WMHUHiVltWWjW
i-s-wimaaa
6
The Commoner.
VOLUME 11, NUMBER 19
jw kdft i0mkmti
fc .
n
Direct Legislation and its Operations in America
By the Washington correspondent for the
Dallas (Texas) Nows: Tho recall Is less of an
Innovation In American constitution-making
than are tho referendum or initiative. Tho re
call was written Into tho first constitution of tho
United States, known as tho articles of con
federation. Tho fathors, to whose sagacity
public men so frequently refer, wrote it into Art.
V. of that instrument in unmistakable terms,
when, in providing for the olection of delegates
to tho national congress, they reserved to each
etato the power "to recall Its delegates, or any
of them, at any time within the year, and to
Bond others in tholr stead for the remainder of
tho year." When tho delegates to tho constitu
tional convention undertook to writ a now or
ganic law for tho nation they created the second
chamber of congress, the senato, and left out
tho recall provision of tho articles of confedera
tion. But there Is another constitution, oldor than
tho constitution of tho United States, into which
tho fathers wrote a recall sentiment the con
stitution of tho stato of Massachusetts. The re
call is In that instrument to this day and will
bo found in Art. VIII, which reads:
"In order to prevent those who are vested
with authority from becoming oppressors, tho
people havo a right at such periods and in such
manner as thoy shall establish in their frame
of government to causo their public officers to
return to private life, and to fill up vacant places
by certain and regular elections and appoint
ments." In keeping with the spirit of this provision
Massachusetts elects hej stato officers for but
one year.
Former United States Senator Blair of New
Hampshire calls attention to the fact that "tho
power of the removal of the judiciary by ad
dress of the two houses of the legislature
existed, and perhaps still exists, in the state of
New Hampshire, while the entire judiciary has
been changed frequently by the legislature and
the courts since I can remember, about four
tiniQS "
IN USB IN OREGON
Coming down to the present day and to tho
power of the recall vested directly in the hands
of tho people, the record shows that Oregon has
had tho recall, applicable to all elective state
officers, judicial, administrative and legislative,
for the laBt three years. It was written into
the constitution through direct legislation, the
constitutional amendment providing for it being
adopted by a vote of 58,381 to 31,002. In
Oregon the recall on state officers can be in
voked on the application of 25 per cent of tho
legal voters. This agency of control, however,
has not been invoked by the people of that stato
since itB adoption. In this respect the ex
perience of Oregon is similar to that of Switzer
land, where the recall is found in about one
third of the cantons, but is rarely invoked. As
h matter of fact, the Swiss have a way of con
tinually re-electing their public officers, so that
a competent man In office is there for practi
cally all of his life.
The recall, as affecting state officials, has
not yet gone beyond Oregon, but is incorporated
in the proposed constitution for Arizona, and just
recently has been submitted to the people of
California by the legislature of that state. The
California proposal also provides for the initia
tive and referendum, and the situation there
in regard to the application of the recall to tho
judiciary is particularly interesting. In an ex
tended article in the New York Evening Post
on the recent political revolution In California,
written before the legislature voted to submit
a " constitutional amendment granting to the
people the right to recall judges, appears this
statement and prophecy by Chief Justice Beatty
of the California supreme court:
"A special committee of the legislature is to
investigate the most recent decision of the su
preme court in the Ruef case, granting the
former boss a rehearing of his case in the su
preme court. This decision has now been re
versed, and Ruef is at last behind the bars.
Chief Justice Beatty of that court, in a public
statement, says that he expects the legislature to
pass a recall amendment, that a movement will
be begun to recall the supreme court judges and
that the movement will be successful." '
COL. ROOSEVELT FAVORS ADOPTION
Commenting on the situation in California
former President Roosevelt, in an interview'
published by the Associated Press, said that
personally, he would prefer to seo the legislature
itself act in the matter of recalls by providing
- !, .nmnttnl nt an ttnfif iutltra hV ft maioHty
vote of each house without trial, but on assign
ment of reasons. "That some of your judges
havo been placed upon tho bench under the old
convention system, in response to the demands
of special Interests, I little question," Col. Roose
velt is quoted as saying. "The legislature, how
ever, has preferred to put the responsibility of
their recall upon the people themselves, and
therefore you are faced by the alternative of leav
ing the present system unchanged, or else adopt
ing tho amendment proposed. In the immediate
emergency there Is no other choice, and this
being the case, I feel strongly that the amend
ment should be adopted."
Willie, however, the recall is still rare in its
application to state officials, whether legislative,
administrative or judicial, it has spread rapidly
in various parts of the country in city govern
ments. In almost every instance of its applica
tion to local affairs it Is accompanied by the
initiative and referendum. There Is no com
plete list showing the recall, initiative and
referendum in cities to date, because the, move
ment of extending direct legislation in cities
is going on almost from day to day, but the
following summary will Indicate the extent to
which thso three instruments of direct control
over municipal affairs has developed in the
United States:
In Iowa, by a general statute, the recall is
granted to every city having a commission form
of government, and any city of 25,000 or more
may adopt the commission form of government.
In South Dakota there is tho same kind of
a general law, except that in that state any city
of the first or second class or any city having
a special charter may change to the commission
government, tho recall in South Dakota cities
being effective upon the application of 15 per
cent of the legal voters.
HOME RULE TO THE CITIES
In Oregon in 1906 the people, by a vote of
46,678 to 16,735 extended to every city in the
state the initiative, on the application of 15 per
cent, and the referendum on the application of
10 per cent of tho qualified voters.
The next thing to the Oregon constitution and
general law granting home rule to the cities
is the constitution and statutes of the state of
Washington. By an article in its constitution
cities of 20,000 may create for themselves free
hold charters, which need not be approved by
tho legislature, and by a law adopted In 1903
tho local electorate on petition of 15 per cent
of the voters may initiate amendments to the
charter affecting local matters. Under this law
Seattle and Everett, Wash., adopted the recall
By a further provision of the Washington
general laws all cities of the second class may
recall their aldermen on petition of three
fourths of the legal voters of those cities
In California all cities of 3,5 Q0 population or
more may create freeholders' charters, subject
to the approval of the legislatures, but it has
been the custom of the legislatures to approve
practically all of these city charters. Amend
ments to such charters may be Initiated by 15
per cent of the voters, which amendments when
approved by a vote of the people must be sub-
lfi l SJl leg,Blatures. Th amendments,
like the charters, are in nearly every instance
approved by the legislature. Thus all of the
IhfnH"'0,61"60 today hav either
1 thrioatend i the recall, or
fi JSL t thT neans of d,rect legislation.
In a sense, Los Angeles was the pioneer of the
recall cities of California, modeling its statutes
after the recall law of the Canton Schaffhau sen
in Switzerland. It provides for the recall of any
elective officer by 25 per cent of the electors
who are qualified for the election of a successor
to the man to be recalled. Other Calif ornVn
cities followed with modifications in the matter
of percentage of voters required to force a recall
election, as follows: San Diego 25 per cent San
Bernardino 51 per cent, Santa Monica 5 0 pe?
cent, Alameda same as Los Angeles, except that
it applies also to appointive officers; Long Beach
40 per cent San Francisco 30 per cent. River
side and vallejo 25 per cent. A number of
California cities, including Sacramento and
Eureka have tho initiative and referendum with
out the recall while practically all of tho above
mentioned cities, which have the recall, also have
tho Initiative and referendum.
In Texas the initiative, referendum and recall
has been granted by the legislature to three
cities by special charters. The Dallas recall pro
vision follows the general lines of the Los
Angeles provision, except that in Dallas 35 per
cent of tho voters is required for a recall elec
tion; in Fort Worth the percentage is 20, while
in Denison the recall on the application of 20
per cent of the legal voters applies only to the
mayor and aldermen. By reason of Governor
Colquitt's veto the initiative, referendum and
recall charter of Texarkana failed.
This summary does not cover all of the direct
legislation development in American cities, but
it serves to show the extent to which these
checks on representative government in munici
palities has grown in the past decade. How
intelligently it has been used in some communi
ties is shown by the following Instance from
San Francisco, with a mixed, ring-ridden popu
lation of 416,912: On November 15, last, San
Francisco held a special election at which thirty
eight proposed amendments to tho city charter
were voted upon. These 'amendments filled a
thirty-six-page pamphlet, and 45,000 -voters,
about 50 per cent of the electorate, participated
in the election. As to the result, the well-known
weekly publication, the Nation, comments thus:
"Every voter had to discriminate and act
separately on the thirty-eight proposals. There
were no party emblems to help him. Yet there
is nothing in the result to indicate that the de
cision .was not arrived at as carefully as it
would have been had the amendments been
submitted to a representative assembly. Eighteen
of the amendments were carried and twenty
were rejected. Practically all the so-called
reform amendments were accepted. The
franchise rights of the city were safeguarded
by tho passage of amendments forbidding a mo
nopoly of subways and tunnels and permitting
the city to recall a franchise whenever it de
cides to buy the property of the traction com
pany. Business interests opposed the proposal
for the initiative and the recall, and a hard cam
paign was made against the franchise amend
ments, but both were carried, although by closer
votes than those on most of the other pro
posals. San Francisco may be boss-ridden and
union-labeled, but apparently the voters know
how to decide important public Questions in
telligently." MACHINE RULED CITIES
How some of the larger cities obtained the
recall and the initiative and referendum is an
interesting chapter in the development of direct
legislation in machine-ruled cities. Seattle is
a typical Instance. One of the first uses by
Seattle of the initiative and referendum was to
get a charter amendment for a recall. This
was in 1906. It took 25 per cent of the legal
voters to initiate a recall amendment to the
city charter. The city administration, through
its corporation counsel and city clerk, threw
one obstacle after another in the way of the
movement and the courts had to be invoked,
rne supporters of the movement were compelled,
through a technicality, to submit the petition
ror the recall amendment on two separate oc
JaD 2Lper cent of the nters for signa
SEJ ue$Ke thAy, could get lt on the baot, and
V id Aetthere flna"y the amendment was
so worded that the word "recall" did not ap-
nli 50r the Suidance of the voters. The
amendment read as follows: "No. 8. An
amendment to fix term of office." It carried by
ai?h; e 17'708 men wh voted at this
in km h, was also thG mayoralty election,
J?'6 B3 J Seated and voted on the amend-
SSv 1 ??i th 8J?u.mber' 9312 yoted for and
aLiIifagainst lt' At thlB sam election an
XindmS l lncase the salaries of the city
officials was defeated by 1,000 votes.
POWER OF RECALL FEATURE
JpDoVA0iS Anples adopted the recall by a
111 I, ,tclf after an exciting campaign. It
eneS i?611. f COntro1 nce ad threat
Th n t no a 9 l again with interesting results.
th rpoii ngeles omc,al who as removed by
was tho, lZ an flderman, whose influence, it
?orao?RHSfi' w t0 uniformly In favor of the
ter? ihrll at 7ere maiPulating city mat
manlo Hn.gh ??, C.Ity council- When an aldor
rSddr nii,Ioted of1 a Panting contract to
Set ine hld? T ?2M hIgher than tne com"
took to J,n?r' the people of Los Angeles under
man Ahn, ? Of examPle of that particular alder
sXri n SLf perent of tne voters in his ward
recall 3 J?Htitl0? for reca11 and at the special
recall election ho was retired to private life
te bL fnnAS87 t0 1'083' Hi? successor, it
3'f ?uRht .? Political machine and the cor-
5m? w ml domInated the machine for a
me Dut flnaHy eave up the fight and settled
i
'. '
iA. Juk
Hri-WHftiftl Kf 'Mf "i-" -