [3]. To do this, storage is required so that pla- tous placentas of hydrops. We have observed a 180-g fluid
centas are available when needed. The American College of extravasation from a 740-g placenta within 1 day from a
Obstetricians and Gynecologists, on the other hand, has sug- hydropic placenta. The freshly examined placenta is thus
gested, surprisingly, that the routine study of the placenta is softer, bloodier, and thicker than one that has been stored. On
not warranted [1], a decision with which we strongly dis- the other hand, it must be noted that the placenta gains weight
agree. Placentas should not be frozen prior to examination, when it is stored in formalin, particularly during the first day of
as this obliterates the most useful histological characteristics fixation. Not all organs increase in weight uniformly after such
and makes even macroscopic examination more difficult. We fixation, as the detailed report by Schremmer [44] specified.
believe that formalin fixation has similar unwanted effects. It The placenta, according to this author, gains between 0.7% and
is best to store the delivered placentas in plastic containers, 23.0%, with an average of +9.9%. It is among the organs with
labeled, in a refrigerator at 4 °C. In this state, the placenta is the largest deviations in weight gain after fixation [25]. Our
preserved allowing meaningful examination for many days. own findings are summarized in the graph shown in Fig. 1.1.
Autolysis is minimal. We cannot agree with the opinion of
Naeye [36] that this storage causes significant artifacts at the
gross level that render a subsequent examination difficult. Photography
Indeed, the immediate fixation of the organ in formalin, rec-
ommended by others [6] as a good means to evaluate the A photographic record is often desirable and is useful for
extent of infarction, makes the placenta more difficult to many purposes. Nowadays, of course, digital photography
evaluate critically, aside from the storage problems, expense, has become a routine and storage of the digital image is easy.
odor, and hazardous material exposure. Prior fixation, of This suggests that much more photography of specimens is
course, makes tissue culture, bacteriologic examination, and desirable and should be done. This task is generally quickly
other procedures more difficult or impossible. For maximal accomplished. Friends have often been amused by this rec-
convenience, it is a good idea to have a refrigerator with ommendation, but they agree that a good picture is worth a
seven shelves, labeled Monday through Sunday, and to dis- lot of words, especially when it comes to litigation.
card the normal placentas from one shelf when the next simi-
lar weekday arrives. In this way, all placentas from problem
births will be available for study. Examination

Detailed protocols for the examination of the placenta have

R. N. Baergen (*)
Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, been presented in the past [3, 8, 9, 15, 21]. Some protocols
Weill Cornell Medicine, New York Presbyterian Hospital, were designed to allow an unbiased examination of the pla-
New York, NY, USA centa and record keeping by the many different medical
e-mail: [email protected]

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022 1

R. N. Baergen et al. (eds.), Benirschke’s Pathology of the Human Placenta, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84725-8_1
2 R. N. Baergen

Fig. 1.1 Weight gain of Increment in %

placenta (trimmed, without 6
cord or membranes) after
formalin fixation
5

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Days

centas, the fetid smell of Escherichia coli and the rather

sweeter smell of Listeria monocytogenes can be distin-
guished by an experienced pathologist. Storage in the refrig-
erator enhances the growth of Listeria and hence the
recognition of these organisms.
The shape of the placenta is then ascertained by stretching
it flat on the cutting board. Is it round or oval? This may be
assessed by measuring the length of the longest axis and then
the longest length of the axis perpendicular to the first, or by
taking multiple measurements of the radius from the site of
cord insertion [39, 43]. Depending on the methodology used,
Fig. 1.2 Instruments found to be most practical for the placental exam-
ination: scissors, forceps, “dipstick” to measure the thickness of placen- different conclusions are sometimes reached. Interest in pla-
tal tissue, and a long, stiff knife cental shape has been revitalized by the recent observation
that ellipticity is related to developmental programming of
centers of the “Collaborative Study” so that, ultimately, cor- the fetus [4, 5]. The mechanisms underlying this association
relations could be made regarding fetal outcome. Our routine are unknown at present, but the shape of the placenta may
procedure now is to select for histological study those that reflect the site of implantation and hence, potentially, its
appear abnormal or whose perinatal circumstances demand maternal vascular supply or some other aspect of uteropla-
such an examination. The selection and storage process just cental physiology that impacts on placental efficiency.
outlined has been helpful, and we have rarely missed a pla- Another feature to note is the presence of accessory (suc-
centa that was of importance [26, 27, 48]. centuriate) lobes. One finds that usually during the delivery,
The tools for the examination are simple (Fig. 1.2). They the membranes have inverted over the maternal surface
consist of a ruler, a long and sharp knife, toothed forceps, a (shiny “Schultze” position) and rarely are they found in the
pair of scissors, and a scale. Our ruler is permanently configuration they held in utero (dirty “Duncan”) [42].
mounted over the cutting board, thus enabling rapid mea- Membranes are then positioned by the examiner so that they
surement of the length of the umbilical cord and the placen- assume their in utero configuration. One next ascertains the
tal diameter. A butcher’s scale with removable bucket that completeness of the membranes. It is also noted at this time
weighs items up to 2 kg is also available. The long knife, best if the tear that allowed the infant to escape from its membra-
obtained from a butcher supply house, is sharpened just nous enclosure extends to the edge of the placenta or if free
before examination. membranes extend beyond the closest edge. If there is any
When the placenta is removed from its container, one margin of intact membranes, this placenta could not have
often perceives rather characteristic odors. In infected pla- been a placenta previa, provided it was from a vaginal deliv-
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
enumerates these powers is, by all odds, the most important part of
the whole constitution and no one can claim to know much about
the government of the United States unless he understands, at least
in a general way, what these eighteen clauses express and imply.
It will be noted that all the powers except the Express and implied
last are express powers, that is, they are powers.
conveyed to Congress in so many words. The last is a grant of
implied authority, in other words it is a provision for supplementing
the express powers. Where Congress has the express right to tax, to
borrow, to regulate interstate commerce, to raise and support
armies, or to coin money, it has the implied right to make whatever
laws may be “necessary and proper” to carry its express powers into
full operation. Having the express power to borrow money, Congress
may therefore establish a system of banks if this is needed to render
more easy the operations of borrowing. Having the express power to
support armies, it may place almost any sort of restriction upon
industry in war time. By the implied powers clause of the
constitution the authority of Congress is given great elasticity.
Are the Powers of Congress Broad Enough?—If the words of
the constitution had been strictly interpreted, the powers of
Congress would now be too narrow for the work which a strong
national government must perform. It is easy to understand why the
framers of the constitution were cautious about conferring broad
powers upon the new government. They were anxious that no
legislative despotism should be built up in America. But as time
passed the express powers of Congress have been steadily widened
by the process of interpreting them broadly so that today the real
authority of Congress is much greater than one would suspect from
a mere reading of the constitution. For all practical purposes they
are broad enough although it is probably true that if the constitution
were to be redrawn tomorrow, the authority of the national
government would be increased. Nearly all the amendments
proposed in recent years have been in the direction of expanding the
powers of Congress.
The Efficiency of Congress.—In The handicaps to
comparison with the other great parliaments and good work.
legislatures of the world, the Congress of the United States does its
work fairly well. It is rather too large in membership, and the House
of Representatives would probably gain in efficiency if it were
reduced in size. Another handicap to good work arises from the
enormous grist of measures which comes forward at every session.
Congress is always under constant pressure for time. Many millions
are often voted in a single hour and it is impossible for the
congressmen to go carefully through the long list of financial items.
Until very recently, the absence of a budget system afforded an
incentive to extravagance; but this defect has now been remedied.
[119]

Congress also lacks leadership. In European The lack of

countries every parliament and legislature has a leadership.
recognized leader, usually called the prime minister. He or his
colleagues present the business and carry it through.[120] There is
nothing of this sort in either the Senate or the House of
Representatives. It is true that each political party has a floor leader,
but he has not effective control over his followers. The chairmen of
the various committees also supply a certain measure of leadership,
but their work is not unified. Mention should The lobby.
also be made of the pressure which is applied to
individual members of Congress by the lobbyists. These lobbyists are
hired workers, usually lawyers, who are paid to help get measures
through, or in some cases to prevent the passage of certain laws.
They are employed by corporations, or by labor organizations, or by
anyone who is deeply concerned in measures pending before
Congress. They use every form of persuasion in their efforts to have
congressmen see their side of the case. The “lobby” has been placed
under various restrictions in recent years, but it is still an influential
factor.
The Congressional Oligarchies.—We are in The influence of
the habit of assuming that the power in national small groups in
lawmaking rests with the 531 men who Congress.
constitute the Senate and the House of Representatives; but the
dominating influence is in reality exercised by a relatively small
group of men in both chambers. The chairmen of important
committees and certain others of long congressional experience are
the men whose influence counts. The rest follow their lead for the
most part. Important measures, moreover, are often discussed in a
caucus of the majority party, and the action of the caucus is
considered binding on all who attend it. A member in either
chamber, especially a new member, who displays a disposition to be
wholly independent, and to disregard the advice of his party leaders
or the decisions of his party caucus is not likely to get many favors
for himself or for his district. The senator or representative who
desires to be effective finds it necessary, therefore, to help others
with their plans whether he approves them heartily or not, in order
that he may be, in turn, helped with his own. It is almost always
true that a group of thirty or forty members, on the majority side,
can secure the passage of measures which they desire and can
prevent the passage of measures to which they are opposed.[121] In
this respect the Congress of the United States does not differ much
from legislative bodies the world over. Large deliberative bodies are
invariably prone to follow the lead of some relatively small group in
their own membership; otherwise they would never make headway,
and the larger the chamber the more likely is this to be true.
General References
James Bryce, American Commonwealth, Vol. I, pp. 97-208;
Woodrow Wilson, Congressional Government, pp. 58-129;
C. A. Beard, American Government and Politics, pp. 231-293; Ibid., Readings on
American Government and Politics, pp. 214-271;
Everett Kimball, National Government of the United States, pp. 308-378;
W. B. Munro, Government of the United States, pp. 146-218;
S. W. McCall, The Business of Congress, pp. 43-84;
Lynn Haines, Your Congress, pp. 67-109.
Group Problems
1. Is it desirable to restrict the present powers of the Senate in
relation to treaties? Reasons for giving the Senate special powers in relation to
treaties. The meaning of “advice and consent”. Washington’s attitude and
experience. The action of the Senate on important treaties during the past
hundred years. The practical difficulty of obtaining a two-thirds majority.
Confirmation as a barrier to secret diplomacy. References: Ralston Hayden, The
Senate and Treaties, pp. 169-195; H. C. Lodge, The Senate of the United States,
pp. 1-31; Everett Kimball, National Government of the United States, pp. 549-551;
573; S. B. Crandall, Treaties: Their Making and Enforcement, pp. 67-92;
Congressional Record, 1919-1922.
2. The personnel of Congress. References: Types of men elected. Their
occupations at home. Their legislative experience. Are there too many lawyers?
Length of service. How the personnel might be improved. (Material for this study
may be had in the Congressional Directory, and in the various autobiographical
works such as James G. Blaine’s Twenty Years in Congress; Champ Clark’s
Autobiography, etc.)
3. The merits and faults of the committee system. References: James
Bryce, American Commonwealth, Vol. I, pp. 156-166; S. W. McCall, The Business
of Congress, pp. 43-60; L. G. McConachie, Congressional Committees, pp. 58-86;
Everett Kimball, National Government of the United States, pp. 344-356; P. S.
Reinsch, Readings on American Federal Government, pp. 257-264.
Short Studies
1. The old and the new method of choosing Senators. George H. Haynes,
The Election of Senators, pp. 36-129.
2. The procedure in impeachments. W. B. Munro, Government of the United
States, pp. 168-173.
3. The Speaker of the House. C. A. Beard, American Government and Politics,
pp. 280-289; M. P. Follett, The Speaker of the House of Representatives, pp. 296-
330.
4. The rights of minorities. F. A. Cleveland and Joseph Schafer, Democracy in
Reconstruction, pp. 446-467.
5. The general powers of Congress. W. B. Munro, Government of the United
States, pp. 208-218.
6. How Congress legislates. Everett Kimball, National Government of the
United States, pp. 350-356; P. S. Reinsch, Readings on American Federal
Government, pp. 290-296.
7. An Englishman’s observation on the work of Congress. James Bryce,
American Commonwealth, Vol. I, pp. 191-208.
8. The rules of the House and Senate. Everett Kimball, National Government
of the United States, pp. 333-344.
9. Obstruction in Congress. S. W. McCall, The Business of Congress, pp. 85-
92.
10. Party organizations in Congress. W. W. Willoughby and Lindsay Rogers,
Introduction to the Problem of Government, pp. 334-351.
11. The lobby. P. S. Reinsch, American Legislatures and Legislative Methods,
pp. 228-298.
12. The Library of Congress. F. J. Haskin, American Government, pp. 287-288.
 Questions
1. Do the merits of the double-chamber system outweigh the objections? Why
should the members of the two chambers be chosen by different methods? Name
at least three different methods of selecting representatives.
2. What is the present value of equal representation of the states in the Senate?
What legal and practical obstacles are there to changing this system?
3. Look up and explain the following terms which are commonly used in
Congress: executive session; morning hour; union calendar; ranking member;
filibuster; leave to print; pigeon-holing a bill; pork barrel; rider.
4. What are the practical difficulties which arise when the Senate declines to
confirm appointments proposed by the President?
5. Explain the difference between an impeachment and a bill of attainder.
6. The Senate usually exercises more influence than the House in matters of
lawmaking. Can you give reasons why this should be so?
7. Tell how congressional districts are mapped out. Mark on an outline map the
districts in your state. Have any of them been gerrymandered?
8. The chairmanships of committees usually go to senior members. Do you think
this a wise or unwise practice?
9. What would be gained, and what would be lost by lengthening to four years
the term for which representatives are chosen?
10. Two women, Miss Rankin of Montana and Miss Robertson of Oklahoma, have
sat in Congress. What are the arguments for and against electing women in
future?
11. Members of the House of Representatives receive salaries of $7500 per year.
Is this too much or too little? Give your reasons.
12. Congressmen are entitled to the free use of the mails. (This is called the
franking privilege.) Some years ago one senator sent nearly 750,000 copies of his
speeches through the mails free. Do you believe this privilege should be
withdrawn or retained?
13. Should the rules of the House provide for unlimited debate?
14. Can you suggest any practical way in which the work of Congress might be
improved?
Topics for Debate
1. The English practice of choosing non-resident representatives is
advantageous and should be adopted in the United States.
2. The states should be represented in the Senate according to their respective
populations.
3. The provision relating to a reduction in representation, whenever citizens are
excluded from voting (see Amendment XIV) should be enforced.
 CHAPTER XV
THE PRESIDENT AND HIS CABINET

The purpose of this chapter is to explain how the President of the United
States is chosen, what his powers are, and what functions his cabinet
performs.
 The President
The Man and the Office.—Forty years ago, The notable
an eminent English writer on American Presidents.
government spoke of the presidency as the greatest secular office in
the world “to which anyone can rise by his own merits”.[122] In view
of this fact, he asked, how does it come that the position is not more
frequently filled by great and striking men? There have been twenty-
nine presidents since the constitution went into force in 1788. Of
these at least three, Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln have won
an assured place in world history. Five or six (including Adams,
Jackson, Grant, Cleveland, and Roosevelt) displayed during their
respective terms of office some qualities which marked them as men
of uncommon force or ability. Three others are still living and their
achievements cannot yet be fairly estimated. But taking all these
together, and even adding a few more for good measure, would it
not still be a fair statement to say that at least half the presidents
have been men whose names would be entirely forgotten nowadays
were it not for the fact that they occupied the presidential chair?
Alexander Hamilton, Daniel Webster, John Marshall, Henry Clay,
and John C. Calhoun are great and striking figures in American
history although they never reached the presidency; on the other
hand the nation has, at various times, bestowed its highest honor
upon men of commonplace qualities. This, of course, was not what
the Fathers of the Republic expected. It was their anticipation that
the presidential office would always be filled by men of “pre-eminent
ability and virtue”.
Why has this expectation been in part disappointed? That is a
question which can only be answered by a study of the methods by
which presidents are chosen, the relations between the office and
the party system, and the duties that presidents are required to
perform.
 How the President is Chosen.—The Why the plan of
Articles of Confederation did not provide for a indirect election was
President; executive functions were performed adopted.
by committees of the Congress. But this plan was found to be
altogether unsatisfactory and the framers of the constitution decided
in 1787 that the new federal government ought to have a single
executive head. How to choose this head, however, was a problem
which gave them great difficulty and they debated it for a long time.
They did not approve a plan of election by direct popular vote, for
they feared that this might result in the choice of men who were
personally popular but had no other qualifications. Their study of
ancient and mediaeval republics made them averse to choosing the
head of the nation by direct popular vote. They were not prepared
to trust the people; in those days the risk seemed too great. On the
other hand they did not desire to have the President chosen by
Congress because this would give Congress control of the office,
whereas their aim was to make the presidency a check upon
Congress. So they finally decided upon the expedient of direct
election by means of an electoral college.[123]
The Original Plan of Election.—Stated The presidential
briefly the plan which they agreed upon and electors.
inserted in the constitution was as follows: Each state shall choose,
in such manner as its legislature may determine, a number of
electors equal to the state’s combined quota of senators and
representatives in Congress. A state having, for example, two
senators and twelve representatives, is entitled to fourteen electors.
On a definite date, once in four years, the electors meet in their
respective states and give in writing their votes for President and
Vice President. These votes are sealed up, sent to Washington,
counted, and announced. This plan did not contemplate that
nominations should be made in advance, or that political parties
should have anything to do with the election, or that the various
states, in choosing their electors, should pledge them to vote for any
particular candidate. It was expected that the electors would meet,
discuss the merits of all the available men for the position, and give
their votes accordingly.
 The Actual Methods of Election Today.— How the plan
At the first two elections this plan was followed. worked in the
There were no nominations and no campaign earlier elections.
preceding the election. But at the election of 1796 it was well
understood, even before the electors met, that the contest would be
between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. And as time went on
the actual practice drifted further away from the original plan of free
choice by unpledged electors. Political parties grew up; the electors
were chosen with the definite understanding that they would vote
for a particular party candidate, and their share in the election
became purely nominal. In 1804 some changes were made in the
method of election but they did not affect the general plan or the
current practice. Gradually the people took into their own hands the
function of choosing the President; everywhere the state legislatures
turned the work of choosing the electors over to them, so that the
presidential elections became, in everything but name and form,
direct elections by the people.[124]
In the choice of a President there are now five Five steps in the
steps, but only two of these are of any practical choosing of a
importance. First, each political party nominates President:
its candidate at a national convention, as already described.[125]
Second, in each state the political parties 1. The nomination
nominate, either by primaries or state of candidates.
conventions, their respective slates or groups of electors. Third, the
voters on election day decide which group of 2. The nomination
electors shall be given the formal function of of electors.
electing the President. This the voters do on the Tuesday following
the first Monday in November every fourth year. 3. The polling.
Each voter marks his ballot for a group of
electors but what he really does is to indicate his preference for one
of the candidates already nominated at the party conventions. This
means, of course, that one or the other group of electors is chosen
as a whole and the state’s vote cast solidly. It rarely happens, for
example, that a state casts ten electoral votes for one candidate and
five for another; if it has fifteen votes they all go to one candidate.
For this reason it sometimes happens that a candidate receives a
majority of the electoral votes although not a majority of the popular
votes, taking the country as a whole. Fourth, the 4. The action of the
electors meet in their respective states and cast electors.
their votes. Fifth, these votes are opened in Washington and
counted in the presence of Congress. Among 5. Counting the
these five steps the first and third are the votes.
important ones. The last step is nothing but a formality unless it
appears that no candidate has received a majority. In case this
happens the House of Representatives proceeds to choose a
President from among the three candidates who have stood highest.
In the case of the Vice President the choice rests with the Senate.
[126]

Factors which Influence Presidential The “availability” of

Nominations and Elections.—As matters candidates.
have worked out it is not possible for anyone to be elected President
without first obtaining a nomination from one of the two leading
political parties. The party organizations and the party conventions
are influenced by groups of political leaders and these leaders are
often more interested in a man’s strength as a candidate than in his
personal qualifications for the work which a President has to do. The
consequence is that candidates have sometimes been nominated by
party conventions because they were compromises on whom
opposing factions of the party could agree, or because they could be
counted upon to carry some important state at the polls, or for some
other reason having nothing to do with the executive capacity of the
individual concerned.
A big national convention, comprising more “Dark horses”
than a thousand delegates, cannot be expected
to do its work with calm deliberation or to weigh carefully the
personal qualifications of all those who seek to be nominated. If
there is a prolonged contest between two or three strong
candidates, no one of whom can obtain the requisite number of
votes in the convention, the delegates in their impatience are likely
to turn to a “dark horse”, that is to someone less prominent on
whom there is a chance of agreement.[127] This has often happened.
 The real work of nominating candidates is not done on the floor of
the convention. The plans are laid and put into operation by groups
of leaders in private conferences, the delegates following these
leaders when called upon. And the fact that a candidate possesses
“great and striking qualities” does not always commend him to these
party leaders. On most occasions they are likely to prefer a man
who, if elected, will work in harmony with the party organization
rather than take the reins of office wholly into his own hands.[128] By
various combinations of circumstances, therefore, men of mediocre
quality have sometimes been nominated.
Narrowness of the People’s Choice.—A The election may
nomination by one of the two leading parties is turn upon various
in some cases almost equivalent to election. things.
There are times, of course, when the election turns chiefly upon the
merits of the two leading candidates; but more often the result is
determined by other factors entirely. Each candidate embodies the
strength of his party as well as his own, and each political party is
for various reasons stronger in some years than in others. When a
party has been in power for a term of years the people usually grow
disgruntled with its policy and refuse to support the candidate of
that party at the next election no matter how capable he may be.
There is every reason to believe that the Democratic candidate was
doomed to defeat in 1920 no matter who he might have been. When
one political party remains in power for eight or twelve years it
makes many enemies; people find fault on one score or another and
decide that they will vote for a change. Even a strong candidate in
such circumstances has very little hope of winning.
Public opinion is a very fickle thing. It exalts a public man as a
hero today and execrates him tomorrow. It is strong for one policy
this year and often veers around to something quite different a year
or two later. Men are borne into the presidential office on this
surging tide, sometimes without much reference to their individual
qualifications. They are nominated because they are acceptable to
the party leaders, or because they come from some strong and
doubtful state, or because they are agreed upon by compromise, or
for any one of a dozen other reasons. The capacity of the man is not
always, and indeed not usually, the chief factor in determining a
presidential nomination.[129] Under the circumstances the wonder is
that the country has obtained, in the presidential office, such a high
general level of personal capacity and character.
Powers of the President.—The actual Presidential powers:
powers of the President are greater than those
of any other ruler in the world, whether hereditary or elective. He is
the chief engineer of a great mechanism which controls an army,
raises several billion dollars a year in taxes, enforces laws, regulates
commerce, and employs the full time of more than half a million
public officials. Congress makes the laws, it is true; but were it not
for the President and those whom he appoints, the laws would not
be enforced. Congress decides what taxes shall be levied; but the
President and his subordinates collect them. Congress appropriates
money out of the treasury; but the executive branch of the
government, of which the President is the head, spends the money.
The President, in other words, is the nation’s chief executive—he is
charged with the duty of executing the laws. This is a large
responsibility and a good deal of the work is necessarily entrusted to
subordinates whom the President appoints.
The appointing power is, then, an important 1. Appointments.
phase of the President’s authority. He names all
the higher officials of the Government subject to confirmation by the
Senate as has already been explained. He has the power to remove
any national official. In the case of minor officials he may, and
usually does, depend upon the advice of senators or congressmen
both as regards appointments and removals; but in the case of all
high officers these things must have the President’s personal
attention. Naturally they take a great deal of his time.
In relation to Congress the President has the 2. The executive
right to make recommendations and to veto any veto.
measure which he does not approve. These recommendations he
may make either by written message or by appearing before
Congress in person. The veto power places a powerful weapon in
the President’s hands. Every bill or resolution which passes both
Houses of Congress must be laid before the President. If he
approves, he signs it. If not, he is entitled, at any time within ten
days, to return the bill or resolution without his signature, giving his
reasons for the refusal to sign. When the Scope of the veto
President vetoes a measure in this way Congress power.
reconsiders it and a vote is then taken to determine whether the
action of the President shall be sustained or overridden. If two-thirds
of the members present in both the Senate and the House vote to
override the veto, the measure becomes effective; if less than two-
thirds so vote, the measure becomes null.
But suppose the President neither signs nor The “pocket veto”.
vetoes the measure within ten days after it is
sent to him, what then? The constitution provides that in such case
the measure shall become a law. If Congress adjourns before the
ten-day period has expired, however, the bill does not become a law.
It is not necessary for a President to veto any measure that may
come to him during the ten days immediately preceding the
adjournment of Congress. If he does not approve the measure, he
merely withholds his signature and it dies on his table. This is known
as the “pocket veto”.
The veto power has been used very little by Its use and abuse.
some presidents and a great deal by others.
During the first forty years of the Republic only nine bills were
vetoed. But during the past forty years presidential vetoes have
been very common. When a measure has been vetoed there is great
difficulty, as a rule, in obtaining the necessary two-thirds vote to
override the veto; but vetoes, nevertheless, are occasionally
overcome. The use of the veto, although it is an exercise of
executive power, makes the President a vital factor in legislation.
Under ordinary circumstances he can defeat any measure that is not
acceptable to him.[130] There are exceptions to this rule, to be sure,
but it is valid in the main.
Although the power of appointment and the 3. The conduct of
veto power in normal times the two chief foreign relations.
sources of the President’s authority, he has others of considerable
importance. He conducts relations with foreign governments and
negotiates all treaties. Treaties do not become valid, however, until
ratified by the Senate. He decides whether ambassadors and other
diplomats sent to Washington from other countries shall be formally
recognized. He has power to pardon offenders sentenced in the
federal courts. He is commander-in-chief of the military and naval
forces. All these functions are vested in the President by the
constitution and the laws.
Other powers have been acquired by usage, 4. Other powers.
for example, the right to have a large voice in
controlling the policy of the political party to which the President
belongs. The President is a party man, a party leader. He is elected
on a party platform. The people expect the President to carry out
the pledges which this platform contains. To do this the President
finds it necessary at times to take the initiative in securing the
passage of laws by Congress and also to bring influence to bear
upon the members of both Houses. Strictly speaking, the President
has no formal share in the making of the laws; but as a matter of
usage he has a highly-important influence upon legislation.
Succession to the Presidency.—In case the President should
die, or resign, or be removed by impeachment, or be otherwise
incapable of performing his duties, the Vice President succeeds. In
the absence of the Vice President it has been provided by law that
the members of the cabinet, beginning with the Secretary of State,
have the right of succession according to the seniority of their
offices.[131] No President has ever resigned or been removed from
office. On several occasions, however, a Vice President has
succeeded by reason of a President’s death. Some presidents have
been seriously ill during their terms of office, and President Wilson
was absent in France for several months during 1918-1919; but in
no case has the Vice President been called upon to exercise the
presidential functions.
The office of Vice President, apart from the The Vice President.
right of succession which it carries, is not of
much importance. In selecting their candidates for the office the two
leading political parties have usually given very little thought to the
problem of getting the most capable man. By the time the great task
of nominating a candidate for the presidency has been finished, the
delegates are in a mood to get home. They will not spend hours and
days taking ballot after ballot for the second place on the ticket.
Apart from presiding in the Senate the Vice President has no regular
official duties, but there is the ever-present chance that he may have
to step into the chief executive position. For that reason the work of
selecting candidates ought to be done more carefully than has
usually been the case.
 The Cabinet
The Cabinet.—The constitution makes no The whole cabinet
definite provision for a cabinet. Its framers system rests on
expected that the President would appoint usage.
subordinates to assist him in the performance of his numerous
functions and they made allusion to these officials; but there was no
anticipation that the officials in charge of the various departments
would be formed into an organized branch of the government. So
the cabinet rests upon usage, not upon the constitution or the laws.
The same is true of the cabinet in England. It has no legal status,
exercises no formal powers, keeps no records, and has no fixed
membership. The prime minister selects, for membership in the
cabinet, whomsoever he pleases, the only restrictions being that
they shall have seats in parliament and that the cabinet as a whole
shall have the support of a majority in the House of Commons. The
President of the United States has an even wider range of choice in
the selection of his cabinet. He is not bound to choose a group of
men who control a majority in either branch of Congress. His cabinet
may be as large or as small as he chooses to make it. By usage,
however, the American cabinet consists of the heads of the national
administrative departments, these departments having been at
various times established by law.[132] There are now ten such
departments and hence ten members of the cabinet. The ten
departments are as follows: State, Treasury, War, Navy, Post-Office,
Interior, Justice, Agriculture, Commerce, and Labor. The head of
each is appointed by the President with the confirmation of the
Senate; but for more than eighty years this confirmation has never
been refused. The heads of departments are responsible to the
President alone and may be dismissed by him at any time. They are
not permitted to have seats in either the Senate or House of
Representatives.
 The Functions of the Cabinet.—In The cabinet’s
describing the functions of the cabinet it is functions:
advisable to make, at the outset, a distinction between those duties
which are performed by the cabinet as a whole, and those which
pertain to the members of the cabinet individually, as heads of their
own departments.
The cabinet as a whole has no legal authority. 1. As a body.
[133]
It is merely a group of high officials which
the President calls together once or twice a week to discuss such
matters as he chooses to lay before it, or matters which he permits
individual members to bring up. The President may follow its advice
or he may not. He does not need the approval of the cabinet for any
of his actions. At the same time it has become the custom to consult
the cabinet on practically all important questions of general policy
and to give considerable weight to the cabinet’s advice. How much
this weight will be depends, in large measure, upon the
temperament and attitude of the President himself.[134]
Meetings of the cabinet are not public; no records are kept or
printed. Nobody knows what goes on at the meetings of the cabinet
except those who are present. It is a point of honor among the
members that no one will disclose the proceedings to outsiders.
Thus the cabinet always presents an outward appearance of being
unanimous. If any member cannot work in harmony with the
President or with his fellow-members, he is expected to resign.
More vital than the functions of the cabinet as 2. As individuals.
a whole are those which its members perform,
as individuals, as heads of their departments. Every member of the
cabinet, as has been mentioned, is the head of a department, and as
such is given charge of some branch of the government’s work,
subject at all times, however, to the direction of the President. The
functions of each department are indicated, in a general way, by
their respective titles.[135] These duties are so numerous and so
varied that the various departments are divided into bureaus, each
bureau having charge of a certain division of the work. On all routine
matters the head of the department has practically independent
authority, but questions of general policy and those which affect
more than one department are either discussed at cabinet meetings
or taken to the President for his decision.[136]
Should the Cabinet be Enlarged?—Proposals are now under
consideration for enlarging the cabinet by the creation of a
department of education and a department of public health. It is
contended, and perhaps rightly, that the work of the national
government in these two fields is sufficiently important to warrant
their being placed upon the same footing as agriculture, labor, and
commerce. As an alternative it has been suggested that education
and public health might be combined into a single department of
public welfare; but the objection to this is that the two things have
no close relation to each other. There is a feeling, moreover, that the
cabinet should not be made much larger than it now is. If every
request for the creation of a new department were granted, the
cabinet would soon become too cumbrous for the effective
performance of its advisory functions.
American and English Cabinet Systems Compared.—The
cabinet system in the United States is like that of England in some
respects and different in others. These similarities and contrasts may
be made clear by putting them in parallel columns.
Similarities

1. The American cabinet 1. The English cabinet system

system rests on custom or also rests on usage, having no
usage. basis in the laws of England.

2. Members of the American 2. Members of the English cabinet

cabinet are chosen by the are selected in the name of the
chief executive—the nominal chief executive—the
President. king, by the actual chief
executive—the prime minister.

3. Members of the American 3. Members of the English cabinet

cabinet are heads of are also heads of departments;
 departments. but in England not all heads of
departments become members
of the cabinet.

4. The American cabinet 4. The English cabinet, through

advises the President. the prime minister, advises the
king.

Contrasts

1. Members of the American 1. Members of the English cabinet

cabinet are not permitted to must be members of
sit in Congress. parliament.

2. Members of the American 2. Members of the English cabinet

cabinet are responsible to the are responsible to the House of
President only; they do not Commons and must resign
have to resign if they fail to whenever they lose the support
retain the confidence of of a majority of that chamber.
Congress.

3. The American cabinet does 3. The English cabinet is the

not prepare business for “great standing committee” of
Congress nor assume any parliament, preparing all
formal initiative in law- important measures for its
making. consideration and assuming a
definite leadership in the
making of laws.
Which is the Better Plan?—The relative Merits and defects
merits of the American and English cabinet of each plan.
systems have been much discussed by writers in both countries. The
American plan enables the executive branch of the government to
retain its independence and thus prevents the lodging of too much
power in the hands of Congress. The English system makes the
House of Commons the supreme governing organ of the realm, with
no legal checks upon its omnipotence. It affords, moreover, a degree
of leadership in legislation which the American plan fails to provide.
The American system, on the other hand gives the individual
member of Congress greater scope for independent action in that he
is not confronted, at the beginning of each session, with a cut-and-
dried program arranged in advance by the cabinet.
No one can say that either system is of itself better than the other.
As well might it be argued that an elephant is stronger than a whale.
The strength of each depends upon its environment. The American
cabinet system fits into the American scheme of government; the
English system would not do this unless our whole plan of
government were greatly changed.
Should Members of the Cabinet Sit in The arguments in
Congress?—The chief defect of the American favor.
cabinet system, as thoughtful men now realize, is the fact that while
members of the cabinet and members of Congress are deeply
interested in the same work, they are kept at arm’s length apart.
Members of the cabinet have information of great value to Congress;
and Congress is usually desirous of knowing their opinions on public
questions. On the other hand the work of the various departments,
over which members of the cabinet have supervision, depends
largely upon the action of Congress. Congress votes them the money
which they spend and makes the laws under which they spend it.
Why not bring the two bodies into closer contact by permitting
members of the cabinet to sit and speak, but not to vote, in both
houses of Congress? This has frequently been proposed and it could
be accomplished, if Congress so desired, by a change in the rules.
There are practical objections, however, to The arguments
any such arrangement. It would greatly increase against.
the President’s influence over the work of Congress by giving him
ten agents—usually men of ability and experience—in each chamber.
They would have no votes, it is true; but their argumentative powers
would count. The President would doubtless select as members of
his cabinet persons who, by their abilities and logic, could exert a
strong influence upon the lawmaking bodies. It is also pointed out as
an objection that members of the cabinet already have enough to do
in attending to the affairs of their own departments. Were they to
spend their time in attending sessions of the Senate and the House,
they could not give adequate supervision to their other work, and
the administrative branch of the government would suffer in
consequence. When Congress now desires information or an
expression of opinion from any member of the cabinet, moreover, it
is always possible to obtain what it wants by inviting him to appear
before a congressional committee. This partly serves the purpose
which would be attained by giving members of the cabinet the right
to sit and speak in Congress.
General References
James Bryce, American Commonwealth, Vol. I, pp. 38-96;
Woodrow Wilson, Congressional Government, pp. 242-293; Ibid., Constitutional
Government in the United States, pp. 54-81;
W. H. Taft, Our Chief Magistrate and His Powers, especially pp. 1-28;
C. A. Beard, American Government and Politics, pp. 166-230; Ibid., Readings in
American Government and Politics, pp. 154-213;
Everett Kimball, National Government of the United States, pp. 140-270;
James T. Young, The New American Government and Its Work, pp. 10-44;
W. B. Munro, Government of the United States, pp. 88-145;
P. S. Reinsch, Readings on American Federal Government, pp. 1-78;
W. W. Willoughby and Lindsay Rogers, Introduction to the Problem of
Government, pp. 178-195; 323-333.
Group Problems
1. The actual steps in the election of a President. The original plan of
election. What the framers of the constitution intended. The early elections.
Growth of a nominating system. The caucus. The convention. Presidential
primaries. Factors affecting the nomination. Doubtful states. Functions of the
electors today. Counting the electoral votes. The part of Congress in presidential
elections. Suggested changes in the system. Should the electoral college be
abolished? References: Max Farrand, The Framing of the Constitution, pp. 160-
175; The Federalist, No. LXVII; J. H. Dougherty, The Electoral System of the United
States, pp. 13-31; E. B. Stanwood, History of the Presidency, pp. 1-19; C. A. Beard,
Readings in American Government and Politics, pp. 154-163; Everett Kimball,
National Government of the United States, pp. 140-167; Arnold B. Hall, Popular
Government, pp. 98-119 (The Presidential Primary).
 2. The increased powers of the President in war time. References: The
Federalist, No. 74; W. F. Willoughby, Government Organization in War Time and
After, pp. 1-21; W. B. Weeden, War Government, pp. 319-358; W. Whiting, War
Powers under the Constitution, pp. 66-83; Emlin McClain, Constitutional Law in the
United States, pp. 201-212; P. S. Reinsch, Readings on American Federal
Government, pp. 22-31; Allen Johnson, Readings in American Constitutional Law,
pp. 474-481; Everett Kimball, National Government of the United States, pp. 188-
194.
3. The American and English cabinet systems. References: James Bryce,
American Commonwealth, Vol. I, pp. 85-96; John A. Fairlie, National
Administration, pp. 54-69; C. G. Haines and B. M. Haines, Principles and Problems
of Government, pp. 259-279; H. B. Learned, The President’s Cabinet, pp. 9-43;
Jesse Macy and J. W. Gannaway, Comparative Free Government, pp. 81-95; 395-402;
421-446.
Short Studies
1. The personality of Presidents. T. F. Moran, American Presidents, pp. 9-
115.
2. Why great men are not elected. James Bryce, American Commonwealth,
Vol. I, pp. 69-76.
3. The Hayes-Tilden contested election of 1876. E. B. Stanwood, History of
the Presidency, pp. 356-393.
4. The President’s veto power. Allen Johnson, Readings in American
Constitutional History, pp. 370-379; E. C. Mason, The Veto Power, pp. 24-140; H.
J. Ford, Rise and Growth of American Politics, pp. 175-187.
5. The President’s control of foreign relations. E. S. Corwin, The
President’s Control of Foreign Relations, pp. 84-125; Allen Johnson, Readings in
American Constitutional History, pp. 393-404.
6. The President’s appointing power. Everett Kimball, National Government
of the United States, pp. 181-188; L. M. Salmon, “The Appointing Power of the
President”, in American Historical Association, Annual Report (1899), Vol. I, pp. 67-
86.
7. The President as a party leader. C. L. Jones, Readings on Parties and
Elections, pp. 205-211; Jesse Macy, Party Organization and Machinery, pp. 25-42.
8. Daily life in the White House. Benjamin Harrison, This Country of Ours, pp.
159-180.
9. How a cabinet is formed. H. B. Learned, History of the President’s Cabinet,
pp. 110-134.
10. The cabinet’s relation to the President. Everett Kimball, National
Government of the United States, pp. 207-217.
11. Is there need for a readjustment between the executive and
legislative branches of the government? F. A. Cleveland and Joseph Schafer,
Democracy in Reconstruction, pp. 423-445.
 12. The actual work of the administrative departments. F. J. Haskin,
American Government, pp. 14-26 (The State Department); 27-39 (The Treasury
Department); 78-90 (The Department of the Interior).
Questions
1. Study carefully Article II, Sections 2-7, also Amendment XII, of the
constitution, and then answer these questions: (a) In what respects was the
method of election changed by this amendment? (b) In case no candidate receives
a majority of the electoral votes how is the President chosen? The Vice President?
Explain how it would be possible to have a President from one party and a Vice
President from another. (c) If a retiring President or Vice President, immediately
after election in November, should desire to have his successor take office at once,
without waiting for the regular inauguration date in March, how could this be
done?
2. Explain how a candidate for the presidency may obtain a majority of the
people’s votes at the polls and yet not be elected. (This has happened on more
than one occasion.) Do you think it a fair arrangement?
3. What are the qualifications for the presidency: (a) legal requirements; (b)
practical requirements? Compare them with those for the vice presidency under
both heads.
4. Make a list of the qualities which you think a President ought to possess,
placing them in order of their importance. Name the President whom you would
regard as having each of these qualities in the highest degree. What qualities do
you associate with the names of Madison, Jackson, Buchanan, Cleveland,
Roosevelt?
5. Explain the veto and the pocket veto. Would you be in favor of abolishing
either? Ought the opinion of a single man to prevail against the decisions of a
majority of the senators and representatives?
6. Ought the President to give up all connection with his party on assuming
office and be a non-partisan, representing all the people?
7. Explain why the President has so much greater power in war time than in
time of peace.
8. Do you think that a President, in choosing members of his cabinet, should be
guided by any of the following motives and, if so, how much weight should he give
to them: (a) to have all parts of the country represented in the cabinet; (b) to
obtain men of long political experience; (c) to reward those who have supported
him; (d) to strengthen himself for re-election; (e) to give representation to both
the radical and conservative elements?
9. Since the Attorney-General is always a lawyer, the Secretary of Agriculture
usually a farmer, and the Secretary of Labor usually a member of a labor union,
why should not the Secretary of War be a soldier and the Secretary of the Navy a
sailor?
 10. Look up in the Congressional Directory and tell what department has
jurisdiction over the following matters: consular service, pensions, the mint,
animal industry, child labor law enforcement, education, forestry, the census,
Indian affairs, lighthouses, rural free delivery, relations with the Philippine Islands,
inspection of drugs, payment of interest on Liberty Bonds, naturalization,
passports, dredging of harbors.
Topics for Debate
1. The President should be ineligible for re-election.
2. The following new departments should be created and given representation
in the cabinet: (a) Public Health; (b) Education; (c) Public Welfare.
3. Members of the cabinet should be permitted to speak, but not to vote, in
Congress.
 CHAPTER XVI
THE COURTS, THE LAW, AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE.

The purpose of this chapter is to show how the courts are organized and
what systems of law they administer.
 The Courts
The Highest Court in the Land.—Visitors to The supreme
the Capitol at Washington on any week day from justices.
October to June are usually interested to see a group of nine
distinguished-looking men, robed in silk gowns, passing at noon
through the long corridor into a room where a clerk begins to call
out, “Oyez! Oyez!”[137] This is the Supreme Court of the United
States, the highest court in the land and the most powerful tribunal
in the world. It consists of a chief justice and eight associate
justices, all of them appointed for life by the President with the
consent of the Senate. They cannot be removed from office except
by impeachment. The court holds its sessions in the chamber which
was used by the Senate in the days when that body was small. The
justices sit in a row, the chief justice in the center, with four
associates on each side of him. There is no jury, and for the most
part the court simply hears the arguments of attorneys on points of
law in cases which have been appealed. The sessions begin at
twelve o’clock, and continue, with a brief interruption for luncheon,
until late in the afternoon. Every Saturday morning the court meets
behind closed doors to agree upon its decisions and on Mondays the
decisions are publicly announced. These nine justices are the
supreme guardians of the constitution, entrusted with the duty of
seeing that its provisions are duly respected by all officials of
government from the President and Congress down to the humblest
officeholder. Their mandate is binding upon everyone within the
jurisdiction of the United States.[138]
The Supreme Court’s Power.—Congress, The power to
as has been pointed out, is the lawmaking declare laws
branch of the federal government. With the unconstitutional.
approval of the President its power to enact laws, within the limits
prescribed by the constitution, is complete and final. The state
legislatures are the lawmaking organs of state government and with
the approval of the governors the authority of the state legislatures
to make laws within limits prescribed by the national and state
constitutions is also complete and final. Yet the Supreme Court, by a
majority vote of its nine justices, may nullify laws passed by either
Congress or the state legislatures. It has done so on many
occasions. Why have we given to this small group of men, appointed
for life, the power to set aside the action of the people’s
representatives?
The answer is this: American government, Reason for this
both in the nation and in the states, rests upon authority.
certain fundamental rules which are embodied in written
constitutions. These rules determine, among other things, the
powers and functions of government officers and bodies, including
Congress and the legislatures. They have been placed in the national
and state constitutions with the intent that they shall be obeyed, and
if they were not obeyed one branch of the government would be
encroaching upon the powers of the other. But how can powerful
bodies like Congress and the state legislatures be held to the
obedience of rules laid down in the national constitution? The
Supreme Court performs this duty by declaring “unconstitutional”
any law which, in its judgment, violates the provisions of that
document. The constitution, for example, provides that Congress
shall pass no bill of attainder. If Congress should enact a measure of
that kind, the court would nullify it. The constitution stipulates that
no state shall make any law impairing the obligations of contract. If
any state legislature should enact such a law, the Supreme Court
would declare it to be unconstitutional and void.
Now this does not mean that the justices of Limitations upon
the Supreme Court have the right to veto any the discretion of the
measure at their discretion. They have nothing court.
to do with the merits of a measure, nothing to do with the question
whether it has been wisely passed. The only issue they decide is
whether a law conforms to the provisions of the constitution. If they
find that it does not, they have authority to set it aside. And so long
as government is based upon written constitutions there must be
some body with power to decide whether a law is constitutional or
not. Every branch of the government is under a natural temptation
to extend its own authority. State legislatures would like to have a
share in regulating the trunk railroads; Congress would like to decide
how much money may be spent by candidates for senatorial
nominations. Both of them have tried to extend their authority in
these directions during the past few years although the constitution
does not warrant their so doing. We must have some body,
therefore, endowed with the right to say to all public officials and
legislative bodies: “Thus far shall you go and no further; here is the
point where your authority, under the constitution, comes to an
end.”
It is quite true that decisions of the Supreme The Supreme
Court are sometimes unpopular. People who are Court’s power is
eager for humanitarian reforms, when they see essential.
the Supreme Court annulling measures which Congress has passed
to protect women or children, or the weak or the poor, are in the
habit of crying out that the court is an obstacle to progress and that
its power to declare laws unconstitutional should be taken away.
They overlook the fact that if there were no supreme tribunal to
keep Congress within its constitutional limits, it would be easy for
Congress, step by step, to take away all the powers now possessed
by the states and to centralize at Washington the entire government
of the country. Under a federal system of government, with powers
divided between the nation and the states as they are in this
country, disputes as to where a particular power belongs are sure to
arise. How could we devise a more satisfactory plan of deciding
these disputes than by referring them to an impartial body of nine
men chosen for life from among the ablest jurists of the land? Do we
propose to abolish the powers of juries because they sometimes
render unpopular verdicts? People sometimes question the wisdom
of the Supreme Court, but no one has ever doubted its integrity.[139]
How Cases Come Before the Federal Scope of the federal
Courts.—The authority to try cases is divided by courts’ jurisdiction.
the national constitution into two parts, and each part is assigned to
two separate systems of courts. Certain classes of cases are named
in the national constitution as falling within “the judicial power of the
United States” and these cases are tried in the federal courts. All
other classes of cases (and this includes the great majority of legal
disputes) are left to the state courts. The controversies named in the
national constitution as matters for trial in the federal courts are
those which it did not seem wise to let the various state courts
decide, for example, cases arising out of treaties made by the United
States, or controversies between two states, or between citizens of
different states. This is a wise arrangement, for if the state courts
could say the last word on the interpretation of treaties, the nation
might easily find itself forced into trouble with foreign countries. If
cases between citizens of different states were tried in the courts of
either state, there would be a temptation for these courts to favor
their own citizens. Even the rule which requires that cases affecting
ambassadors shall be heard in the federal courts has a good reason,
for the United States guarantees to all foreign ambassadors the
privileges of international law and must be in a position to see that
these guarantees are respected. The entire list of cases over which
federal courts have jurisdiction is so clearly set forth in the
constitution that there is no need for repeating it here.[140]
When any dispute arises between individuals How jurisdiction is
or corporations the lawyers who bring the suit determined.
determine whether the matter is one for the federal or the state
courts to hear. This they do by considering whether the controversy
comes within any of the classes named in the constitutional
provision just mentioned. If they find that it does, the suit is usually
commenced in the federal courts; otherwise it is begun in the state
courts. Most suits begin in the lowest court, and, if the decision is
not satisfactory, can be carried on appeal to the higher federal or
state courts as the case may be, until finally a very small proportion
of them reach the Supreme Court.[141] But not all cases which are
heard in the lower federal courts, or in the state courts, can be
brought up to the Supreme Court of the United States. If that were
permitted, the Supreme Court would never be able to handle all the
business which would come before it. From the lower federal courts
only cases of great importance can be brought to it, and from the
state courts only controversies in which some provision of the
national constitution is involved.
The Lower Federal Courts.—The lower federal courts are called
district and circuit courts. The country is divided into about one
hundred judicial districts, in each of which there is a United States
district court with a judge, a marshall, and a district attorney, all
appointed by the President. Next above these courts are the circuit
courts of appeals. There are nine of these courts, each having
jurisdiction within a certain section of the country. A circuit court of
appeals has from two to four judges, appointed by the President,
and also has its own court officials. These courts derive their name
from the fact that they go “on circuit”, that is, they move about from
one large city to another within their respective sections of the
country holding sessions in each. In most cases they have final
jurisdiction.[142]