Produced by Irma pehar, Cori Samuel and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
DIRECT LEGISLATION
BY
THE CITIZENSHIP
THROUGH
THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM
BY
J.W. SULLIVAN
* * * * *
CONTENTS:
AS TO THIS BOOK i.
THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM IN SWITZERLAND 5
THE PUBLIC STEWARDSHIP OF SWITZERLAND 25
THE COMMON WEALTH OF SWITZERLAND 47
DIRECT LEGISLATION IN THE UNITED STATES 72
THE WAY OPEN TO PEACEFUL REVOLUTION 95
* * * * *
[_Copyright, 1892, by J.W. Sullivan._]
* * * * *
NEW YORK
TRUE NATIONALIST PUBLISHING COMPANY
1893
AS TO THIS BOOK.
This is the second in a series of sociological works, each a small
volume, I have in course of publication. The first, "A Concept of
Political Justice," gave in outline the major positions which seem to me
logically to accord in practical life with the political principle of
equal freedom. In the present work, certain of the positions taken in
the first are amplified. In each of the volumes to come, which will be
issued as I find time to complete them, similar amplification in the
case of other positions will be made. Naturally, the order of
publication of the proposed works may be influenced by the general trend
in the discussion of public questions.
The small-book plan I have adopted for several reasons. One is, that the
writer who embodies his thought on any large subject in a single weighty
volume commonly finds difficulty in selling the work or having it read;
the price alone restricts its market, and the volume, by its very size,
usually repels the ordinary reader. Another, that the radical world,
which I especially address, is nowadays assailed with so much printed
matter that in it big books have slight show of favor. Another, that the
reader of any volume in the series subsequent to the first may on
reference to the first ascertain the train of connection and entire
scope of the thought I would present. And, finally, that such persons as
have been won to the support of the principles taught may interest
themselves, and perhaps others, in spreading knowledge of these
principles, as developed in the successive works.
On the last-mentioned point, a word. Having during the past decade
closely observed, and in some measure shared in, the discussion of
advanced sociological thought, I maintain with confidence the principles
of equal freedom, not only in their essential truth, but in the leading
applications I have made of them. At least, I may trust that, thus far
in either work, in coming to my more important conclusions, I have not
fallen into error through blind devotion to an "ism" nor halted at
faulty judgment because of limited investigation. I therefore hope to
have others join with me, some to work quite in the lines I follow, and
some to move at least in the direction of those lines.
The present volume I have prepared with care. My attention being
attracted about eight years ago to the direct legislation of
Switzerland, I then set about collecting what notes in regard to that
institution I could glean from periodicals and other publications. But
at that time very little of value had been printed in English. Later, as
exchange editor of a social reform weekly journal, I gathered such facts
bearing on the subject as were passing about in the American newspaper
world, and through the magazine indexes for the past twenty years I
gained access to whatever pertaining to Switzerland had gone on record
in the monthlies and quarterlies; while at the three larger libraries of
New York--the Astor, the Mercantile, and the Columbia College--I found
the principal descriptive and historical works on Switzerland. But from
all these sources only a slender stock of information with regard to the
influence of the Initiative and Referendum on the later political and
economic development of Switzerland was to be obtained. So, when, three
years ago, with inquiry on this point in mind, I spent some months in
Switzerland, about all I had at first on which to base investigations
was a collection of commonplace or beclouded fact from the newspapers, a
few statistics and opinions from an English magazine or two, and some
excerpts from volumes by De Laveleye and Freeman which contained
chapters treating of Swiss institutions. Soon after, as a result of my
observations in the country, I contributed, under the caption
"Republican Switzerland," a series of articles to the New York "Times"
on the Swiss government of today, and, last April, an essay to the
"Chautauquan" magazine on "The Referendum in Switzerland." On the form
outlined in these articles I have constructed the first three chapters
of the present work. The data, however, excepting in a few cases, are
corrected to 1892, and in many respects besides I have profited by the
labors of other men in the same field.
The past two years and a half has seen much writing on Swiss
institutions. Political investigators are awakening to the fact that in
politics and economics the Swiss are doing what has never before been
done in the world. In neighborhood, region, and nation, the entire
citizenship in each case concerned is in details operating the
government. In certain cantons it is done in every detail. Doing this,
the Swiss are moving rapidly in practically grappling with social
problems that elsewhere are hardly more than speculative topics with
scholars and theorists. In other countries, consequently, interested
lookers-on, having from different points of view taken notes of
democratic Switzerland, are, through newspaper, magazine, and book,
describing its unprecedented progress and suggesting to their own
countrymen what in Swiss governmental experience may be found of value
at home. Of the more solid writing of this character, four books may
especially be recommended. I mention them in the order of their
publication.
"The Swiss Confederation." By Sir Francis Ottiwell Adams and C.D.
Cunningham. (London: Macmillan & Co.; 1889; 289 pages; $1.75.) Sir
Francis Ottiwell Adams was for some years British Minister at Berne.
"The Federal Government of Switzerland: An Essay on the Constitution."
By Bernard Moses, Ph.D., professor of history and political economy,
University of California. (Pacific Press Publishing Company: Oakland,
Cal.; 1889; 256 pages; $1.25.) This work is largely a comparative study
of constitutions. It is meant chiefly for the use of students of law and
of legal history. It abounds, however, in facts as to Switzerland which
up to the time of its publication were quite inaccessible to American
readers.
"State and Federal Government of Switzerland." By John Martin Vincent,
Ph.D., librarian and instructor in the department of history and
politics, Johns Hopkins University. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press;
1891; 247 pages; $1.50.) Professor Vincent had access, at the
university, to the considerable collection of books and papers relating
to Switzerland made by Professor J.C. Bluntschli, an eminent Swiss
historian who died in 1881, and also to a large number of government
publications presented by the Swiss Federal Council to the university
library.
"The Swiss Republic." By Boyd Winchester, late United States Minister at
Berne. (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & Co.; 1891; 487 pages; $1.50.)
Mr. Winchester was stationed four years at Berne, and hence had better
opportunity than Professor Vincent or Professor Moses for obtaining a
thorough acquaintance with Switzerland. Much of his book is taken up
with descriptive writing, all good.
Were I asked which of these four works affords the fullest information
as to new Switzerland and new Swiss political methods, I should be
obliged to refer the inquirer to his own needs. Professor Moses's is
best for one applying himself to law and constitutional history.
Professor Vincent's is richest in systematized details and statistics,
especially such as relate to the Referendum and taxation; and in it also
is a bibliography of Swiss politics and history. For the general reader,
desiring description of the country, stirring democratic sentiment, and
an all-round view of the great little republic, Mr. Winchester's is
preferable.
In expanding and rearranging my "Times" and "Chautauquan" articles, I
have, to some extent, used these books.
Throughout this work, wherever possible, conservatives, rather than
myself, have been made to speak; hence quotations are frequent. The
first drafts of the chapters on Switzerland have been read by Swiss
radicals of different schools, and the final proofsheets have been
revised by a Swiss writer of repute living in New York; therefore
serious error is hardly probable. The one fault I myself have to find
with the work is its baldness of statement, rendered necessary by space
limits. I could, perhaps more easily, have prepared four or five hundred
pages instead of the one hundred and twenty. I leave it rather to the
reader to supply comparison and analysis and the eloquent comment of
which, it seems to me, many of the statements of fact are worthy.
J.W.S.
THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM IN SWITZERLAND.
_Democratic versus Representative Government._
There is a radical difference between a democracy and a representative
government. In a democracy, the citizens themselves make the law and
superintend its administration; in a representative government, the
citizens empower legislators and executive officers to make the law and
to carry it out. Under a democracy, sovereignty remains uninterruptedly
with the citizens, or rather a changing majority of the citizens; under
a representative government, sovereignty is surrendered by the citizens,
for stated terms, to officials. In other words, democracy is direct rule
by the majority, while representative government is rule by a succession
of quasi-oligarchies, indirectly and remotely responsible to the
majority.
Observe, now, first, the influences that chiefly contribute to make
government in the United States what it is:--
The county, state, and federal governments are not democracies. In form,
they are quasi-oligarchies composed of representatives and executives;
but in fact they are frequently complete oligarchies, composed in part
of unending rings of politicians that directly control the law and the
offices, and in part of the permanent plutocracy, who purchase
legislation through the politicians.
Observe, next, certain strong influences for the better that obtain in a
pure democracy:--
An obvious influence is, in one respect, the same as that which
enriches the plutocrat and prompts the politician to reach for
power--self-interest. When all the members of any body of men find
themselves in equal relation to a profitable end in which they solely
are concerned, they will surely be inclined to assert their joint
independence of other bodies in that respect, and, further, each member
will claim his full share of whatever benefits arise. But, more than
that; something like equality of benefits being achieved, perhaps
through various agencies of force, a second influence will be brought
powerfully to bear on those concerned. It is that of justice. Fair play
to all the members will be generally demanded.
In a pure democracy, therefore, intelligently controlled self-interest
and a consequent sentiment of justice are the sources in which the
highest possible social benefits may be expected to begin.
The reader has now before him the political principle to be here
maintained--pure democracy as distinguished from representative
government. My argument, then, becomes this: To show that, by means of
the one lawmaking method to which pure democracy is restricted,--that of
direct legislation by the citizenship,--the political "ring," "boss,"
and "heeler" may be abolished, the American plutocracy destroyed, and
government simplified and reduced to the limits set by the conscience
of the majority as affected by social necessities. My task involves
proof that direct legislation is possible with large communities.
_Direct Legislation in Switzerland._
Evidence as to the practicability and the effects of direct legislation
is afforded by Switzerland, especially in its history during the past
twenty-five years. To this evidence I turn at once.
There are in Switzerland twenty-two cantons (states), which are
subdivided into 2,706 communes (townships). The commune is the political
as well as territorial unit. Commonly, as nearly as consistent with
cantonal and federal rights, in local affairs the commune governs
itself. Its citizens regard it as their smaller state. It is jealous of
interference by the greater state. It has its own property to look
after. Until the interests of the canton or the Confederation manifestly
replace those of the immediate locality, the commune declines to part
with the administration of its lands, forests, police, roads, schools,
churches, or taxes.
In German Switzerland the adult male inhabitants of the commune meet at
least once annually, usually in the town market place or on a mountain
plain, and carry out their functions as citizens. There they debate
proposed laws, name officers, and discuss affairs of a public nature. On
such occasions, every citizen is a legislator, his voice and vote
influencing the questions at issue. The right of initiating a measure
belongs to each. Decision is ordinarily made by show of hands. In most
cantons the youth becomes a voter at twenty, the legal age for acquiring
a vote in federal affairs, though the range for cantonal matters is from
eighteen to twenty-one.
Similar democratic legislative meetings govern two cantons as cantons
and two other cantons divided into demi-cantons. In the demi-canton of
Outer Appenzell, 13,500 voters are qualified thus to meet and legislate,
and the number actually assembled is sometimes 10,000. But this is the
highest extreme for such an assemblage--a Landsgemeinde (a
land-community)--the lowest for a canton or a demi-canton comprising
about 3,000. One other canton (Schwyz, 50,307 inhabitants) has
Landsgemeinde meetings, there being six, with an average of 2,000 voters
to each. In communal political assemblages, however, there are usually
but a few hundred voters.
The yearly cantonal or demi-cantonal Landsgemeinde takes place on a
Sunday in April or May. While the powers and duties of the body vary
somewhat in different cantons, they usually cover the following
subjects: Partial as well as total revision of the constitution;
enactment of all laws; imposition of direct taxes; incurrence of state
debts and alienation of public domains; the granting of public
privileges; assumption of foreigners into state citizenship;
establishment of new offices and the regulation of salaries; election of
state, executive, and judicial officers.[A]
[Footnote A: J.M. Vincent: "State and Federal Government in
Switzerland."]
The programme for the meeting is arranged by the officials and published
beforehand, the law in some cantons requiring publication four weeks
before the meeting, and in others but ten days. "To give opportunities
for individuals and authorities to make proposals and offer bills, the
official gazette announces every January that for fourteen days after a
given date petitions may be presented for that purpose. These must be
written, the object plainly stated and accompanied by the reasons. All
such motions are considered by what is called the Triple Council, or
legislature, and are classified as 'expedient' and 'inexpedient.' A
proposal receiving more than ten votes must be placed on the list of
expedient, accompanied by the opinion of the council. The rejected are
placed under a special rubric, familiarly called by the people the
_Beiwagen_. The assembly may reverse the action of the council if it
chooses and take a measure out of the 'extra coach,' but consideration
of it is in that case deferred until the next year. In the larger
assemblies debate is excluded, the vote being simply on rejection or
adoption. In the smaller states the line is not so tightly drawn....
Votes are taken by show of hands, though secret ballot may be had if
demanded, elections of officers following the same rule in this matter
as legislation. Nominations for office, however, need not be sent in by
petition, but may be offered by any one on the spot."[B]
[Footnote B: Vincent.]
_The Initiative and the Referendum._
It will be observed that the basic practical principles of both the
communal meeting and the Landsgemeinde are these two:
(1) That every citizen shall have the right to propose a measure of law
to his fellow-citizens--this principle being known as the Initiative.
(2) That the majority shall actually enact the law by voting the
acceptance or the rejection of the measures proposed. This principle,
when applied in non-Landsgemeinde cantons, through ballotings at polling
places, on measures sent from legislative bodies to the people, is known
as the Referendum.
The Initiative has been practiced in many of the communes and in the
several Landsgemeinde cantons in one form or other from time immemorial.
In the past score of years, however, it has been practiced by petition
in an increasing number of the cantons not having the democratic
assemblage of all the citizens.
The Referendum owes its origin to two sources. One source was in the
vote taken at the communal meeting and the Landsgemeinde. The principle
sometimes extended to cities, Berne, for instance, in the fifty-five
years from 1469 to 1524, taking sixty referendary votings. The other
source was in the vote taken by the ancient cantons on any action by
their delegates to the federal Diet, or congress, these delegates
undertaking no affair except on condition of referring it to the
cantonal councils--_ad referendum_.
The principles of the Initiative and Referendum have of recent years
been extended so as to apply, to a greater or lesser extent, not only to
cantonal affairs in cantons far too large for the Landsgemeinde, but to
certain affairs of the Swiss Confederation, comprising three million
inhabitants. In other words, the Swiss nation today sees clearly, first,
that the democratic system has manifold advantages over the
representative; and, secondly, that no higher degree of political
freedom and justice can be obtained than by granting to the least
practicable minority the legal right to propose a law and to the
majority the right to accept or reject it. In enlarging the field of
these working principles, the Swiss have developed in the political
world a factor which, so far as it is in operation, is creating a
revolution to be compared only with that caused in the industrial world
by the steam engine.
* * * * *
The cantonal Initiative exists in fourteen of the twenty-two cantons--in
some of them, however, only in reference to constitutional amendments.
Usually, the proposal of a measure of cantonal law by popular initiative
must be made through petition by from one-twelfth to one-sixteenth of
the voters of the canton. When the petition reaches the cantonal
legislature, the latter body is obliged, within a brief period,
specified by the constitution, to refer the proposal to a cantonal vote.
If the decision of the citizens is then favorable, the measure is law,
and the executive and judicial officials must proceed to carry it into
effect.
The cantonal Referendum is in constant practice in all the cantons
except Freiburg, which is governed by a representative legislature. The
extent, however, to which the Referendum is applied varies considerably.
In two cantons it is applicable only to financial measures; in others it
is optional with the people, who sometimes demand it, but oftener do
not; in others it is obligatory in connection with the passage of every
law. More explicitly: In the canton of Vaud a mere pseudo-referendary
right exists, under which the Grand Council (the legislature) may, if it
so decides, propose a reference to the citizens. Valais takes a popular
vote only on such propositions passed by the Grand Council as involve a
one and a half per cent increase in taxation or a total expenditure of
60,000 francs. With increasing confidence in the people, the cantons of
Lucerne, Zug, Bâle City, Schaffhausen, St. Gall, Ticino, Neuchâtel, and
Geneva refer a proposed law, after it has passed the Grand Council, to
the voters when a certain proportion of the citizens, usually one-sixth
to one-fourth, demand it by formal petition. This form is called the
optional Referendum. Employed to its utmost in Zurich, Schwyz, Berne,
Soleure, Bâle Land, Aargau, Thurgau, and the Grisons, in these cantons
the Referendum permits no law to be passed or expenditure beyond a
stipulated sum to be made by the legislature without a vote of the
people. This is known as the obligatory Referendum. Glarus, Uri, the
half cantons of Niwald and Obwald (Unterwald), and those of Outer and
Inner Appenzell, as cantons, or demi-cantons, still practice the
democratic assemblage--the Landsgemeinde.
In the following statistics, the reader may see at a glance the progress
of the Referendum to the present date, with the population of
Switzerland by cantons, and the difficulties presented by differences of
language in the introduction of reforms:--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
| No. inhab. | | Form of Passing | Yr. of
Canton. | Dec., 1888. | Language. | Laws. | Entry
-------------|-------------|-----------------|-----------------|-------
Zurich | 337,183 | German. | Oblig. Ref. | 1351
Berne | 536,679 |Ger. and French. | " | 1353
Lucerne | 135,360 | German. | Optional Ref. | 1332
Uri | 17,249 |Ger. and Italian.| Landsgemeinde. | 1291
Schwyz | 50,307 | German. | Oblig. Ref. | "
Unterwald | | | | "
Obwald | 15,041 | " | Landsgemeinde. |
Niwald | 12,538 | " | " |
Glarus | 33,825 | " | " | 1352
Zug | 23,029 | " | Optional Ref. | "
Freiburg | 119,155 | French and Ger. | Legislature. | 1481
Soleure | 85,621 | German. | Oblig. Ref. | "
Bâle | | | | 1501
City | 73,749 | " | Optional Ref. |
Country | 61,941 | " | Oblig. Ref. |
Schaffhausen | 37,783 | " | Optional Ref. | "
Appenzell | | | | 1573
Outer | 54,109 | " | Landsgemeinde. |
Inner | 12,888 | " | " |
St. Gall | 228,160 | " | Optional Ref. | 1803
Grisons | 94,810 | Ger.,Ital.,Rom. | Oblig. Ref. | "
Aargau | 193,580 | German. | " | "
Thurgau | 104,678 | " | " | "
Ticino | 126,751 | Italian. | Optional Ref. | "
Vaud | 247,655 | French and Ger. | " | "
Valais | 101,985 | " | Finance Ref. | 1814
Neuchâtel | 108,153 | French. | Optional Ref. | "
Geneva | 105,509 | " | " | "
|-------------| | |
| 2,917,740 | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
In round numbers, 2,092,000 of the Swiss people speak German, 637,000
French, 156,000 Italian, and 30,000 Romansch. Of the principal cities,
in 1887, Zurich, with suburbs, had 92,685 inhabitants; Bâle, 73,963;
Geneva, with suburbs, 73,504; Berne, 50,220; Lausanne, 32,954; and five
others from 17,000 to 25,000. Fourteen per cent of the inhabitants
(410,000) live in cities of more than 15,000. The factory workers number
161,000, representing about half a million inhabitants, and the peasant
proprietors nearly 260,000, representing almost two millions. The area
of Switzerland is 15,892 square miles,--slightly in excess of double
that of New Jersey. The population is slightly less than that of Ohio.
_Switzerland--The Youngest of Republics._
It is misleading to suppose, as is often done, that the Switzerland of
today is the republic which has stood for six hundred years. In truth,
it is the youngest of republics. Its chief governmental features,
cantonal and federal, are the work of the present generation. Its unique
executive council, its democratic army organization, its republican
railway management, its federal post-office, its system of taxation, its
two-chambered congress, the very Confederation itself--all were
originated in the constitution of 1848, the first that was anything more
than a federal compact. The federal Referendum began only in 1874. The
federal Initiative has been just adopted (1891.)[C] The form of cantonal
Referendum now practiced was but begun (in St. Gall) in 1830, and forty
years ago only five cantons had any Referendum whatever, and these in
the optional form. It is of very recent years that the movement has
become steady toward the general adoption of the cantonal Referendum. In
1860 but 34 per cent of the Swiss possessed it, 66 per cent delegating
their sovereign rights to representatives. But in 1870 the
referendariship had risen to 71 per cent, only 29 submitting to
lawmaking officials; and today the proportions are more than 90 per cent
to less than 10.
[Footnote C: For constitutional amendments only.]
The thoughtful reader will ask: Why this continual progress toward a
purer democracy? Wherein lie the inducements to this persistent
revolution?
The answer is this: The masses of the citizens of Switzerland found it
necessary to revolt against their plutocracy and the corrupt politicians
who were exploiting the country through the representative system. For a
peaceful revolution these masses found the means in the working
principles of their communal meetings--the Initiative and
Referendum,--and these principles they are applying throughout the
republic as fast as circumstances admit.[D]
[Footnote D: While the reports of the Secretary of State and "The
History of the Referendum," by Th. Curti, will bear out many of the
statements here made as to how the change from representative to direct
legislation came about, the story as I give it has been written me by
Herr Carl Bürkli, of Zurich, known in his canton as the "Father of the
Referendum."]
The great movement for democracy in Europe that culminated in the
uprising of 1848 brought to the front many original men, who discussed
innovations in government from every radical point of view. Among these
thinkers were Martin Rittinghausen, Emile Girardin, and Louis Blanc.
From September, 1850, to December, 1851, the date of the _coup d'état_
of Louis Bonaparte, these reformers discussed, in the "Democratic
pacifique," a weekly newspaper of Paris, the subject of direct
legislation by the citizens. Their essays created a sensation in France,
and more than thirty journals actively supported the proposed
institution, when the _coup d'état_ put an end to free speech. The
articles were reprinted in book form in Brussels, and other works on the
subject were afterward issued by Rittinghausen and his co-worker Victor
Considérant. Among Considérant's works was "Solution, ou gouvernement
direct du peuple," and this and companion works that fell into the hands
of Carl Bürkli convinced the latter and other citizens of Zurich ("an
unknown set of men," says Bürkli) of the practicability of the
democratic methods advocated. The subject was widely agitated and
studied in Switzerland, and the fact that the theory was already to some
extent in practice there (and in ancient times had been much practiced)
led to further experiments, and these, attaining success, to further,
and thus the work has gone on. The cantonal Initiative was almost
unknown outside the Landsgemeinde when it was established in Zurich in
1869. Soon, however, through it and the obligatory Referendum (to use
Herr Bürkli's words): "The plutocratic government and the Grand Council
of Zurich, which had connived with the private banks and railroads, were
pulled down in one great voting swoop. The people had grown tired of
being beheaded by the office-holders after every election." And
politicians and the privileged classes have ever since been going down
before these instruments in the hands of the people. The doctrines of
the French theorists needed but to be engrafted on ancient Swiss custom,
the Frenchmen in fact having drawn upon Swiss experience.
_The Optional and the Obligatory Referendum._
To-day the movement in the Swiss cantons is not only toward the
Referendum, but toward its obligatory form. The practice of the optional
form has revealed defects in it which are inherent.[E]
[Footnote E: The facts relative to the operation of these two forms of
the Referendum have been given me by Monsieur P. Jamin, of Geneva.]
Geneva's management of the optional cantonal Referendum is typical. The
constitution provides that, certain of the laws being excepted from the
Referendum, and a prerequisite of its operation being the presentation
to the Grand Council of a popular petition, the people may sanction or
reject not only the bulk of the laws passed by the Grand Council but
also the decrees issued by the legislative and executive powers. The
exceptions are (1) "measures of urgence" and (2) the items of the annual
budget, save such as establish a new tax, increase one in force, or
necessitate an issue of bonds. The Referendum cannot be exercised
against the budget as a whole, the Grand Council indicating the sections
which are to go to public vote. In case of opposition to any measure, a
petition for the Referendum is put in circulation. To prevent the
measure from becoming law, the petition must receive the legally
attested signatures of at least 3,500 citizens--about one in six of the
cantonal vote--within thirty days after the publication of the proposed
measure. After this period--known as "the first delay"--the referendary
vote, if the petition has been successful, must take place within forty
days--"the second delay."
The power of declaring measures to be "of urgence" lies with the Grand
Council, the body passing the measures. Small wonder, then, that in its
eyes many bills are of too much and too immediate importance to go to
the people. "The habit," protested Grand Councilor M. Putet, on one
occasion, "tends more and more to introduce itself here of decreeing
urgence unnecessarily, thus taking away from the Referendum expenses
which have nothing of urgence. This is contrary to the spirit of the
constitutional law. Public necessity alone can authorize the Grand
Council to take away any of its acts from the public control."
Another defect in the optional Referendum is that it can be transformed
into a partisan weapon--politicians being ready, in Geneva, as in San
Francisco, to take advantage of the law for party purposes. For example,
the representatives of a minority party, seeking a concession from a
majority which has just passed a bill, will threaten, if their demands
are not granted, to agitate for the Referendum on the bill; this, though
the minority itself may favor the measure, some of its members, perhaps,
having voted for it. As the majority may be uncertain of the outcome of
a struggle at the polls, it will probably be inclined to make peace on
the terms dictated by the minority.
But the most serious objections to the optional form arise in connection
with the petitioning. Easy though it be for a rich and strong party to
bear the expense of printing, mailing, and distributing petitions and
circulars, in case of opposition from the poorer classes the cost may
prove an insurmountable obstacle. Especially is it difficult to get up a
petition after several successive appeals coming close together, the
constant agitation growing tiresome as well as financially burdensome.
Hence, measures have sometimes become law simply because the people have
not had time to recover from the prolonged agitation in connection with
preceding propositions. Besides, each measure submitted to the optional
Referendum brings with it two separate waves of popular discussion--one
on the petition and one on the subsequent vote. On this point
ex-President Numa Droz has said: "The agitation which takes place while
collecting the necessary signatures, nearly always attended with strong
feeling, diverts the mind from the object of the law, perverts in
advance public opinion, and, not permitting later the calm discussion of
the measure proposed, establishes an almost irresistible current toward
rejection." Finally, a fact as notorious in Switzerland as vote-buying
in America, a large number of citizens who are hostile to a proposed law
may fear to record an adverse opinion by signing a Referendum list.
Their signatures may be seen and the unveiling of their sentiments
imperil their means of livelihood.
Zurich furnishes the example of the cantons having the obligatory
Referendum. There the law provides: 1. That all laws, decrees, and
changes in the constitution must be submitted to the people. 2. That all
decisions of the Grand Council on existing law must be voted on. 3. That
the Grand Council may submit decisions which it itself proposes to make,
and that, besides the voting on the whole law, the Council may ask a
vote on a special point. The Grand Council cannot put in force
provisionally any law or decree. The propositions must be sent to the
voters at least thirty days before voting. The regular referendary
ballotings take place twice a year, spring and autumn, but in urgent
cases the Grand Council may call for a special election. The law in this
canton assists the lawmakers--the voters--in their task; when a citizen
is casting his own vote he may also deposit that of one or two relatives
and friends, upon presenting their electoral card or a certificate of
authorization.
In effect, the obligatory Referendum makes of the entire citizenship a
deliberative body in perpetual session--this end being accomplished in
Zurich in the face of every form of opposing argument. Formerly, its
adversaries made much of the fact that it was ever calling the voters to
the urns; but this is now avoided by the semi-annual elections. It was
once feared that party tickets would be voted without regard to the
merits of the various measures submitted; but it has been proved beyond
doubt that the fate of one proposition has no effect whatever on that of
another decided at the same time. Zurich has pronounced on ninety-one
laws in twenty-eight elections, the votes indicating surprising
independence of judgment. When the obligatory form was proposed for
Zurich, its supporters declared it a sure instrument, but that it might
prove a costly one they were not prepared by experiment to deny. Now,
however, they have the data to show that taxes--unfailing reflexes of
public expenditure--are lower than ever, those for police, for example,
being only about half those of optional Geneva, a less populous canton.
To the prophets who foresaw endless partisan strife in case the
Referendum was to be called in force on every measure, Zurich has
replied by reducing partisanship to its feeblest point, the people
indifferent to parties since an honest vote of the whole body of
citizens must be the final issue of every question.
The people of Zurich have proved that the science of politics is simple.
By refusing special legislation, they evade a flood of bills. By deeming
appropriations once revised as in most part necessary, they pay
attention chiefly to new items. By establishing principles in law, they
forbid violations. Thus there remain no profound problems of state, no
abstruse questions as to authorities, no conflict as to what is the law.
Word fresh from the people is law.
_The Federal Referendum._
The Federal Referendum, first established by the constitution of 1874,
is optional. The demand for it must be made by 30,000 citizens or by
eight cantons. The petition for a vote under it must be made within
ninety days after the publication of the proposed law. It is operative
with respect either to a statute as passed by the Federal Assembly
(congress), or a decree of the executive power. Of 149 Federal laws and
decrees subject to the Referendum passed up to the close of 1891 under
the constitution of 1874, twenty-seven were challenged by the necessary
30,000 petitioners, fifteen being rejected and twelve accepted. The
Federal Initiative was established by a vote taken on Sunday, July 5,
1891. It requires 50,000 petitioners, whose proposal must be discussed
by the Federal assembly and then sent within a prescribed delay to the
whole citizenship for a vote. The Initiative is not a petition to the
legislative body; it is a demand made on the entire citizenship.
Where the cantonal Referendum is optional, a successful petition for it
frequently secures a rejection of the law called in question. In 1862
and again in 1878, the canton of Geneva rejected proposed changes in its
constitution, on the latter occasion by a majority of 6,000 in a vote of
11,000. Twice since 1847 the same canton has decided against an increase
of official salaries, and lately it has declined to reduce the number of
its executive councilors from seven to five. The experience of the
Confederation has been similar. Between 1874 and 1880 five measures
recommended by the Federal Executive and passed by the Federal Assembly
were vetoed by a national vote.
_Revision of Constitutions._
Revision of a constitution through the popular vote is common. Since
1814, there have been sixty revisions by the people of cantonal
constitutions alone. Geneva asks its citizens every fifteen years if
they wish to revise their organic law, thus twice in a generation
practically determining whether they are in this respect content. The
Federal constitution may be revised at any time. Fifty thousand voters
petitioning for it, or the Federal Assembly (congress) demanding it, the
question is submitted to the country. If the vote is in the affirmative,
the Council of States (the senate) and the National Council (the house)
are both dissolved. An election of these bodies takes place at once; the
Assembly, fresh from the people, then makes the required revision and
submits the revised constitution to the country. To stand, it must be
supported by a majority of the voters and a majority of the twenty-two
cantons.
_Summary._
To sum up: In Switzerland, in this generation, direct legislation has in
many respects been established for the federal government, while in so
large a canton as Zurich, with nearly 340,000 inhabitants, it has also
been made applicable to every proposed cantonal law, decree, and
order,--the citizens of that canton themselves disposing by vote of all
questions of taxation, public finance, executive acts, state employment,
corporation grants, public works, and similar operations of government
commonly, even in republican states, left to legislators and other
officials. In every canton having the Initiative and the obligatory
Referendum, all power has been stripped from the officials except that
of a stewardship which is continually and minutely supervised and
controlled by the voters. Moreover, it is possible that yet a few years
and the affairs not only of every canton of Switzerland but of the
Confederation itself will thus be taken in hand at every step.
* * * * *
Here, then, is evidence incontrovertible that pure democracy, through
direct legislation by the citizenship, is practicable--more, is now
practiced--in large communities. Next as to its effects, proven and
probable.
THE PUBLIC STEWARDSHIP OF SWITZERLAND.
If it be conceived that the fundamental principles of a free society are
these: That the bond uniting the citizens should be that of contract;
that rights, including those in natural resources, should be equal, and
that each producer should retain the full product of his toil, it must
be conceded on examination that toward this ideal Switzerland has made
further advances than any other country, despite notable points in
exception and the imperfect form of its federal Initiative and
Referendum. Before particulars are entered into, some general
observations on this head may be made.
_The Political Status in Switzerland._
An impressive fact in Swiss politics to-day is its peace. Especially is
this true of the contents and tone of the press. In Italy and Austria,
on the south and east, the newspapers are comparatively few, mostly
feeble, and in general subservient to party or government; in Germany,
on the north, where State Socialism is strong, the radical press is at
times turbulent and the government journals reflect the despotism they
uphold; in France, on the west and southwest, the public writers are
ever busy over the successive unstable central administrations at
Paris, which exercise a bureaucratic direction of every commune in the
land. In all these countries, men rather than measures are the objects
of discussion, an immediate important campaign question inevitably being
whether, when once in office, candidates may make good their
ante-election promises. Thus, on all sides, over the border from
Switzerland, political turmoil, with its rancor, personalities, false
reports, hatreds, and corruptions, is endless. But in Switzerland,
debate uniformly bears not on men but on measures. The reasons are
plain. Where the veto is possessed by the people, in vain may rogues go
to the legislature. With few or no party spoils, attention to public
business, and not to patronage or private privilege, is profitable to
office holders as well as to the political press.
In the number of newspapers proportionate to population, Switzerland
stands with the United States at the head of the statistical list for
the world. In their general character, Swiss political journals are
higher than American. They are little tempted to knife reputations, to
start false campaign issues, to inflame partisan feeling; for every
prospective cantonal measure undergoes sober popular discussion the year
round, with the certain vote of the citizenship in view in the cantons
having the Landsgemeinde or the obligatory Referendum, and a possible
vote in most of the other cantons, while federal measures also may be
met with the federal optional Referendum.
The purity and peacefulness of Swiss press and politics are due to the
national development of today as expressed in appropriate institutions.
Of these institutions the most effective, the fundamental, is direct
legislation, accompanied as it is with general education. In education
the Swiss are preëminent among nations. Illiteracy is at a lower
percentage than in any other country; primary instruction is free and
compulsory in all the cantons; and that the higher education is general
is shown in the four universities, employing three hundred instructors.
An enlightened people, employing the ballot freely, directly, and in
consequence effectively--this is the true sovereign governing power in
Switzerland. As to what, in general terms, have been the effects of this
power on the public welfare, as to how the Swiss themselves feel toward
their government, and as to what are the opinions of foreign observers
on the recent changes through the Initiative and Referendum, some
testimony may at this point be offered.
In the present year, Mr. W.D. McCrackan has published in the "Arena" of
Boston his observations of Swiss politics. He found, he says, the
effects of the Referendum to be admirable. Jobbery and extravagance are
unknown, and politics, as there is no money in it, has ceased to be a
trade. The men elected to office are taken from the ranks of the
citizens, and are chosen because of their fitness for the work. The
people take an intelligent interest in every kind of local and federal
legislation, and have a full sense of their political responsibility.
The mass of useless or evil laws which legislatures in other countries
are constantly passing with little consideration, and which have
constantly to be repealed, are in Switzerland not passed at all.
In a study of the direct legislation of Switzerland, the "Westminster
Review," February, 1888, passed this opinion: "The bulk of the people
move more slowly than their representatives, are more cautious in
adopting new and trying legislative experiments, and have a tendency to
reject propositions submitted to them for the first time." Further: "The
issue which is presented to the sovereign people is invariably and
necessarily reduced to its simplest expression, and so placed before
them as to be capable of an affirmative or negative answer. In practice,
therefore, the discussion of details is left to the representative
assemblies, while the people express approval or disapproval of the
general principle or policy embraced in the proposed measure. Public
attention being confined to the issue, leaders are nothing. The
collective wisdom judges of merits."
A.V. Dicey, the critic of constitutions, writes in the "Nation," October
8, 1885: "The Referendum must be considered, on the whole, a
conservative arrangement. It tends at once to hinder rapid change and
also to get rid of that inflexibility or immutability which, in the eyes
of Englishmen at least, is a defect in the constitution of the United
States."
A Swiss radical has written me as follows: "The development given to
education during the last quarter of a century will have without doubt
as a consequence an improved judgment on the part of a large number of
electors. The press also has a rôle more preponderant than formerly.
Everybody reads. Certainly the ruling classes profit largely by the
power of the printing press, but with the electors who have received
some instruction the capitalist newspapers are taken with due allowance
for their sincerity. Their opinion is not accepted without inquiry. We
see a rapid development of ideas, if not completely new, at least
renewed and more widespread. More or less radical reviews and
periodicals, in large number, are not without influence, and their
appearance proves that great changes are imminent."
Professor Dicey has contrasted the Referendum with the _plébiscite_:
"The Referendum looks at first sight like a French _plébiscite_, but no
two institutions can be marked by more essential differences. The
_plébiscite_ is a revolutionary or at least abnormal proceeding. It is
not preceded by debate. The form and nature of the questions to be
submitted to the nation are chosen and settled by the men in power, and
Frenchmen are asked whether they will or will not accept a given policy.
Rarely, indeed, when it has been taken, has the voting itself been full
or fair. Deliberation and discussion are the requisite conditions for
rational decision. Where effective opposition is an impossibility,
nominal assent is an unmeaning compliment. These essential
characteristics, the lack of which deprives a French _plébiscite_, of
all moral significance, are the undoubted properties of the Swiss
Referendum."