Hon. Boyd Winchester, for four years American minister at Berne, in his
recent work, "The Swiss Republic," says: "There is no country in Europe
where land possesses the great independence, and where there is so wide
a distribution of land ownership as in Switzerland. The 5,378,122 acres
devoted to agriculture are divided among 258,637 proprietors, the
average size of the farms throughout the whole country being not more
than twenty-one acres. The facilities for the acquisition of land have
produced small holders, with security of tenure, representing
two-thirds the entire population. There are no primogeniture, copyhold,
customary tenure, and manorial rights, or other artificial obstacles to
discourage land transfer and dispersion." "There is no belief in
Switzerland that land was made to administer to the perpetual elevation
of a privileged class; but a widespread and positive sentiment, as
Turgot puts it, that 'the earth belongs to the living and not to the
dead,' nor, it may be added, to the unborn."
Turgot's dictum, however, obtains no more than to this extent: (1) The
cantonal testamentary laws almost invariably prescribe division of
property among all the children--as in the code Napoleon, which prevails
in French Switzerland, and which permits the testator to dispose of only
a third of his property, the rest being divided among all the heirs. (2)
Highways, including the railways, are under immediate government
control. (3) The greater part of the forests are managed, much of them
owned, by the Confederation. (4) In nearly all the communes, some lands,
often considerable in area, are under communal administration. (5) In
the Landsgemeinde cantons largely, and in other cantons in a measure,
inheritance and participation, jointly and severally, in the communal
lands are had by the members of the communal corporation--that is, by
those citizens who have acquired rights in the public property of the
commune.
Nearly every commune in Switzerland has public lands. In many communes,
where they are mostly wooded, they are entirely in charge of the local
government; in others, they are in part leased to individuals; in
others, much of them is worked in common by the citizens having the
right; but in the Landsgemeinde cantons it is customary to divide them
periodically among the members of the corporation.
Of the Landsgemeinde cantons, one or two yet have nearly as great an
area of public land as of private. The canton of Uri has nearly 1,000
acres of cultivated lands, the distribution of which gives about a
quarter of an acre to each family entitled to a share. Uri has also
forest lands worth between 4,000,000 and 5,000,000 francs, representing
a capital of nearly 1,500 francs to each family. The commune of Obwald,
in Unterwald, with 13,000 inhabitants, has lands and forests valued at
11,350,000 francs. Inner Rhodes, in Appenzell, with 12,000 inhabitants,
has land valued at 3,000,000 francs. Glarus, because of its
manufactures, is one of the richest cantons in public domain. In the
non-Landsgemeinde German cantons, there is much common land. One-third
of all the lands of the canton of Schaffhausen is held by the communes.
The town of Soleure has forests, pastures, and cultivated lands worth
about 6,000,000 francs. To the same value amounts the common property of
the town of St. Gall. In the canton of St. Gall the communal Alpine
pasturages comprise one-half such lands. Schwyz has a stretch of common
land (an _allmend_) thirty miles in length and ten to fifteen in
breadth. The city of Zurich has a well-kept forest of twelve to fifteen
square miles, worth millions of francs. Winterthur, the second town in
Zurich, has so many forests and vineyards that for a long period its
citizens not only had no taxes to pay, but every autumn each received
gratis several cords of wood and many gallons of wine. Numerous small
towns and villages in German Switzerland collect no local taxes, and
give each citizen an abundance of fuel. In addition to free fuel,
cultivable lands are not infrequently allotted. At Stanz, in Unterwald,
every member of the corporation is given more than an acre. At Buchs, in
St. Gall, each member receives more than an acre, with firewood and
grazing ground for several head of cattle. Upward of two hundred French
communes possess common lands. In the canton of Vaud, a number of the
communes have large revenues in wood and butter from the forests and
pastures of the Jura mountains. Geneva has great forests; Valais many
vineyards.
In the canton of Valais, communal vineyards and grain fields are
cultivated in common. Every member of the corporation who would share in
the produce of the land contributes a certain share of work in field or
vineyard. Part of the revenue thus obtained is expended in the purchase
of cheese. The rest of the yield provides banquets in which all the
members take part.
Excepting in the case of forests, the trend is away from working the
lands in common. Examples of the later methods are to be seen in the
cantons of Ticino and Glarus, as follows:--
Several communes in Ticino, notably Airolo, have much public wealth.
Airolo has seventeen mountain pastures, each of which feeds forty to
eighty head of cattle. Each member of the corporation has the right to
send up to these pastures five head for the summer. Those sending more,
pay for the privilege; those sending less, receive a rental. On a
specified day at the beginning of the season and on another at the
close, the milk of each cow is weighed; from these amounts her average
yield is estimated, and her total produce computed. The cheese and
butter from the herds are sold, most of it in Milan, the hire of the
herders paid, and the net revenue divided among the members according to
the yield of their cows.
In Glarus, the produce of the greater part of the communal lands,
instead of being directly divided among the inhabitants, is substituted
for taxation. The commonable alps are let by auction for a term of
years, and, in opposition to ancient principles, strangers may bid for
them. Some of the Glarus communes sell the right to cut timber in the
forest under the superintendence of the guardians. The mountain hotels,
in not a few instances the property of the communes, are let year by
year. Land is frequently rented from the communes by manufacturing
establishments. A citizen not using his share of the communal land may
lease it to the commune, which in turn will let it to a tenant. The
communes of Glarus are watchful that enough arable land is preserved for
distribution among the members. If a plot is sold to manufacturers, or
for private building purposes, a piece of equal or greater extent is
bought elsewhere. Glarus has relatively as many people engaged in
industries aside from farming as any other spot in Europe. It has 34,000
inhabitants, of whom nearly 15,000 live directly by manufactures, while
of the rest many indirectly receive something from the same source.
Distributive coöperative societies on the English plan exist in most of
the industrial communes. The members of the communal corporations in
Glarus, though not rich, are as free and independent as any other
wage-workers in the world: they inherit the common lands; their local
taxes are little or nothing; they are assured work, if not in the
manufactories then on the land.
Of the poverty that fears pauperism in old age, that dreads enforced
idleness in recurrent industrial crises, that undermines health, that
sinks human beings in ignorance, that deprives men of their manhood, the
Swiss who enjoy the common lands of the Landsgemeinde cantons know
little or nothing. They have enough. They have nothing to waste, nothing
to spare; their fare is simple. But they are free. It is to the like
freedom and equality of their ancestors that historians have pointed. It
would be well nigh meaningless to refer to any freedom and equality
among other ancient Swiss. The right of asylum from religious oppression
is the sole feature of liberty at all general of old. The present is the
first generation in which all the Swiss have been free. The chief
elements of their political freedom--the Initiative and
Referendum--came from the Landsgemeinde cantons. From the same source,
in good time, so also may come to all Switzerland the prime element of
economic freedom--free access to land.
* * * * *
Poverty is a relative condition. Men may be poor of mind--ignorant; and
of body--ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-sheltered; and of rights--dependent.
And from the state of hopeless deprivation involving all these forms
upward are minute gradations. Where stand the Swiss in the scale?
This the reply: Their system of education gives free opportunity to all
to partake of the mental heritage of the ages. Their method of
distribution, through the inheritance laws, of private and common lands,
has made roughly two-thirds of the heads of families agricultural land
holders. There being in other regards government control of all
monopolies, the consequence is a widespread distribution of the annual
product. Hence, no pauperism to be compared with that of England; no
plutocracy such as we have in America. Certain other facts broadly
outline the general comfort and independence. As one effect of the
subdivision of the land, the soil, so far as nature permits, is highly
cultivated, its appearance fertile, finished, beautiful, and in striking
contrast with the dominating vast, bare mountain rocks and snowbeds. The
many towns and cities bear abundant signs of a general prosperity, their
roads, bridges, stores, residences, and public buildings betokening in
the inhabitants industry and energy, and freedom to employ these
qualities. Emigration is at low percentage, and of those citizens who do
leave for the New World not a few are educated persons with some means
seeking short cuts to fortune. Much of the rough work of Switzerland is
done by Savoyards, as houseworkers, and by Italians, as farm hands,
laborers, and stone masons: showing that as a body even the poorest of
the propertyless Swiss have some choice of the better paid occupations.
Every spring sees Italians, by scores of thousands, pouring over the
Alps for a summer's work in Switzerland. Indeed, Swiss wage-workers
might command better terms were it not for competing Italians, French,
and Germans. In other words, through just social arrangements, enough
has been done in Switzerland to raise the economic level of the entire
nation; but the overflow of laborers from other lands depresses the
condition of home labor. Nevertheless, where, it may be asked, is the
people higher in the scale of civilization, in all the word implies,
than the Swiss?
* * * * *
To recount what the Swiss have done by direct legislation:
They have made it easy at any time to alter their cantonal and federal
constitutions,--that is, to change, even radically, the organization of
society, the social contract, and thus to permit a peaceful revolution
at the will of the majority. They have as well cleared from the way of
majority rule every obstacle,--privilege of ruler, fetter of ancient
law, power of legislator. They have simplified the structure of
government, held their officials as servants, rendered bureaucracy
impossible, converted their representatives to simple committeemen, and
shown the parliamentary system not essential to lawmaking. They have
written their laws in language so plain that a layman may be judge in
the highest court. They have forestalled monopolies, improved and
reduced taxation, avoided incurring heavy public debts, and made a
better distribution of their land than any other European country. They
have practically given home rule in local affairs to every community.
They have calmed disturbing political elements;--the press is purified,
the politician disarmed, the civil service well regulated. Hurtful
partisanship is passing away. Since the people as a whole will never
willingly surrender their sovereignty, reactionary movement is possible
only in case the nation should go backward. But the way is open forward.
Social ideals may be realized in act and institution. Even now the
liberty-loving Swiss citizen can discern in the future a freedom in
which every individual,--independent, possessed of rights in nature's
resources and in command of the fruits of his toil,--may, at his will,
on the sole condition that he respect the like aim of other men, pursue
his happiness.
DIRECT LEGISLATION IN THE UNITED STATES.
"But these are foreign methods. How are they to be engrafted on our
American system?" More than once have I been asked this question when
describing the Initiative and Referendum of Switzerland.
The reply is: Direct legislation is not foreign to this country. Since
the settlement of New England its practice has been customary in the
town meeting, an institution now gradually spreading throughout the
western states--of recent years with increased rapidity. The Referendum
has appeared, likewise, with respect to state laws, in several forms in
every part of the Union. In the field of labor organization, also,
especially in several of the more carefully managed national unions,
direct legislation is freely practiced. The institution does not need to
be engrafted on this republic; it is here; it has but to develop
naturally.
_The Town Meeting._
The town meeting of New England is the counter-part of the Swiss
communal political meeting. Both assemblies are the primary form of the
politico-social organization. Both are the foundation of the structure
of the State. The essential objects of both are the same: to enact local
regulations, to elect local officers, to fix local taxation, and to
make appropriations for local purposes. At both, any citizen may propose
measures, and these the majority may accept or reject--_i.e._, the
working principles of town and commune alike are the Initiative and the
Referendum.
A fair idea of the proceedings at all town meetings may be gained
through description of one. For several reasons, a detailed account here
of what actually happened recently at a town meeting is, it seems to me,
justified. At such a gathering is seen, in plain operation, in the
primary political assembly, the principles of direct legislation. The
departure from those principles in a representative gathering is then
the more clearly seen. In many parts of the country, too, the methods of
the town meeting are little known. By observing the transactions in
particular, the reader will learn the variety in the play of democratic
principle and draw from it instructive inference.
The town of Rockland, Plymouth county, in the east of Massachusetts, has
5,200 inhabitants; assesses for taxation 5,787 acres of land; contains
1,078 dwelling houses, 800 of which are occupied by owners, and numbers
1,591 poll tax payers, who are therefore voters.
At 9 a.m., on Monday, March 2, 1891, 819 voters of Rockland assembled in
the opera house for the annual town meeting, the "warrant" for which, in
accordance with the law, had been publicly posted seven days before and
published once in each of the two town newspapers. A presiding officer
for the day, called a moderator, was elected by show of hands, after
which an election by ballot for town officers for the ensuing year was
begun. The supervisors of the voting were the town clerk and the three
selectmen (the executive officers of the town), who were seated on a
platform at one end of the hall. To cast his ballot, a voter mounted the
platform, his name was called aloud by the clerk, his ballot was
deposited, a check bell striking as it was thrown in the ballot-box, and
the voter stepped on and down. The ballot was a printed one, its size,
color, and type regulated by state law. When the voters had cast their
ballots, five tellers, who had been chosen by show of hands, counted the
vote. In this balloting for town officers, there was no division into
Republicans and Democrats, although considerable grouping together
through party association could be traced. The officers elected were a
town clerk and treasurer; a board of three, to serve as selectmen,
assessors, overseers of the poor, and fence viewers; three school
committeemen; a water commissioner; a board of health of three members;
two library trustees; three auditors, and seven constables.
A vote was also taken by ballot--"Yes" or "No"--on the question: "Shall
licenses be granted for the sale of intoxicating liquors in this town?"
The yeas were 317; nays, 347. The form of ballot used in this case was
precisely that invariably employed in the Referendum in Switzerland.
After a recess of an hour at midday, the business laid out in the
"warrant" was resumed. There were present 700 to 800 voters, with, as
on-lookers on the same floor, a large number of women, the principal
and pupils of the high school, and the teachers and children of the
grammar schools.
The "warrant" (the schedule for the meeting) consisted of forty-four
"articles," each representing a matter to be debated and voted on--that
is to say, a subject for legislation. These articles had been placed in
the warrant by the selectmen, either on their own motion or on request
of citizens. The election of moderator had taken place under article 1;
that of town officers under article 2; the license vote under article 3.
The voting on the rest of the articles now took place by show of hands.
Article 4 related to the annual reports of the town officers, printed
copies of which were to be had by each citizen. These were read and
discussed. Article 5 related to the general appropriations for town
expenses for the ensuing year. The following were decided on, each item
being voted on separately:
For highway repairs $3,800 For military aid $500
For removing snow 300 For guideboards 50
For fire department 1,200 For abatement of taxes and
For police service 500 collector's fee 500
For night watch 600 For support of poor 5,500
For town officers 2,200 For library, etc 1,000
For town committees, and For schools, proper 11,300
Abingdon records 50 For school-incidentals 1,000
For miscellaneous expenses 1,200 For school books 1,000
For interest 1,000 For hydrants 2,300
For memorial day 100 For water bonds, etc 2,500
Article 6, which was agreed to, authorized the town treasurer to borrow
money in anticipation of the collection of taxes; article 7 related to
the method of collecting the town taxes. It was decided these should be
farmed out to the lowest bidder, and, on the spot, a citizen secured the
contract at sixty-eight cents on the hundred. Article 8 related to the
powers of the tax collector; 9, to a list of jurors reported by the
selectmen, which was accepted; 10, to methods of repairing highways and
sidewalks; 11, to appropriating money for memorial day. Articles 10 and
11 were passed over, having been covered in the general appropriations,
and the selectmen were instructed to enforce in highway work the
nine-hour law. Article 12, which was adopted, provided for a night
watch; 13, relating to copying the records of Abingdon, had been passed
upon in the general appropriations; 14, providing for widening and
straightening a street, was passed, and $350 appropriated for the
purpose; 15, providing for concrete sidewalks, excited much debate, and
$300 was appropriated in addition to material on hand. Articles 16,
appropriating $350 for draining a street, and 17, requesting the
selectmen to lay out a water course on another street, were adopted.
Article 18, which was carried by a large majority, appropriated, in five
items, discussed and voted on separately, $7,250 for the fire
department. Article 19 appropriated $100 for a town road, 20 $200 for
another, and these were adopted, but 21, by which $325 was asked for
another road, was laid on the table. Articles 22 and 23, appropriating
$75 and $25 for bridges, were passed. Article 24, proposing the
graveling of a sidewalk, was referred to the selectmen. Articles 25, 26,
27, and 28, proposing the laying of sidewalks, were adopted, with
appropriations of $150, $125, $150, and $150; but 29, also proposing a
new sidewalk, was laid on the table. Article 30, proposing a new
sidewalk, was adopted, with an appropriation of $300, but 31, proposing
another, was laid on the table. Articles 32, proposing to change the
grading of two streets, with an appropriation of $500; 33, appropriating
$300 for a highway roller; 34, providing for a public drinking fountain,
and appropriating $200; 35, providing for a new bridge, and
appropriating $75, were all adopted. Articles 36, 37, and 38, providing
for extensions to the water mains, were laid on the table. Article 39,
appropriating $300 for relocation of a telephone line, was adopted; but
articles 40, providing for a memorial building, 41, providing for a town
hall, and 42, providing for a soldiers' memorial, were laid on the
table. Lastly, articles 43 and 44, providing for changes in street
names, were accepted as reported by the selectmen.
After finishing the "warrant," the meeting appropriated $10 to pay the
moderator, fixed $3 a day as the rate for the selectmen, and directed
the latter not to employ as constable any man who had been rejected by a
vote of the town. It was 10.45 p.m. when the assemblage broke up, a
recess having been taken from 5.30 to 7.30.
The proceedings at this meeting were characterized by democratic
methods. When the town officers handed in their reports, they were
questioned and criticised by one citizen and another. A motion to refer
the general appropriation list to a committee of twenty-five met with
overwhelming defeat in the face of the expressed sentiment that about
all left of primitive democracy was the old-fashioned town meeting. One
of the speakers on the town library appropriation was a lady, and her
point was carried. On the question of buying new fire extinguishing
apparatus, there were sides and leaders, with prolonged debate. As to
roads and bridges, each matter was dealt with on its own merits and
separately from other similar propositions. In the election for
officers, women voted for school committeemen.
The only officials of Rockland under annual salary are the treasurer and
town physician. Selectmen receive a sum per diem; constables, fees;
school committeemen make out their own bills. The others serve for
nothing.
Rockland, politically, is a typical New England town. What is to be said
of its manner of town meeting may, with little modification, be said of
all. Each citizen present at such a meeting may join in the debate. From
the printed copy of the officers' reports he may learn what his town
government has done in the year past; from the printed warrant he may
see what is proposed to be done in the year coming. He who knows the
better way in any of the business is sure to receive a hearing. The
pockets of all being concerned, whatever is best and cheapest is
insured. Bribery, successful only in the dark, has little or no field in
the town meeting.
Provision usually exists by which a town may dispose of any urgent
matters springing up for legislation in the course of the year: as a
rule a special town meeting may be called on petition of a small number
of citizens, commonly seven to eleven.