June, 1891, Henry Loomis Nelson brought out many convincing facts as to
its superiority over government by a town board. Where the cost for
public lighting in a New England town had been but $2,000, in a New York
town of the same size it had amounted to $11,000. The cities of
Worcester, Mass., and Syracuse, New York, each of about 80,000
inhabitants, were compared, with the New England city in every respect
by far the more economically governed. Towns in New England are
uniformly superior to others in other parts of the country with regard
to the extent of sewers and paved streets. The aggregate of town debts
in New England is vastly less than the aggregate for a similar
population in the Middle States. The state constitutions of New England
commonly relate to fundamental principles, since each district may
protect itself by the town meeting; but outside New England, to assert
the rights of localities, state constitutions usually perforce embody
particulars. In their fire and police departments, and public school and
water supply systems, New England towns lead the rest of the country.
"The influence," says Mr. Nelson, "of the town meeting government upon
the physical character of the country, upon the highways and bridges,
and upon the appearance of the villages, is familiar to all who have
traveled through New England. The excellent roads, the stanch bridges,
the trim tree-shaded streets, the universal signs of thrift and of the
people's pride in the outward aspects of their villages, are too well
known to be dwelt upon." In every New England community many of the men
are qualified by experience to take charge of a public meeting and
conduct its proceedings with some regard to the forms observed in
parliamentary bodies. But elsewhere in the Union few of the citizens
have any knowledge of such forms and observances. "In New England there
is not a voter who may not, and very few voters who do not, actively
participate in the work of government. In the other parts of the country
hardly any one takes part in public affairs except the office-holder."
John Fiske, in "Civil Government in the United States," (1890), says
that "the general tendency toward the spread of township government in
the more recently settled parts of the United States is unmistakable."
The first western state to adopt the town meeting system was Michigan;
but it now prevails in four-fifths of the counties of Illinois; in
one-sixth of Missouri, where it was begun in 1879; and in one-third of
the counties of Nebraska, which adopted it in 1883; while it has gone
much further in Minnesota and Dakota, in which states it has been law
since 1878 and 1883, respectively.
"Within its proper sphere," says Fiske, "government by town meeting is
the form of government most effectively under watch and control.
Everything is done in the full daylight of publicity. The specific
objects for which public money is to be appropriated are discussed in
the presence of everybody, and any one who disapproves of any of these
objects, or of the way in which it is proposed to obtain it, has an
opportunity to declare his opinions." "The inhabitant of a New England
town is perpetually reminded that 'our government' is 'the people.'
Although he may think loosely about the government of his state or the
still more remote government at Washington, he is kept pretty close to
the facts where local affairs are concerned, and in this there is a
political training of no small value."
The same writer notes in the New England towns a tendency to retain good
men in office, such as we have seen is the case in Switzerland. "The
annual election affords an easy means of dropping an unsatisfactory
officer. But in practice nothing has been more common than for the same
persons to be re-elected as selectmen or constables or town-clerks for
year after year, as long as they are willing or able to serve. The
notion that there is anything peculiarly American or democratic in what
is known as 'rotation in office' is therefore not sustained by the
practice of the New England town, which is the most complete democracy
in the world." In another feature is there resemblance to Swiss custom:
some of the town officials serve without pay and none receive
exorbitant salaries.
_The Referendum in States, Cities, Counties, Etc._
Few are aware of the advances which direct legislation has made in state
government in the United States. Many facts on this subject, collected
by Mr. Ellis P. Oberholtzer, were published in the "Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science," November, 1891.
Condensed, this writer's statement is as follows: Constitutional
amendments now go to the people for a vote in every state except
Delaware. The significance of this fact, and the resemblance of this
vote to the Swiss Referendum, are seen when one considers the subject
matter of a state constitution. Nowadays, such a constitution usually
limits a legislature to a short biennial session and defines in detail
what laws the legislature may and may not pass. In fact, then, in
adopting a constitution once in ten or twenty years, the voters of a
state decide upon admissible legislation. Thus they themselves are the
real legislators. Among the matters once left entirely to legislatures,
but now commonly dealt with in constitutions, are the following:
Prohibiting or regulating the liquor traffic; prohibiting or chartering
lotteries; determining tax rates; founding and locating state schools
and other state institutions; establishing a legal rate of interest;
fixing the salaries of public officials; drawing up railroad and other
corporation regulations; and defining the relations of husbands and
wives, and of debtors and creditors. In line with all this is a
tendency to easy amendment. In nearly all the new states and in those
older ones which have recently revised their constitutions, the time in
which amendments may be effected is as a rule but half of that formerly
required. Where once the approval of two successive legislatures was
exacted, now the consent of one is considered sufficient.
In fifteen states, until submitted to a popular vote, no law changing
the location of the capital is valid; in seven, no laws establishing
banking corporations; in eleven, no laws for the incurrence of debts
excepting such as are specified in the constitution, and no excess of
"casual deficits" beyond a stipulated sum; in several, no rate of
assessment exceeding a figure proportionate to the aggregate valuation
of the taxable property. Without the Referendum, Illinois cannot sell
its state canal; Minnesota cannot pay interest or principal of the
Minnesota railroad; North Carolina cannot extend the state credit to aid
any person or corporation, excepting to help certain railroads
unfinished in 1876. With the Referendum, Colorado may adopt woman
suffrage and create a debt for public buildings; Texas may fix a
location for a college for colored youth; Wyoming may decide on the
sites for its state university, insane asylum and penitentiary.
Numerous important examples of the Referendum in local matters in the
United States, especially in the West, were found by Mr. Oberholtzer.
There are many county, city, township, and school district referendums.
Nineteen state constitutions guarantee to counties the right to fix by
vote of the citizens the location of the county seats. So also usually
of county lines, divisions of counties, and like matters. Several
western states leave it to a vote of the counties as to when they shall
adopt a township organization, with town meetings; several states permit
their cities to decide when they shall also be counties. As in the
state, there are debt and tax matters that may be passed on only by the
people of cities, boroughs, counties, or school districts. Without the
Referendum, no municipality in Pennsylvania may contract an aggregate
debt beyond 2 per cent of the assessed valuation of its taxable
property; no municipalities in certain other states may incur in any
year an indebtedness beyond their revenues; no local governments in the
new states of the West may raise any loans whatever; none in other
states may exceed certain limits in tax rates. With the Referendum,
certain Southern communities may make harbor improvements, and other
communities may extend the local credit to railroad, water
transportation, and similar corporations. The prohibition of the liquor
business in a city or county is often left to a popular vote; indeed,
"local option" is the commonest form of Referendum. In California any
city with more than 10,000 inhabitants may frame a charter for its own
government, which, however, must be approved by the legislature. Under
this law Stockton, San José, Los Angeles, and Oakland have acquired new
charters. In the state of Washington, cities of 20,000 may make their
own charters without the legislature having any power of veto. Largely,
then, such cities make their own laws.
In fact, the vast United States seems to have seen as much of the
Referendum as little Switzerland. But the effect of the practice has
been largely lost in the great size of this country and in the loose and
unsystematized character of the institution as known here.
* * * * *
In the "American Commonwealth" of James Bryce, a member of Parliament,
there is a chapter entitled "Direct Legislation by the People." After
reciting many facts similar in character to those given by Mr.
Oberholtzer, Mr. Bryce inquires into the practical workings of direct
legislation. He finds what are to his mind some "obvious demerits." Of
these demerits, such as apply to details he develops in the course of
his statements of several cases of Referendum. In summing up, he further
points out what seem to him two objections to the principle. One is that
direct legislation "tends to lower the authority and sense of
responsibility of the legislature." But this is precisely the aim of
pure democracy, and from its point of view a merit of the first order.
The other objection is, "it refers matters needing much elucidation by
debate to the determination of those who cannot, on account of their
numbers, meet together for discussion, and many of whom may have never
thought about the matter." But why meet together for discussion? Mr.
Bryce here overlooks that this is the age of newspaper and telegraph,
and that through these sources the facts and much debate on any matter
of public interest may be forthcoming on demand. Mr. Bryce, however,
sees more advantages than demerits in direct legislation. Of the
advantages he remarks: "The improvement of the legislatures is just what
the Americans despair of, or, as they would prefer to say, have not time
to attend to. Hence they fall back on the Referendum as the best course
available under the circumstances of the case and in such a world as the
present. They do not claim that it has any great educative effect on the
people. But they remark with truth that the mass of the people are equal
in intelligence and character to the average state legislator, and are
exposed to fewer temptations. The legislator can be 'got at,' the people
cannot. The personal interest of the individual legislator in passing a
measure for chartering banks or spending the internal improvement fund
may be greater than his interest as one of the community in preventing
bad laws. It will be otherwise with the bulk of the citizens. The
legislator may be subjected by the advocates of women's suffrage or
liquor prohibition to a pressure irresistible by ordinary mortals; but
the citizens are too numerous to be all wheedled or threatened. Hence
they can and do reject proposals which the legislature has assented to.
Nor should it be forgotten that in a country where law depends for its
force on the consent of the governed, it is eminently desirable that law
should not outrun popular sentiment, but have the whole weight of the
people's deliverance behind it."
_The Initiative and Referendum in Labor Organizations._
The Referendum is well known to the Knights of Labor. For nine years
past expressions of opinion have been asked of the local assemblies by
the general executive board. The recent decision of the order to enter
upon independent political action was made by a vote in response to a
circular issued by the General Master Workman. The latter, at the annual
convention at Toledo, in November, 1891, recommended that the Referendum
form a part of the government machinery throughout the United States.
The Knights being in some respects a secret organization, data as to
referendary votings are not always made public.
For the past decade or longer several of the national and international
trades-unions of America have had the Initiative and Referendum in
operation. Within the past five years the institution in various forms
has been taken up by other unions, and at present it is in more or less
practice in the following bodies, all associated with the American
Federation of Labor:
No. of No. of Members,
National or International Union. Local Unions. December, 1891.
Journeymen Bakers 81 17,500
Brewery Workmen 61 9,500
United Broth'h'd of Carpenters and Joiners 740 65,000
Amalgamated Carpenters and Joiners 40 2,800
Cigar-Makers 310 27,000
Carriage and Wagon Makers 11 2,000
Garment Workers 24 4,000
Granite Cutters 75 20,000
Tailors 170 17,000
Typographical Union 290 28,000
-------
Total 192,800
Direct legislation has long been familiar to the members of the
International Cigar-Makers' Union. Today, amendments to its
constitution, the acts of its executives, and even the resolutions
passed at delegate conventions, are submitted to a vote by ballot in the
local unions. The nineteenth annual convention, held at Indianapolis,
September, 1891, provisionally adopted 114 amendments to the
constitution and 33 resolutions on various matters. Though some of the
latter were plainly perfunctory in character, all of these 147
propositions were printed in full in the "Official Journal" for October,
and voted on in the 310 unions throughout America in November. The
Initiative is introduced in this international union through local
unions. When twenty of the latter have passed favorably on a measure, it
must be submitted to the entire body. An idea of the financial
transactions of the Cigar-Makers' International Union may be gathered
from its total expenditures in the past twelve years and a half. In all,
it has disbursed in that time $1,426,208. Strikes took $469,158; sick
benefits, $439,010; death benefits, $109,608; traveling benefits,
$372,455, and out of work benefits, $35,795. The advance of the
Referendum in this great union has been very gradual. It began in 1877
with voting on constitutional amendments. The most recent, and perhaps
last possible, step was to transfer the election of the general
executive board from the annual convention to the entire body.
The United Garment Workers of America practice direct legislation under
Article 24 of their constitution, which is printed under the caption,
"Referendum and Initiative." It prescribes two methods of Initiative.
One is that three or more local unions, if of different states, may
instruct the general secretary to call for a referendary vote in the
unions of the national organization. The other is that the general
executive board must so submit all questions of general importance. The
general secretary issues the call within two weeks after the petition
for a vote reaches him, and the vote is taken within six months
afterward. Eighteen propositions passed by the annual convention of this
union at Boston, in November, 1891, were submitted to a vote of the
local unions in December.
In 1890, the local unions of the International Typographical Union, then
numbering nearly 290, voted on twenty-five propositions submitted from
the annual convention. In 1891, fourteen propositions were submitted. Of
the latter, one authorized the formation of unions of editors and
reporters; another directed the payments to the President to be a salary
of $1,400, actual railroad fares by the shortest possible routes, and $3
a day for hotel expenses; another rescinded a six months' exemption from
a per capita tax for newly formed unions; another provided for a funeral
benefit of $50 on the death of a member; by another an assessment of ten
cents a month was levied for the home for superannuated and disabled
union printers. All fourteen were adopted, the majorities, however,
varying from 558 to 8,758.
_Is Complete Direct Legislation in Government Practicable?_
The conservative citizen, contented with the existing state of things,
is wont to brush aside proposed innovations in government. To do so he
avails himself of a familiar stock of objections. But have they not all
their answer in the facts thus far brought forth in these chapters? Will
he entertain no "crazy theories"? Here is offered practice, proven in
varied and innumerable tests to be thoroughly feasible. He is opposed to
foreign institutions? Here is a time-honored American institution. He
holds that men cannot be made better by law? Here are facts to show that
with change of law justice has been promoted. He deems democracy
feebleness? Here has been shown its stalwart strength. He is sure
workingmen are incapable of managing large affairs? Let him look to the
cigar-makers--their capacity for organization, their self-restraint as
an industrial army, the soundness of their financial system, the mastery
of their employers in the eight-hour question. He believes the
intricacies of taxation and estimates of appropriation beyond the
average mind? He may see a New England town meeting in a single day
dispose of scores of items and, with each settled to a nicety, vote away
fifty thousand dollars. He fears state legislation, by reason of its
complexity, would prove a puzzle to the ordinary voter? Why, then, are
the more vexatious subjects so often shifted by the legislators to the
people?
The conservative objector is, first, apt to object before fully
examining what he dissents from, and, secondly, prone to have in mind
ideal conditions with which to compare the new methods commended to him.
In the matter of legislation, he dreams of a body of high-minded
lawgivers, just, wise, unselfish, and not of legislators as they
commonly are. He forgets that Congress and the legislatures have each a
permanent lobby, buying privileges for corporations, and otherwise
influencing and corrupting members. He forgets the party caucus, at
which the individual member is swamped in the majority; the "strikers,"
members employing their powers in blackmail; the Black Horse Cavalry, a
combination of members in state legislatures formed to enrich themselves
by plunder through passing or killing bills. He forgets the scandalous
jobs put through to reward political workers; the long lists of doubtful
or vicious bills reviewed in the press after each session of every
legislative body; the pamphlets issued by reform bodies in which perhaps
three-fourths of a legislature is named as untrustworthy, and the price
of many of the members given. The City Reform Club of New York published
in 1887: "As with the city's representatives of 1886, the chief objects
of most of the New York members were to make money in the 'legislative
business,' to advance their own political fortunes, and to promote the
interests of their factions." And where is the state legislature of
which much the same things cannot be said?
The conservative objector may not know how the most important bills are
often passed in Congress. He may not know that until toward the close
of a session the business of Congress is political in the party sense
rather than in the governing sense; that on the floor the play is
usually conducted for effect on the public; that in committees, measures
into which politics enter are made up either on compromise or for
partisan purposes; that, finally, in the last days of a session, the
work of legislation is a scramble. The second day before the adjournment
of the last Congress was thus described in a New York daily paper:
"Congress has been working like a gigantic threshing machine all day
long, and at this hour there is every prospect of an all-night session
of both houses. Helter-skelter, pell-mell, the 'unfinished business' has
been poured into the big hopper, and in less time than it takes to tell
it, it has come out at the other end completed legislation, lacking only
the President's signature to fit it for the statute books. Public bills
providing for the necessary expenses of the government, private bills
galore having as their beneficiaries favored individuals, jobbery in the
way of unnecessary public buildings, railroad charters, and bridge
construction--all have been rushed through at lightning speed, and the
end is not yet. A majority of the House members, desperate because their
power and influence terminate with the end of this brief session, and a
partisan Speaker, whose autocratic rule will prevail but thirty-six
short hours longer, have left nothing unattempted whereby party friends
and protégés might be benefited. It is safe to say that aside from a
half dozen measures of real importance and genuine merit the country
would be no worse off should every other bill not yet acted upon fail of
passage. Certain it is that large sums of money would be saved to the
Government." And what observer does not know that scenes not unlike this
are repeated in almost every legislature in its closing hours?
As between such manner of even national legislation on the one hand, and
on the other the entire citizenship voting (as soon would be the fact
under direct legislation) on but what properly should be law--and on
principles, on policies, and on aggregates in appropriations--would
there be reason for the country to hesitate in choosing?
Among the plainest signs of the times in America is the popular distrust
of legislators. The citizens are gradually and surely resuming the
lawmaking and money-spending power unwisely delegated in the past to
bodies whose custom it is to abuse the trust. "Government" has come to
mean a body of representatives with interests as often as not opposed to
those of the great mass of electors. Were legislation direct, the circle
of its functions would speedily be narrowed; certainly they would never
pass legitimate bounds at the urgency of a class interested in enlarging
its own powers and in increasing the volume of public outlay. Were
legislation direct, the sphere of every citizen would be enlarged; each
would consequently acquire education in his rôle, and develop a lively
interest in the public affairs in part under his own management. And
what so-called public business can be right in principle, or expedient
in policy, on which the American voter may not pass in person? To reject
his authority in politics is to compel him to abdicate his sovereignty.
That done, the door is open to pillage of the treasury, to bribery of
the representative, and to endless interference with the liberties of
the individual.
THE WAY OPEN TO PEACEFUL REVOLUTION.
What I set out in the first chapter to do seems to me done. I essayed to
show how the political "machine," its "ring," "boss," and "heeler,"
might be abolished, and how, consequently, the American plutocracy might
be destroyed, and government simplified and contracted to the field of
its natural operations. These ends achieved, a social revolution would
be accomplished--a revolution without loss of a single life or
destruction of a dollar's worth of property.
Whoever has read the foregoing chapters has seen these facts
established:
(1) That much in proportion as the whole body of citizens take upon
themselves the direction of public affairs, the possibilities for
political and social parasitism disappear. The "machine" becomes without
effective uses, the trade of the politician is rendered undesirable, and
the privileges of the monopolist are withdrawn.
(2) That through the fundamental principles of democracy in
practice--the Initiative and the Referendum--great bodies of people,
with the agency of central committees, may formulate all necessary law
and direct its execution.