still regulated to a considerable extent by its own constitution. When the associating states merge their existence under a unified constitution, their earlier constitutions are destroyed save in so far as is provided by the new instrument. This now becomes the fundamental law regulating the relation between the sovereign power and the citizens.

In every case where federation or voluntary unification of previously independent states has taken place, an enquiry into their history shows that they have long been in closer political contact and have had far more interests in common than is usual between independent states. Their act of permanent association is the result of causes that have long been at work, and it is precipitated by some sudden access of difficulty or danger that has a common effect upon all the associates. In certain cases, however, a federal relation between separately governed political communities may be reached in an opposite direction. A centralized or unitary state may attempt to cope with political difficulties by the grant of a separate and inalienable legal status to groups of citizens living in an outlying portion of its territory whose administration from the centre is inconvenient. Such cases have been frequent in the British Empire, and in the United States and Canada newly settled territories, which were at first administered from the centre, have, after a time, been erected into full States of the Union or Provinces of the Dominion, and thus placed upon a footing of equality with the originally associating states. All these cases are of modern date, and their consideration lies rather beyond that of the essential principles of federation.

Simple states have in the course of history become linked together in many ways and in varying degrees of intimacy, and this linking may considerably affect their relations with other powers. Unions are usually classified under three heads: (1) Personal Unions, (2) Real Unions, and (3) Federal Unions. The typical "personal" union was that which existed between Great Britain and Hanover between 1714 and 1837. The

sovereignty of each state remains unimpaired though each is ruled over by the same prince; their relations with other powers are distinct, and the states are in no sense regarded as one corporation in international law. A "real" union exists when two or more sovereign states, each preserving its internal sovereignty with distinct fundamental laws and political institutions, merge their external sovereignty and appear as one in their relations with foreign powers. Scotland and England were in such a real union under a single monarch between 1603 and 1707; Austria and Hungary, though separate sovereign states, were in real union from the Pragmatic Sanction of 1723 down to 1849, and again from 1867 to 1918, appearing in international affairs as a single power, the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Sweden and Norway were in like situation from 1815 to the Treaty of Karlstad in 1905, by which their separation was effected. In practically every case real and personal unions have come about between monarchies and their union has generally been effected by dynastic causes. Federal unions are more complex in their development and must be approached from a different angle.

Independent states may enter into contracts with one another to accomplish certain purposes of common interest without in any way derogating from their complete sovereignty. Such contracts are called "treaties." As a rule treaties of alliance are temporary in character and are directed to a particular purpose, but some are of a much more sweeping kind and bind the contracting powers in stipulated circumstances to give unlimited aid one to the other, including assistance in the waging of offensive or defensive war. Such treaties of alliance may be so comprehensive in their provisions as to compel the allies to undertake common action in almost all their foreign relations but, as a rule, any such alliance does not exist for long. It either develops into a permanent and closer association, or is dissolved in favour of some fresh grouping of allies. In certain instances in past centuries where the association between the states lasted for a long period and especially where the

allies were individually weak but collectively strong, the alliance was called a league. More than one such league developed into a permanent association and acquired machinery for common action. It thus became what is known as a confederation," a Staatenbund, wherein the associates were no longer such fully independent states as before, for they had certainly resigned some portion of their sovereignty into the hands of the central body. The states are connected together by a compact which does not essentially differ from an ordinary treaty of alliance, and the internal sovereignty of each state remains unimpaired, for the resolutions of the federal body are not enforced upon individual citizens, but through the agency of each state government which gives to them the force of law. But the external sovereignty of the confederated states is as a rule diminished, as in the case of a real union. The confederates bind themselves not to enter into relations with foreign powers independently of one another, and resign the greater part of their external sovereignty into the hands of the confederation. Confederate unions have differed widely in the extent to which this resignation of power has been carried, and it is therefore difficult to distinguish them in the beginning from close alliances. They have not as a rule proved satisfactory to their members for long, and have either broken up, or passed into the closer form of association called "federal union," or have become completely merged into a single unitary state.

A "federal state" (compositive state, Bundesstaat) is a perpetual union of several sovereign states based first upon a treaty between those states or upon some historical status common to them all, and secondly upon a federal constitution accepted by their citizens. The central government acts not only upon the associated states but also directly upon their citizens. Both the internal and external sovereignty of the states is impaired, and the federal union in most cases alone enters into international relations. This is not, however, invariably the case, for under the strictly federal union of the German Empire,

which existed from 1871-1918, the member states retained some of their external sovereignty and some power of entering into treaty relations with one another and with foreign states. On the other hand, in the typical federal union, that of the United States of America under the Constitution of 1789, the external sovereignty of the associate states has been entirely absorbed by the Federal State, and only their internal sovereignty remains. But even this is rather a matter of legality and convenience of government than of fundamental importance; since the close of the Civil War, in which it was proved conclusively that the Union was one and indivisible, the Federal government has completely overshadowed the states in all political matters.

$ 2.

Most writers on Federalism have devoted a considerable part of their attention to the federal unions that were formed among certain of the city states of Ancient Greece. To the student of political theory they afford much interest and a basis for comparison with modern federations, but there is no historical connexion, and the historian must trace the beginnings of the European associations of to-day amid the happenings of the Middle Ages. Two sharply distinct lines of descent are to be traced among modern federal unions, the first leading from the mediæval Empire to the Swiss and German Confederations, the second in quite a different way to the federations and unions of the English-speaking world which have exercised so considerable an influence on constitutional development in Latin America. These lines of descent demand attention in turn, and, since the continental line has much the earlier origin, it may be considered first.

The nominal sovereignty of the Carolingian emperors over the whole of Christendom, that was a fundamental conception under Charlemagne and his immediate successors, had completely broken down by the end of the eleventh century. It had been to some extent revived under the Saxon emperors, but even

at the height of their power the little effective suzerainty that could be exercised embraced only Germany, Switzerland, Burgundy and the Low Countries, and the ancient Lombard kingdom in North Italy. But the rise of the great feudal vassals broke down the control of the central power in these regions under weak emperors, and every part of the empire strove to free itself from all outside interference. By the middle of the twelfth century the cities of the Lombard Plain had become practically independent states, and it is among them that the first sign of re-grouping into new combinations is found in the growth of the Lombard Leagues to withstand the reassertion of Imperial control. Milan, Lodi, Piacenza, and Cremona first leagued together as early as 1093 against the Emperor Henry IV, but the great League was formed in 1167 to oppose joint military resistance to the designs of Frederick Barbarossa, who attempted to enforce ancient Imperial restrictions in Italy. The decisive struggle began in 1174 and lasted till 1183, when at the Peace of Constance Frederick acknowledged defeat and the Imperial power in Italy became merely nominal. But the struggle was renewed when Frederick II intervened in Italian affairs and fresh leagues were formed to resist him between 1226 and the final downfall of the Hohenstaufen about 1250. While the dangers to be faced were acute, the association between the members of the Lombard Leagues was very close and almost amounted to "confederation" under the rule of a congress meeting at irregular intervals and known as the Rectores Societatis Lombardia, but the attacks of the emperors were beaten off in so comparatively short a time that their menace was insufficient to hammer the temporary leagues into a permanent confederation.

The exhaustion of the Hohenstaufen emperors in their Italian struggles and the weakness of those who succeeded them threw all centralized power in Germany into almost complete abeyance, leaving the richer and more powerful cities as practically independent powers, though all acknowledged the nominal