Varied tasks throughout the vast field of activities of the executive branch of the federal government can be performed only by persons with training in one of more branches of law. The tasks run all the way from the administration of locally established rules and regulations of the several government agencies to the argument of fundamentally important constitutional questions before the Supreme Court. Down through the years of American history there has been conflict of opinion as to the proper mode of organizing the legal work of the government. It is contended, on the one hand, that functions of a highly specialized and highly professionalized character such as those of law ought, in the interest of symmetry and efficiency, to be integrated under centralized management. To a limited extent, such integration has been brought about in the Department of Justice. On the other hand, it is contended that the work of lawyers merely aids in the performance of more fundamental classifications of work done by the government, and that organization should be in terms of such topics as finance, foreign affairs, commerce, agriculture, and labor, with legal tasks grouped in subordinate categories and subject to control only by the respective heads of the major organizations. In line with this contention, all major departments and most other agencies have staffs of lawyers not directly connected with the Department of Justice.

Nationalism as we understand it is not older than the second half of the eighteenth century. Its first great manifestation was the French Revolution, which gave the new movement an increased dynamic force. Nationalism had, however, become manifest at the end of the eighteenth century almost simultaneously in a number of widely separated European countries. Its time in the evolution of mankind had arrived, and although the French Revolution was one of the most powerful factors in its intensification and spread, it was not its date of birth. Like all historical movements, nationalism has its roots deep in the past. The conditions which made its emergence possible had matured during centuries before they converged at its formation. These political, economic, and intellectual developments took a long time for their growth and proceeded in the various European countries at different pace. It is impossible to grade them according to their importance or to make one dependent upon the other. All are closely interconnected, each reacting upon the other; and although their growth can be traced separately, their effects and consequences cannot be separated otherwise than in the analysis of the scholar; in life, they are indissolubly intertwined.

When the first session of the 76th Congress convened, demands for economy and a curtailment of presidential power and influence were rather prevalent in all parts of the country. The activities of the session were influenced by the 1940 election, coalition of parties to act on particular issues, fights between the Executive and Congress, partisan action, and many other political contrivances. In the face of all this, the National Legislature, according to many political observers, made a somewhat unpredictable record.

As in previous lists, mention is here confined generally to units specifically authorized by law or established by the President by executive order or Reorganization Plans under general authority vested in him. Changes in units created by heads of departments or independent establishments are excluded unless of major importance.

Administrative Office of the United States Courts. Created by Public No. 299, 76th Congress, approved August 7,1939, effective 90 days thereafter. This office has charge of all administrative matters relating to the offices of clerks and administrative personnel of the courts, the disbursement of appropriations, and the preparation of budget estimates; this work having been formerly in the Department of Justice.

The original veto power in Illinois was vested in a council of revision, consisting of the governor and the justices of the supreme court, whose function was limited to a preview of legislative acts for the purpose of making recommendations in regard to their constitutionality. Practical difficulties hampered the effective operation of this council, especially the inability of justices to perform adequately their two sets of diverse duties. The constitutional convention of 1848 found it expedient, therefore, to reform the constitutional mandate of veto by concentrating the function in the governor.

Developments in rural local government during 1938, although including occasional innovations, consisted chiefly in the continuation and extension of trends previously discernible. Although most state legislatures were not in session, several of those which met gave an unusual amount of attention to problems of local government. Especially in evidence were efforts to place local finances upon a sound basis, but there were also noteworthy measures designed to adjust local areas to present needs and to revitalize the internal machinery of local government. In reviewing the events of the year, a topical arrangement similar to that used in previous summaries will be followed.

In the light of the recent enactment of the Emergency Powers (Defense) Bill into law, the question of how Great Britain has dealt with national crises in the past is both timely and significant. The crises which will be touched upon here are (1) the World War, 1914–18; (2) the coal strikes of 1921; (3) the general strike of 1926; and (4) the new war of 1939. All of these situations led Parliament to give virtually unlimited powers to the crown for purposes of defense of the realm.