GOVERNMENT 
 FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 BY 
 
 THOMAS H. REED 
 
 Professor of Municipal Government in the 
 University of California 
 
 ^5^ 
 
 mm 
 
 Revised Edition 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
 B. W. HUEBSCH 
 
 1919 
 
\ 
 
 Copyright, 1915, by 
 B. W. HUEBSCH 
 
 Printed in U. S. A. 
 
NOTE TO THE SECOND EDITION 
 
 The world has marched far in the four years 
 since this book first made its appearance. We 
 have, however, made comparatively little prog- 
 ress in the matters covered by its pages. The 
 whole energy of mankind has gone into the wag- 
 ing of a world war and the solution of the inter- 
 national problems left behind it. In many of 
 the warring countries the need of victory or the 
 shock of defeat has produced great changes in 
 governmental organization. But in the United 
 States the forms of domestic politics have re- 
 mained fixed in the face of war. We have 
 thought little in these years of struggle for de- 
 mocracy of how democracy might be preserved 
 from itself! It is time to think again. 
 
 I desire to acknowledge the assistance in pre- 
 paring this revised edition of Dr. Charles E. 
 Martin and Dr. J. R. Douglas, my colleagues at 
 the University of California. 
 
 T. H. R. 
 
 August 15, 1919. 
 
 
 "k') i O «' i- 
 
PEEFACE 
 
 This book is an effort to state in a thoroughly 
 clear way, for that growing portion of the gen- 
 eral public who are interested in the mechanism 
 of govermnent, some of the obvious truths with 
 regard to it. It makes no claim to erudite 
 profundity, which is always stupid and gen- 
 erally misleading. It is not markedly original. 
 Originality in the interpretation of the phenom- 
 ena of government is usually purchased at the 
 expense of sound reasoning. This book is 
 merely a sane criticism of our institutions. It 
 does not murder truth in the name of clever- 
 ness. 
 
 The material embodied in the succeeding 
 chapters is the result of a long process of re- 
 flection and modification. In the fall of 1910, 
 the writer delivered, under the auspices of the 
 Extension Department of the University of 
 California, a series of lectures on contempo- 
 rary political questions. These lectures, fre- 
 quently repeated, were finally crystallized into 
 this book. During this long period of gesta- 
 tion, what were originally separate essays have 
 
vi . PREFACE 
 
 grown into a single constructive criticism of 
 our government. 
 
 The bibliographies appended to each chapter 
 are not intended to be exhaustive, but merely 
 to suggest some of the more available works 
 and articles for use by those who wish to pur- 
 sue the subject further. 
 
 I wish to make acknowledgment of the con- 
 stant encouragement which has been afforded 
 me throughout the various stages of my work 
 by Professor David P. Barrows, Head of the 
 Political Science Department and Dean of the 
 Faculties of the University of California. Al- 
 though differing with me materially in some of 
 my conclusions, he has always urged me to a 
 sincere expression of my own views. Mr. J. H. 
 Quire has assisted me in the correction of 
 proofs, and Mr. J. R. Douglas, Teaching Fel- 
 low in Political Science, has given untiring 
 service in the preparation of the book for the 
 press. My greatest helper has been my wife, 
 who at every stage has been ready with pointed 
 criticism. 
 
 Bekkeley, California, 
 January 11, 1915. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER PAGE 
 
 I The Citizen and the State 1 
 
 II The Wobkings of Representative Democracy 16 
 
 III The Place of Political Parties 28 
 
 IV Nominations to Office 49 
 
 V Misrepresentative Legislatures 69 
 
 VI The Long Ballot as a Cause of Political Cor- 
 ruption 95 
 
 VII The Corruption of Politics by Big Business . 108 
 
 VIII The Corruption of Politics by Organized Vice . 123 
 
 IX The Initiative, Referendum and Recall . . .137 
 
 X Our Judicial Dilemma 161 
 
 XI Disorganization of State Administration .179 
 
 XII The Place of Experts in State and Local Ad- 
 ministration 194 
 
 XIII The Administration of Education 215 
 
 XTV What is the Matter with the Presidency ? . . 230 
 
 XV The United States and the World .... 249 
 
GOVERNMENT FOR 
 THE PEOPLE 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE 
 
 It is time that we took stock of our Democracy. 
 Tlie Great War has swept from the world one 
 threatening rival, Autocracy, only to slip the 
 leash from another even more dangerous, ^'Bol- 
 shevism. ' ^ Americans must think clearly on the 
 fundamental relations of man and political so- 
 ciety—the state. If they would play their part 
 in the preservation of Democracy, they must 
 understand how it really works — where it suc- 
 ceeds, where it fails. In the coming pages the 
 veil is piously lifted from certain mysteries of 
 our Democratic state. 
 
 The one great duty that man owes to the 
 state is obedience. In the most primitive 
 forms of society of which we have record, long 
 before the appearance of government in the 
 ordinary sense of that term, there were certain 
 
2 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 acts which were generally recognized as in* 
 imical to the common good and others as essenv 
 tial to its preservation. The custom of the 
 people forbade the one and enjoined the other. 
 To break these simple folk-ways meant exclu- 
 sion from the tribe, within which there could 
 be no place for one who imperiled its safety 
 by disobedience of its collective judgment. We 
 may leave the origins of these primitive cus- 
 toms for others to conjecture. It is enough 
 for our purposes that they existed and were 
 obeyed. Gradually it was found desirable to 
 have some determination of their scope and 
 some formal judgment when they were broken. 
 Gathered about the council fire the clans lis- 
 tened to the solemn pronouncement of the 
 ** law-speaker'' and rendered their verdict of 
 guilt or innocence. Later generations have 
 devised elaborate machinery for the authentic 
 declaration of the law and its interpretation 
 and enforcement, but the obligation of obedi- 
 ence has never abated. A multitude of com- 
 mands are issued instead of a few, but to the 
 whole category, from dying in battle to paying 
 one's taxes, obedience is due. 
 
 Obedience is an especially imperative duty 
 under the circumstances of modern society. 
 Such society, indeed, would be impossible with- 
 out it. Man cannot live in that proximity to man 
 
THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE 3 
 
 which the conditions of our economic life have 
 ordained, without rules, well observed. Just 
 as on the cinder-path we confine each sprinter 
 to a tape-marked lane so that none may jostle 
 another, so we must have jostle-bars in life. 
 They may be defined by statutes enforced by 
 policemen ; they may be the result of the simple 
 consensus of society, depending for their sanc- 
 tion upon public opinion only; or, as is com- 
 monly the case, they may be the product of 
 both these methods. The process of enact- 
 ment and enforcement has of itself no signifi- 
 cance. It makes little difference whether you 
 refrain from stealing from fear of jail, the 
 cold looks of your neighbors, or the rigors of 
 your o^vn conscience. In any event you obey 
 the social will. Even our friends the an- 
 archists, with their enchanting pictures of life 
 without law, unconsciously premise absolute 
 obedience to the more fundamental customs of 
 society. Obedience to law in its broadest 
 sense is the basis on which society is built. 
 Without it the mutual confidence which makes 
 life among men tolerable could not exist. By 
 virtue of it we lie down at night confident in 
 the safety of our lives and possessions. With- 
 out it we would go back to naked savagery and 
 the continual task of defending a luckless ex- 
 istence. Without law there can be no confi- 
 
4 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 dence; without confidence, no peace or security; 
 without security, no possessions; without pos- 
 sessions, no civilization. 
 
 We must note that, whereas law may be de- 
 fined by statute, law is not in reality made by 
 statute. The vital principle of law is the so- 
 cial will, and it is only when the statute records 
 it accurately that the statute is in truth a law. 
 Our processes of law-making are at best im- 
 perfect. Motives many and various swerve 
 legislatures from the strict performance of 
 their representative function. Deliberate and 
 inadvertent errors help to crowd the statute 
 books with lawless enactments. It should ex- 
 cite no remark that such acts are disobeyed. 
 They are our peculiar American disgrace. We 
 frequently cry **Amen!'' to those of our for- 
 eign critics who describe us as a lawless people. 
 As a matter of fact we are not lawless; only 
 perverse and insincere. We permit our legis- 
 lators to enact statutes which we either do not 
 want at all or at least not sufficiently to trouble 
 ourselves with their enforcement. Through 
 positive dislike or passive indifference we tol- 
 erate their constant infraction. The worst 
 consequence is that the fact of a difference be- 
 tween the legal standard and the real social 
 will is a veritable Archimedean fulcrum of 
 graft. 
 
THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE 5 
 
 Just as in many small matters our so-called 
 ^'law-makers" fall something short of the 
 mark, so the whole form of government may 
 fundamentally fail to express the real social 
 will. Under normal conditions it is our duty to 
 obey the behests of constituted authority even 
 when they measurably depart from our stand- 
 ard of right. It is not reasonable to condemn 
 a worthy institution because of its incidental 
 failures. There come times, however, when 
 the will of society and that of its usual agent 
 come into conflict so violently that the indi- 
 vidual must choose between them. At such a 
 time the higher obligation attaches to substance 
 rather than to form. The eighteenth century 
 political philosophers called this duty to 
 choose the better part *'the right of revolu- 
 tion." We no longer accept their ** compact" 
 theory of government by which it became 
 man's duty to resist the invasion of those fun- 
 damental rights that the original social con- 
 tract had reserved to him. We arrive, how- 
 ever, at the same practical result by holding 
 that the right to command obedience inheres 
 not in any form of government but in the state 
 as we have defined it. At every such funda- 
 mental crisis there is a right and a wrong side, 
 and man makes choice between them at his 
 peril. There is a Thomas Hutchinson and a 
 
6 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 Samuel Adams, a Jefferson Davis and an 
 Abraham Lincoln for every attempted revolu- 
 tion. In the long run, government must con- 
 form to the social will, itself a product of the 
 economic conditions of the country. It may 
 be accident or prescience, but some read the 
 writing on the wall and become heroes. Others 
 fail to read it and suffer the hard penalties of. 
 failure. 
 
 Before entering upon the discussion of the 
 nature of the obligation due from the state to 
 its people, let us be clear as to the nature of 
 the obligor. To use the legal phrase, every 
 citizen in a democracy is severally liable upon 
 the obligations of the state. We frequently 
 speak of the duty of the citizen to participate 
 with his whole heart and mind in the determina- 
 tion of public questions, as a duty he owes to 
 the state. It is in fact a duty that he owes 
 because he is the state. It is a duty owed not 
 to a cold abstraction but to his fellow-men. 
 Too little emphasis is placed upon this obliga- 
 tion side of citizenship. We hear a great deal 
 about the sovereignty of the people, but it is 
 the powers rather than the duties of sover- 
 eignty that are held prominently in mind. 
 Every loud-mouthed fellow on the hustings 
 crowds upon his hearers the fact of their 
 power. The completeness of their control 
 
THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE 7 
 
 over government is made an issue at elections. 
 There are few to remind them that power car- 
 ries with it responsibility, in this case respon- 
 sibility for the lives, health, morality, and hap- 
 piness of a nation. 
 
 This failure of the popular sense of respon- 
 sibility is by no means unaccountable. When 
 Louis XIV cried out ^'L'etat, c'est moi/' it was 
 obvious that he assumed the obligations as well 
 as the privileges of power. Since his time we 
 have diffused sovereign power among the people 
 without the state suffering the least diminu- 
 tion of its authority. Indeed, the state is 
 stronger now than then, and the government 
 infinitely more secure on this broader basis 
 than on the narrow support of personal power. 
 Power is divisible. Separate it into millions of 
 parts and they readily combine to make a whole. 
 Its determinations thus reached are no less au- 
 thentic than when they originate in the brain 
 and purpose of a single man. Responsibility, on 
 the other hand, is indivisible. Half a sense of 
 responsibility is as good as worthless. Divide it 
 by a million and no reassembling of parts will 
 ever give the whole again. Man must be wholly 
 responsible or he will not be responsible at all. 
 It should be an inspiration to that end that he 
 is not responsible to a mere abstraction, but to 
 a living, moving, suffering humanity. If this 
 
8 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 is an age of philanthropy — and we see evi- 
 dences of a growing love of man for man on 
 every side — it would seem to be easy to carry 
 the eagerness of that love into political life. 
 It should be the most potent motive for intelli- 
 gent and honest activity in performing the func- 
 tions of the state. When by our vote a bad 
 mayor steps into office we should be red with 
 the shame of it. Of his every act of maladmin- 
 istration we should say, **We did it and we did 
 it to our fellow-men!" This is our only hope 
 of good government. 
 
 Here we meet another difficulty that besets 
 the establishment of a true sense of responsi- 
 bility among individual members of the body 
 politic. The evil results of maladministration, 
 while inevitable enough, are by no means ob- 
 vious. In simpler times the consequences of 
 misgovernment were open and palpable injus- 
 tice, robbery and oppression. In these intri- 
 cate days, sins governmental are of a more 
 mediate character. Newly elected Mayor 
 Smith appoints ex-Divekeeper Jones as Chief 
 of Police. No one is thrown into a bastile, or 
 banished, or bastinadoed. There is simply less 
 efficiency in the police department. The city's 
 money is wasted; but that fact comes home in 
 no perceptible form to the non-taxpaying voter, 
 and only in a slight measure to the taxpayers 
 
THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE 9 
 
 themselves. The matter is passed by with a 
 ^' Jones is a good fellow.'^ It is more than 
 likely, however, that waste in the police de- 
 partment has prevented the city from under- 
 taking some useful improvement, such as the 
 opening of a playground in a congested tene- 
 ment district. Scores of boys and girls have 
 lost their chance for health, perhaps for life 
 itself. It is hard for the voter to see that he 
 has committed murder by the simple act of cast- 
 ing liis ballot, but under such circumstances he 
 has. Legal and moral science concur in fixing 
 upon every man the intention to produce every 
 reasonable consequence of his acts. The 
 criminal voter is the most common type of 
 criminal we have. 
 
 The obligation which the state owes to its 
 members is justice. I do not mean by justice 
 the thing administered by judge and jury. 
 Neither do I mean by justice that narrow per- 
 sonal quality which is listed in the manuals 
 of ethics with courage, temperance, chastity, 
 and kindred *^ virtues.'^ The justice to which 
 I refer is social justice, not differing in kind, 
 perhaps, from the personal variety, but so far 
 removed from it in its actual manifestations 
 as to be scarcely capable of comparison with 
 it. It is this justice which is ^'the great end 
 of man on earth. *^ 
 
10 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 If it be questioned tliat justice is tlie sole 
 duty of the state to its citizens, a momentary 
 analysis of the other * Virtues" will show them 
 to be but synonyms of justice or purely per- 
 sonal qualities impossible to a corporate body. 
 A state cannot be brave, except in its rela- 
 tion to other states, a situation in which it par- 
 takes largely of the character of a person. It 
 cannot be chaste or temperate, except in the 
 sense of moderation, which is a phase of jus- 
 tice. Honesty and fairness are but other 
 words for justice. The relations of individ- 
 uals are also affected by motives which impel 
 to conduct more than just. **Love'' and 
 ^'charity'' are familiar names for such expan- 
 sive impulses. Life would lose its charm with- 
 out them. From the point of view of indi- 
 vidual ethics they are all important; but with 
 the state there is no room for any obligation 
 beyond simple justice. The self-abnegation of 
 the state would reduce, not increase, the sum 
 of human happiness. It would merely be the 
 subversion of the interests of the many to the 
 interests of the few. The state cannot give 
 more than justice to one without giving less 
 than justice to another, — without robbing 
 Peter to pay Paul. The best the state can do 
 is to give fair play to all its members. 
 
 Justice is simply the widest possible diffu- 
 
THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE 11 
 
 sion among all the members of society of the 
 opportunity for self-realization. As to what 
 it is in the concrete, no two generations give 
 the same answer. It is a variable, constantly 
 approaching infinity. Nautilus-like 
 
 ^^Each new chamber, loftier than the last. 
 Shuts it from heaven with a dome more vast.^' 
 
 The history of the world's progress is found 
 in its expanding definition. The street boy of 
 today knows more of social justice than the 
 immortal Plato. Was not Plato's ideal state, 
 doubtless in perfect consonance with his idea 
 of justice, founded upon a system of slave la- 
 bor? Plato saw with the eyes of his time as 
 we with the eyes of our time. Paul preached 
 a gospel which put master and slave on an 
 equality before God, but he taught in the same 
 breath the duty of slaves to submit to their 
 masters. Ascending the years to the full ma- 
 turity of the feudal system, we find the laborer 
 no longer the personal property of the master. 
 We find him, indeed, possessing certain rights 
 which the master must respect; but he is at- 
 tached to the soil, with no liberty to come or 
 go, and burdened with heavy services. In 
 1789 we find the French Eevolution enacting a 
 new ideal of justice in the abolition of the old 
 restraints and privileges. We find the Eng- 
 
12 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 lisli economists of the first half of the nine- 
 teenth century preaching laissez faire as the 
 only rule of fairness and justice. Today we 
 know that to leave men to work out their 
 economic salvation unhampered by legal re- 
 strictions is simply to enact the dominance of 
 the strong and the subjection of the weak. In 
 a state of freedom the race is to the swift and 
 the battle to the strong : witness the acquisition 
 of the resources and opportunities of our coun- 
 try today by a few great interests. In the in- 
 active state the extremes of society grow 
 steadily apart, the fortune of the parent de- 
 termining the future of the child. The great 
 mass of those born down stay down or sink 
 lower. If there is to be genuine equal oppor- 
 tunity for all it must be secured through state 
 action limiting the strong, and protecting the 
 weak. Justice means, then, the curbing of cor- 
 porate power, the regulation of monopolies, the 
 prescription of the terms and conditions of em- 
 ployment. It means pure food laws, enforced. 
 It means schools, libraries, playgrounds, 
 nurseries, parks, lectures, and a wide variety 
 of social enterprises. It is significant that the 
 *^ Money Power" which followed Hamilton 
 against Jefferson, demanding a wide exercise 
 of governmental authority, have learned the 
 value to themselves of freedom from govern- 
 
THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE 13 
 
 mental control, and are advocating a strict con- 
 struction of the Constitution. It was the pro- 
 letariat who followed Mr. Roosevelt into a 
 **new nationalism,'^ and beyond. 
 
 The phases of justice are as varied as those 
 of human life. To generalize, justice is the 
 current ideal of social and economic fair play. 
 Popularly it is the *^ Square Deal.'' It does 
 not imply equality of possessions or of stand- 
 ing in the community. Equality in this sense 
 would be injustice, unless we are to deny re- 
 ward to virtue and talent. Neither is justice 
 sjTionymous with socialism, although many of 
 its manifestations are socialistic. It goes to 
 the point of an opportunity for all men to be, 
 and do, and get the best. That is all. 
 
 In conclusion, one further fact must be em- 
 phasized. Justice is impossible of achieve- 
 ment today except through the state. In some 
 way the social will must be forcibly exerted to 
 settle our vexing problems. Modern indus- 
 trial development has forever destroyed com- 
 petition as a method of controlling prices. 
 The consuming public is helpless in this re- 
 gard except as it is capable of definite political 
 action. Protection against infected milk, im- 
 pure water, embalmed beef, and sweatshop 
 clothing is far beyond the power of the in- 
 dividual. He lives in an ignorance, by no 
 
14 GOVERNMENT FOB THE PEOPLE 
 
 means blissful, of the origin of his dinner, his 
 coat, and his cigar. We could in a simpler 
 state of civilization raise our own food, make 
 our own candles, own our own horse, and de- 
 pend upon our own exertions for the abun- 
 dance and purity of the supply of everything 
 in common use. We have lost control over the 
 quality and price of almost every enjoyable 
 commodity and service. Our only help is in 
 the state, whose activity is ubiquitous and 
 whose arm is strong with the strength of the 
 millions. 
 
 The state has a wonderful new work to do, 
 far beyond us as individuals. Some fear its 
 increased social activity and presage the de- 
 preciation of individual development. It will 
 not check but foster individuality. Wider op- 
 portunities for self-development are inherent 
 in social fair-play. Right living conditions, 
 otherwise impossible, will make men stronger, 
 wiser, more aspiring than ever. If the com- 
 pletest self-realization be the goal of ethical 
 conduct, the way to that goal for the mass of 
 men is through justice. The enactment of jus- 
 tice, as the light of the dawning twentieth cen- 
 tury gives us to see it, is the duty of each of us 
 as fully responsible participants in the power 
 of the state. 
 
THE CITIZEN AND THE STATE 15 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Bryce, James, ''The Hindrances to Good Citizenship." 
 
 Cunningham, W., "Outlines of English Industrial 
 History," pp. 89-109. (A brief account of in- 
 dustrial conditions in the seventeenth and eighteenth 
 centuries.) 
 
 Dunning, W. A., ''Political Theories Ancient and 
 Mediaeval"; "Political Theories from Luther to 
 Montesquieu. ' ' 
 
 Fowler, William Warde, "The City State of the 
 Greeks and Romans." 
 
 Gaullier, Henry, "The Paternal State in France 
 and Germany." 
 
 GoDKiN, E. L., "The Duty of Educated Men in a De- 
 mocracy," in "Problems of Modern Democracy"; 
 also Forum, March, 1894. 
 
 Jenks, Edward, "The History of Politics." 
 
 Leroy-Beaulieu, p., ' ' The Modem State. ' ' 
 
 Pollock, Sir Frederick, "History of the Science of 
 Politics." 
 
 Roosevelt, Theodore, "A Charter of Democracy." 
 Outlook, February 24, 1912. (See also numerous 
 other articles in same magazine during 1912.) 
 
 Root, Elihu, "The Citizen's Part in Government." 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 THE WORKINGS OF EEPEESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY 
 
 Representative democracy is a recent innova- 
 tion, a scarcely tried experiment. The so- 
 called democracies of ancient times were 
 neither representative nor democratic; the 
 right to participate in the government was lim- 
 ited to much less than the whole adult male pop- 
 ulation, while the device of representation does 
 not appear to have occurred to the ancients. 
 Representative government grew up naturally, 
 out of the conditions of mediaeval Europe; but 
 not until well into the nineteenth century did 
 it take on a democratic form. In Great Brit- 
 ain, which possessed the oldest and most fa- 
 mous representative assembly, the suffrage was 
 not at all widely extended until 1867, and it was 
 not put upon a genuinely democratic footing 
 until 1885. France, save for brief periods, 
 never enjoyed a government based on the votes 
 of all the people until 1871. The constitution 
 of the North German Confederation first intro- 
 duced apparent universal suffrage into Ger- 
 many. In our own country, severe restrictions 
 
 16 
 
WOEKINGS OF DEMOCRACY 17 
 
 on the riglit to vote prevailed in most of our 
 States down to 1830, and it was not until about 
 1850 that universal white male suffrage came 
 to be the rule in the United States. The moun- 
 tain cantons of Switzerland are the only exist- 
 ing political organizations which have enjoyed 
 democratic institutions for any long period of 
 time ; and their type of democracy is direct, not 
 representative. 
 
 There is no exaggeration, then, in saying that 
 our popular representative government is prac- 
 tically an untried experiment. This is a fact, 
 however, which the American people are very 
 prone to neglect. That pseudo-patriotism 
 which finds its expression in the spread-eagle- 
 ism of the Fourth of July oration takes it for 
 granted that our form of government is per- 
 fect. As a matter of fact, our kind of govern- 
 ment has existed for too short a period to have 
 proved itself beyond question. Many men of 
 learning and wisdom have decried democracy, 
 and they have been able to support their argu- 
 ments with abundant references to our own 
 unfortunate political experience. We have had 
 too many Platts, Quays, Ruefs and Lorimers; 
 too many machines, gangs and bosses ; too much 
 waste and too much corruption in government 
 to be brash in our assertions of the great su- 
 periority of our institutions. If American de- 
 
18 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 mocracy is to stand, it must be by the applica- 
 tion of a constructive criticism whicli will lay 
 bare abuses that pervert its activity. This is 
 not at all inconsistent Avitli a firm belief in its 
 vitality and permanence. Indeed, it must be 
 said that at no other time or place in the history 
 of the world has there been so profound an oc- 
 casion for hope of the solution of the problems 
 of a government in the interest of all as in the 
 United States today. 
 
 It is remarkable how little we who are actu- 
 ally participating in the conduct of a democratic 
 government know of the workings of democ- 
 racy. Practically the only light that has been 
 thrown upon this subject has been by one of the 
 most severe critics of all popular government 
 — Sir Henry Sumner Maine. In his essay on 
 the *^ Nature of Democracy," he says: ** De- 
 mocracy is a form of government, and in all 
 governments acts of state are determined by 
 an exertion of will. But in what sense can a 
 multitude exercise volition? The student of 
 politics can put to himself no more pertinent 
 question than this. No doubt, the vulgar opin- 
 ion is that the multitude makes up its mind as 
 the individual makes up his mind; that the 
 Demos determines like the Monarch. A host 
 of popular phrases testify to this belief. ^The 
 will of the people,' ^public opinion,' ^the sov- 
 
WOKKINGS OF DEMOCRACY 19 
 
 ereign pleasure of tlie nation,' Wox populi, 
 vox Dei/ belong to this class, wliicli indeed 
 constitutes a great part of the common stock of 
 the platform and the press. But what do such 
 expressions mean? They must mean that a 
 great number of people, on a great number of 
 questions, can come to an identical conclusion 
 and found an identical determination upon it. 
 But this is manifestly only on the simplest ques- 
 tions. On the complex questions of politics, 
 which are calculated in themselves to task to 
 the utmost all the powers of the strongest 
 minds, but are in fact vaguely conceived, 
 vaguely stated, dealt with, for the most part, 
 in the most haphazard manner by the most ex- 
 perienced statesmen, the common determination 
 of the multitude is a chimerical assumption. 
 The truth is, that the modem enthusiasts for 
 democracy make one fundamental confusion. 
 They mix up the theory, that the Demos is 
 capable of volition, with the fact, that it is capa- 
 ble of adopting the opinion of one man or of a 
 limited number of men, and of founding direc- 
 tions to its instruments upon them. ' ' 
 
 The reader may test for himself the validity 
 of Maine's theory. Even small committees of 
 four or ^Ye people are utterly unable spon- 
 taneously to reach a conclusion. One man 
 makes a proposition, another criticises it, an- 
 
20 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 other suggests amendments or proposes an al- 
 ternative, and in the end the will of the commit- 
 tee has simply been adopted from the sugges- 
 tions of the individuals who make it up. Of 
 course, this process somewhat approximates the 
 mental deliberations of the individual, but when 
 we are dealing with large groups of men even 
 this approximation disappears. The larger the 
 group, the less opportunity there is for discus- 
 sion and amendment, and the more nearly the 
 group is reduced simply to adopting or reject- 
 ing the proposals put before it. This principle 
 we shall find of great value in estimating the 
 work of legislatures and the possible results of 
 the initiative and referendum. It is of vital 
 importance, also, in settling the place in our in- 
 stitutions to be occupied by political parties. 
 It is true that the pressure of like forces upon 
 men in similar environments frequently brings 
 it to pass that many persons spontaneously and 
 without any collusion come to possess similar 
 ideas. The great uprising of the German peo- 
 ple against Napoleon is a sufficient historical 
 example of this fact. It does not, however, de- 
 tract from the validity of the original principle 
 that a democracy is capable only of adopting 
 the opinions of individuals or limited bodies 
 of individuals. It simply means that the great 
 mass of the people receives suggestions in such 
 
WORKINGS OF DEMOCRACY 21 
 
 critical times from a relatively larger number 
 of sources. It means many leaders rather than 
 few. 
 
 In modern times there is no lack of agencies 
 for producing that limited volition of which the 
 Demos is capable. Many of the criticisms 
 which have been leveled at democracy have 
 been really due to the imperfections of what 
 Mr. Bryce calls the *^ organs of public opinion.'' 
 The daily newspapers, which are more numer- 
 ous and more efficient as distributors of news 
 in the United States than anywhere else in the 
 world, have, through very natural processes, 
 come to be dominated by what may be called 
 their business side. Not only do the owners 
 of the newspapers dictate the editorial policy of 
 their papers, a thing which is of course unavoid- 
 able and not at all improper in itself, but they 
 very frequently permit their large advertisers 
 to exercise, in particular instances, this power 
 for them. If the matter stopped with the ex- 
 pressions of the editorial page, which every one 
 knows to be of an ex "parte character, the evil 
 would not be great. There is, however, a rap- 
 idly increasing tendency to color the news; to 
 ignore or pervert news favorable to their op- 
 ponents, and to magnify that favorable to the 
 cause for which they stand. Newspapers all 
 over the country, of every shade of political be- 
 
22 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 lief, are guilty of this practice. Of course, 
 there are limits to which it can not go. There 
 is a point where the news instinct of the paper 
 triumphs over the political views or greed of 
 its proprietors. A paper cannot utterly cease 
 to be a ^^news" paper and continue in business. 
 Short of this limit, however, they have a con- 
 siderable latitude for massacring truth. An- 
 other point worthy of our consideration is, that 
 most of the great newspapers are owned by men 
 in close alliance with the great corporate inter- 
 ests of the country, and that, on the whole, they 
 present to the people a one-sided picture of po- 
 litical conditions. There is danger that the 
 newspapers will become the instrument of a sin- 
 gle class. 
 
 It is obvious that although the newspapers 
 are the most natural organs for the creation of 
 public opinion, they have lost a considerable 
 degree of influence which they once possessed. 
 Men and causes, unable to get a fair hearing 
 through the newspapers, have had to resort to 
 other means of reaching the people. This has 
 resulted in the recent revival of the platform as 
 a means of public discussion. There was a 
 time only a few years ago when it was very 
 common for dealers in trite phrases to remark 
 upon the decline of oratory in America. We 
 are now living in an age of oratory — not, per- 
 
WORKINGS OF DEMOCRACY 23 
 
 haps, of the old flamboyant variety, but even 
 more effective in influencing the judgment and 
 conduct of men. From the Socialist on his soap 
 box, or the militant suffragette on her corner 
 barrel, to the wonderfully effective campaigns 
 of such great national figures as Bryan, Roose- 
 velt and Johnson, there is more public speak- 
 ing today than ever in the history of our coun- 
 try. The history of Governor Johnson's cam- 
 paign in California in the Fall of 1910 is a case 
 in point. He started out in the late summer 
 of that year, without the aid of the newspapers, 
 with practically no organization behind him. 
 He traveled the State in his own automobile, 
 speaking everywhere — and the results of the 
 election proved conclusively that he had come 
 nearer to the people than his opponents who had 
 abundant newspaper support. 
 
 Another result of the failure of the newspa- 
 pers to open their news columns fairly to all 
 sides, has been the power and influence of the 
 great weekly and monthly periodicals. The il- 
 lusion which used to glorify for the average 
 American whatever he read in his daily paper 
 still clings in considerable degree to the maga- 
 zine ; and it is not over-praise to say that they 
 have been truer to their trust and have done 
 more to preserve the faith of the people than 
 have their daily rivals. Pamphlet literature, 
 
24 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 so effective a hundred years ago, has become 
 almost useless as a means of creating opinion. 
 Books are just coming into their own. It is 
 said that in England, — and it is certainly com- 
 ing more and more to be true in the United 
 States, — the most popular types of literature 
 are those which deal with social and political 
 questions in a serious way. It may be that the 
 tremendous problems whieh we now face are 
 reflected in the seriousness with which the peo- 
 ple are approaching them. The day of the 
 book, at once accurate and popular, is dawning. 
 The character of the public will thus created, 
 and, as we shall see, focused through the instru- 
 mentality of political parties, has seldom been 
 deliberately evil. With the exception of a few 
 repudiations of state and municipal indebted- 
 ness, a few scattering acts which may be inter- 
 preted as confiscatory, and an occasional ex- 
 pression of class or race bitterness and preju- 
 dice, there has been nothing to mar the honor 
 of our American democracy. Indeed, it is posi- 
 tively unthinkable that the great mass of the 
 people should deliberately and intentionally, do 
 wrong. In this respect the Demos is the su- 
 perior of the individuals who make it up, and 
 public opinion is more moral than private opin- 
 ion. It is useless to deny that democr;'- jias 
 done many wrong and harmful things, but they 
 
WOKKINGS OF DEMOCRACY 25 
 
 have been the product of mistake and not of 
 malevolence. Upon this proneness of democ- 
 racy to error, many writers and speakers of the 
 conservative type have was-ted a great deal of 
 eloquence. I think it can be safely admitted 
 by the firm believer in popular government that 
 the people, as a whole, are more liable to errors 
 of judgToent than a limited class of the well 
 born and well educated. The more inclusive 
 our ruling class, the less efficiently critical it 
 becomes. On the other hand, the narrower we 
 make our ruling class, the less honest it be- 
 comes. No oligarchy or aristocracy ever gov- 
 erned for a long period in the interest of all the 
 people. It is so fatally easy for those in power 
 to assume that their interests are the interests 
 of all; it is so difficult not to see things from 
 the point of view of one's own pocket or preju- 
 dice, that the limited ruling class is almost sure, 
 without any necessarily evil intent, to sub- 
 ordinate the welfare of the rest of society to its 
 own. This is the reason why the careless 
 phrase which we have heard so often repeated 
 — '^mob rule'' — ought to have no terrors for the 
 American citizen. The people are, in a cer- 
 tain aspect, a mob, capable of being vio- 
 lently misled and of making hideous mistakes ; 
 but ionhe long run, over any considerable period 
 of time, their judgment will point the way more 
 
26 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 surely to the common good than that of any 
 class among them. If we hold, as we must, that 
 government exists for the benefit of the gov- 
 erned, and that its end is to produce the maxi- 
 mum benefit for all, we can hardly deny the su- 
 periority of democracy to other forms of gov- 
 ernment. There is no escape from democracy 
 and its evils, except into dangers much more 
 terrifying. 
 
 Now, the Demos in the United States has 
 ruled, not deliberately badly, but, in many in- 
 stances, with bad results. Serious charges are 
 brought against it. The causes of its wrong 
 doing may be reduced to two: 
 
 (1) Indifference, a state of mind largely due 
 to that lack of a sense of responsibility to which 
 we have referred in the last chapter. There is 
 no cure for this indifference except an appeal 
 to the moral consciousness of the individual 
 citizen. Such appeals are frequently voiced to- 
 day, and they are having their effect. People 
 are becoming less careless ; more and more in- 
 tensely interested in the vital problems of gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 (2) The failure of our governmental ma- 
 chinery to establish the responsibility of its 
 several agents. In other words, our system of 
 government is such an intricate thing that the 
 popular mind cannot follow its processes and ^ 
 
WORKINGS OF DEMOCRACY 27 
 
 blame and praise where they belong. These 
 defects we shall examine carefully in the suc- 
 ceeding chapters. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Cleveland, F. A., ''Organized Democracy." 
 
 Eliot, C W., ''American Contributions to Civiliza- 
 tion," pp. 39-67. 
 
 Fisher, H. A. L., "The Republican Tradition in 
 Europe." 
 
 GiDDiNGS, F. H., "Democracy and Empire," pp. 29- 
 65. 
 
 Hadley, a. T., "The Education of the American 
 Citizen." 
 
 Lecky, W. E. H., "Democracy and Liberty." 
 
 Lowell, A. Lawrence, "The Government of Eng- 
 land," vol. 2, pp. 505-514. 
 
 Lowell, A. L., "Public Opinion and Popular Gov- 
 ernment." 
 
 IVIaine, Sir Henry Sumner, "Popular Government." 
 
 Parsons, Frank, "Legal Doctrine and Social Prog- 
 
 ress. ' ' 
 
 Seeley, J. R., "Introduction to Political Science." 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 THE PLACE OF POLITICAL PARTIES 
 
 Many very intelligent persons profess to see in 
 political partisanship a fruitful cause of the 
 failures of representative government. ^^Parti- 
 sanship" is for them the direct antithesis of 
 * ' Patriotism, ' ' and they have ready to hand all 
 too numerous instances in which so-called rep- 
 resentatives of the people have employed their 
 power to the aggrandizement of their party 
 rather than for the service of the state. They 
 can draw an indictment against party govern- 
 ment on so many counts as almost to convict it 
 without trial. On the other hand we find many 
 persons who affirm the necessity of parties and 
 who, while minimizing the evils of partisanship, 
 are loud in their assertions of the service which 
 a party renders in the process of government. 
 Every new voter is faced by the problem of 
 party allegiance. So is every old voter who 
 thinks. It is, therefore, extremely pertinent to 
 inquire into the relation which the citizen should 
 sustain toward parties. 
 Until the beginning of the nineteenth century 
 
 28 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PAETIES 29 
 
 parties were generally regarded with abhor- 
 rence by patriotic men. Washington in his 
 *^ Farewell Address," warned his countrymen 
 in the most solemn manner against the baneful 
 effects of the spirit of party. ^ ' This spirit, un- 
 fortunately, is inseparable from our nature, 
 having its roots in the strongest passions of the 
 human mind. It exists under different shapes 
 in all governments, more or less stifled, con- 
 trolled, or repressed; but in those of the pop- 
 ular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and 
 is truly their worst enemy. The alternate dom- 
 ination of one faction over another, sharpened 
 by the spirit of revenge natural to party dis- 
 sension^, which in different ages and countries 
 has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is 
 itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at 
 length to more frightful and permanent despot- 
 ism. The disorders and miseries which result 
 gradually incline the minds of men to seek se- 
 curity and repose in the absolute power of an 
 individual ; and sooner or later the chief of some 
 prevailing faction — more able or more fortunate 
 than his cotnpetitors — turns this despotism to 
 the purpose of his own elevation, on the ruins 
 of public liberty.'^ Bolingbroke, in his ^^ Pa- 
 triot King,'' described the ideal monarch who 
 should break down party domination and com- 
 mand for the state the services of all its best 
 
30 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 men. It was on the theory of this book that 
 poor George the Third tried to conduct the af- 
 fairs of his kingdom. Even so great a states- 
 man as Chatham held that this country ought 
 not to be governed by any party or faction, and 
 that if it were so governed the Constitution 
 must necessarily expire. Burke was the only 
 great writer of the age to defend parties. His 
 definition of a party deserves attention and we 
 may well adopt it as expressive of what a party 
 ought to be. A party, he said, *4s a body of 
 men united for promoting by their joint en- 
 deavors the national interest upon some partic- 
 ular principle on which they are all agreed. ' ' 
 
 The fact is that there was much more in the 
 previous history of parties to justify the opin- 
 ion of Washington and Chatham than that of 
 Burke. He was, at least in this instance, a po- 
 litical prophet. It may not be certain that 
 there have always been parties, but it is highly 
 probable that they have existed from the time 
 when man first began to have community life. 
 The most primitive band of savages naturally 
 falls into parties as it debates the fate of cap- 
 tives and the disposition of the spoils of war. 
 From that time on wherever there has been 
 difference of opinion on a public matter there 
 has been a division into parties. Until quite 
 recently, however, such bodies of men as Burke 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PAKTIES 31 
 
 describes had no means at once peaceful and 
 honest by whicli they could bring the particular 
 principle on which they were all agreed into 
 effect. The Yorkists and Lancastrians of the 
 War of the Roses were simply rival parties con- 
 tending for the control of the state in the only 
 way open to them under the circumstances of 
 the time. Cromwell was a partisan leader who 
 brought his party to victory by his skill on the 
 battle field. Even where, as in the Greek and 
 Eoman Eepublics, the forms of democracy were 
 more or less observed, the idea of a distinct 
 change of rulers and policies without banish- 
 ments, confiscations and executions was almost 
 unknown. The Italian City States of the Mid- 
 dle Ages and, to a certain extent, the South 
 American Eepublics of today fall into the same 
 class. In all of them the electorate was very 
 narrow or, if broad, very ignorant. If narrow, 
 as in the Greek Eepublics and the Italian cities, 
 there was always the populace to which the de- 
 feated candidate might appeal to correct by 
 force the decision of the ballot. If broad and 
 ignorant, and the real ruling class differed 
 among themselves, the contests of the rival fac- 
 tions were conducted by buying votes or enlist- 
 ing men to fight. 
 
 It is only since the first quarter of the nine- 
 teenth century that the extension of the suf- 
 
32 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 frage and the improved intelligence of the peo- 
 ple have combined to secure in the English- 
 speaking countries and, to a less extent in the 
 other civilized quarters of the world, the possi- 
 bility of an orderly change in leaders, policies 
 and even forms of government. Such striking 
 changes as have been introduced in many of 
 our State constitutions by the adoption of the 
 initiative, referendum and recall; and such al- 
 teration in the power of an historic branch of 
 the government as has been made in England 
 through the abolition of the veto power of the 
 House of Lords, are now made with no greater 
 disturbance than the discharge of unlimited elo- 
 quence. Rivers of blood would have flowed at 
 the mere suggestion of such fundamental alter- 
 ations in the form of any government two 
 hundred years ago. The case against parties 
 was very much stronger Avhen Washington 
 wrote his ^ ' Farewell Address ' ' than it is today. 
 Parties which formerly might resort to any 
 means and go to any lengths in the prosecution 
 of a triumph are now, comparatively speaking, 
 political in their methods. They may still be 
 utilized by powers that prey, and their action 
 is frequently perverted by lesser forms of cor- 
 ruption, but they are no longer necessarily bad. 
 They are simply like men or eggs, good or bad 
 as circumstances determine. 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PAKTIES 33 
 
 There can be no doubt that such a morally in- 
 different institution must make good its right to 
 existence on some ground of necessity. Here 
 parties have all the best of it. Not only are 
 they necessary in the sense that the natural 
 traits of human nature make them inevitable, 
 but in the sense that democratic government is 
 impossible without them. As early as Wash- 
 ington's time they had become essential to the 
 conduct of government. Eoyal prerogative had 
 ceased to be the source of authority, and power 
 had been transferred, not, it is true, to the peo- 
 ple, but at least to large bodies of men. A 
 few individuals may get together and, without 
 any artificial organization whatever, arrive at 
 an agreement on a given question. Such ability 
 may even extend to as many persons as make up 
 the population of a small village. Beyond 
 this point a body of people cannot render an 
 orderly decision upon questions of men or meas- 
 ures without the help of parties. We have 
 already noted Sir Henry Sumner Maine's an- 
 swer to his own pertinent question: *^In what 
 sense can a multitude exercise volition!'' As 
 a matter of fact it is through the agency of 
 parties that the Demos makes up its mind in all 
 large states. Elihu Eoot in a lecture on the 
 *^ Function of Political Parties" makes use of 
 the best possible illustration of the confusion 
 
34 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 which would exist without parties. ''If you 
 can imagine all the sixteen hundred thousand 
 voters of the State of New York, for example, 
 going to the polls on an election day with no 
 previous concert of action, but each determined 
 to vote for the best man — that is, each de- 
 termined to vote for the man who of all his ac- 
 quaintance seems to him the best to fill the posi- 
 tion, or for the man whose opinion most closely 
 agrees with his upon some subject which hap- 
 pens to be uppermost in his mind — what would 
 be the result ! What thousands of names would 
 be found upon the ballots when they came to 
 be counted! If a majority of votes were re- 
 quired to elect, of course there would never be 
 an election. If only a plurality of votes were 
 necessary to elect, the largest number of votes 
 cast for any one man would inevitably be a very 
 small proportion of the total of votes cast. It 
 is highly probable that the great majority of the 
 voters would have preferred that the man with 
 the plurality should not be elected, and would 
 have been quite ready to agree on some one else 
 whom they all preferred to him and considered 
 but little less desirable than the various persons 
 for whom they had cast their scattering ballots. 
 The men elected in such a way would have no 
 guide as to the principles, or policies, or rules 
 of conduct which the majority of the voters 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PARTIES 35 
 
 wished them to follow in the offices to which 
 they were elected. 
 
 ^^Such a method of conducting popular gov- 
 ernment, however, is not merely futile, it is 
 impossible ; for human nature is such that long 
 before such an election could be reached some 
 men who wished for the offices would have taken 
 steps to secure in advance the support of vot- 
 ers; some men who had business or property 
 interests which they desired to have protected 
 or promoted through the operations of govern- 
 ment would have taken steps to secure support 
 for candidates in their interest; and some men 
 who were anxious to advance principles or pol- 
 icies that they considered to be for the good of 
 the commonwealth would have taken steps to 
 secure support for candidates representing 
 those principles and policies. All of these 
 would have got their friends and supporters to 
 help them, and in each group a temporary or- 
 ganization would have grown up for effective 
 work in securing support. Under these circum- 
 stances, when the votes came to be cast, the 
 candidates of some of these extempore organi- 
 zations would inevitably have a plurality of 
 votes, and the great mass of voters who did not 
 follow any organized leadership would find that 
 their ballots were practically thrown away by 
 reason of being scattered about among the great 
 
36 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 number of candidates instead of being concen- 
 trated so as to be effective.'' 
 
 Here we liave admirably set forth the reasons 
 for the existence and the justification for the 
 activities of parties. We must, however, go 
 further. Not only is it necessary that there 
 be parties but there must normally be no more 
 than two main or principal parties. If we sup- 
 pose the process of party formation suggested 
 by Mr. Root to go on, at each succeeding elec- 
 tion there will be fewer and fewer groups. The 
 same reasoning which prompts individuals to 
 form groups instead of scattering their vote 
 resultlessly apphes to induce groux>s to unite 
 into ever larger units. The limit is reached 
 when the whole voting population is divided 
 into two great divisions, the individual com- 
 prising the divisions ready to sacrifice the many 
 little things about which they differ for the 
 sake of more surely obtaining the few things 
 which they hold to be of most importance. The 
 motive may be offix^e, business interest, or prin- 
 ciple. It may be worthy or unworthy. The 
 essential fact, however, is that there is an in- 
 evitable tendency for men, at any rate men of 
 the Anglo-Saxon race, to cohere in huge po- 
 litical organizations which engage in a gigantic 
 struggle for the control of the government. 
 Indeed no one can truly understand our two- 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PARTIES 37 
 
 party system without taking into account the 
 Anglo-Saxon's love of games and his willing- 
 ness to sacrifice many things to a good soul-sat- 
 isfying contest. It is true that there are per- 
 manently some groups of individuals too much 
 devoted to their peculiar doctrines to give al- 
 legiance to one or the other of the two great 
 parties. It is also true that there have been 
 at various times in the history of the United 
 States and England third parties of great size 
 and temporary political importance. They 
 were born at times when public opinion was 
 undergoing one of its periodical readjustments, 
 but the number of parties was promptly re- 
 duced to two either by the disappearance of one 
 of the old parties or by the absorption of the 
 new. The merit of the two-party system lies 
 in the fact that there is by its means the near- 
 est possible approach to a determination of 
 what the majority of the people want. It would 
 be idle to contend that the system always works 
 with the accuracy of a law of nature, but over 
 long periods of time and within measurable 
 limits it does w^ork out results more satisfactory 
 than any other yet devised. Out of the strug- 
 gles of the great parties come compromises and, 
 out of the compromises, victory for one side 
 or the other. Public opinion has through the 
 triumph of one or the other of them an authen- 
 
38 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 tic expression, and by them the majority really 
 rules. 
 
 It is true that in the countries of continental 
 Europe parties are not two, but many. They 
 have not passed the group stage of party devel- 
 opment. There are a variety of assignable rea- 
 sons for this difference from Anglo-Saxon prac- 
 tice. It is said that the European holds opin- 
 ions of a deeply theoretical tinge and that he is 
 much slower to abandon them for the practical 
 advantage of winning an election than is the 
 Anglo-Saxon. This may be because he holds 
 his opinions more sincerely. It may rise from 
 his lack of political experience of the necessity 
 of compromise. It may be because he is less 
 of a natural sportsman than the Englishman. 
 There are, besides, in each of these countries 
 reasons peculiar to each which have tended to 
 keep political groups apart. In Italy there is 
 the strength of local and personal ties. In 
 France the presence of a Royalist group to the 
 right and a Socialist group to the left of the 
 genuine Republicans has tended to prevent the 
 creation of well-defined party divisions among 
 the great mass of the people. In Germany the 
 inferior position of the Reichstag and the policy 
 of the Imperial Government in making from 
 time to time differing combinations of groups 
 as the source of its majority, has had distinct 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PARTIES 39 
 
 effect in deterring the formation of great 
 parties. It is worth considering that all of 
 these countries have had much briefer experi- 
 ence with representative institutions than our 
 own race. Ever since the days of Edward I a 
 considerable proportion of the English people 
 have had the privilege of selecting members 
 of Parliament, and from these centuries of ex- 
 perience has been evolved the two-party sys- 
 tem. 
 
 Having thus analyzed the nature of parties 
 and their place in democratic government we 
 may now properly turn to the ethical relation 
 of citizen and party. If, as we have seen, par- 
 ties are not intrinsically evil, are inevitable in 
 human nature, and necessary for the conduct 
 of democratic government, nothing can be 
 clearer than the duty of the citizen to be an 
 active partisan. It boots him nothing to urge 
 that the actual existing parties are corrupt and 
 full of evil works. They are so only because 
 of the failure of himself and others of his kind 
 to participate in their activities. If the citizens 
 who actually take an interest in the affairs of 
 any party are honest and intelligent, as are the 
 majority of our citizens, that party will be as 
 they are. If the party councils are left to the 
 direction of the ill-disposed minority the party 
 will partake of their ill disposition. Here we 
 
40 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 have an essential instrument of government 
 which may be turned to the good or evil of the 
 country as good or evil men control it. Under 
 such circumstances to avoid party service is 
 treason. 
 
 Each voter should join a party according to 
 his or her individual conviction. Preferably 
 the choice should be of a great national party 
 of which there are normally but two, although, 
 sometimes, in periods of party readjustment, 
 more. Of course if one's deliberate convic- 
 tions lead into one of the smaller parties which, 
 as has been explained, exist for the expression 
 of particularist opinion, it cannot be denied that 
 there is in such matters no higher guide than a 
 deliberate conviction. It should be remem- 
 bered, however, that in taking up such an al- 
 legiance one shuts himself off from participa- 
 tion in the great national movements for achiev- 
 able results, and by so doing condemns himself 
 to a life of unavailing protest. Once in a party 
 one should take an active part in its work. 
 There is little room in these days for the kid- 
 glove indifferentism which some persons of so- 
 called culture affect toward things political. 
 There is no place at all for a man or woman 
 who reclining at ease captiously criticises the 
 conduct of those who toil in the heat of the day. 
 The selfishness which prompts an active poli- 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PARTIES 41 
 
 tician to corruption is no worse than the selfish- 
 ness which keeps otherwise incorruptible men 
 out of active politics. This does not mean that 
 every citizen has got to be a member of party 
 committees and spend all his time at party 
 ^^Headquarters." It simply means taking an 
 interest in party proceedings and being ready 
 to participate intelligently in all the selective 
 functions to which party members are called. 
 There should be also a reasonable willingness to 
 accept more onerous duties if the public good 
 demands it. 
 
 To the party of his choice the citizen should 
 remain true even when its conduct is no longer 
 wholly pleasing to him. His selection should 
 have been made, not on the ground that some 
 particular candidates at the moment of his ad- 
 mission to the suffrage excited his admiration, 
 or because the party was his father's or his 
 friend's, but because the declared principles and 
 general attitude of the party represented, as 
 near as may be in such matters, his political 
 ideals. So long as this general attitude is pre- 
 served his allegiance should remain unbroken 
 even though in some particulars the policy of 
 the party diverges from his standard. 
 
 He should leave his party at the moment when 
 its general attitude and his cease to coincide. 
 In other words, when he differs with the con- 
 
42 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 trolling element of Ms party on essential mat- 
 ters, it is liis duty to seek elsewhere that repre- 
 sentation of his principles which he can no 
 longer find in the ohject of his former faith. 
 This obligation is the most emphatic of impera- 
 tives. Onr worst political evils in the United 
 States and England have arisen from that mis- 
 taken party loyalty that induces men to support 
 an organization which no longer serves the pur- 
 pose of its inception. All parties are bom of 
 great principles. Men rush into them with the 
 fresh enthusiasm of the cause for which the 
 party stands. They win success; place and 
 power come to the leaders; the principles of the 
 party are achieved or relegated to oblivion by 
 the social and economic changes which modern 
 times drag after one another with such precip- 
 itancy. Does the party then disband and merge 
 itself into new organizations based on new is- 
 sues? Never. It sometimes enters into a wild 
 and futile competition with its rival for the 
 right side of new issues as they arise, with the 
 result that it is frequently found standing for 
 things which, in spite of its manifestoes, it is 
 afraid to undertake. 
 
 Parties persist long after the original reason 
 for their existence has become ancient history 
 largely for the personal benefit of those ac- 
 tively connected with their organizations, — 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PARTIES 43 
 
 in other words, for the possession of office and 
 what goes with it. This is made possible by the 
 unthinking loyalty of the rank and file who have 
 acquired in the days of real struggle a degree 
 of esprit de corps which makes them ready to 
 fight on in their old battalions. They love their 
 party second only to their country, and some- 
 times with confusion as to the proper order of 
 their affection. It is only natural that old vet- 
 erans who have served the party in its days of 
 adversity and of triumph should come to regard 
 it as an end and not a means. Counting in 
 part on this blind devotion and relying for the 
 rest upon the use of patronage, the favor of 
 corporations, and the expenditure of money, the 
 partisans for profit keep the old machine in 
 operation. So powerful is its momentum that 
 it may go on victoriously for years after it has 
 ceased to stand for any recognizable principle 
 upon which its supporters are agreed. It is 
 this effort to secure the effect — no longer se- 
 curable by agreement as to principles — by ap- 
 peals to the selfish instincts of individuals, 
 which has corrupted our politics. If it were 
 not for the fetish-like power of the party name ; 
 if men left parties, as they enter them, from 
 conviction, there would be no party which the 
 politicians could deliver to the corporations, 
 nor would there be great opportunity for them 
 
44 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 to practice successfully the smaller arts of cor- 
 ruption. 
 
 We find in the present party situation in the 
 United States abundant illustration of what has 
 just been said. The Republican and Demo- 
 cratic parties have long since ceased to stand 
 for any principle on which their membership 
 is agreed. Take the historic question of the 
 tariff. A Democrat from the iron region of 
 Alabama is closer to the Republican from Penn- 
 sylvania on this question than he is to his Dem- 
 ocratic comrade from Texas. The two repre- 
 sentatives of the iron industry will vote together 
 on any schedule of the tariff that affects their 
 section, no matter what the tariff principles of 
 their party platform may be. The issues which 
 once divided these parties have become blurred, 
 and their effort to conciliate all sections of their 
 following has made it almost impossible for 
 them to take definite attitudes on the questions 
 of the deepest current interest. At the same 
 time they have gradually become permeated 
 with corruption. They exist to serve the selfish 
 desires of a few, and the creaking of their ma- 
 chinery is silenced with the oil of patronage. 
 They both have had glorious histories. We 
 cannot escape a genuine thrill when the *^ prac- 
 ticed hustings liars ^' point with pride to the 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PARTIES 45 
 
 splendid achievements which adorn their pasts. 
 The memory of great men still lingers redo- 
 lently about them. It is unfortunately true, 
 however, that whatever of glory and almost all 
 of interest which attaches to them is historical. 
 They are meaningless, except as examples of 
 the compelling power of organization, because 
 they no longer correspond to the real division 
 of opinion in American life. This division is 
 a threefold one. In the first place there are 
 those who, because they profit by it, or because 
 they are pessimistic of the possibility of im- 
 provement, or because they are simply inert, 
 are desirous of permitting at least the present 
 status to persist. In the next place there are 
 those who, recognizing the existence of certain 
 economic and social injustices, are ready to ap- 
 ply to them practical and concrete remedies 
 while preserving the essential features of our 
 present order. In the third place there are 
 those who, because of the existence of social 
 and economic injustices which they believe to 
 be inherent in the present industrial system of 
 the world, would overturn that system in its 
 entirety. We may call these three groups of 
 opinion Conservative, Progressive and Social- 
 ist. Our adherence to one or the other of them 
 is inevitable. Honest people may belong to any 
 
46 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 one of them, and it is certain that dishonest 
 persons are connected with every one of them. 
 One may be a Conservative with the idea of 
 protecting his bank account, a Progressive for 
 reasons of popularity, or a Socialist because he 
 wants a chance at some one else's property 
 when the crash comes. Most persons subscribe 
 to one or the other from motives of real con- 
 viction. The overwhelming majority of our 
 people are Conservatives or Progressives, both 
 the Republican and Democratic parties being 
 resolved into these two elements. The Social- 
 ist cannot for a long time to come, if ever, be 
 a great party. No sooner do any of its aims 
 become practicable than they become the com- 
 mon property of every party. Strangely 
 enough, the success of Socialist measures only 
 retards the growth of the Socialist party. 
 
 It may be a very long time before the actual 
 alignment of parties will be made to correspond 
 with the real differences of opinion. But it can 
 only be by such a change of a half century old 
 habit that they can be made to perform their im- 
 portant function of giving authentic expression 
 to the will of the majority. There will be two 
 great parties under names which the future will 
 determine. To one of these great parties it is 
 the duty of each voter to ally himself, to the end 
 
PLACE OF POLITICAL PARTIES 47 
 
 that parties may well perforin their function of 
 determining the will of the people. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Beard, C. A., ''American Government and Politics," 
 ch. VL; ''Readings," ch. VI. 
 
 Bryce, James, "American Commonwealth," vol. 2, 
 chs. LIII-LVI, and LXXVI-LXXXVII. (Fasci- 
 nating study of operation of public opinion.) 
 
 Bryce, James, "Hindrances to Good Citizenship," pp. 
 75-104. 
 
 Ford, Henry Jones, "Rise and Growth of American 
 Politics." 
 
 GiDDiNGS, F. H., "Democracy and Empire," pp. 179- 
 196, 251-255. 
 
 Hughes, C. E., "Conditions of Progress in Demo- 
 cratic Government," pp. 59-123. 
 
 Jones, C. L., "Readings on Parties and Elections." 
 
 Macy, J., "Political Parties in the United States"; 
 "Party Organization and Machinery." 
 
 Maine, Sir Henry Sumner, "The Nature of Democ- 
 racy" in "Popular Government." 
 
 Morley, John, "Life of Walpole"; "Life of Glad- 
 stone. ' ' 
 
 Ostrogorski, M., "Democracy and the Organization 
 of Political Parties." 
 
 Ostrogorski, M., "Democracy and the Party Sys- 
 tem." 
 
 Ray, p. 0., "An Introduction to Political Parties and 
 Practical Politics," pp. 3-11. 
 
48 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 Root, Elihu, "The Citizen's Part in Government," 
 
 pp. 32-93. 
 Smith, J. A., "The Spirit of American Government." 
 Washington, George, "Farewell Address." 
 Wilson, Woodrow, "Constitutional Government in 
 
 the United States." 
 WooDBURN, J. A., "Political Parties and Party Prob- 
 lems in the United States." 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 NOMINATIONS TO OPFICE 
 
 Intimately connected with the problem of 
 party loyalty are the questions which arise out 
 of the necessity of arriving at a preliminary 
 understanding or agreement as to the candi- 
 dates of the party. Our English ancestors 
 found it unnecessary to have any machinery for 
 this purpose. Down to the Eeform Bill of 1832, 
 suffrage was limited; the districts were small; 
 in many, the seat in Parliament was in the ab- 
 solute gift of some local magnate; and even 
 where this was not the case the leading families 
 were so easily dominant that their nominee, 
 determined informally, was accepted by the 
 rank and file as the party candidate. There is 
 still in England no formal method of nomina- 
 tion. Any man can become a candidate for 
 Parliament upon obtaining the signatures of a 
 nominator and seconder and eight other per- 
 sons. Party candidates in various districts are 
 put forward by the local party committees, 
 which are purely voluntary bodies, upon the 
 suggestion of the *^ Central Office'' of the party 
 
 49 
 
50 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 in London. It was natural that in Colonial 
 America the English custom should prevail, and 
 candidates, who were generally men of wealth 
 and family, simply offered themselves to the 
 electorate without any preliminary party ac- 
 tion of a formal kind. The one great exception 
 to this was the ^^ Boston Caucus,'' a group of 
 leading men of the patriot side who met to- 
 gether and agreed to support particular candi- 
 dates. It is almost needless to say that these 
 candidates were almost always successful. 
 
 Immediately after the Revolution, there be- 
 gan a process of change in the matter of nom- 
 inations for office. This was due in part to the 
 rapid increase in population, accompanied by 
 a rapid extension of the suffrage, which so 
 greatly enlarged the districts in which candi- 
 dates were chosen that some sort of pre-ar- 
 rangement became necessary to party success. 
 Even more important was the authoritative se- 
 lection in advance of candidates for the increas- 
 ing number of offices filled by the vote of the 
 State at large. As early as 1790 the members 
 of the legislature of one of the parties in the 
 State of Rhode Island met together in caucus 
 for the purpose of nominating candidates for 
 state offices. After 1791 this method of nom- 
 ination became general throughout the United 
 States. It was a very natural expedient. 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 51 
 
 These legislators were already assembled — and 
 in those times of slow and expensive travel the 
 assembling of a body of representatives was 
 no easy matter — and they might very well be 
 taken to represent the feeling of the districts 
 from which they came. The dilBficulty was that 
 in such a caucus those districts which happened 
 to have elected a member of the opposite po- 
 litical party to the legislature were unrepre- 
 sented. This led to the system known as the 
 *^ Mixed Caucus,'' in which the districts other- 
 wise unrepresented were represented by dele- 
 gates especially elected for this purpose. 
 
 In the meanwhile there had grown up a still 
 more serious problem; namely, that of nom- 
 inating candidates for President of the United 
 States for whom the party electors in the sev- 
 eral States could be expected to vote. In the 
 first two elections there was, of course, practi- 
 cally speaking, no contest. In 1800 Adams and 
 Jefferson were nominated by secret caucuses of 
 the Federalist and Republican members of Con- 
 gress. In 1804 the Eepublicans nominated Jef- 
 ferson by an ^^open" caucus, or one of which no 
 secret was made. Henceforward until 1824 
 there was but one caucus every four years, there 
 being but one party. Thus the caucus seemed, 
 at least, to have the power of absolutely de- 
 termining who should be President, the candi- 
 
52 GOVEENMENT FOE THE PEOPLE 
 
 date agreed upoii by it receiving, as a matter of 
 course, the votes of the only party. Naturally 
 enough, this state of affairs produced dissatis- 
 faction. Men began to say that Congress was 
 usurping a power which had not been granted to 
 it by the Constitution. They dubbed the insti- 
 tution ^^King Caucus, '^ and the issue of its de- 
 thronement became one of the principal ele- 
 ments in national politics. The strongest op- 
 position to the caucus came from the newer 
 Western States where the s-pirit of democracy 
 was very keen. This spirit found a leader in 
 Andrew Jackson, and he became, in 1824, a 
 candidate for the Presidency in opposition to 
 the caucus candidate. By this time so general 
 had become hostility to the caucus that only 
 66 out of 216 members of Congress had at- 
 tended the caucus whic'h had nominated "Wil- 
 liam H. Crawford for the Presidency. In the 
 campaign that followed, Jackson received a 
 plurality of the popular vote, while Crawford 
 ran a poor third. Congress elected Adams to 
 the Presidency, but the caucus was dead, and 
 no attempt has since been made to revive it. 
 Its downfall insured the breaking up of the leg- 
 islative caucus system in the several States. 
 
 The abandonment of the caucus did not, how- 
 ever, do away with the necessity of preliminary 
 agreement as to candidates if the party was to 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 53 
 
 be successful. A new method of selecting can- 
 didates liad to be developed, and this method 
 was the *^ delegate convention,'' consisting en- 
 tirely of delegates elected for the sole purpose 
 of making the necessary nominations. The 
 first of these delegate conventions occurred in 
 Pennsylvania in 1817, and became the fixed cus- 
 tom for both parties in that State in 1823. Dur- 
 ing the next ten years it came into universal 
 use as a method of nominating state officers. 
 At the same time, the nomination of candidates 
 for the Presidency came to be taken up by simi- 
 lar conventions. In 1831, the Anti-Masonic 
 party, a purely ephemeral organization, held the 
 first national delegate convention for the pur- 
 pose of nominating a candidate for President. 
 In December of the same year the Anti-Jackson 
 forces met and nominated Clay; while in May, 
 1832, a Jackson convention met for the purpose 
 of endorsing Van Buren as a candidate for 
 Vice-President. Van Buren was nominated for 
 the Presidency in 1835 by a Democratic conven- 
 tion, while the opposing forces that year held 
 no convention. In 1840, however, both Demo- 
 crats and Whigs employed the convention sys- 
 tem of nomination, and every political party 
 has done so previous to each election since that 
 time. 
 
 The system of party organization which has 
 
54 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 been brought into existence by these changes, 
 and which maintained itself practically un- 
 broken throughout the remainder of the nine- 
 teenth century, was, in theory, at least, popular 
 and representative. Nothing could be in ap- 
 pearance more democratic. There existed a 
 regular hierarchy of conventions built one upon 
 the other, beginning with the town, village, or 
 ward caucus in which all voters of the party 
 were supposed to participate directly, and ex- 
 tending up through district, city, county, con- 
 gressional, state and national conventions. 
 This scheme of party control was adopted at 
 the instance of the reformers of 1830 in place 
 of what they called the corrupt and aristocratic 
 system which had preceded it. 
 
 There is no question but that the convention 
 was a great improvement upon legislative and 
 congressional caucuses. The new system was, 
 however, open to many abuses, which, through- 
 out the next two-thirds of a century, developed 
 alarmingly. In the first place, the town, vil- 
 lage and ward primaries or caucuses, on which 
 the whole superstructure was reared, were not 
 fairly conducted. There was no legal regula- 
 tion of them. The right to membership and 
 participation in them was a matter not deter- 
 mined by law but subject to the will or caprice 
 of the presiding officer, or, at best, of the other 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 55 
 
 persons present. There were no penalties pro- 
 vided for bribery, intimidation, nor for frauds 
 in counting the votes. There was no provision 
 for adequate notice being given of the intention 
 to hold such a caucus, and **snap" caucuses 
 were a common device of the wily politicians. 
 They were attended by the roughest elements, 
 and were frequently the scenes of disgraceful 
 disorder. Peaceable citizens tended to shun 
 them, and their control came quite rapidly into 
 the hands of a new class which the politics of 
 the Jacks onian era introduced into American 
 society — the professional politician and office 
 holder. Jackson did not invent the so-called 
 spoils system, by which offices were used as a 
 reward for political services, but he applied it 
 with a vigor and completeness which had never 
 been witnessed in American history before. 
 Since his time there has always been a class of 
 men making, or hoping to make, their bread and 
 butter by politics and, in consequence, instant 
 in every partisan service. Professor Goodnow, 
 in his *^ Politics and Administration,'^ shows 
 how the establishment of this spoils system was 
 a necessary evil in that it served the otherwise 
 unaccomplishable purpose of so solidifying the 
 parties as to make it possible for our check and 
 balance system of government to work without 
 constant friction. Control of all the branches 
 
56 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 of government at once by the same party is, 
 according to this theory, the only way in which 
 our institutions can be made effectively op- 
 erative. Whether the service rendered in this 
 regard by the spoils system was as valuable as 
 has been claimed, it is certainly true that the 
 spoilsmen obtained a firm grip upon the politi- 
 cal organizations through their control of the 
 local primaries which in turn determined the 
 complexion of the whole series of conventions. 
 We shall see in a subsequent chapter some of 
 the part that has been played by the saloon 
 keeper and others of his ilk in the perfection of 
 this political machine. It is enough for our 
 present purpose to know that the party pri- 
 maries being misrepresentative of the party 
 membership, the delegate conventions above 
 them were irresponsible and corrupt. Thus, a 
 system which owed its inception to the spirit 
 of democracy came to be in its working some- 
 thing very other than democratic. 
 
 The first attempt to regulate primaries was 
 made by the State of California in March, 1866. 
 This law was an optional one, which might or 
 might not be adopted by the various political 
 parties. If adopted, it provided for due notice 
 of the call, for a preliminary statement of the 
 qualifications of the members who were to par- 
 ticipate in the primary, for a supervisor of the 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 57 
 
 balloting who was to be sworn to perform his 
 duties properly, and for penalties for any 
 breach of the law. New York, in the same year, 
 established a penalty for bribery, intimidation, 
 etc., at a primary. In 1874 California put 
 about primary elections practically the same 
 safeguards as those which its laws had previ- 
 ously thrown around regular elections, and by 
 1890 half of the States had adopted some kind 
 of primary regulation. With the adoption of 
 the Australian ballot which began with the 
 State of Massachusetts in 1888, and was rapidly 
 followed by other States, there arose, of course, 
 an absolute necessity of regulating by law the 
 system of nominations. The new ballot laws 
 recognized the existence of parties, and pro- 
 vided for printing on the ballot the party desig- 
 nation of the various candidates. There had 
 to be, of course, some way in which an authori- 
 tative determination could be made of the can- 
 didate entitled to use the party name. The re- 
 sult was that practically every State adopted 
 primary regulations similar to those which pro- 
 tect other elections, while regulatory provisions 
 have been applied to the conduct of conventions 
 within the States. So far, no effort has been 
 made to regulate by federal law the conduct of 
 a national convention. 
 
 Even regulated conventions showed a dispo- 
 
58 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 sition to be controlled more readily by political 
 macbines tban tbe people would bave tbem. 
 Tbe cboice of delegates bas been one of tbe 
 tasks most commonly sbirked by tbe busy citi- 
 zen and tbere bas never been evolved any very 
 effective way of bolding tbe members of tbese 
 conventions responsible for tbe work tbey do. 
 It was not unnatural, tberef ore, tbat politicians 
 of tbe reforming instinct, finding tbemselves 
 tbwarted by tbe manipulations of tbe old-time 
 leaders in conventions, turned an eye of favor 
 upon tbe system of direct nominations. Tliis 
 plan bad been proposed as early as 1878 in Mc- 
 Millan 's ' ' Elective Francbise. ' ' Tbe first State 
 to adopt tbe primary on a state-wide scale was 
 Wisconsin, in 1903. Oregon and Alabama fol- 
 lowed in 1904, and since tbat time about balf of 
 tbe States of tbe Union bave adopted direct 
 primary laws. Tbese direct primary laws per- 
 mitted tbe names of tbe candidates for tbe sev- 
 eral offices to be placed upon tbe primary ballot 
 by tbe presentation of a petition signed by a cer- 
 tain proportion of tbe qualified voters of tbe 
 constituency. In order to participate in a pri- 
 mary election, it is usually necessary for tbe 
 voter to bave designated at tbe time of registra- 
 tion witb wbicb political party be intends to 
 affiliate, wbicb declaration or designation stands 
 for at least a year. Tbe results of tbe direct 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 59 
 
 primary have not been such as to excite either 
 great enthusiasm on the part of the reformers 
 or great chagrin on the part of political ma- 
 chinists. It seems that the direct primary has 
 made it somewhat more easy for a reform move- 
 ment, strongly backed and well organized, to 
 overthrow the machine. It has not, however, 
 obviated the necessity for organization. To 
 carry the state primary for a particular candi- 
 date for Governor requires about the same exer- 
 tion and the same vigor of organization neces- 
 sary to carry an ordinary election. The result 
 is that in ordinary times, where people are not 
 greatly aroused, the old machine has a great 
 advantage over any independent movement. 
 The net result may be summed up to be that it 
 is now possible, by the liberal expenditure of 
 energy and the erection of a strong organiza- 
 tion, to beat an organization already firmly in- 
 trenched. The remarkable facility with which 
 the American people organize, politically — 
 marvelously well illustrated in the sudden rise 
 of the Progressive party — is the condition 
 which makes the direct primary really service- 
 able to reform. 
 
 The latest application of the direct primary is 
 the so-called *^ presidential preference pri- 
 mary, ' ' in which the voters of a State are given 
 an opportunity to indicate their choice of the 
 
60 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 party candidate for the presidency. At the 
 same time, they elect delegates to the national 
 convention, who may or may not be pledged to 
 vote for a particular candidate. There are 
 great advantages in this method of procedure 
 over the old methods of choosing delegates to 
 national conventions. It does give a choice to 
 the people, and there is little doubt but that this 
 direct method of election of delegates will soon 
 supplant all other methods. Here, however, we 
 run flat against one of those peculiar difficul- 
 ties which the Federal character of our govern- 
 ment often creates. While the State may pro- 
 vide a method of electing delegates to the na- 
 tional conventions, it cannot at all regulate the 
 right of those delegates to sit in the national 
 conventions. A national convention is called 
 by the national committee of the party. This 
 national committee is in the eyes of the law 
 simply the executive committee of a volun- 
 tary organization, and it has the right to 
 put into its call any terms it likes. It could 
 provide that only blue-eyed or black-haired 
 people should be delegates to the convention. 
 Over such a national voluntary organization no 
 state law other than that of the jurisdiction 
 in which the individual members happen to be 
 at the moment can have any legal authority. 
 The result is such unfortunate circumstances 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 61 
 
 as those which led the Eepublican national 
 convention of 1912 to refuse to seat two dele- 
 gates duly elected from California under the 
 law of that State. National conventions can 
 be successfully regulated only by the nation. 
 A statute for this purpose is now probably un- 
 constitutional, but the Constitution should be 
 amended to allow of the regulation of this im- 
 portant step in the choice of a president. 
 
 We have already seen the degree of success 
 which the direct primary has achieved in break- 
 ing the grip of the machine politician. There 
 are, however, certain defects of the direct pri- 
 mary, as it ordinarily exists. The first of these 
 is the possibility of packing the primary. Pri- 
 maries are packed both intentionally and by an 
 unconscious disposition of the people to par- 
 ticipate in real struggles. For example, if 
 there be in a State a severe contest pending in 
 the Eepublican primary, there will be a ten- 
 dency for voters, when registering, even though 
 they intend to vote the ticket of some other 
 party in the election, to register in the Repub- 
 lican primary. This was very evident in the 
 primary elections in California in 1910 and 
 1918. Furthermore, it is possible for the boss 
 of one party to lend to the boss of another party 
 voters who will support him in a primary con- 
 test. The other principal defect of the direct 
 
62 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 primary is that even a greater premium tlian 
 before is placed upon capturing the party nom- 
 ination, and success in the party comes to be 
 sought too eagerly. It does not give us any 
 escape from the necessity of getting the party 
 label attached to the candidate in order to in- 
 sure his success. This was very well illus- 
 trated in the primary election in California in 
 the fall of 1912. The great majority of Cali- 
 fornia Republicans had become Progressives, 
 and were determined to support the candidates 
 of the Progressive party. They felt, however, 
 that the control of the Republican organiza- 
 tion, which they had secured by carrying the 
 direct primary in 1910 when they had no suspi- 
 cion of being anything but Republicans, was too 
 valuable to be surrendered to their opponents 
 without a struggle. They estimated highly — 
 perhaps too highly — the value of the Republi- 
 can name. The result was that they went into 
 the Republican party, carried it for their candi- 
 dates, and made Roosevelt and Johnson the 
 Republican candidates in California. This en- 
 abled the Taft Republicans to raise the cry that 
 they had been disfranchised, although it is diffi- 
 cult to see how, under the existing state of the 
 law and of human nature, the Progressives 
 could have done anything other than they did. 
 The Taft Republicans went over in a body to 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 63 
 
 Wilson, and the electoral vote of the State was 
 split. Frequently the consequences of the 
 eager pursuit of the party name are more seri- 
 ous than those just mentioned. They often 
 lead to deliberate fraud and corruption. 
 
 In no other country of the world, as we have 
 seen, are executive officers elected at large. 
 This, of course, renders the problem of nomina- 
 tions and elections much more simple than in 
 this country. It is, however, worth while for 
 us to remember that in none of the great Euro- 
 pean countries does a party nomination have 
 anything to do with getting a man's name on 
 the ballot. In England, as we have observed, 
 any man who can get ten backers can run for 
 Parliament. In France, the candidate for the 
 Chamber of Deputies has merely to indicate 
 that he intends to run. In Prussia he did not 
 have to go through this formality; he simply 
 ran. The provisions for balloting are still the 
 same or worse than the crude ones which pre- 
 vailed in the United States prior to 1890. No 
 one would for a moment suggest going back to 
 their antiquated practice in this respect. In 
 England, however, the ballot, although much 
 shorter than ours, is of the same sort. Indeed, 
 the so-called Australian ballot is really the Eng- 
 lish ballot, and it was, more than anything else, 
 prejudice against the English name, which led 
 
64 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 to our use of the term Australian. On this 
 English ballot there appear simply the names 
 of the candidates with their addresses and their 
 business. There is no party designation what- 
 ever. Candidates are the nominees of parties, 
 but the voters are expected to know the name 
 of their candidate well enough to get along with- 
 out the assistance of a party designation. In 
 England, the candidates are compelled to pay 
 the expenses of polling — a thing which serves to 
 keep out people who stand no chance of election. 
 In France and Prussia, however, another 
 method is adopted. Two elections are held. 
 At the first an absolute majority of the votes 
 cast is necessary for an election. If no one re- 
 ceives such a majority, a second election is re- 
 sorted to. In France, at the second election 
 there is no limit to the number of candidates, 
 and a simple plurality wins. In Germany, the 
 second election is confined to the two candidates 
 who receive the highest vote at the first. This 
 German method has been adopted by many 
 American cities, including practically all those 
 which possess the commission form of govern- 
 ment. A variation of this form was adopted 
 by the city of Des Moines, where the first elec- 
 tion simply serves to narrow the number of 
 candidates to two, without the possibility of 
 any candidate being elected at that time, no mat- 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 65 
 
 ter what vote he receives. There are great 
 advantages to this German system, or its Des 
 Moines modification. Adequate provision is 
 made for reducing the number of candidates. 
 The person ultimately elected must be the choice 
 of a majority of the people. He may not be 
 the man whom they would prefer above all 
 others, but he is surely the second choice, at 
 least, of the majority. There is no necessity 
 under this system of a party label. There is no 
 premium for capturing the party standard. It 
 is no more expensive than the direct primary 
 system, which involves, of course, two state- 
 wide elections. 
 
 The writer would not have you imagine that 
 he is opposed to political parties. Indeed, he 
 has already stated emphatically the necessity 
 of political parties in a democracy. They 
 should, however, be reduced to their proper 
 place, and not made the well-nigh exclusive 
 means of getting for a candidate favorable con- 
 sideration upon the ballot. Under the two-elec- 
 tion system it is not necessary to have elaborate 
 regulation of party management and control. 
 The ease with which a rival candidate can be 
 put in the field disposes of the temptation to 
 use underhand methods to secure a nomination. 
 It does not do away with parties. They are 
 still necessary to the success of democratic gov- 
 
66 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ernment, but simply as organizations to pro- 
 mote the conduct of government ^^on a par- 
 ticular principle/' not as monopolies of the 
 nomination market. In cities, according to the 
 observation of the writer, the effect of the 
 double-election system is to bring into exist- 
 ence before each election temporary parties 
 which assume all the attributes of politi- 
 cal organization and die with the hilarity of 
 election night. Another result has been that 
 the old trick of the ^^gang" of secretly promot- 
 ing respectable candidacies in order to divide 
 the vote of the good people is rendered nega- 
 tive by the requirement of a majority for elec- 
 tion. We may then look forward to the direct 
 primary ultimately giving way to a double or 
 majority election system, in which there shall 
 be no partisan designations on the ballot, or to 
 some system of preferential vote which will 
 accomplish a similar result without the neces- 
 sity for two elections. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 American and English Encyclopedia of Law, see 
 
 ''Elections," vol. X. 
 American Political Science Association Proceedings, 
 
 1907, pp. 175-179. 
 Bishop, Cortlandt, F., *' History of Elections in the 
 
 American Colonies." 
 
NOMINATIONS TO OFFICE 67 
 
 Bishop, J. B., ''Presidential Nominations and Elec- 
 tions." 
 
 Bryce, James, ''American Commonwealth," vol. 2, 
 ch. LIX-LXX. 
 
 Dallinger, F. W., "Nominations for Elective Office 
 in the United States." 
 
 Dougherty, J. H., "Electoral System of the United 
 States." 
 
 Eaton, Dorman B., "The Independent Movement in 
 New York"; "Primary Elections," in Lalor's 
 "Encyclopedia of Political Science," vol. Ill, 
 p. 343. 
 
 GooDNOw, Frank J., "Politics and Administration." 
 (The relation of the spoils system and party 
 machinery.) 
 
 Haynes, George H., "The Election of Senators." 
 
 Johnston, A., "Nominating Conventions," in Lalor's 
 "Cyclopedia," vol. II, p. 1039. 
 
 Jones, C. L., "Readings on Parties and Elections." 
 
 Lawton, George W., "The American Caucus Sys- 
 tem." 
 
 Lowell, A. L., "Government of England," ch. X. 
 (The English System.) 
 
 Macy, Jesse, "Party Organization and Machinery." 
 
 ]\Ierrl\m, C. E., "Primary Elections." (Best short 
 and up-to-date book.) 
 
 Meyer, E. C, "Nominating Systems." 
 
 Michigan Political Science Association Proceedings, 
 1905. 
 
 McMillan, Duncan C, "The Elective Franchise in 
 the United States." 
 
68 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 National Municipal Lea^e Proceedings. (Numerous 
 
 excellent papers.) 
 OsTROGORSKi, M., ''Democracy and the Organization 
 
 of Political Parties," vol. II. (The great work on 
 
 this subject.) 
 Roosevelt, Theodore, ^ ' Essays on Practical Politics. ' ' 
 
 For further bibliography, see Merriam "Primary 
 Elections" and Library of Congress lists on Primary 
 Elections and Political Parties. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 MISREPRESENTATIVE LEGISLATURES 
 
 When our Revolutionary forefathers discov- 
 ered themselves to be without legal government 
 in the latter part of 1775, they began to take 
 thought as to the form of organization best 
 suited to their needs. They naturally exalted 
 the Legislature as the most important feature 
 of their government. During the long period 
 of controversy with the mother country which 
 preceded the Revolution, it had been the Legis- 
 lature which, representing the people, had con- 
 tended with the Governor, representing the 
 crown. Executive power had thereby become 
 unpopular; legislative power, popular. The 
 legislatures were in many instances given 
 power to elect the governor and all other state 
 officers. Only in Massachusetts were they sub- 
 jected to the gubernatorial veto.^ They were, 
 for the moment, practically all powerful. 
 These legislatures, however, showed unfor- 
 tunately little capacity in dealing with the criti- 
 
 1 Veto existed in first New York constitution but was exer- 
 cised by Council of Revision. 
 
 69 
 
70 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 cal conditions which followed the close of the 
 Revolution. Influenced by this experience the 
 Constitution of the United States, the result of 
 a moderately conservative reaction, gave to the 
 chief executive an indepelident position, and, 
 at the same time, a share in legislation, 
 through the veto. The vigor of the new federal 
 government led the States, by example, to give 
 their executives the same independence and 
 power. From that day to this the influence of 
 the legislature has declined while that of the 
 executive has been maintained. 
 
 The most obvious reason for this change has 
 been that the executive has proved to be the 
 only representative of all people of State and 
 nation. In our choice of representatives in the 
 state legislature and in Congress we have 
 been governed often by considerations of local 
 advantage. We have been much more con- 
 cerned as to whether our Congressman could 
 secure for us a handsome and expensive federal 
 building than as to whether he held sound views 
 on questions of great national importance. We 
 have been more anxious that our State legis- 
 lator should get for us some desired local ex- 
 penditure of State money than he should be a 
 real representative of the whole people of the 
 State. Legislative bodies made up of persons 
 chosen on such grounds have never been, and 
 
LEGISLATURES 71 
 
 can never be, genuinely representative of the 
 whole community. As our legislatures have de- 
 clined, we have come more and more to look to 
 the Governor and the President, with their veto 
 power and their commanding moral position, 
 actually to govern for us. This is no mere 
 popular superstition. It is the view of prac- 
 tically every well-informed, conservative man 
 in the country. President Nicholas Murray 
 Butler of Columbia University, exponent of the 
 extreme type of political conservatism, declared 
 in his Charter Day address at the University of 
 California in 1906: ^^As a matter of fact, if 
 our American political experience proves any- 
 thing, it proves that the executive branch of the 
 government is the most efficient representative 
 and spokesman that the popular will has. So 
 it was with Lincoln in the Civil War ; so it was 
 with Cleveland in the struggle for a monetary 
 system ; so it was with Roosevelt in the battle 
 against privilege and greed. Indeed, in every 
 real sense, the popular will in the United States 
 has no other representative, for political pur- 
 poses, than the President. *' The names of 
 Stubbs of Kansas, LaFollette of "Wisconsin, 
 Hughes of New York, and Johnson of Cali- 
 fornia are sufficient in themselves to establish 
 the fact of the prominence in state affairs of the 
 Governor. 
 
72 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 The decline of legislatures is evident also in 
 the limits which have been placed upon them 
 by state constitutions. In the first place, all 
 the later constitutions have, out of distrust of 
 the legislature, been made to contain very many 
 matters which, in the earlier documents, were 
 left to the discretion of the law-making bodies. 
 The constitution of the State of California, as 
 it now stands, would occupy over one hundred 
 pages of this book. It descends to the most 
 minute details, of course removing all these 
 matters from the competence of the legislature. 
 Most of the state constitutions now limit the 
 frequency and duration of legislative sessions, 
 apparently on the theory that the less of legis- 
 lation the better. In Alabama there is but one 
 regular session of the legislature every four 
 years. In many States the duration of the 
 legislative session is limited to ninety, sixty, or 
 even forty days. Further, the field of special 
 legislation has been closed to legislators. Ad- 
 vantageous and almost essential as is the power 
 of passing statutes to fit the varying needs of 
 the localities of a great State, the abuses of the 
 power had been so continuous and excessive, 
 that the people determined, perhaps wisely and 
 certainly with justification, deliberately to cut 
 otf the offending member. The current jests 
 as to relative social advantage of service in the 
 
LEGISLATURES 73 
 
 state legislature and in the penitentiary are 
 indications of the low esteem in which our legis- 
 lative bodies are held. This low esteem has 
 had a disastrous effect upon the personnel of 
 these bodies, and the poor character of their per- 
 sonnel has, in turn, tended to added disrespect. 
 At the same time, the vital importance of the 
 legislature as an instrument of government has 
 not declined. The law-making powers of the 
 state legislature extend over an enormous range 
 of subjects. It can make or mar the happiness 
 and welfare of the whole community. We are 
 truly in an unfortunate position when such 
 great powers are entrusted to bodies so little 
 trusted, and so frequently unworthy of trust. 
 
 If we would penetrate into the reasons for 
 the unfortunate condition of our American 
 legislatures, we must consider, briefly, the or- 
 ganization of legislative bodies. In the last 
 chapter we saw that any considerable body of 
 men is incapable of independent volition; that 
 it simply can adopt only what is suggested to 
 it. This applies to the problem of the legis- 
 lature very pertinently. Edwin L. Godkin, 
 in his essay on the *^ Decline of Legislatures,'' 
 pointed out a very significant fact frequently 
 lost sight of by serious students of the subject 
 — that the Eoman Senate, the archetype of 
 legislative assemblies, was a consultative, not an 
 
74 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 initiatory, body. It deliberated and said yes 
 or no to the propositions of the magistrates and 
 people. That other great model of a legisla- 
 ture, the only one which has had long and 
 continuous existence to the present time, the 
 British House of Commons, has also, through- 
 out its history, limited itself to simple con- 
 sultatory functions. In all its struggles with 
 the crown, the demand of the Commons was 
 that they were to be consulted in the matter of 
 making and unmaking laws. It is true that 
 individual members of the House have had from 
 early times the right of introducing bills, and 
 that private and local measures may be intro- 
 duced by petition of those concerned, but there 
 has never been a time in the history of the 
 House when this right of private introduction 
 of bills has been of prime importance. The 
 chief desire of the House, and its chief busi- 
 ness, has been to register approval or disap- 
 proval of the measures emanating from the 
 ministers of the crown. The right of the 
 House to be consulted on every proposition of 
 law was finally settled in 1689. It soon there- 
 after became evident that the king could obtain 
 the necessary assent of Parliament to the meas- 
 ure he desired only by appointing ministers 
 agreeable to the majority of the House. From 
 this situation developed the present system of 
 
LEGISLATURES 75 
 
 government by responsible ministers, by which 
 the men who are the natural leaders of the ma- 
 jority party in the House of Commons consti- 
 tute the cabinet, and at once administer the ex- 
 ecutive department of the government and 
 initiate all important legislation. They are 
 subjected to the questions and criticisms of the 
 members, and their measures must stand the 
 fire of debate. If the majority of the House 
 votes down a cabinet minister's proposal, the 
 cabinet resigns, and a new one is formed from 
 the majority in the House. The fact that the 
 question, ^^Who shall govern England?'' is to 
 be answered by the adverse or favorable vote 
 on each bill makes the debate on measures a 
 matter of more importance than can usually be 
 the case in this country. Debate in the English 
 House of Commons has been notably free, and 
 there has been an abundant opportunity for 
 men of talent to distinguish themselves in it 
 and thereby to win places in the cabinet. The 
 fact that this is possible attracts the best brains 
 in England into the House of Commons. Of 
 late years, of course, there have been placed 
 upon the freedom of debate certain limitations, 
 but the personnel of the House of Commons re- 
 mains notably high; higher than that of any 
 legislative body in the history of the world 
 with the possible exception of the Eoman Sen- 
 
76 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ate in its palmiest days, or of our own Senate 
 in its brief period of glory from 1830 to 1850. 
 Its legislative product, being determined by 
 men whose political life and death depend upon 
 the character of what they recommend, is su- 
 perior to that of practically every legislature. 
 "When our state governments were formed, 
 the English system of responsible ministry was 
 not thought of. Few Americans even knew 
 that it existed in England. There were ap- 
 parently none of the materials out of which 
 to construct such a system in this country. 
 The matter of introducing bills in the legisla- 
 ture was left to the individual members, each 
 being on an equal footing with every other. It 
 early became manifest that the number of bills 
 introduced was too large to be dealt with by 
 the House as a whole : that there must be some 
 division of labor. The method adopted was 
 the appointment of committees, each dealing 
 with bills on a particular subject matter, sifting 
 from them those that had merit and reporting 
 them again to the House. Even a system of 
 division into committees, however, has failed 
 in Congress and in some of the larger state 
 legislatures to reduce sufficiently the num- 
 ber of measures. There are introduced dur- 
 ing the two years' life of a House of Repre- 
 sentatives over thirty thousand bills and resolu- 
 
LEGISLATURES 77 
 
 tions. If each member spoke one minute on 
 each bill, the session would last between eighty 
 and ninety years. ^ Of course most of these 
 bills fail to pass through the meshes of the 
 committee nets. However, enough do pass 
 through to make it impossible for the House, 
 as a whole, to deal with them all. Toward the 
 close of the session, especially, the lists, or cal- 
 endars, upon which bills are placed in the order 
 of their report from committee become so long 
 that it is impossible to get through them. 
 There has to be some means of reaching down 
 into the calendar and getting out those meas- 
 ures which are of special importance and bring- 
 
 1 In the 61st Congress the House of Representatives was 
 obliged to deal with the following measures: 
 
 House Bills 33,015 
 
 House Resolutions 1,008 
 
 House Joint Resolutions 295 
 
 House Concurrent Resolutions 65 
 
 Senate Bills 691 
 
 Senate Joint Resolutions 51 
 
 Senate Concurrent Resolutions 29 
 
 Total 35,154 
 
 For their consideration the House was in session from 
 March 15 to August 5, 1909; from December 6, 1909, to June 
 23, 1910; and from December 5, 1910, to March 3, 1911. De- 
 duction must be made for two weeks' vacation at Christmas. 
 The total is about thirteen months. The first or special ses- 
 sion was entirely taken up with the tariflf, and only eight 
 bills were passed. There were thus about eight and one-half 
 months for the remaining 33,007 bills. The conservative char- 
 acter of the statement in the text is obvious. 
 
78 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ing them before the House. This has been for 
 many years the function of the Rules Commit- 
 tee, and is the source of its power. Being able 
 to report at any time a resolution for the sus- 
 pension of the rules for the purpose of con- 
 sidering a particular measure or list of meas- 
 ures, it could control the proceedings of the 
 House. Up to the changes made in the session 
 of 1910, all the committees of the House, in- 
 cluding the Rules Committee, were appointed by 
 the Speaker. He was himself a member of 
 the Rules Committee, with two other trusted 
 lieutenants of his own party, and two members 
 of the minority, who, for practical purposes, 
 might just as well not have been on the com- 
 mittee. Since the fate of most bills was de- 
 cided by a committee, and the fate of a great 
 many others by the Rules Committee, it was 
 obvious that the power of the man who ap- 
 pointed these committees was enormous. A 
 measure once recommended by the Rules Com- 
 mittee was almost sure of passage. The House 
 of Representatives is so large, its business so 
 prodigious, that there is little time or oppor- 
 tunity for the members to engage in a discus- 
 sion of .bills on the floor. A great deal is said 
 and printed in the ^^Congressional Record," but 
 to very little purpose. The real work is the 
 
LEGISLATURES 79 
 
 work of the committees, and the Committee on 
 Eules was the King of Committees. 
 
 It is clear that the function of selecting the 
 measures to be actually considered by the 
 House, which in England belongs to the re- 
 sponsible members of the cabinet, in this coun- 
 try belonged, prior to 1910, to the Speaker and 
 the Eules Committee. These men, nominally 
 the servants of the House, were really its mas- 
 ters. The young member arriving from the 
 country, full of enthusiasm, soon found that his 
 only chance of getting through a measure which 
 his constituents desired was by doing the will 
 of the Speaker and his fellows on the Rules 
 Committee. Now, the power to determine what 
 measures the House of Representatives shall 
 consider must devolve on some one. Like every 
 other considerable body, it is incapable of in- 
 dependent volition. It must have leadership. 
 It differed from the British House of Commons 
 in this — that the leadership in the House of 
 Commons is responsible leadership, while the 
 leadership in our House of Representatives was 
 irresponsible. If the Speaker's measures were 
 defeated, he did not resign. If they were 
 passed and turned out to be bad measures, 
 there was no way of holding him responsible 
 for what had taken place. In his own district 
 
80 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 he was popular because his position as Speaker 
 enabled him to retrieve more local plunder than 
 any other member could obtain in his place, and 
 no s«uccessful effort could be made to hold 
 other members responsible in their districts 
 for what the Speaker had done. In England, 
 just the contrary situation prevailed. Every 
 member of the House of Commons is elected 
 because he is a supporter of a particular pos- 
 sible prime minister. In this way, prime minis- 
 ters become responsible, through the members 
 of Parliament, to the people. In our system, 
 the Speaker, controlling as he did the fortunes 
 of members of the House, was apparently re- 
 sponsible only to himself. Power without re- 
 sponsibility is almost invariably abused, and 
 the Speaker and the Rules Committee had 
 power without responsibility. 
 
 In the spring of 1909 there broke out an open 
 revolt against Speaker Cannon, and early in 
 1910 this took the form of a set of amendments 
 to the rules by which the Speaker was deprived 
 of the power of appointing the members of 
 the Rules Committee, and was himself pro- 
 hibited from being a member of the committee. 
 The power formerly possessed by the Speaker 
 was transferred to the House itself. In the 
 fall elections of 1910 the question of ^^Cannon- 
 ism" was an issue in many of the congressional 
 
LEGISLATURES 81 
 
 districts, and did no little to assist the Demo- 
 cratic party to win a majority in Congress. 
 This Democratic majority still further tied the 
 hands of the Speaker by handing over the choice 
 of committees to the House, a thing which in 
 practice meant that the Ways and Means Com- 
 mittee was selected in the first instance by 
 the party caucuses and then by the House, while 
 all other committees were selected by this first 
 chosen committee. There has been much dis- 
 cussion of the effect of these amendments of 
 the rules upon the procedure of Congress. 
 There has been little external evidence of any 
 alteration in the position of the Speaker other 
 than that given by the rules themselves. 
 Speaker Clark, while differing in personality 
 from Speaker Cannon, and while being the 
 choice of a nominally different political party, 
 was a representative of the same political group 
 from which Cannon was drawn. The chair- 
 manships of committees were handed over to 
 the senior Democratic member of each commit- 
 tee, and apparently few changes in the per- 
 sonnel of these committees were made. The 
 result is that the control of Congress has re- 
 mained in the hands of the same people, at 
 least in the hands of some of the same people, 
 who controlled it prior to 1910. The power of 
 the Speaker has been greatly diminished, al- 
 
82 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 though not destroyed. A man strong enough 
 to secure the nomination of the party caucus as 
 Speaker will, under ordinary circumstances, ex- 
 ercise great influence in the selection of com- 
 mittees and in the other operations of the great 
 party machine. The majority floor-leader, 
 however, has proved to equal if not to surpass 
 the Speaker in importance. His position as 
 chairman of the Ways and Means Committee 
 gives him the choice strategic position. In one 
 respect, the change of the rules will be produc- 
 tive of anything but good. We were just be- 
 coming thoroughly aware of the extent of the 
 Speaker's power, and willing to apply the 
 rather obvious remedy of holding the members 
 of Congress responsible for the conduct of the 
 Speaker of their choice ; in other words, we were 
 beginning to evolve something approaching re- 
 sponsible leadership for the House of Eepre- 
 sentatives. Every one recognizes that the 
 power formerly exercised by the Speaker and 
 the Rules Committee is necessary to the con- 
 duct of business. There was really on the part 
 of the members of Congress and the people no 
 quarrel with the power of the Speaker, but only 
 with the way in which the particular Speaker 
 exercised it. As often happens in such cases, 
 however, they went at Speaker Cannon by at- 
 tacking his power. It would have been much 
 
LEGISLATURES 83 
 
 better if there could have been devised and ap- 
 plied some method of retaining the power, 
 trusteed for the benefit of the people. It will 
 be a long time before the people come to recog- 
 nize the responsibility of the new Rules Com- 
 mittee or of the Ways and Means Committee 
 and its floor-leader chairman. We will have to 
 adjust our minds to a whole new series of 
 political ideas, and that, for a population of 
 ninety millions, is a slow process. 
 
 Our state legislatures are but miniature rep- 
 resentations of Congress. Ordinarily, the 
 presiding officer of the lower house does not 
 possess so much power, relatively, as the 
 Speaker of the National House of Representa- 
 tives; a greater amount being reposed in the 
 important committee chairmen. On the whole, 
 however, every criticism which applies to the 
 organization of the House of Representatives 
 applies to the organization of both the houses 
 of the state legislatures. One of the most ob- 
 vious results of this system in State and nation 
 is to make a legislative career unattractive. It 
 is in committees that the real work is done. 
 Bills that are once reported from the com- 
 mittees stand, if they can come to a vote, an 
 excellent chance of passage. Indeed, in most 
 of our legislative bodies, bills receive very little 
 consideration upon the floor. It is not meant 
 
84 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 by this that no speeches are indulged in, for 
 there is much talk at every stage of legislative 
 business, but any one who is at all familiar 
 with the character of debate in legislative 
 bodies knows that these speeches have not, 
 and are not expected to have, any appreciable 
 effect upon the decision of the question. They 
 are usually uttered for the purpose of making 
 a record, of appealing to one's constituents, or 
 of laying the foundation for future political ac- 
 tivity. They are simply moves in the game 
 of politics. The real discussion of measures 
 takes place in the committees. Committee 
 work is laborious and carries with it anything 
 but glory. The work of committees attracts 
 little attention and is given only a modicum of 
 publicity. A large part of the work of the 
 committeemen is very similar, as Godkin says, 
 to that of college professors in correcting 
 Freshman themes, eliminating mistakes, and 
 discarding absurd propositions. For success 
 in committee work, the qualities most needed 
 are patience, adroitness and experience; quali- 
 ties which are by no means uncommon among 
 American politicians. There is little scope for 
 the broader ability of the orator, the philoso- 
 pher or the statesman. A glance at the per- 
 sonnel of any of our legislative bodies, except, 
 perhaps, the United States Senate, will con- 
 
LEGISLATURES 85 
 
 vince any honest observer that a mediocre man 
 can reach the highest point of authority sim- 
 ply by being reelected repeatedly to the body. 
 There is not a prominent leader in the House 
 of Representatives who has not served term 
 after term, and there are few of them who are 
 anything more than patient, adroit and experi- 
 enced mediocrities. Really keen men do not 
 seek election to legislative bodies. There is 
 nothing in legislative service to attract them. 
 They can find in the law or in business a 
 better scope for their activity, a better chance 
 to make a name for themselves; and when it 
 comes to the choice of the more important elec- 
 tive officers, such as Governor, United States 
 Senator, or President, these men who have won 
 their spurs outside of the legislature seem to 
 suffer no handicap — even to possess an advan- 
 tage in the race. 
 
 The members of the average American legis- 
 lature can be divided into three classes: first, 
 and largest, a body of well meaning men of 
 meager ability, usually fairly well along in life, 
 very frequently men who have made a success 
 to a moderate extent in business and who come 
 to the state legislature or to Congress because 
 the honor of an election appeals to them; sec- 
 ond, a small group of experienced, long-headed, 
 wily politicians, old, usually in years, but al- 
 
86 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ways in experience. These men find it easy 
 to rule and manage the mass of well-meaning 
 persons of which we have spoken. It is almost 
 impossible to define what they do except by em- 
 ploying that very expressive Americanism, 
 *^slip it over"; third, a small group of men, 
 usually young both in years and experience, 
 frequently members of the legal profession, in 
 their briefless stage, who bring to the legisla- 
 ture considerable ability, courage and right- 
 eousness of motive. They battle with the sec- 
 ond class for the control of the first. They only 
 occasionally control the situation, but they at 
 all times operate as a check upon the rapacious 
 audacity of the second class. It is one of the 
 saddest phases of legislative life that the best 
 citizens from the small towns — the retired mer- 
 chant or banker — makes the most pitiable type 
 of legislator. They are as much out of place 
 as a horse in a garage. They are opinionated, 
 self-satisfied and easily fooled. They are easy 
 marks for the lobbyist and the experienced 
 manipulator. A constituency takes less chance 
 with a thorough crook, known and watched as 
 such, than with one of these * ^ first citizens. * ' 
 
 It is legislatures thus constituted which have 
 employed those numerous deceptive tactics that 
 have disgusted the people and have brought 
 about our numerous constitutional restrictions 
 
LEGISLATURES 87 
 
 upon tlieir activity. It used to be a favorite 
 trick to place a misleading title on a bill ; a title 
 innocent in itself but quite misrepresentative of 
 the measure appearing below. This was par- 
 ticularly the case before it became the custom 
 to print all bills. There was one famous in- 
 stance in a State of the Middle West, in which 
 a bill was introduced regulating the running- 
 at-large of cattle in one of the older and more 
 settled counties of the State. It was a very 
 long measure and it was expected, as a local 
 measure, to go through upon the recommenda- 
 tion of the member from that county. One of 
 the other members, however, became distrust- 
 ful of the purpose of this bill, and insisted, as 
 was his constitutional right, on the bill being 
 read in full. It was read amidst the protests 
 and jeers of practically the whole body. The 
 feeling, however, changed considerably when 
 it was discovered that in the very middle of 
 the bill was a clause giving the introducer an 
 absolute divorce from his wife. All this has 
 now been stopped by prohibiting measures from 
 containing more than one subject, and requir- 
 ing that the title be descriptive of the matter 
 contained. 
 
 Another device was that of introducing a bill 
 at the very close of the session and rushing it 
 through at a time when no one was in position 
 
88 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 to give it consideration. A variation upon this 
 practice was to introduce a measure doing a par- 
 ticular tiling of an unobjectionable sort, and 
 then, at a late hour of the session, and with as 
 little furore as possible, to get it reported from 
 committee with an amendment entirely chang- 
 ing its effect. The matter of late introduction 
 has now been generally cared for by limiting 
 the period within which bills may be introduced 
 to a specific number of days, but the trick of 
 late amendment is still available in most juris- 
 dictions. Perhaps the worst of legislative 
 tricks was that of passing measures by unani- 
 mous consent. You could do anything by 
 unanimous consent of the legislature except 
 amend the constitution. You could suspend any 
 of the rules of the legislature itself, and pass 
 bills in every imaginable kind of hurry. At 
 the same time, procedure under unanimous con- 
 sent possessed the great advantage of not put- 
 ting anybody on record. Of course, every mem- 
 ber was nominally recorded in favor of the bill, 
 but he was always able to save himself before 
 his constituents by saying there was no opposi- 
 tion — the bill passed by unanimous consent. 
 Our constitutions nowadays provide that bills 
 must be read upon three separate days and be 
 in their final printed form for a specified time 
 before passage. This blocks the use of unani- 
 
LEGISLATURES 89 
 
 mous consent for the purpose of avoiding all 
 consideration, but the abuse of unanimous con- 
 sent still remains considerable. 
 
 A very striking example of the recent use of 
 these legislative devices came under the per- 
 sonal observation of the writer in the session, 
 of the New York legislature of 1905. Just 
 a few days before the end of the session, a 
 bill was introduced providing that hotels of 
 over two hundred rooms might sell intoxicating 
 liquors in spite of the fact that they w^ere within 
 two hundred feet of a church or school, within 
 which limits the sale was at the time prohibited 
 by law. The bill was advanced through vari- 
 ous stages and passed the Senate without a 
 vote in opposition. It passed the Assembly, 
 being reported by the Rules Committee and 
 put through all its various stages there with 
 marvelous quickness. It developed that it was 
 intended to permit the Gotham Hotel, just 
 across 55th Street from the Fifth Avenue Pres- 
 byterian Church, to sell liquor. The measure 
 had behind it the personal influence of United 
 States Senator Thomas C. Piatt. It was 
 vetoed by Governor Higgins. Next year a 
 measure was introduced by Senator Brackett of 
 Saratoga extending the two hundred feet pro- 
 hibition to public libraries as well as churches 
 and schools. Along toward the end of the ses- 
 
90 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 sion this bill was reported from the committee 
 with an amendment which was not at all noted 
 by the press, exempting from the whole pro- 
 vision hotels in existence on the first day of 
 January of the year preceding. This bill had 
 passed the Senate and was nearly through the 
 Assembly before the change was discovered. 
 It was then too late to organize opposition to 
 it. It was, however, vetoed by Governor Hig- 
 gins. The following year a bill was introduced, 
 this time by a member of the assembly, from 
 Brooklyn, excepting from the operation of the 
 two-hundred-foot provision all churches any 
 part of whose property was used for business 
 purposes. It was claimed that this was to af- 
 fect a situation in Brooklyn, but investigation 
 showed that the Fifth Avenue Presbyterian 
 Church owned a dwelling house immediately 
 adjoining the church on Fifth Avenue which 
 was leased to an art store. This bill again 
 passed the Senate without serious opposition, 
 but in the Assembly an earnest fight on it was 
 feared and its sponsors endeavored to execute 
 a clever flank movement. They brought the bill 
 up on Friday. On Friday most of the members 
 of the New York legislature go home. All 
 business is transacted by unanimous consent, 
 and the few of the old guard who hang about 
 have so many little jobs of their own which they 
 
LEGISLATURES 91 
 
 want to put through that they seldom have the 
 heart to say anything against anybody else^s 
 little job. Legislators show a great amount of 
 charity in their dealings with one another — a 
 high degree of *^ Christian'^ virtue. The bill 
 would have passed on this occasion had it not 
 been for the unexpected presence and still more 
 unexpected opposition of one of the younger 
 members. The bill did finally pass after a bit- 
 ter fight and was again vetoed by Governor 
 Hughes. This is a very good sample of the 
 arts and devices of which skilled legislators are 
 capable, as well as of the power and influence 
 of a politician even at that time supposedly 
 discredited with the people of his State. 
 
 Back of it all, however, lies the responsibility 
 of the people themselves. They are careless in 
 their choice of representatives. They demand 
 practically nothing of them except that they dip 
 deep into the pork barrel for the benefit of the 
 district. The writer requested one of his stu- 
 dents to address a letter to each of the eight 
 Congressmen from California asking them 
 whether their constituents had more interest 
 in local appropriations or in the attitude of 
 their representatives upon national issues. 
 Seven of the Congressmen who replied to this 
 very frankly admitted that their people cared 
 nothing as to their attitude on national issues 
 
92 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 provided they bro-Qght home the necessary ap- 
 propriations. The eighth, who declared quite 
 curtly that the people of his district were more 
 interested in national issues, apparently told 
 the truth for he was defeated for renomination 
 in 1910 in a campaign in which he based his 
 claim to the consideration of the voters upon 
 what he had been able to do for the district. 
 This, however, is the exception which proves 
 the rule. There is no royal road to good gov- 
 ernment. It can be secured only by the eter- 
 nal vigilance of the individual citizen. Each 
 must be persistently and intelligently active in 
 politics, not in the sense of being a candidate 
 for office, but in that of constant watchfulness 
 and criticism of the men chosen to represent 
 him. Proper attention by each citizen to this 
 matter will abolish the pork barrel, wipe out 
 legislative chicanery, give us legislators of high 
 character and good ability, and restore our 
 legislatures to the position which they ought to 
 hold. The powers which are exercised by our 
 state legislators are the most important ex- 
 ercised by any agency in our governmental sys- 
 tem. They include the whole realm of private 
 and criminal law — practically everything which 
 has to do with the relations of individuals to 
 one another and to society. Legislatures 
 ought to be bodies of first importance, not only 
 
LEGISLATUEES 93 
 
 in respect of the powers they may exercise but 
 in respect of the persons who exercise them, as 
 well. The only way to this is through the peo- 
 ple. That this problem of our American life 
 will be met, there are many signs. Popular 
 indifference is being in a large measure over- 
 come. The people today are more interested 
 in our government than they have ever been, 
 and there is every reason to believe that they 
 will make it really ours. There are some who 
 profess to see in the failure of our American 
 legislatures arguments against democracy. As 
 a matter of fact, however, the history of our 
 legislatures points in the opposite direction. 
 Their misdoings prove that we have had too lit- 
 tle democracy, not too much. By reason of the 
 failure to evolve a system of legislative re- 
 sponsibility the people — the Demos — have 
 never had a chance to rule. These defects in 
 machinery are being corrected. The people are 
 becoming actively aware of their duty. As in 
 every great crisis in American life, the unspent 
 brain of the American people is extending it- 
 self to meet every demand of the situation. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Beard, C. A., ''American Government and Politics," 
 pp. 267-293, 516-546; "Readings in American 
 Government and Politics," pp. 457-487. 
 
94 GOVEENMENT FOE THE PEOPLE 
 
 Bryce, James, "The American Commonwealth," 
 chapters X, XIX, XL, XLII, LXXVI, LXXXVII. 
 
 DoDDS, H. W., "Procedure in State Legislatures." 
 FoLLETT, M. P., "The Speaker of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives. ' ' 
 Ford, H. J., "The Rise and Growth of American 
 
 Politics," pp. 188-196, 216-293. 
 Fuller, H. B., "Speakers of the House." 
 HoLCOMBE, A. N., "State Government in the United 
 
 States." 
 GoDKiN, E. L., "Unforeseen Tendencies of Democ- 
 racy." (Especially, "The Decline of Legisla- 
 tures.") 
 Lowell, A. Lawrence, "Government of England," 
 
 vol. I (gives the contrasting English system). 
 McCall, S. W., "The Business of Congress." 
 McCoNNACHiE, L. G., "Congressional Committees." 
 Ray, p. 0., "An Introduction to Political Parties and 
 
 Practical Politics," pp. 390 et seq. 
 Reinsch, p. S., "American Legislatures and Legisla- 
 tive Methods"; "Readings on American State 
 Government," pp. 41 et seq. 
 Wilson, Woodrow, "Congressional Government." 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 THE LONG BALLOT AS A CAUSE OF POLITICAL 
 CORRUPTION 
 
 Students of politics in the United States have 
 known for a long time that our ballot was too 
 long. Comments have been made from time to 
 time upon the impossible burden of determining 
 the merits of numerous candidates for a multi- 
 tude of positions and upon the confusion of 
 state and city administration produced by elect- 
 ing one man to be the nominal chief of the ad- 
 ministration while, at the same time electing 
 several others, not necessarily in sympathy with 
 the first, to conduct many of its most important 
 branches. Any thinking man who has ever cast 
 a ballot in state or city elections knows of the 
 feeling of helplessness with which he faces the 
 problem of discriminating between the candi- 
 dates for the various minor offices. Such cir- 
 cumstances as the New York State election of 
 1908, in which Governor Hughes, really chosen 
 by the people because of his high character and 
 
 splendid boss-free record, was accompanied into 
 
 96 
 
96 GOVEENMENT FOE THE PEOPLE 
 
 office by a crew of state politicians selected by 
 the very men against whom be bad made tbat 
 record, bave set people to tbinking of tbe folly 
 of a divided responsibility in state government. 
 Of late we bave bad a Sbort Ballot Organiza- 
 tion, including among its officers and members 
 some of tbe most distinguisbed public men in 
 tbe United States. Statesmen of sucb differ- 
 ences of opinion on otber subjects as Taft, 
 Eoosevelt and Wilson bave all condemned tbe 
 long ballot. Tbe voter, at a state election in 
 California, casts bis ballot for some forty dif- 
 ferent offices, besides tbe important one of Gov- 
 ernor. In New York City, in tbe four year 
 cycle, according to Mr. Eicbard S. Cbilds, Sec- 
 retary of tbe Sbort Ballot Organization, four 
 bundred offices are filled by tbe vote of tbe 
 people, and tbe number is even greater in Chi- 
 cago and Pbiladelpbia. Add to all of tbis tbe 
 increasingly large number of constitutional 
 amendments, bond issues, local option, initiative 
 and referendum and recall propositions, in 
 connection witb wbicb tbe people are called 
 upon to exercise tbe franchise, and it is easy 
 to see tbat we bave placed upon our citizens a 
 burden too heavy to bear. No man who does 
 not make a business of politics can vote with 
 genuine intelligence except for a very few of 
 the most important officers and propositions. 
 
THE LONG BALLOT 97 
 
 The long ballot does not exist anywhere else 
 in the world. It is no reflection on the voters of 
 England, France and other European countries 
 that they are not called upon to partici- 
 pate in any such tremendous selective process 
 as that imposed upon our people. The English 
 voter casts his ballot for a member of Parlia- 
 ment on an average of once in every five years. 
 He votes for one member of the borough coun- 
 cil every year, except in certain of the smaller 
 boroughs which are not divided into wards, 
 where he may have to vote for a larger number 
 of members but where the limited size of the 
 constituency pretty well guarantees that all 
 candidates will be fairly well known to the voter. 
 He also casts his ballot for two borough audi- 
 tors each year, whose office is of no real impor- 
 tance — the actual auditing"^ of accounts being 
 done by public accountants chosen for the pur- 
 pose. If he lives in a city of less than fifty 
 thousand he will also have to vote for a member 
 of the county council once in three years and, 
 at intervals, for a member of the Board of 
 Guardians. All this is on the supposition that 
 he is a city dweller. If he lives in a rural por- 
 tion of the country, he will vote for a member of 
 the county council once in three years and for 
 rural district councilors and for members of the 
 parish council at varying intervals and in vary- 
 
9*8 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ing numbers.^ The French voter casts his bal- 
 lot for a member of the Chamber of Deputies 
 once in four years ; for a member of the General 
 Council (of the Department) every six years; 
 for a member of the Council of the Arondisse- 
 ment every six years ; and for four or five mem- 
 bers of the Communal Council every four years. 
 In the smaller cities which are not divided into 
 districts for the purpose of electing members 
 of the Communal Council this number may be 
 larger. The pre-war Prussian voter cast his 
 vote for a Member of the Reichstag every five 
 years; for a member of the Prussian House of 
 Representatives every three years; for a mem- 
 ber of the city assembly every year if rich 
 and every three years if poor. If he lived 
 in the country he also voted for a member of 
 the Circle Diet every three years. Briefly, in 
 European countries the ballot is short. 
 
 The origin of the American system is to be 
 
 1 The number of members of Boards of Guardans, District 
 Councils, and Parish Councils are determined by the County 
 Council, which also may divide parishes into wards according 
 to the purpose of the particular election. This makes it im- 
 possible to state any general rule with regard to the ballot- 
 burden of the people. It may be said, however, that in such 
 small units as the Rural District and Parish, in which every 
 one pretty well knows every one else, a long ballot is no evil 
 — vide the New England Town where the annual meeting elects 
 a list of officers of portentous length. 
 
THE LONG BALLOT 99 
 
 found in the great democratic movement of 
 1830 to 1850, the effect of which on party or- 
 ganization and methods of nomination to office 
 we have already commented upon. It so hap- 
 pened that this period was one of very rapid 
 expansion of the social and economic, and, con- 
 sequently, of the political arrangements of our 
 people. Many new offices had to be created, 
 and some means had to be found of selecting 
 persons to fill them. The original state consti- 
 tutions had given the appointment of the few 
 important administrative offices required under 
 the simple conditions of the time to the legis- 
 lature, or, in a few States, to the governor. 
 The method of appointment by the legislature 
 proved to be unsatisfactory. The general 
 causes which led to the decline of the legisla- 
 ture led to its dealing with the places within its 
 gift in a spirit of jobbery and corruption. At 
 the same time there was some fear of entrusting 
 to the governor of the State a great power of 
 appointment. In the face of these difficulties, 
 what was more natural than to entrust to the 
 people themselves the task of choosing these 
 officers. It was easy to assume that the people 
 would be best represented by the men whom 
 they themselves selected, and, in the belief that 
 they were doing the democratic thing, constitu- 
 tion-makers and amenders jDrovided for the elec- 
 
100 GOVEENMENT FOE THE PEOPLE 
 
 tioii of the principal state officers by tlie people. 
 In consequence, the average American State 
 elects not only a governor and lieutenant-gov- 
 ernor, but also a controller or auditor, a treas- 
 urer, an attorney-general, a superintendent of 
 public instruction, a surveyor-general or land 
 registrar, and, in some States, a state engineer. 
 This is a very conservative list, as in practically 
 every State there are other elective officers more 
 or less numerous filling a great variety of posi- 
 tions. The judges, also, who under most of the 
 early state constitutions were elected by the 
 legislature, came in like manner to be elected 
 by the people. The same causes operated to in- 
 crease the number of elective officers in cities 
 and other units of local government. The only 
 reason, in all probability, that the government 
 of the United States was not affected in the 
 same - direction was the extreme difficulty of 
 amending the Constitution of the United States. 
 The government of the United States, therefore, 
 stands alone among our numerous community 
 of governments. As the result of earlier influ- 
 ences it is highly centralized, the number of offi- 
 cers elected very small/ and, while the long bal- 
 lot of our States and subdivisions operates to 
 a considerable extent to deteriorate the person- 
 nel of the House of Eepresentatives, that is not 
 the fault of our national Constitution. 
 
THE LONG BALLOT 101 
 
 Although the elective principle was extended 
 to so numerous a list of positions in the name 
 of democracy, the long ballot has turned out to 
 be anything but a democratic institution. A 
 fair test of the democratic character of any gov- 
 ernmental device may be presumed to be the 
 question — Does it or does it not bring to pass 
 the real will of the people ? As a matter of fact, 
 the people never really choose the minor offi- 
 cers for whom they vote. In the first place the 
 citizen does not have an opportunity to make 
 an intelligent choice. He is ignorant of the 
 • character of the position to be filled, and of the 
 qualifications necessary to fill it. He is also ig- 
 norant of the extent to which the various can- 
 didates possess these or any other qualifica- 
 tions. They are simply so many names to him. 
 The writer has made it a practice with numer- 
 ous audiences to ask them how many knew the 
 names of the incumbents of each of the elective 
 state offices other than governor and lieutenant- 
 governor. This is a more than fair test, 
 because these men were the successful candi- 
 dates, and may be presumed to have gained 
 some notoriety by that success. They have 
 been for some time incumbents of the places 
 they occupy, a fact which brings them into con- 
 tact with considerable numbers of people. The 
 replies of the audiences varied from total ig- 
 
102 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 norance to about twenty-five per cent, of knowl- 
 edge. The only audience the writer found who 
 anything like unanimously knew the name of a 
 state officer was an audience of about two hun- 
 dred school teachers in Los Angeles, practically 
 all of whom knew the name of the Superin- 
 tendent of Public Instruction. The voter is 
 also confused by the size and complicated ar- 
 rangement of the ballot. Under such circum- 
 stances, he naturally votes his party ticket 
 straight on the assumption that, other things 
 being equal, the men nominated by his party 
 will better satisfy him than the men nominated 
 by the other party. This is what President 
 Eliot says he does, and it is what practically all 
 of us are obliged to confess that w^e do. Of 
 course, being ignorant, the voter is not in a po- 
 sition to criticise his party's choice either be- 
 fore or after election. Little information fil- 
 ters through the press concerning these minor 
 offices, and the voter never really comes to know 
 how his party choice fills the position. Those 
 exceptional cases in which some startling mal- 
 feasance in office brings one of them into a sud- 
 den and unsavory prominence, go to prove the 
 rule. Applying, then, our democratic test to 
 the long ballot, we cannot escape the conclusion 
 that, whatever else it may be, it is not demo- 
 cratic. 
 
THE LONG BALLOT 103 
 
 We still might have ground for consolation 
 if by a means, however undemocratic, the offices 
 were well filled. The political machines, how- 
 ever, which make up the slates of candidates, 
 have, in general, filled the minor places badly. 
 It is true that some of the state officers are 
 splendid men, and that the great majority of 
 them are passably honest, but taken by and 
 large they are not competent. This is not to 
 be wondered at. These offices not being sub- 
 ject to popular criticism, the machines and 
 bosses are at liberty to put up for them whom 
 they please. They choose the men who will do 
 their bidding, or who will strengthen their 
 organization. Now, the qualities of mind which 
 make a man subservient to the bosses do 
 not generally make him an efficient servant of 
 the people. Neither is ability to win votes by 
 bar-front or demagogic methods always syn- 
 onymous with real administrative ability. We 
 have, then, a situation in which these numerous 
 elective offices furnish a means of political cor- 
 ruption, and, at the same time, give the State 
 inefficient servants. The introduction of the di- 
 rect primary will work no improvement. The 
 people are no more competent at the direct pri- 
 mary to discriminate between the candidates 
 for these minor offices than they are at the elec- 
 tion. Indeed, the fact that they have to go 
 
104 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 through the process of selection twice is a cause 
 of still further confusion to them. In conse- 
 quence, the men who prepare the pre-primary 
 slate are in at least the same position as the 
 men who in older times prepared the pre-elec- 
 tion slate. Add to these evils disorganization 
 of administration by entrusting it to a whole 
 series of independently elected officers who are 
 as likely to hate as to love one another, a con- 
 sequence upon which we shall dwell at length 
 hereafter, and we have a situation thoroughly 
 discouraging to the lover of good government. 
 There is, however, light ahead. Our Amer- 
 ican cities, which Mr. Bryce said a few years 
 ago were the one conspicuous failure of our 
 governmental system, have been rapidly throw- 
 ing off the shackles of the long ballot. One 
 fundamental element in the success of the com- 
 mission and manager forms of government has 
 been the short ballot. Under these systems, the 
 political branch of city government is simply 
 organized. The reason for its success is its 
 simplicity. For the first time, we have a 
 form of government in American cities that 
 is so simple that the responsibility for good 
 or ill conduct in any city or department clearly 
 attaches to a few individuals. The ballot is 
 short. In Sacramento, which carries the plan 
 to the extreme limit, the people choose one city 
 councilor a year. This is a short enough bal- 
 
THE LONG BALLOT 105 
 
 lot to suit anybody, and if tlie people of Sacra- 
 mento cannot elect a good city councillor once 
 a year they deserve to have bad government. 
 California, indeed, is taking the lead in the di- 
 rection of the short ballot. The legislative ses- 
 sion of 1911 reduced the number of state elec- 
 tive officers for whom each voter must cast his 
 ballot, by three. The same legislature enacted 
 a freeholder charter plan for counties which 
 permits them to make the usual county adminis- 
 trative officers appointive by the board of su- 
 pervisors. Los Angeles and San Bernardino 
 Counties have already, under this provision, 
 framed charters on the short ballot principle. 
 Old Bishop Berkeley prophesied that westward 
 the course of empire would take its way. Hav- 
 ing flowed west to the apparently impassable 
 barrier of the Pacific, the tide of human prog- 
 ress is turning back upon itself. The East can 
 learn much from the freedom-loving, progres- 
 sive West. 
 
 It would not do to leave this subject without 
 offering for the reader's consideration a sug- 
 gested short ballot plan. Here it is : 
 
 First year: President and Vice-President 
 for four years. United States Senator for six 
 years. Member of the House of Representa- 
 tives for two years. 
 
 Second year: Governor for four years. 
 
106 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 Lieutenant-Governor for four years. State 
 Senator (in half of districts) for four years. 
 Assemblyman for two years. 
 
 Third year: Member of House of Represent- 
 atives for two years. (A United States Sena- 
 tor in this or fifth year.) 
 
 Fourth year: State Senator (in half the dis- 
 tricts) for four years. Assemblyman for two 
 years. 
 
 SPEING ELECTION 
 
 Each year: City Councilman for five years 
 or Member of the Township Board for three 
 years. Member of the County Board for fiYQ 
 years. Member of the School Board for fi^Q 
 years. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Beard, C. A., ''The Ballot's Burden," in Political 
 Science Quarterly ^ vol. XXIV, pp. 589-614. 
 ''Digest of Short Ballot Charters." 
 
 Bradford, E. S., "Commission Government in Amer- 
 ican Cities." 
 
 Childs, Richard S., "Politics without Politicians," 
 "The Short Ballot," "Short Ballot Principles." 
 "The Secret of the Success of the Commission 
 Plan," in Beard, C. A., "Digest of Short Ballot 
 Charters. ' ' 
 
 Eliot, C. W., "Better Municipal Government," in 
 Beard, C. A., "Digest of Short Ballot Charters." 
 
THE LONG BALLOT 107 
 
 Eliot, C. W., ''City Government by Fewer Men," in 
 
 World's Work, vol. XIV, pp. 9419-26. 
 Hamilton, J. J., "Dethronement of the City Boss." 
 Orth, S. p., ''The Boss and the Machine." 
 Woodruff, Clinton Rogers, "City Government by 
 Commission." 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 THE CORRUPTION OF POLITICS BY BIG BUSINESS 
 
 It is a mistake to assume that corruption in 
 politics is ascribable to the peculiar bad-heart- 
 edness of those who profit by it. We have seen 
 how the door to graft is conveniently shaded 
 by the complex organization of our government. 
 The corrupt politician is merely a person of no 
 more than average conscience whom a tempt- 
 ing obscurity invites to wrongdoing. In this 
 chapter we are to consider the buying end of 
 the ^'business'' of politics — the motives and 
 methods of those who corrupt politics in the in- 
 terest of what, in another aspect, is legitimate 
 business. 
 
 The motive is privilege. Our governments, 
 national, state and local, have in their disposi- 
 tion special privileges of enormous value. They 
 consist in part of positive gifts, in part of ex- 
 emptions from the burdens that others bear. 
 To secure or maintain these benefactions and 
 immunities is the motive which has led aggres- 
 sive and ambitious big business to debauch our 
 representatives. To rehearse the privileges 
 
 108 
 
COREUPTION BY BIG BUSINESS 109 
 
 which have been sought and won regardless of 
 the interests of the public would fill a book. 
 Most important in the aggregate value of the 
 gifts conferred are franchises — the right to sup- 
 ply public services for private profit by the use 
 of the streets or the people ^s right of eminent 
 domain. The excessive land grants in alleged 
 aid of railroad building were the most signal 
 and dramatic donations to private enterprise in 
 the history of our country. The lending of 
 credit to railroad, canal, and similar companies 
 by state and local governments was only a few 
 years ago so lavish and reckless that all our 
 newer state constitutions forbid it. Water 
 powers, timber lands, and mineral lands have 
 been pursued more persistently than was ever 
 the Fountain of Youth. And the story of the 
 tariff makes the longest and blackest chapter in 
 the whole great ^^book of jobs." 
 
 Of no less importance to business interests 
 is freedom from restrictive legislation. Amer- 
 ican legislators have not been above introducing 
 restrictive measures for no other purpose than 
 to be bought off. A few years ago a member 
 introduced into the legislature of one of our 
 largest States a bill prohibiting race track gam- 
 bling. It progressed swimmingly for a time. 
 Then its introducer lost interest in it and it 
 was allowed to die. The next year he built a 
 
110 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 fine house, ostensibly on tlie proceeds of a coun- 
 try law practice which had been neglected for 
 the small salary and large expenses of a state 
 senator. This type of legislation is known as 
 the ^'strike/' 
 
 More frequently our legislative bodies, with 
 the very best intentions in the world, pass meas- 
 ures so unscientific and so destructive of the 
 legitimate interests of Capital as to make the 
 use of any means of prevention seem justifia- 
 ble. On the other hand, it is true that many 
 of our great corporations meet with the same 
 hostility and fight with the same ardor the 
 wisest and best-considered measures for the 
 protection of th-e people. When a powerful 
 organization has been created for the purpose 
 of legitimate self-protection, there is a well- 
 nigh irresistible temptation to call its power 
 into exercise for illegitimate purposes if occa- 
 sion arises. Big business also has, of course, 
 an interest in a lax enforcement of the laws 
 limiting its activity. It therefore seeks to con- 
 trol the administrative departments of govern- 
 ment, in which effort it is, as we have seen, 
 greatly aided by our usual long ballot. The 
 characteristic relation, however, between big 
 business and government, is the relation which 
 it sustains to the law-making body — the legis- 
 lature; and it is upon the legislature that the 
 
CORRUPTION BY BIG BUSINESS 111 
 
 corrupting influence of big business has been 
 most potent. 
 
 The methods of this control have undergone 
 progressive modifications. The old method 
 was that of direct action upon the legislature 
 itself. This involved the maintenance of a fa- 
 miliar institution, the ^4obby,'' consisting of 
 one or more representatives of each * interest '^ 
 concerned. Popular imagination has pictured 
 them as haunting the halls of legislation. They 
 made it their business, quite legitimately, to 
 keep their employers in touch with the progress 
 of matters in the legislature, and to present 
 their views to committees and individuals. 
 They became familiar also with the character 
 of each member and with the influences that 
 might be brought to bear upon him. So far 
 there was nothing necessarily evil in their ac- 
 tivities. No more complete system of keeping 
 track of members of a legislature was ever em- 
 ployed than that used by the women's lobby 
 which passed the women's suffrage bill through 
 the 1913 session of the Illinois legislature. 
 The old ^'lobbyists," however, did not stop at 
 the point of legitimate argument or with the 
 use of the pressure of public opinion. They 
 had recourse to any and all means to control 
 the votes of the members. They were shrewd, 
 rich in their knowledge of human nature, and 
 
112 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 shameless in serving tlie interests of their em- 
 ployers, and sometimes more than incidentally 
 their own. 
 
 Certain lobbyists belonged to the regular 
 navy of the greater interests. Others were 
 pirate craft preying right and left on the cred- 
 ulously avaricious smaller men of business. So 
 great became the popular reputation of the 
 omnipresence of ^ ' influence ^ ' in legislative af- 
 fairs, that many a man counting himself wise 
 in business, corrupt in motive, but innocent as 
 a child in the apprehension of things political, 
 bought at a high price an "influence" which did 
 not exist. Vast amounts of money paid to lob- 
 byists to be used in securing votes for or against 
 measures never passed out of their hands. 
 
 Those were the times of high living among 
 legislators, and if a member could be swayed 
 by wining and dining, or by pampering his ap- 
 petite for any kind of vice, the lobbyist took ad- 
 vantage of his weakness. When the passage of 
 an Anti-Race Track Gambling Bill was impend- 
 ing in one of our state legislatures, a promi- 
 nent member of the upper house was engaged 
 in a poker game by race-track men and so in- 
 dustriously plied with liquor that he never came 
 to his senses until the vote had been taken. In 
 another State the Librarian of the State Li- 
 brary maintained a well-stocked buffet in Ms 
 
COREUPTION BY BIG BUSINESS 113 
 
 office at which thirsty legislators might regale 
 themselves. A kindly, well-trained man, the 
 Librarian would offer to new members, beside 
 liquid refreshment, help in the preparation of 
 speeches and the drawing of bills. It was not 
 long before they were caught in the invisible 
 coils of obligation and delivered, bound hand 
 and foot, to a great corporation. If the legis- 
 lator was susceptible to flattery, he was flat- 
 tered ; if he was susceptible to bribery, he was 
 bribed. It was part of the lobbyists' business 
 to know the price of men and never to overpay. 
 If a man could not be influenced by the direct 
 use of money, contributions to his campaign 
 fund or jobs for his friends in the service of a 
 corporation were made to take the place of a 
 positive money payment. If a great popular 
 uprising swept over the country, the big busi- 
 ness interests habitually bent to the storm. 
 They never asked their friends in the legisla- 
 ture to commit political suicide, and they were 
 always willing for a man to vote against them 
 on a particular question if it were clear that he 
 must do so in order to retain his place and his 
 opportunity for serving them in their other 
 needs. 
 
 The days of wild living on the part of legis- 
 lators have been gone for a decade, never to re- 
 turn. It has been no uncommon thing in a state 
 
114 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 capital these days to hear the bar-tenders and 
 the dive-keepers mourn over the decline of legis- 
 lative life. The modern legislator eats pre- 
 pared breakfast food and drinks buttermilk. 
 He haunts the cafeteria rather than the grill 
 room. The corporations still maintain repre- 
 sentatives at the capital, but their business is 
 more particularly to watch the course of legis- 
 lation and warn their masters of what is to fol- 
 low. Almost the only great lobbies of the pres- 
 ent day are those conducted by the numerous 
 reform agencies. Sometimes, too, the amateur 
 activities of some city council or chamber of 
 commerce crowd the capital with buttonholing 
 badge wearers. The representatives of big 
 business are no longer very conspicuous ex- 
 cept, perhaps, at Washington. There, the ex- 
 traordinary stimulus of tariff revision will 
 still draw out an old-time gathering of the 
 clans. More typical is the case of a great finan- 
 cial interest in the State of California, which 
 to present certain important considerations to 
 the legislature, — a matter which in past times 
 would have required the service of a host of 
 attorneys and retainers, — sent but one man to 
 Sacramento who merely appeared before the 
 committee concerned, and left immediately 
 thereafter. 
 
 The outright use of money to buy a legisla- 
 
COEKUPTION BY BIG BUSINESS 115 
 
 ture or a city council is becoming an exceptional 
 practice likewise ; a crude relic of the time wlien 
 the control of politics was not thoroughly un- 
 derstood. In these days big business still con- 
 trols legislative action and by the use of means 
 no less sinister than formerly. It works, how- 
 ever, through ways less obvious to the public. 
 Its control is now secured through the political 
 organization or machine upon which the indi- 
 vidual legislators depend. Big business enters 
 into close alliance with the boss. Indeed, it is 
 the possibility of such a connection with big 
 business which supplies the chief incentive to 
 attain bossship. Even where the element of 
 personal corruption is less evident big business 
 secures party gratitude by campaign contribu- 
 tions. Note, for example, Miss TarbelPs ex- 
 planation of the influence of Mr. William Whit- 
 man of Boston in securing the infamous Sched- 
 ule K of the tariff of 1909 : 
 
 *' 'What made Mr. Whitman so powerful? Prob- 
 ably we shall not go far astray if we assert that the 
 real reason is that for many years he and his worsted 
 friends have been one of the main financial reserves 
 of the high protection wing of the Republican Party 
 in New England, and that in return they have got 
 what they asked for. That is political ethics — or 
 etiquette. Ever since 1888, it has been a settled and 
 openly expressed principle in political circles that 
 
116 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 your protection shall be in proportion to your cam- 
 paign contribution.' " 
 
 Furthermore, our standards of business and 
 political ethics have made it possible for men 
 representing big business in their own persons 
 to become the bosses of great States without 
 any self-acknowledged loss of personal honor 
 and to use their positions to benefit themselves 
 and others of their class. The individual mem- 
 ber of the legislature under this system rarely 
 profits financially for casting a corporation 
 vote. The boss may profit financially or polit- 
 ically, but he does not divide with his h.enchmen. 
 One rather tragic case arose in connection with 
 the race track bill to which we have already re- 
 ferred. A young man of good parts having 
 given assurances to the people of his district 
 of his probable adherence to the bill was or- 
 dered by his boss to vote against it. True to 
 the discipline of his organization he did so, al- 
 though his ^'No'^ was a self -pronounced sen- 
 tence of political death. He never got a cent 
 for his sacrifice. If there are any pickings for 
 the purchasable member of the legislature 
 these days, they are from the small fry of cor- 
 ruptionists — not from the big business inter- 
 ests. It was commonly reported prior to 1911 
 that a seat in the California legislature was 
 
COREUPTION BY BIG BUSINESS 117 
 
 worth $3000. They are no longer capitalized 
 at any jSgure. 
 
 The new method is, from the corporation 
 standpoint, infinitely superior to the old, which 
 was fraught with the danger of exposure and 
 prosecution. By processes rarely illegal they 
 now become an integral part of the organiza- 
 tion which determines the choice of legislators. 
 They thus control the product of legislation at 
 all times except when a party organized upon 
 principle drives the machine from its strong- 
 hold and puts into power real servants of the 
 people. 
 
 There is scarcely a citizen of our country who 
 has not heard the expression ^'The System. '' 
 The great majority of them, however, have only 
 a very hazy idea as to what the expression 
 means. It is variously used,, but most signifi- 
 cantly to describe a condition of combination or 
 cooperation on the part of great financial en- 
 terprises to affect the operation of government. 
 There is little evidence that there is anything 
 formal about it. It is simply an understanding 
 among the men who look out for the political 
 interests of the big corporations. In the old 
 days their representatives in the lobby pooled 
 their interests, and by an alliance made their 
 control over the legislature more certain. In 
 these days, the combination is normally effected 
 
118 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 through undiscoverable channels, and with no 
 possible implication of the individual officers 
 of the corporations, but is none the less effec- 
 tive. 
 
 Frequently, when some one big corporation 
 has secured the control of the politics of a State, 
 or of a city, the other corporations, instead of 
 dealing directly in politics, deal with this major 
 corporation, and it becomes a clearing house 
 for the political activities of all the big business 
 interests of the community. An excellent ex- 
 ample of this was the situation which prevailed 
 with regard to the Southern Pacific Railroad in 
 the State of California prior to the advent to 
 power of the progressive administration of 
 Governor Hiram Johnson in 1911. Any one 
 who wanted legislation went to the representa- 
 tive of the Southern Pacific, who disposed of 
 legislative favors with almost regal lavishness. 
 The policy of this great corporation was, once 
 its own demands were satisfied, a fairly liberal 
 one. It was friendly to education and gladly 
 acquiesced in large appropriations for state in- 
 stitutions. It is not uncommon, therefore, to 
 find high-minded people, now forced to run the 
 gauntlet of the whole legislature, shamefacedly 
 sighing for the simplicity of the * ' System. ' ' 
 
 Another aspect of the political power of the 
 great corporations, and one which has been too 
 
CORRUPTION BY BIG BUSINESS llD 
 
 little commented upon, is their power to control 
 votes. Every such corporation employs vast 
 numbers of men, over whom they can exercise 
 a great deal of influence. It is not uncommon 
 for such corporations to order them to vote in 
 a particular way, and while it is impossible to 
 say to what extent the order is obeyed there 
 can be no doubt but it has a very material in- 
 fluence on the result of many elections. More 
 commonly the corporations effect their purpose 
 by inducing their men to stay away from the 
 poUs, by which means a check-list test can be 
 applied to their loyalty. There might be really 
 grave danger if this power to control votes 
 should increase. It is surprising that the cor- 
 porations have not more clearly seen the eco- 
 nomic and political advantages of sharing with 
 their employees some measure of the plunder 
 which they wrested from the people. If they 
 had generally adopted the policy of making their 
 employees somewhat better off than other men 
 of the same class, they might have made the in- 
 terests of the employees their own. A few 
 years ago it appeared highly probable that 
 within a short time we should see great corpo- 
 rate interests in which the laboring men and the 
 capitalists presented a united front, politically, 
 to every effort to regulate or control them. 
 Like the robber barons of feudal times, the 
 
120 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 heads of these corporations would have gath- 
 ered about them great hosts of retainers who 
 would have cast their votes at the beck and nod 
 of their superiors. This process of amalgama- 
 tion of the interests of masters and men has 
 been distinctly, if unconsciously, facilitated by 
 the perfection of trades unionism. A powerful 
 union dealing with a corporation in receipt of 
 swollen profits could frequently force conces- 
 sions which had the effect of making it a partner 
 in the corporate success. The most notable in- 
 stance of this partnership was between the glass 
 ^ ' trust '^ and the glass workers where a hard and 
 fast agreement for mutual aggrandizement was 
 reached. Something of the same sort, had 
 taken place between some of our great railroads 
 and the powerful unions of their employees be- 
 fore the roads passed into Federal control and 
 now promises to be a feature of their future 
 disposition, but, with the unions in first place. 
 Trust, and Trade Union, both in their nature 
 monopolistic, are not unnatural allies. 
 
 Capital, however, in the great trustified indus- 
 tries took advantage of a coincident improve- 
 ment of machinery and the flood of cheap labor 
 from Eastern and Southeastern Europe to break 
 up trades unionism. Trades unions are now 
 only sporadic in the fundamental industries of 
 
COERUPTION BY BIG BUSINESS 121 
 
 our country, except that of transportation. The 
 trusts have been blind, perhaps, to the dangers 
 of disassociating their interests from those of 
 their employees. Perhaps they have deliber- 
 ately tempted the deluge. Suffice it to say that 
 at the moment when their top-heaviness, lack 
 of efficiency and reckless financiering are 
 threatening their economic supremacy, they 
 stand without a friend politically, unless it be 
 a mercenary and sycophantish press. They 
 have alienated the middle class by their sense- 
 less exactions. Their employees are ignorant, 
 hard-pressed, half-starved proletarians among 
 whom — and small wonder — the revolutionary 
 doctrines of syndicalism spread like wildfire. 
 
 There is in modern society a fundamental 
 antithesis. Politically speaking, society is 
 democratic ; economically, society is feudal. So 
 far, feudal economic society has by means of 
 the corrupt methods we have discussed in this 
 chapter pretty well dominated our political de- 
 mocracy. The supreme test of democracy will 
 be to bring under its control rebellious eco- 
 nomic society. If it cannot do so and at the 
 same time preserve the individual rights of 
 property ; if it cannot do so by regulation and 
 restraint — by rate fixing and service compel- 
 ling — democracy will have proved a failure. 
 Happily, economic feudalism is weaker politi- 
 
122 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 cally than it has ever been since the introduction 
 of machinery. It is beginning to disintegrate 
 as a means of production. There is hope for 
 democracy. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Brooks, John Graham, ''The Conflict Between Pri- 
 vate Monopoly and Good Citizenship." 
 
 Brooks, R. C, ' ' Corruption in American Politics and 
 Life." 
 
 Bryce, James, ' ' Hindrances to Good Citizenship, ' ' pp. 
 43-74. 
 
 Churchill, "Winston, ' ' Conniston, ' ' (fiction) . * ' Mr. 
 Crewe's Career," (fiction). 
 
 Howe,- F. C, ''The City the Hope of Democracy," 
 "European Cities at Work." 
 
 Johnson, Tom L., "My Story." 
 
 Kales, A. M., "Unpopular Government." 
 
 Lewis, Alfred Henry, "The Boss," (fiction). 
 
 LiNDSEY, Ben B., and Higgins, Harvey J., "The 
 Beast." 
 
 Myers, Gustavus, "History of Tammany Hall." 
 
 Steffens, Lincoln, "The Shame of the Cities,'^ 
 "TheUpbuilders." 
 
 Tarbell, Ida M., "The Tariff in Our Times." 
 
 Wilcox, D. F., "Great Cities of America," "Munici- 
 pal Franchises," "The American City," pp. 59-90. 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 
 TELE COKEUPTION OF POLITICS BY OKGANIZED VICE 
 
 At the root of tlie problem with, which this 
 chapter deals lies the old distinction between 
 vice and crime. Crime is conduct so obviously 
 detrimental to society that there is an absolute 
 consensus of opinion concerning its prohibition. 
 Crimes are clearly offenses against society, 
 which society has no hesitation in using its ut- 
 most force to suppress. Vices, on the other 
 hand, are primarily harmful to the people that 
 practice them, and only secondarily injure so- 
 ciety. Certain of them like drunkenness, the 
 use of certain drugs, gambling and the practice 
 of sexual irregularity have come to be recog- 
 nized as inimical to society, and to be the sub- 
 ject of legal restrictions. Only to a limited ex- 
 tent have vices been prohibited as such, and 
 the laws which in certain States make gam- 
 bling, fornication and adultery criminal have 
 not been noticeably effective. In general the 
 effort of society has been to regulate or stop 
 altogether the business of ministering to these 
 vices. Upon this subject there is no consensus 
 
 123 
 
124 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 of opinion. No policy with regard to these 
 vices is agreed to even by a large majority of 
 the people. Even when a majority does ac- 
 quiesce in some particular mode of treatment, 
 the support of the measure adopted is fre- 
 quently so lukewarm as to make its enforce- 
 ment a matter of great difficulty. It is indeed 
 very much easier to the average citizen to en- 
 dorse the enactment of a law than to be active 
 in his desire for its enforcement. We are 
 rather prone as a people to aspire to very high 
 ideals in our laws and then to resent being 
 bothered about their execution. The first chap- 
 ter of his book has commented upon the oppor- 
 tunity for graft afforded by the difference be- 
 tween the legal and the actual moral standards 
 of the people. It need not surprise us, there- 
 fore, that the effort to regulate or prohibit the 
 purveying of these vicious pleasures has been a 
 fruitful source of political corruption. We may 
 even confidently expect that the recently adopted 
 policy of national prohibition will, unless backed 
 by the most vigorous sentiment for its enforce- 
 ment, bring with it enormous temptations and 
 opportunity for the corruption of politics. 
 
 Before we can understand the extent to which 
 our political institutions have been infected from 
 
COREUPTION BY ORGANIZED VICE 125 
 
 this source we must realize the relation which 
 existed between the three great vice purveying 
 industries. The trade in women, vast and enor- 
 mously profitable as it is, has very little direct 
 political power. The number of men engaged 
 in it is small and though the introduction of 
 woman suffrage will greatly increase its voting 
 strength, it will remain relatively weak. The 
 business is so unspeakably vile that it can not 
 raise its voice in its own defense and there are 
 few indeed among the general public so de- 
 praved as to give it open aid. There is no pol- 
 itician so corrupt that he will not record an em- 
 phatic ''Aye'' on any White Slave bill. The 
 professional gamblers are not very numerous 
 and, while their business is not so utterly be- 
 yond the pale as that of the pander, it finds few 
 advocates. The social evil and gambling have 
 now long been under the ban of the law, but in 
 spite of the most determined efforts to suppress 
 them they are still buying the right to exist by 
 the corruption of politics. In the liquor traffic, 
 however, we come to a very different grade of 
 business. Here we are dealing, not with a busi- 
 ness ministering to a limited class of the de- 
 praved, but with a great industry which sup- 
 plied in vast quanitities a commodity desired 
 by almost a majority of normal men and women. 
 
126 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 There is in their opinion absolutely nothing 
 wrong in the properly regulated sale of liquor. 
 Relatively speaking, then, the liquor business 
 had the advantage, not only of prodigious 
 wealth, but of comparative respectability. It 
 had other great sources of political power of 
 which we shall speak presently, and it was in 
 the position, if its interests were the same, to 
 protect the other vice-mongers along with itself. 
 Now, little as he liked to acknowledge it, the 
 saloon owner was very closely connected in in- 
 terest with the owner of the gambling den and 
 the brothel. In the first place, liquor is in great 
 demand by the patrons of the latter resorts. 
 Men must needs inflame themselves with strong 
 drink before the grosser forms of madness can 
 be enjoyed. Vast quantities of liquor were sold 
 in such places at exaggerated prices and these 
 places were one and all profitable customers of 
 the brewers, distillers and wine merchants. 
 Furthermore, the conditions in the liquor busi- 
 ness were latterly such that it was very difficult 
 for the saloonkeeper to run a decent saloon if he 
 desired to. In times gone by the liquor store 
 with its stock and fixtures belonged to the sa- 
 loonkeeper, and the profits of the retail trade 
 made him a fat, rich and near-respectable citi- 
 zen. In 1919 probably very close to ninety 
 per cent, of all saloons were not owned by their 
 nominal proprietors. In the eager rush for an 
 
COERUPTION BY ORGANIZED VICE 127 
 
 outlet for their several products, the brewers 
 and distillers were willing to finance any cap- 
 able-appearing young fellow who wanted to 
 start a saloon. They rented the premises and 
 fitted them up, added a stock of liquor, and se- 
 cured themselves by a chattel mortgage. Under 
 this system the number of saloons was multi- 
 plied out of all proportion to the genuine de- 
 mand for them, and the profits of the retail 
 business very much reduced. In these days un- 
 less the saloon is in an exceptionally good loca- 
 tion, or unless the saloonkeeper was an excep- 
 tionally good hand with the boys, there was 
 little more than wages for the proprietor. 
 Face to face every month with interest pay- 
 ments, principal payments, and the monthly 
 bills for beer supplied by the financing brewery, 
 it was no wonder that the struggling drink dis- 
 penser found his scruples against allowing 
 gamblers and evil women to ply their trade in 
 his rear room breaking down. The brewers 
 .and distillers very lately professed to be very 
 much shocked at the conditions prevailing in the 
 retail liquor trade and took some steps to reform 
 the saloon. Death bed repentances have small 
 virtue and the American people paid little heed 
 to these pleas for forgiveness. The light had 
 come too late. The intimacy between the pur- 
 veyors to our three great vices was a very close 
 one, and it required something more than pro- 
 
128 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 testations to open up a gap between them. 
 Down to the day of its decease it was the saloon 
 machine which championed, of course without 
 unnecessary fanfare or parade, the other vices 
 in distress. 
 
 We have already noted that the liquor busi- 
 ness possessed that very essential source of po- 
 litical power, vast wealth. In this respect it 
 bore the same relation to pohtics that is borne 
 by any of the great corporate influences of the 
 country. Beyond this, however, the saloon 
 played a part of the first importance in the 
 working of machine politics. It was indeed the 
 center around which every such machine was 
 built. Despite all that the extreme opponents 
 of the saloon may say, it was the only existing 
 social center for the great mass of the people. 
 It was in a very real sense the poor man's club. 
 In it congregated the men of the neighborhood, 
 and if this were the whole story it would be evi- 
 dent that the leader or organization which con- 
 trolled the saloon would control the best of 
 opportunities for coming into personal touch 
 with the electorate. The saloonkeepers and 
 their bartenders were in direct proportion to 
 their success ''good fellows." The very quali- 
 ties which drew custom to their bars made them 
 natural leaders among the simple men who fre- 
 quented them. The temperance enthusiast who 
 
COERUPTION BY ORGANIZED VICE 129 
 
 pictures the bar-keeper as an ogre is vastly de- 
 ceived. He did not wear the brand of Cain or 
 any lesser criminal on his brow, and he pos- 
 sessed many of the more elementary human 
 virtues. He had an opportunity to do many 
 small favors for his customers such as cashing 
 checks and giving limited credit. He not only 
 more or less influenced all his regular patrons 
 but attached to himself a few hangers-on whom 
 he delivered absolutely as the saloon-owner di- 
 rected. It is natural that a machine of the cor- 
 rupt order, which was kept together by some- 
 thing other than an appeal to principle, should 
 find the petty officers of its organization among 
 saloonkeepers. As the more influential bosses 
 are simply men of the petty officer class who 
 have in some way gained control of the other 
 petty officers, the higher as well as the lower 
 officers of the machine were saloonkeepers or 
 ex-saloonkeepers. There were exceptions, but 
 this was the rule. Being thus strong politi- 
 cally, the friendship of the saloon was sought 
 by politicians of a larger sort, and it grew still 
 stronger as the result of the alliances thus made. 
 It was therefore possible for the saloon to pro- 
 tect its interests and those of its allies not only 
 because of its economic strength to influence 
 the political machine but because it was the ma- 
 chine itself. This is what made the corruption 
 
130 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 of politics by the saloon so insidiously effective. 
 It is not difficult, therefore, to realize that 
 there was a close connection between the politi- 
 cal activities of big business and the liquor traf- 
 fic. Just as the rich brewer disliked to ac- 
 knowledge his relation to the lawbreaking joint, 
 so the corporation magnate hesitated to own 
 association with the great political power of the 
 saloon. His control of politics, however, was 
 based upon the machine which, as we have seen, 
 was so largely dominated by the saloonkeeper. 
 In almost every struggle the saloon and the 
 great interests were allies. Hence that other- 
 wise unexplainable reluctance of certain pillars 
 of the church and ornaments of society to lend 
 the influence of their names to attacks even upon 
 the grosser vices. This explains why so many 
 men of substance are so insistent that the 
 preacher devote himself to the ** simple gospel.'' 
 To get nearer home than Judea of two thousand 
 years ago savors to them of danger to their in- 
 heritance of an efficient and venal machine. On 
 the other hand the saloonkeeper was seldom 
 progressive in his views of economic and politi- 
 cal questions. Reform of any sort spelled ter- 
 ror for him. He was a natural conservative, 
 agreeing in all points with those representatives 
 of corporate wealth who pin their hope to things 
 as they are. In defeating hostile legislation 
 
CORRUPTION BY ORGANIZED VICE 131 
 
 and in promoting that which favors their busi- 
 ness and that of their allies and dependents, the 
 saloon operated much as does big business, 
 sometimes by the use of money and other influ- 
 ences directly on the members of the legislature, 
 but, more normally in these days, by means of 
 its control of the machine. In the same way 
 it secured the complaisance of the local authori- 
 ties to the constant infringements of the law of 
 which almost all saloons were guilty. 
 
 The adoption of national prohibition has at- 
 tached a peculiar significance to the situation 
 which only time will show whether our newly 
 adopted policy of national prohibition will be 
 thoroughly enforced in every part of the coun- 
 try. Wherever the authorities allow it to be 
 violated, there will be found the same results, 
 which always occur when a law which is broken 
 is not an expression of the real desires of the 
 community. This, as we all know, has been 
 frequently the case, especially in large cities. 
 It is the situation logically expected to arise 
 from that proneness of the American people to 
 lend themselves to the enactment into law of 
 general moral aspirations without any accom- 
 panying earnest desire for their enforcement. 
 Where the attempted repression goes beyond 
 the real desires of the community, it is clear that 
 no serious political consequences can attend 
 
132 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 upon an attitude of indifference as to the en- 
 forcement of the law on the part of public of- 
 ficials. If the law is enforced, no one can truly 
 blame the zealous officer who is responsible for 
 it. This situation is the cause of that police 
 corruption which is such a widespread phe- 
 nomenon in our American cities. The police 
 know of practically all the violations of the law 
 committed by the establishments which minister 
 to the various forms of vice. It is an easy 
 thing, therefore, to say to the law breaker in 
 the laconic dialect of graft, ''Put up or we'll 
 shut you up." Sometimes the tribute thus 
 wrung from these wrong-doers is the vulgar 
 little perquisite of the patrolman on the beat. 
 Sometimes it is shared with the officials ''higher 
 up.'' Sometimes an important and responsible 
 official, a Lieutenant Becker for example, has it 
 collected for himself directly. Every dealer 
 in vice, from the simple saloonkeeper who 
 wanted to sell a few glasses of beer on Sunday 
 to the proprietors of the dives of the unspeak- 
 able degree of infamy, are subject to this form 
 of blackmail. Even when the saloon as a po- 
 litical force was dominant in the city, it, in 
 general, had to put into office such a dishonest 
 set of grafters that they would not play fair 
 even with the machine which made them. 
 
CORRUPTION BY ORGANIZED VICE 133 
 
 It is also unfortunately true that even the 
 strongest and most righteous head of an admin- 
 istration can do next to nothing to prevent the 
 petty grafting of the individual members of the 
 police force where the latitude of local public 
 opinion on the subject of law enforcement is of 
 such degree. So long as a discrepancy exists 
 between the face of the law and the hearts of the 
 people there will be graft. The frightful police 
 corruption of New York which recently shocked 
 the whole country has long been no secret to 
 those who have been familiar with the attempted 
 regulation of vice in that city. It grew out 
 of the difference in moral standard between 
 an up-state legislature and the public opinion 
 of the metropolis. In particular the Sunday 
 closing of saloons for which the famous Raines 
 law provided was a policy none too popular 
 among the people of the city. It was genu- 
 inely enforced by Theodore Roosevelt, then Po- 
 lice Commissioner, for one Sunday, at the ex- 
 pense of calling the force pretty largely away 
 from every other duty. For a short period he 
 kept up the honest effort to enforce it. No 
 other police commissioner has ever even pre- 
 tended to do so. The thousands of saloons 
 have all the while paid tribute to some one or 
 other. The same is true of the gambling 
 houses, the disorderly hotels, a^d even of the 
 
134 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 individual street walker. We can never hope 
 to put an end to this system until we are ready 
 to recognize that a law worth passing is worth 
 enforcing. If it is for the best interests of the 
 whole community that the State or Nation 
 should enact laws distasteful to large sections 
 of the country, the only logical thing to do is to 
 provide state machinery for their enforcement. 
 To enact such laws and then leave their enforce- 
 ment to the officers chosen for the purpose by 
 the locality is the rankest folly. It means the 
 loss of the benefit of that uniformity of policy 
 which was the excuse for the adoption of the 
 law. It means also graft ad libitum. How 
 long will we remain hypocrites ! 
 
 National prohibition by destrojdng the saloon 
 as a social institution has made innocuous the 
 real political power of vice. A great machine 
 cannot be built around the secret contrivances 
 of bootleggers. The corroding influence, how- 
 ever, of unenforced law will be vastly more viru- 
 lent than heretofore if measures for its execu- 
 tion are not agreed to by all the people or, as 
 to which the majority proposes honestly and 
 thoroughly to have its way. Political reform 
 and honest party organization will remove cor- 
 ruptible men from political power. Public pro- 
 vision of clean recreation for the leisure time of 
 
CORRUPTION BY ORGANIZED VICE 135 
 
 the people will lessen the temptation to evade 
 the prohibition law and at the same time weaken 
 the influence of all the other vices. The leisure 
 time of the rising generation is happily taking 
 more and more the attention of our moralists 
 and social workers. Toil, within reasonable 
 limits, is not a corrupting agency. At worst it 
 merely produces such bodily fatigue as predis- 
 poses to harmful indulgence in certain forms of 
 pleasure. It is in idle time that the lure of vice 
 is felt. Let us have more playgrounds, more 
 baths, more gymnasiums, more libraries and 
 reading rooms, more neighborhood centers, 
 more regulated dance halls, more well censored 
 moving pictures, more rational amusement of 
 every kind, and we will have in direct ratio a 
 reduction of drunkenness, gambling and social 
 vice. 
 
 It sometimes seems as if these diseases of 
 society inevitably infect every hand that touches 
 them, no matter what the motive. We must not, 
 however, be discouraged into an abandonment 
 of the effective restraints which law can place 
 on vice. There is a thorough method of anti- 
 sepsis — to bathe the government in high moral 
 purpose that puts right before purse or party. 
 Thus the foul places can be made clean. 
 
136 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Addams, Jane, ''A New Conscience and an Ancient 
 
 Evil.'' 
 Anonymous, ** Municipalities and Vice," in Municipal 
 
 Affairs, June, 1901. 
 Committee of Fifteen, ''The Social Evil," 2nd edition, 
 
 E. R. A. Seligman, editor. 
 Committee of Fourteen, "The Social Evil in New 
 
 York City: A Study of Law Enforcement." 
 Flynt, Josiah, ''The "World of Graft." 
 FuLD, L. F., "Police Administration," pp. 369-415. 
 Kneeland, George J., "Commercialized Prostitution 
 
 in New York City. ' ' 
 McAdoo, W., "Guarding a Great City." 
 Peters, John P., "Suppression of the 'Raines Law 
 
 Hotels,' " in Annals American Academy, vol. 32. 
 Report of the Chicago Vice Commission: "The Social 
 
 Evil in Chicago." 
 Report of the Vice Commission of ]\Iinneapolis. 
 Rns, Jacob, "The Battle with the Slum." 
 Sanger, W. W., ' ' History of Prostitution.' ' 
 Webb, SroNEY and Beatrice, ' ' The Historj^ of Liquor 
 
 Licensing in England." 
 Wilcox, D. F., "The American City," pp. 121-173. 
 
CHAPTEE IX 
 
 THE INITIATIVE, EEFEKENDUM AND RECALL 
 
 We ordinarily think of tlie initiative, referen- 
 dum and recall as tlie trilogy of modern pro- 
 gressivism. They are generally regarded as 
 recent innovations in government. As a mat- 
 ter of fact, however, they all have histories, 
 and have all been more or less familiar instru- 
 ments of popular government for a considerable 
 time. The referendum is the most ancient. We 
 find it in use from the beginning of the Swiss 
 Confederation, in which the delegates of the 
 several States determined matters, not finally, 
 but '^ad audiendum et referendum.^' Their 
 decision went back to the people of the cantons 
 they represented for approval there. With the 
 introduction of representative institutions in 
 Switzerland, early in the nineteenth century, 
 the referendum was reinstated, this time as a 
 means of check on these representative govern- 
 ments. The Swiss, unused to representative 
 principles, distrusted their legislators, and 
 could be reconciled to them only by reserving 
 to the people the right to veto by popular vote 
 
 137 
 
138 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 the laws passed by them. In some cantons the 
 referendum was obligatory and applied to all 
 laws; in others it was optional, being applied 
 only to those laws concerning which a referen- 
 dum petition was filed. Later, the government 
 of the Confederation adopted an optional refer- 
 endum on constitutional matters. 
 
 Li the United States, in the meantime, and 
 quite independently of Switzerland, the refer- 
 endum had been put into practice. When the 
 constitutional convention of the new State of 
 Massachusetts had completed in 1778 the draft 
 of its constitution, it submitted it to the people 
 for their ratification. This was in strict ac- 
 cordance with the prevailing theory of govern- 
 ment, which held that all powers were derived 
 from the consent of the governed, and as the 
 constitution was to be the fundamental law or 
 compact on which all other arrangements were 
 to be based, it was only proper that it should be 
 adopted by the people themselves. This con- 
 stitution of 1778 was defeated, but in 1780 a 
 second constitution was submitted and ratified. 
 Since that time it has gradually become the cus- 
 tom in all our States to submit to the people 
 for their ratification, not only new constitutions, 
 but constitutional amendments as well. The 
 custom grew up also of submitting to the people 
 other propositions of a quasi-constitutional na- 
 
INITIATIVE, EEFERENDUM, ETC. 139 
 
 ture, sucli as the issuing of bonds pledging the 
 credit of the State or fixing the site of the state 
 capital. The principle was also extended to 
 local governments. The organization of new 
 counties, the ratification of city charters, the 
 approval of local bond issues, the granting of 
 franchises and many other similar matters were 
 frequently made the subjects of popular vote. 
 The most striking instance of all is to be found 
 in the local option liquor legislation which pre- 
 vailed in most of our states. Sometimes the 
 vote depended upon a petition, but in other 
 cases, it took place automatically at each elec- 
 tion. Local option broke the back of the 
 saloon and paved the way for prohibition. It 
 would then be distinctly incorrect to say that 
 the referendum is a new institution in the 
 United States. It is only its application to the 
 general laws of state legislatures and every 
 day ordinances of city councils that is new. 
 
 The initiative is, comparatively speaking, a 
 modern device in government. It was devel- 
 oped in Smtzerland in the early part of the 
 nineteenth century to meet fully that sense of 
 distrust which was partly expressed by the 
 adoption of the referendum. The legislature, 
 as well as doing things which the people would 
 not have done, might leave undone tilings which 
 
140 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 the people would have done. Hence it was nec- 
 essary to endow the people with power to pro- 
 pose legislation. The Swiss constitutions usu- 
 ally provide that a measure proposed by popu- 
 lar petition shall be submitted first to the legis- 
 lature to give it an opportunity to adopt or re- 
 ject it. In some cantons measures are submit- 
 ted in final form, in others, only the general 
 terms of the proposition are put forward by 
 the people, the detail drafting being left to the 
 legislatures. If rejected, however, the meas- 
 ure must be submitted to the people, and if 
 passed by them it becomes a law. In some 
 cases the legislature is permitted to propose 
 alternatives to be voted on at the same time as 
 the original p]*oposition. Our only experience 
 with the initiative in the United States has been 
 with regard to local option liquor laws, some 
 of which provide for the submission of the ques- 
 tion to the people upon a popular initiative 
 petition. This has somewhat familiarized us 
 in the United States with a portion of the legis- 
 lative policy of a locality, at least, originating 
 with the people themselves. 
 
 The recall is nearly as ancient as the 
 referendum. Its origin is buried in more or 
 less obscurity. There is evidence that it has 
 existed time out of mind in Switzerland, and 
 several of the cantonal constitutions now make 
 
INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM, ETC. 141 
 
 provisions for it. There is no record of its use, 
 at least in modern times, annual elections leav- 
 ing little room for the recalL It has been al- 
 leged by some writers that it existed in the Ar- 
 ticles of Confederation under which our na- 
 tional affairs were directed from 1778 to 
 1789. Those articles provided that the repre- 
 sentatives of each State might be recalled by 
 the legislature which had elected them. This, 
 however, differs very markedly from the recall 
 as we now understand it. The delegates of the 
 Congress of the Confederation were little more 
 than representatives of the States as units; 
 more on the order of diplomatic agents of inde- 
 pendent governments than members of the 
 representative body of an organic union. They 
 were subject to recall, as all such agents are, by 
 the power that appointed them. The fact that 
 their functions were revocable grew out of the 
 nature of the assemblage, not out of the desire 
 to make them amenable to the people. 
 
 The first appearance of the recall in American 
 government was in the Los Angeles charter 
 amendments of 1903. It went into the Los 
 Angeles charter along with the initiative and 
 the referendum, the principal proponent of the 
 scheme being Dr. John R. Haines. Dr. Haines 
 alleges, and there is no reason to doubt his 
 word, that he had no knowledge of the Swiss 
 
142 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 recall, and that he simply worked the matter 
 out in his own head with nothing but the pro- 
 visions in the Articles of Confederation to go 
 upon. It has been asserted by a well known 
 writer on such subjects, that the recall provision 
 of the Los Angeles charter is almost identical 
 word for word, with that of the cantonal consti- 
 tution of Schaffhausen. A glance, however, at 
 the language of that constitution and the 
 charter of Los Angeles will serve to free Dr. 
 Haines from a charge of slavish copying. He is 
 entitled to the credit of introducing to American 
 government a highly original and practically 
 framed addition to the mechanism of democ- 
 racy. 
 
 Contrary to the usual belief, the recall is the 
 least radical of all these institutions. It does 
 not at all alter the usual method of making laws 
 and it is entirely consistent with the general 
 theory of representative government. Indeed, 
 the existence of the recall is logically necessary 
 to the thorough democracy of a representative 
 government. Under the usual system of elect- 
 ing representatives for a definite period, they 
 are subject to control only at the moment of 
 their selection. Of course, the desire of hold- 
 ing office, and, to a certain extent, the honest 
 fear of public opinion will cause them to rep- 
 resent faithfully the wishes of their constitu- 
 
INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM, ETC. 143 
 
 ents, bi>t at any one moment they and not the 
 people control the situation. To be thoroughly 
 democratic, the organization of the powers of 
 government must give to the people poten- 
 tial authority at all times. Thus, the recall is 
 logically the last word in representative democ- 
 racy. If, of course, the recall were to be used 
 extensively, it might result in an extreme dis- 
 organization of government. There is no evi- 
 dence, however, that it will be so used. It is 
 never used in Switzerland, and in those Ameri- 
 can cities which, beginning with Los Angeles, 
 have adopted the recall, and which now num- 
 ber nearly three hundred, there have been few 
 instances of its use. In Los Angeles itself, two 
 persons have been made the subject of recall: a 
 councilman accused of corruption, and a mayor 
 accused of intriguing with the purveyors of vice. 
 The councilman was recalled and the mayor re- 
 signed before the recall election was held. In 
 Dallas, Texas, two separate recall elections 
 were held to recall the members of the school 
 board, the difficulty growing out of the dismissal 
 of a popular principal of the high school. A 
 subsequent effort to recall the members of the 
 city council and mayor was defeated by the 
 circulation of a counter petition which was 
 promptly signed by more than a majority of the 
 qualified voters of Dallas, upon which gentle 
 
144 GOVEKNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 Milt the recallers ceased their operations. In 
 Seattle, Mayor Gill was recalled because of his 
 attitude with regard to an open town, and in 
 Tacoma, a serious controversy resulted in two 
 recall elections which were partially success- 
 ful. In the city of Berkeley, California, an ef- 
 fort was made to recall the school board in the 
 Spring of 1912 because of their refusal to con- 
 tinue in office a very efficient superintendent of 
 schools.^ It was pretty clear that the school 
 board had made a serious error of judgment in 
 refusing to reemploy the superintendent. The 
 people of Berkeley held that the board of edu- 
 cation had been elected to choose a superintend- 
 ent, and that it was not proper to recall them 
 for a mere error of judgment in carrying out 
 this duty. The recall was defeated by a de- 
 cisive majority. From our experience with the 
 recall, it is plain that it can ordinarily be suc- 
 cessfully used only in those cases where the 
 officer who is sought to be recalled has been 
 guilty of corruption or some serious moral 
 dereliction. 
 
 The recall as a state institution is, practically 
 speaking, unworkable. The difficulty of secur- 
 ing signers to a recall petition is very consider- 
 able, men hesitating to put down their names 
 
 1 The writer took an active part in this campaign in advo- 
 cacy of the recall. 
 
INITIATIVE, KEFERENDUM, ETC. 145 
 
 upon such a document which is open to public 
 inspection; and the consequent trouble and ex- 
 pense of securing a petition of the requisite 
 size with signers distributed over the State puts 
 an almost impassable obstacle in the way of its 
 use. The only instance in which it can be 
 used will probably be where an official has com- 
 mitted some act of malfeasance so palpable and 
 so atrocious as to create a practically unani- 
 mous public demand for his removal. "With re- 
 gard to the recall of judges, we shall speak in 
 a succeeding chapter. 
 
 Not only is the recall likely to be used spar- 
 ingly, and with a proper degree of conserva- 
 tism, but it is serving a very useful purpose in 
 reconciling the people to that concentration of 
 power and responsibility which seems essential 
 to the proper working of democratic govern- 
 ment. It is doubtful if the people would ever 
 have become willing to adopt the commission 
 plan of government, which delivers the city ad- 
 ministration without reserve to a board of five 
 men, if it had not been for the recall. Galves- 
 ton adopted the commission form of govern- 
 ment in 1901, and Houston in 1905, but it was 
 not until Des Moines joined the initiative, ref- 
 erendum and recall to the commission form of 
 government that it began to be looked on with 
 favor throughout the .United States. People 
 
146 GOVEKNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 recognized the wonderful success of the new 
 plan of government in Galveston, but wise old 
 people still shook their heads and said, ^^It is 
 dangerous. It is un-American to give so much 
 power mthout any check.'' The recall will 
 play the same part in consoling the people for 
 the shortening of the state and county ballot 
 and to further concentration of administrative 
 power. 
 
 The referendum is, as we have seen, an al- 
 ready familiar institution. Its existence, also, 
 is not at all inconsistent with the theory of rep- 
 resentative government. It is, at most, a veto 
 upon measures which must in every instance 
 have originated with the legislature, and which 
 have received there at least some degree of dis- 
 cussion and modification. The very existence 
 of such a check is likely to prevent the necessity 
 of its use, and, in consequence, it will in all 
 probability be used only in certain exceptional 
 cases. A consideration of the Oregon ballot 
 of 1912, shows that in the State which has been 
 distinctly the most active in the use of direct 
 legislation, of a total of thirty-seven proposi- 
 tions only nine were referendums. Six of 
 these were in the nature of constitutional 
 amendments on which a referendum was oblig- 
 atory, only three being ordered by a petition 
 of the people. California in her first year of 
 
INITIATIVE, EEFEEENDUM, ETC. 147 
 
 the referendum on state laws liad on the ballot 
 at the November election of 1912 three referen- 
 dum propositions. These three were, in 
 reality, only one, the bills as passed by the legis- 
 lature having been companion measures. 
 
 Of the forty-eight propositions submitted to 
 the voters of California in November 1914, but 
 four were referenda by petition. In those 
 municipalities in which the people possess the 
 privilege of the referendum, it has been spar- 
 ingly used. 
 
 In general, we may say that the referendum 
 produces whatever result it accomplishes as a 
 simple in terrorem without 'the necessity of its 
 actual application. Not only does its existence 
 ward off the passage of bad laws but it tends 
 also to eliminate undesirable methods of in- 
 fluencing the conduct of the legislature. What 
 profit is it to control the legislature so as to be 
 able to pass bills in the corporation interest if 
 on a possible referendum to the people those 
 bills may be defeated? The corrupt legislator 
 has, under the referendum, no merchantable 
 commodity of which he may dispose. The 
 referendum, too, has to play, along with the 
 recall, an important part in reconciling our peo- 
 ple to the centralization of authority in a few 
 hands, and to the abolition of the traditional 
 checks and balances of government. 
 
148 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 When we turn to tlie initiative we reach an 
 institution of a very different character. 
 Strangely enough, in the California campaign 
 for the initiative, referendum and recall, it was 
 the recall which drew all the fire of the opposi- 
 tion. The initiative was ignored, while the hor- 
 rid radicalism of the recall was frequently re- 
 ferred to. As a matter of fact, however, the 
 initiative is by far the most radical of the three 
 institutions we have been considering. In the 
 first place, it practically abolishes the constitu- 
 tion of the State, because, under it, constitu- 
 tional amendments may be proposed and 
 adopted just as easily as ordinary laws. The 
 constitution is reduced to nothing more than a 
 set of rules for the legislature. To the mind 
 of the writer, this is no serious objection to the 
 initiative. He firmly believes that, for our 
 state governments at least, the day of the rigid 
 written constitution has gone by, and that what 
 is needed is such flexibility in the forms and 
 powers of our state governments as will enable 
 them to cope effectively with rapidly develop- 
 ing economic conditions.^ It would be useless 
 to deny, however, that an institution which 
 practically sets aside the restrictive character 
 of the state constitution is radical; far more 
 
 1 Another phase of this subject is discussed in Chapter X. 
 
INITIATIVE, EEFERENDUM, ETC. 149 
 
 radical than either the recall or the referen- 
 dum. 
 
 Furthermore, it appears almost certain that 
 the initiative will be used more freely. It has 
 not been much used in city government, but 
 this is to be readily accounted for by the fact 
 that city government is not so much concerned 
 with the adoption of general policies as with 
 their administration. It is the State which 
 holds the great bulk of the lawmaking power 
 in its hands, and the initiative seems in a 
 fair way to become a monstrously active prin- 
 ciple. The following table shows the compara- 
 tive use of the referendum and initiative in 
 Oregon and California: 
 
 
 
 OREGON 
 
 Measures 
 
 
 
 Measures 
 
 
 Subjected 
 
 
 
 Proposed by 
 
 to Refer- 
 
 
 Year 
 
 Petition 
 
 Adopted 
 
 endum 
 
 Rejected 
 
 1904. 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 1906. 
 
 10 
 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1908. 
 
 11 
 
 8 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 1910. 
 
 25 
 
 8 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1912. 
 
 28 
 
 8 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1914. 
 
 19 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 1916. 
 
 8 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 1918. 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 106 42 11 6 
 
 Prepared by Bureau in Public Administration, University 
 of California, J. R. Douglas, Ph.D., Director. 
 
150 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 
 CALIFORNIA 
 
 
 
 
 
 Measures 
 
 
 
 Measures 
 
 
 Subjected 
 
 
 
 Proposed by 
 
 
 to Refer- 
 
 
 Year 
 
 Petition 
 
 Adopted 
 
 endum 
 
 Rejected 
 
 1912. 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 1914. 
 
 17 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1916. 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1918. 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 30 8 9 6 
 
 In Oregon, the number of measures steadily 
 increased until in 1912 there were on the ballot 
 twenty-eight propositions, since which time 
 there has been a sharp decline in the use of the 
 initiative. California reached her maximum in 
 1914 while subsequently there has been a very 
 moderate amount of attempted direct legisla- 
 tion. New brooms sweep clean, and it is really 
 safe to assume that the initiative has found its 
 place, and that not an exaggerated one, in our 
 system of government. 
 
 An initiative measure remains the easiest way 
 in which the propaganda of any ism can be 
 brought decisively before the people. In order 
 to appreciate the effect of its wide use, we must 
 turn back for a moment to consider again the 
 method by which multitudes exercise volition. 
 Laws do not originate spontaneously even with 
 
INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM, ETC. 151 
 
 limited bodies such as our legislatures. In ev- 
 ery case they are suggested to the legislature by 
 the member who introduces the bill. In a large 
 number, perhaps the majority of cases, even 
 he is not the originator of the proposition. It 
 has very likely been given to him by some con- 
 stituent, or by some organization. Occa- 
 sionally a committee appointed by the preced- 
 ing legislature to make an investigation con- 
 cerning some subject presents legislation rela- 
 tive thereto. A certain number of more im- 
 portant measures emanate from small groups 
 of leading men of the party in power in the 
 State. None springs full armed from the com- 
 posite brain of the legislature. The legisla- 
 ture through its committees, and later by feeble 
 discussion of the measure on the floor, criti- 
 cises, modifies, or rejects the propositions made 
 to it. In proportion as it is a good legislature, 
 it performs this critical function carefully and 
 well. It is, of course, obviously true that if 
 laws cannot originate with the legislature as a 
 whole, they certainly cannot originate with the 
 people as a whole. There seems to have been 
 a feeling on the part of some of the most ar- 
 dent advocates of the initiative that by some 
 hocus pocus the people would suddenly and 
 spontaneously evolve measures of surprising 
 value to themselves. As a matter of fact, how- 
 
152 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ever, initiative propositions are suggested to 
 the people by groups of individuals more or less 
 perfectly organized, who, for reasons of in- 
 terest or principle, desire to secure the adop- 
 tion of particular legislation. Under the 
 initiative provisions of the Oregon and Cali- 
 fornia constitutions, there is a limited oppor- 
 tunity only to discuss, and no opportunity to 
 modify these propositions. The State pub- 
 lishes and distributes to the voters arg-uments 
 pro and con upon each measure, and these ar- 
 guments now form a very substantial book — 
 substantial physically — of something like 250 
 pages at the last Oregon election. These ar- 
 guments are weak, and the illumination which 
 they shed on the questions is no more than that 
 dim light usually associated with things of 
 mystery. There is some excellent discussion 
 by speakers on both sides of the measures 
 which attract most public interest. The news- 
 papers lend occasional aid. 
 
 Prior to each of the elections of 1914, 1916 
 and 1918, in California, many organizations such 
 as Chambers of Commerce, City Clubs, and 
 some of the newspapers, published lists of meas- 
 ures with recommendations as to the way in 
 which the citizens should vote. These sugges- 
 tions were grasped at eagerly. Where the num- 
 ber of measures, including constitutional refer- 
 
INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM, ETC. 153 
 
 enda is so exceedingly great as in these recent 
 elections there is no doubt that, for many of the 
 voters, the majority of the measures are sur- 
 rounded by an umbrageous gloom. 
 
 It would painfully weary the reader to go 
 into the relative merits and demerits of the 
 measures which have been before the people 
 in Oregon and California. In general they 
 have illustrated the same popular tendencies 
 which have long been observable in Switzer- 
 land. An aversion to spending money, even 
 where enlightened policy demands it; a whole- 
 hearted desire to smite the corporations but 
 an unfortunate lack of consensus as to con- 
 structive measures; and a tenacious conserva- 
 tism as to wholesale political or social reforms 
 are the qualities which characterize direct 
 legislation in Oregon. 
 
 At the California election of 1914, the people 
 voted $15,800,000 bonds for public improve- 
 ments, including $1,800,000 for buildings at the 
 University. It may be inferred from this that 
 the people of California are more liberal than 
 the people of Oregon. They exhibited in gen- 
 eral the same sort of conservatism in political 
 and social reforms which has been shown in 
 their northern neighbor. Oregon in 1914 de- 
 parted from this conservatism by adopting 
 state prohibition, a measure which was severely 
 
154 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 beaten in California. The people of Cali- 
 fornia, however, were guilty of one act of 
 petty meanness. They abolished the poll tax, 
 not because of any reasoned objection to it as a 
 form of taxation, but because they wished to 
 avoid paying it. It is something better than 
 bossism and yet far from perfect. It is 
 enough for our immediate purpose to make 
 clear the absolute certainty in the long run 
 that masses of initiative propositions will have 
 to be voted on by the majority of the people in 
 the dark, and will rise or fall with little or no 
 regard to their merits. It is possible to lay 
 traps for the people similar to those which were 
 formerly laid for the state legislatures. At 
 the California election in 1912, one of the ini- 
 tiative measures voted upon had this title: 
 *^An act to prohibit book making, pool selling, 
 and to provide for a state racing commission; 
 to grant licenses for horse racing in the State 
 of California, for a limited period, and to 
 permit of wagering upon such races by the 
 Paris Mutual and Auction Pool systems only; 
 and repealing all acts and parts of acts in con- 
 flict with this act. ' ^ Hundreds of people signed 
 the petition to propose this measure on the 
 faith of the statement in the first clause that it 
 was an act to prohibit book making and pool 
 selling. The fraud was ultimately exposed and 
 
INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM, ETC. 155 
 
 the bill defeated after a very active campaign. 
 What would have happened to a measure of less 
 striking importance buried in the midst of 
 twenty-five or thirty other propositions is a 
 subject for serious reflection. 
 
 There is reason to fear that initiative 
 propositions can not be properly criticised by 
 the people even with reference simply to their 
 adoption or rejection. It is also clear that un- 
 der the Oregon and California laws there is no 
 possibility of the amendment or correction of 
 an initiative measure. It may be on the whole 
 a meritorious proposition badly framed and 
 cumbered with some injudicious provision. 
 There is no chance to separate the good from 
 the bad. In other words, the initiative cannot 
 be successfully used as a substitute for a rep- 
 resentative legislature. The legislature with 
 all its defects does give an opportunity for a 
 thorough going over of the proposed law, and 
 for every imaginable kind of criticism of it. 
 Initiation by irresponsible bodies of men and 
 quasi deliberation before the people can never 
 be made to do the work of a genuine delibera- 
 tive assembly. If the initiative could be re- 
 sented as a corrective for the non-action of the 
 legislature on matters of vital importance, there 
 could be little criticism of it, but it is not used 
 in that way. A glance at the Oregon ballot of 
 
156 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 1912 will convince any observer that matters 
 of inconsequent importance are dealt with by 
 means of the initiative. On the other hand, 
 many important matters are of such a technical 
 character that they can not well be criticised 
 by the people. There is no way of restricting 
 the use of the initiative to those purposes for 
 which it ought to be used. The only way of 
 escape is by so altering the nature of the ini- 
 tiative as to minimize the evils of the institu- 
 tion. The new Ohio constitution contains the 
 suggestion of a better method with regard to 
 the initiative. Substantially it is this : a small 
 proportion (three per cent.) of the total elec- 
 torate may propose any measure, which is by 
 this fact introduced into the state legislature. 
 The legislature may then adopt it with or with- 
 out amendments, or reject it. If it adopts it 
 without amendment, that ends the matter unless 
 a referendum petition is filed in respect thereto. 
 If it adopts it with amendments, the measure 
 as originally introduced or with the addition 
 of any amendments incorporated therein may 
 be submitted by either branch of the legisla- 
 ture to the people if an additional three per 
 cent, of the electorate petition to that effect. 
 If the measure so submitted is adopted by a 
 majority of those voting thereon it takes prece- 
 
INITIATIVE, BEFEKENDUM, ETC. 157 
 
 dence over the amended form passed by the 
 legishiture. The proposed amendment of the 
 Wisconsin constitution, which was defeated at 
 the polls November 3, 1914, limited the initiative 
 to measures actually introduced into the legisla- 
 ture. As in the Wisconsin legislature each bill 
 must be reported from a committee, there would 
 have been under this system, a reasonable 
 guarantee that the measure would have received 
 some consideration by a recognized and re- 
 sponsible body. The California constitution, 
 as amended in 1911, provides for the submission 
 of measures directly to the people or to the 
 legislature upon eight or five per cent, petitions 
 respectively. In the latter case, if the legisla- 
 ture amends the proposition, the measure as pro- 
 posed and the legislature's amendments are 
 both submitted to the people ; if the legislature 
 rejects the proposal outright, the original meas- 
 ure is submitted alone. As a matter of prac- 
 tice, there is too little difference between the 
 percentages for direct submission and submis- 
 sion to the legislature to induce the friends of 
 any measure to resort to the latter method of 
 promoting it. At the session of 1913, there was 
 proposed a new constitutional amendment, 
 not pressed to passage, very similar to the 
 Ohio plan, except that direct submission could 
 
158 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 still be secured by filing a much larger petition 
 (12%). (See Appendix for Ohio, and Wis- 
 consin methods.) 
 
 There is the gravest necessity of gearing in 
 some such way the initiative on to our legisla- 
 tive system. Measures introduced to the con- 
 sideration of the legislature, as in Ohio, with the 
 possibility of subsequent reference to the peo- 
 ple will always receive consideration by the 
 legislature and in the great majority of in- 
 stances they will undoubtedly be able to ar- 
 rive at some adjustment which will be satisfac- 
 tory to all concerned. It will reduce the dan- 
 ger of a long ballot of propositions, in its way 
 quite as serious an evil as the long ballot of 
 elective officers, and it will, at the same time, 
 give the people an absolute check upon the pos- 
 sible inactivity of the legislature. With this 
 change the initiative may rank alongside the 
 recall and referendum as an efficient mechanism 
 for the promotion of genuinely popular gov- 
 ernment. As at present organized in Cali- 
 fornia and Oregon, it is likely to result in con- 
 fusion and danger. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Annals of the American Academy of Political and 
 Social Science, September, 1912. (A symposium.) 
 
INITIATIVE, EEFERENDUM, ETC. 159 
 
 Atlantic Monthly, January, 1912, pp. 143-4: List of 
 measures submitted to the people of Oregon in the 
 last four elections. 
 
 Barnett, J. D., ''Initiative, Referendum and Recall 
 in Oregon." 
 
 Bkvrd, C. a., and Shultz, B. E., "Documents on the 
 Initiative, Referendum and Recall." 
 
 Boyle, James, "The Initiative and Referendum." 
 
 Butler, Nicholas Murray, "Why Should We 
 Change Our Form of Government?" 
 
 Deploige, Simon, ' ' The Referendum in Switzerland. ' ' 
 
 Eaton, A. H., "The Oregon System." 
 
 GiDDiNGS, F. H., "Democracy and Liberty," pp. 259- 
 266. (Quarterly.) 
 
 Hartwell, Edward M., "Referenda in Massachu- 
 setts, 1776-1907," Proceedings National Municipal 
 League, 1909, pp. 334-353. 
 
 Haynes, John R., "The Actual Workings of the 
 Initiative, Referendum and Recall," in National 
 Municipal Review, October, 1912. 
 
 Haynes, G. H., "People's Rule in Oregon, 1910," in 
 Political Science Quarterly, March, 1911, pp. 32- 
 62; "People's Rule on Trial," in ibid, March, 1913, 
 p. 18. 
 
 Haynes, G. H., "The Initiative and Referendum." 
 
 Honey, S. R., "The Referendum among the Eng- 
 lish." 
 
 LoBiNGiER, C. S., "The People's Law." 
 
 Lowell, A. L., "Governments and Parties in Conti- 
 nental Europe," vol. II, pp. 238-300. 
 
160 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 McCall, S. W., ''Representative as against Direct 
 Government." (Sen. Doe. 273, 62d Cong., 2d Sess.) 
 
 MuNRO, W. B., ''The Initiative, Referendum and Re- 
 call." 
 
 Oberholtzer, E. p., "The Referendum, Initiative, 
 and Recall in America." 
 
 Ogg, F. a., "Social Progress in Contemporary- 
 Europe," pp. 200-212. 
 
 Proceedings American Political Science Association, 
 1907, pp. 193-221. 
 
 Taylor, Charles F., "Municipal Initiative, Referen- 
 dum and Recall in Practice," in National Munici- 
 pal Review, October, 1914. 
 
 Teal, Joseph N., "The Practical Workings of the 
 Initiative and Referendum in Oregon," Proceed- 
 ings National Municipal League, 1909, pp. 309-325. 
 
 Vincent, J. M., "Government in Switzerland," pp. 
 84-90, 188-201. 
 
 Wilcox, Delos F., "Government by All the People." 
 
CHAPTER X 
 
 OUR JUDICIAL DILEMMA 
 
 It was Hume who said that man *4s engaged 
 to establish political society, in order to ad- 
 minister justice: without which there can be 
 no peace among them, nor safety, nor mutual 
 intercourse. We are, therefore, to look upon 
 all the vast apparatus of our government as 
 having ultimately no other object or purpose 
 but the distribution of justice, ©r in other words, 
 the support of the twelve judges. Kings and 
 parliaments, fleets and armies, officers of the 
 court and revenue, ambassadors, ministers and 
 privy-counselors are all subordinate in their 
 end to this part of administration.'^ What 
 was true in eighteenth century England is no 
 less true today. At the very basis of civiliza- 
 tion lies the process for the orderly adjudica- 
 tion of disputes between individuals, and the 
 punishment of offenders against society. Be- 
 fore the establishment of courts barbarism pre- 
 vailed. Their destruction would mean an- 
 archy. It is not enough, however, that there 
 should be a mechanism for deciding cases, i. e., 
 
 161 
 
162 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 with jurisdiction broad enough to cover all 
 cases and with power to enforce its decrees. 
 There must be implicit confidence in the wis- 
 dom and fairness of the tribunal, so that men 
 will gladly submit to its adjudication and cheer- 
 fully accept its judgments. It removes none 
 of the smart of an unfair decision to know that 
 there is nothing to do but to obey. Indeed, per- 
 sistently to force men to obey decrees which 
 they sincerely feel are the result of ignorance, 
 prejudice or corruption is deliberately to breed 
 revolutionists. Every few months the dis- 
 patches from Italy tell of some atrocity attri- 
 buted to the *^ Mafia" or ^'Camorra," great 
 secret societies which defy the government. 
 Behind their present criminal activities is a 
 suggestive history. Southern Italy and Sicily 
 were for centuries following the disintegration 
 of the Roman Empire, horribly misgoverned by 
 a succession of foreign despots who con- 
 trolled the administration of justice in the 
 interest of themselves or their rapacious 
 courtiers. So long continued was this reign of 
 injustice that it became a point of honor 
 with good Italians, no matter what their griev- 
 ance, not to resort to the courts of the op- 
 pressor. Private disputes were settled by 
 vendetta and, to protect themselves further, 
 they organized these great secret societies 
 
OUR JUDICIAL DILEMMA 163 
 
 which enforced the rights and obligations of 
 their members by means of threats and vio- 
 lence. Though the occasion for their existence 
 ceased long ago these societies still continue in 
 blood and crime. Popular disrespect for the 
 courts has had in Italy its logical outcome in 
 outrage and murder. 
 
 For hundreds of years we rested content in 
 the majestic pronouncement of Magna Charta: 
 '^ To none will we sell; to none will we deny or 
 delay right or justice/^ We believed it to rep- 
 resent the fact as well as the theory of our 
 legal system. Only within the last ten years 
 have we been rudely awakened from our confi- 
 dent repose, and our sense of security shaken 
 by sounds of popular distrust of the courts. 
 The cry of organized labor was the first to be 
 heard, followed here and there by the thin voice 
 of some academic critic. Before long a dis- 
 cordant tumult raged about the erstwhile un- 
 approachable dignity of our judges. Laws' de- 
 lays, technicalities, prejudice, political ambition, 
 lack of courage, ignorance, laziness, corrup*- 
 tion, medisevalism, are some of the charges 
 hurled at them from every quarter. Whether 
 or not we believe any or all of these complaints 
 to be well founded, we must admit what is al- 
 most equally portentous, that they are sincerely 
 made by a large and increasing number of per- 
 
164 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 sons. There is every reason, therefore, for the 
 closest analysis of the situation to determine, 
 if possible, a means of restoring the courts to 
 the affectionate regard of the people. Little 
 can be done by reciting like the chorus of a 
 Greek tragedy, ^' The courts must be respected.'' 
 The days of magic and hocus pocus have gone 
 by. The only way in which an institution can 
 be made to be respected is to make it respect- 
 able in fact and seeming. 
 
 At the first glance it is apparent that the 
 criticisms of our courts may be segregated into 
 two main groups. It is charged that : 
 
 1. They have a bias toward the rights of 
 property. 
 
 2. They are slow and inefficient. 
 
 Let us carry our examination a little further 
 into the nature and causes of these widely dif- 
 ferent charges. 
 
 The accusation that the courts show a bias 
 toward wealth is based especially on their de- 
 cisions in two important classes of cases: (a) 
 Constitutional questions, and (b) Injunctions in 
 labor disputes. It is secondarily founded on 
 the inevitable hardship on poor litigants of a 
 slow and inefficient administration of justice, 
 with which we shall deal later. 
 
 The constitutional decisions which are most 
 commonly cited have to do with the Fifth and 
 
OUR JUDICIAL DILEMMA 165 
 
 Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of 
 the United States and the similar provisions 
 which have found their way into our state con- 
 stitutions. The Fifth Amendment forbade the 
 United States, and the Fourteenth the several 
 States to deprive any person ^*of life, liberty 
 or property, without due process of law/* To 
 this and other provisions intended to protect 
 the individual from the arbitrary authority of 
 government the courts have given a narrow 
 technical interpretation which, under our 
 changed economic conditions, has favored the 
 rights of property as against the rights of man. 
 Unconscious of their responsibility as cus- 
 todians, not only of the fixity of the law, but 
 of its growth, our courts have made what were 
 intended as bulwarks of individual liberty the 
 very means of corporate oppression. Take the 
 Braceville Coal Company Case (147 111. 66) 
 in which the Supreme Court of Illinois held that 
 a law requiring the payment of wages weekly 
 by a certain class of corporations violated the 
 liberty of and denied the equal protection of 
 the laws to the corporations affected. This, 
 in the face of the well-known fact that the de- 
 ferred wage systems of many corporations re- 
 duce their employees to a condition of practical 
 peonage. The interpretation of ^*due process 
 of law'* has been equally productive of injus,- 
 
166 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 tice. The most flagrant instance, perhaps, is 
 the decision in Ives vs. South Buffalo Railway 
 Company (201 N. Y. 271). The legislature of 
 New York had adopted an act providing for the 
 payment of a compensation by employers to 
 employees for injuries received in certain haz- 
 ardous occupations, without reference to the 
 negligence of either party. The Court of Ap- 
 peals declared unconstitutional this change in 
 the basis of liability for damages, on the ground 
 that it deprived the railway company of its 
 property ^^ without due process of law." The 
 law had been solemnly enacted. The question 
 of whether anything, and if so how much, was 
 to be paid as damages was to be settled by a 
 judicial process. There was no arbitrary seiz- 
 ure of any one's property, merely a new bur- 
 den put upon property; and to do this in any 
 way whatsoever was, in the opinion of the court, 
 not due process of law. If men or corporations 
 can acquire by long usage a property right in 
 a given liability for damages, the law has 
 reached an alarming condition of fixity. It is 
 not surprising, therefore, that we find a pro- 
 fessor of law, himself a product of the con- 
 servative atmosphere of Harvard, declaring: 
 **The Fourteenth Amendment, metamorphosed 
 by judicial sleight-of-hand, now embodies, not 
 a bill of human rights, but a broad bill of prop- 
 
OUR JUDICIAL DILEMMA 167 
 
 erty privileges, of vested rights to exploit 
 others. " ^ It is fair to conclude, therefore, 
 that, if the millions of our fellow-countrymen 
 who share this view are wrong, at least there is 
 strong reason for their state of mind. 
 
 Turning now to the second category of 
 charges which we summed up in the statement 
 that the courts are slow and inefficient, we will 
 find the complaints equally justified. Cases 
 like that of Williams v. Delaware and Lacka- 
 wanna Eailway Company, in which a brakeman 
 injured in 1882, after six appeals and five new 
 trials, got final judgment in 1904, are perhaps 
 extreme, though by no means untypical of the 
 real situation. The crowded dockets in most 
 centers of population make the delay preceding 
 a first trial a matter of months, even in the case 
 of the most willing litigants, while a defendant 
 who seeks opportunities for delay may almost 
 indefinitely postpone his day of reckoning. 
 The motive for so doing, especially in the case 
 of great corporations and liability insurance 
 companies, is obvious. A very simple com- 
 putation will show that the postponement of 
 the payment of a claim for ten years, or even 
 for five, will net a substantial interest return 
 to the defendant. Further, it forces the poor 
 litigant to compromise, if it does not discour- 
 
 1 H. W. Ballatine, Case and Comment^ September, 1912, 
 
168 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 age him into utter abandonment of his claim. 
 To delay justice is to deny it to the poor, and, 
 in effect, to sell it to the rich and powerful. 
 The limit of legal absurdity was probably 
 reached in the celebrated Jones County Calf 
 Case from Kansas. The original casus belli 
 was four calves worth twenty-five dollars. 
 The case ran over twenty-five years, went to 
 the Supreme Court four times, gave rise to 
 $75,000 of lawyers' fees and $2,800 of costs, all 
 to secure $1000 as a final judgment. Only the 
 well-to-do can afford such an orgy of ^'justice." 
 In criminal cases, the effect of delays is even 
 more serious than in civil cases. We have 
 thrown about the accused a profusion of con- 
 stitutional and legal guarantees of his right to 
 a speedy trial. The community, however, has 
 no such protection. It is seldom that a speedy 
 trial is favorable to the interests of a guilty 
 person. The longer the time between the crime 
 and the day in court the more difiicult becomes 
 the task of proving affirmatively the guilt of the 
 prisoner. Witnesses die, move away, memories 
 are dimmed, — circumstances which in a civil ac- 
 tion affect one side as much as another, but 
 which in a criminal case only prejudice the 
 prosecution. The tedious months of jury draw- 
 ing in the Calhoun case in San Francisco, the 
 interminable prosecution of Harry Thaw, are 
 
OUR JUDICIAL DILEMMA 169 
 
 only notable examples of the leaden-footed 
 march of justice. When, as frequently hap- 
 pens, a case is sent back by the higher courts 
 for retrial all the difficulties of the state's 
 attorney are further exaggerated. Indeed, 
 criminal prosecution is so slow and uncertain in 
 the United States as materially to weaken the 
 deterrent influence of punishment on crime. 
 Criminologists unite in ascribing to the crimi- 
 nal, as one of his most typical characteristics, 
 a childish failure to foresee anything beyond 
 the immediate consequences of his acts. 
 Hence every delay in the infliction of punish- 
 ment detracts from its moral effect, a loss which 
 can not be redeemed by any subsequent sever- 
 ity. The prevalence of crime, especially mur- 
 der and other crimes of violence, in this coun- 
 try as compared with England and European 
 countries is appalling. The awful retributions 
 of Judge Lynch are, too, but a natural conse- 
 quence of the failure of justice to follow hot 
 foot on crime. Lynch law is swift, if erratic, 
 but its results as an in terrorem are purchased 
 at the too great cost of the general degradation 
 of the community. 
 
 There is no diiference of opinion among men 
 who know, as to the universality and dire con- 
 sequences of the law's delays. Natural con- 
 servatives like ex-President Taft and radicals 
 
170 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 like Colonel Roosevelt alike are caustic in tlieir 
 criticism of tardy justice. Wrecks of home, 
 family and life, itself, are strewn as thick be- 
 hind our deliberate judicial Juggernaut as they 
 were behind the Chancery which Dickens long 
 ago attempted to reform by caricature. There 
 can be no question that justice is slow even to 
 the extent of its denial to those who need it 
 most. 
 
 We are, therefore, ready to return a *Hrue 
 bilP' against our judicial system. There are 
 two counts in the indictment: first, that they 
 have come under well founded suspicion of a 
 bias toward wealth and, second, that beyond the 
 peradventure of a doubt, they are egregiously 
 snail-paced. Let us now go to trial on these 
 issues. Our first discovery will be that it is 
 the exercise of a different kind of power which 
 gives rise to each category of complaints. The 
 interpretation of the constitution — law-vetoing 
 on grounds of unconstitutionality — is essen- 
 tially a political act. Several very learned gen- 
 tlemen have recently contributed their exten- 
 sive views as to the assumption of this power 
 by the courts. Their opinions are various and 
 very interesting, — as historical conjectures. 
 For our present purpose, however, it makes lit- 
 tle difference whether the courts stole the power 
 or received it legitimately from the hands of 
 
OIIB JUDICIAL DILEMMA 171 
 
 constitution makers. The important thing is 
 that they have it and that their early awe in 
 its presence has given place to a nonchalance 
 comparable to that with which an experienced 
 miner juggles dynamite. Whereas, at first, 
 they held statutes unconstitutional only in very 
 clear cases, and then with manifest reluctance, 
 they now do not scruple to reverse the policy 
 of the noiTnal law-making bodies on grounds the 
 most technical. It is idle to say that in so do- 
 ing they are simply applying the law and em- 
 ploying the ordinary means of judicial inter- 
 pretation. From the very begimiing, public 
 opinion in the United States has divided on con- 
 stitutional questions. Toward questions of 
 constitutional interpretation, a judge ^s attitude 
 is determined by his general habits of political 
 thinking. Federalist John Marshall gave us 
 McCulloch vs. Maryland; and Democratic 
 Taney, Dred Scott vs. Sanford. A shift in the 
 political complexion of the Supreme Court made 
 a previously constitutional income tax uncon- 
 stitutional. The general attitude of the judge 
 toward modem economic and social problems 
 determines his opinion upon the constitutional- 
 ity of social legislation. In the case of Loch- 
 ner vs. New York (198 U. S. 45) the majority 
 of the court decided that a New York statute 
 prohibiting the employment of men in bakeries 
 
172 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 more than ten hours per day was not a proper 
 health regulation and deprived employers and 
 employees of their liberty of contract. In de- 
 livering the opinion of the court, Justice Peck- 
 ham said, * ' Statutes of the nature of that under 
 review, limiting the hours in which grown and 
 intelligent men may labor to earn their living, 
 are mere meddlesome interferences with the 
 rights of the individual. ' ' Contrast this ex- 
 pression of narrow individualism with the 
 broader social policy of Justice Holmes, dis- 
 senting, who said: ^^I think the word liberty 
 in the Fourteenth Amendment is perverted 
 when it is held to prevent the natural outcome 
 of a dominant opinion, unless it can be said 
 that a rational and fair man necessarily would 
 admit that the statute proposed would infringe 
 fundamental principles as they have been un- 
 derstood by the traditions of our people and our 
 law. It does not need research to show that 
 no such sweeping condemnation can be passed 
 upon the statute before us.'' In each case the 
 judge was giving expression to his social rather 
 than his legal opinion. In almost every consti- 
 tutional question the decision rests on social 
 and political grounds. Whether the judges will 
 or no the policy of the law is the real ratio 
 decidendi. 
 In the decision of ordinary cases — the cases 
 
OUR JUDICIAL DILEMMA 173 
 
 in which the delays of the law constitute that 
 flagrant abuse on which we have animadverted, 
 — there is no legitimate political influence. 
 The ordinary administration of justice is sim- 
 ply a highly specialized and technical branch 
 of general administration. The chief qualities 
 necessary to its successful conduct are training 
 and that skill which comes from experience. 
 A thorough knowledge of the law and a judicial 
 temperament are the essential equipment of the 
 judge. It is the unfortunate absence of these 
 qualities, especially among the trial judges of 
 our state courts, which is the chief cause of 
 slow justice. It is the lack of power among 
 trial judges more than anything else which 
 gives opportunity for delays. It is their lack 
 of training and experience which leads us to 
 deny them adequate power. Take for example 
 our jury drawing, all that keeps us from Eng- 
 lish expedition is that our judges have less 
 power, *and much less confidence in the use of 
 the power they have, than their English com- 
 peers. In the Federal courts where the au- 
 thority of the judge is great the speed at every 
 stage of the case is proportionately accelerated. 
 In the matter of time-wasting appeals it is 
 argued that we cannot give to our low-grade 
 trial judges the powers of final decision which 
 are given trial judges in England. It is true, 
 
174 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 also, that tlie inartistic work of trial judges 
 tempts the higher courts into the realms of 
 technicality, a field which seems highly con- 
 genial to them. When the Supreme Court 
 of California holds that an indictment for 
 ^^larcey'^ is bad because there is no such 
 crime known to the laws of the State, or that 
 an indictment for the murder of ^^Ah Fong'^ 
 is bad because it contains no allegation that 
 Ah Fong is a human being ; when the Court of 
 Criminal Appeals of Texas says that a verdict 
 spelled ^^guity'' is bad but one spelled 
 ^^guily'' is good; when the Supreme Court of 
 Missouri declares that * instantly'' will not do 
 as a substitute for ^'then and there," we have 
 a situation arising in large measure from the 
 distrust which appellate courts have of their 
 inferiors. If we would enhance the authority 
 of the lower courts we can nowise do it but by 
 improving their personnel — its average of 
 training and experience. 
 
 Now political power naturally suggests politi- 
 cal responsibility, while a demand for expert 
 training and experience carries with it the 
 idea of careful selection and freedom from di- 
 rect political responsibility. To the first, popu- 
 lar election and even recall are essential. To 
 the second, popular election is absolutely de- 
 structive. Here, then, is our dilemma. How 
 
OUR JUDICIAL DILEMMA 175 
 
 may we have judges at once responsible for 
 political power and expert in judicial adminis- 
 tration? How may we avoid both the frying- 
 pan and the fire! If we have political judges, 
 they will administer the law like amateurs. If 
 we have judges appointed for good behavior, 
 we will have on their part more and more class 
 bias. Indeed the dilemma is a very real one. 
 From such a situation there is but one escape — 
 destroy the cause of the dilemma. 
 
 If we remove from the courts their political 
 duty of holding statutes unconstitutional, we 
 can then with safety make our judges ap- 
 pointive, pay them large salaries and give them 
 a permanent tenure. In no other way can we 
 have efficient courts and speedy justice. Vari- 
 ous methods of relieving the courts of their 
 political responsibilities have been suggested. 
 It is done to considerable extent by adoption of 
 the initiative which makes the constitution as 
 amendable as any law. Little harm can be 
 done by postponing a measure of reform long 
 enough for a popular vote to put the seal of con- 
 stitutionality upon it. Mr. Roosevelt's awk- 
 ward phrase ^'the recall of decisions'' con- 
 cealed, for many, an idea of genuine merit. 
 There is nothing revolutionary in submitting 
 to the people a statute declared by the courts 
 to be unconstitutional and making it part of the 
 
176 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 constitution if they give it their approval. It 
 is only a new aspect of the constitutional refer- 
 endum by which the people have made and al- 
 tered our so-called fundamental laws for a cen- 
 tury. If a legislature may submit a constitu- 
 tional amendment directly to the people, it is 
 scarcely more radical to submit one to them in- 
 directly by way of an ordinary statute and the 
 courts of law. Where the initiative exists there 
 can be no serious need of such a referendum. 
 Of course from this point of view the recall 
 of judges is unwise and unnecessary. As long 
 as the judges are elective officers there is no 
 reason for excepting them from the dangers 
 which dog the path of other elective officers. 
 When we remove the reason for judges being 
 elective we remove at the same time all reason 
 for their recall. By this method we avoid those 
 evils which lurk in a judicial system where 
 every man on the bench has his eye cocked on 
 a coming day of election. 
 
 ** Justice/' said Webster, *4s the great end 
 of man on earth." Justice requires efficient 
 courts. We can never have swift and efficient 
 administration of justice from courts selected 
 on the basis of political considerations. Let 
 us free our courts from their impossible bur- 
 den and enable them to dispense justice with an 
 equal hand. 
 
OUR JUDICIAL DILEMMA 177 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Alger, G. W., ''The Old Law and the New Order." 
 
 Baldwin, S. E., "The American Judiciary." 
 
 Ballantine, H. W., "Labor Legislation and the 
 Judicial Veto," in Case and Comment, September, 
 1912. 
 
 Bkird, Charles A., "The Supreme Court and the 
 Constitution." 
 
 BouDiN, L. B., "Government by Judiciary," Political 
 Science Qicarterly, June, 1911. 
 
 Carpenter, W. S. "Judicial Tenure in the United 
 States." 
 
 Connolly, C. P., "Big Business and the Bench," 
 Everybody's, February-July, 1912. 
 
 CoRW^iN, E. S., "The Doctrine of Judicial Review." 
 
 Fink, A., ' ' Recall of Judges, ' ' North American, May, 
 1911. 
 
 Frederick, K. T., "Significance of the Recall of 
 Judicial Decisions," Atlantic, July, 1912. 
 
 GooDNOW, F. J., "Social Reform and the Constitu- 
 tion." 
 
 GooDNOW, F. J., "Legislative Power of Congress un- 
 der the Judicial Article of the Constitution," 
 Political Science Quarterly, December, 1910. 
 
 Greely, L. M., "Changing Attitude of the Courts 
 towards Social Legislation," Conference of Chari- 
 ties and Corrections, 1910, pp. 391-405. 
 
 Guthrie, W. D., "Constitutional Morality," North 
 American, August, 1912. 
 
178 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 Haines, C. G., "The American Doctrine of Judicial 
 Supremacy. ' ' 
 
 Hamill, C. H., ''Constitutional Chaos," Forum, 
 July, 1912. 
 
 JuDSON, F. N., ''The Judiciary and the People." 
 
 LuRTON, H. H., "Government of Law or a Govern- 
 ment of Men," North American, January, 1911. 
 
 Myers, Gustavus, "History of the Supreme Court 
 of the United States." 
 
 Kansom, W. L., "Majority Rule and the Judiciary." 
 
 Roe, Gilbert E., "Our Judicial Oligarchy." 
 
 Roosevelt, T., "Charter of Democracy," Outlook, 
 Feb. 21, 1912. "Judges and Progress," Outlook, 
 January 6, 1912. "People and the Courts," Out- 
 look, Aug. 17, 1912. "Right of the People to 
 Rule," Outlook, March 23, 1912. 
 
 Root, E., "Importance of an Independent Judiciary," 
 Independent, April 4, 1912. 
 
 Smalley, H. S., "Nullifying the Law by Judicial 
 Interpretation," Atlantic, April, 1911. 
 
 Smith, J. Allen, "The Spirit of American Govern- 
 ment. ' ' 
 
 Storey, Moorfield, "The Reform of Legal Pro- 
 cedure." 
 
CHAPTER XI 
 
 DISORGANIZATION OF STATE ADMINISTRATION 
 
 There is one subject which has almost entirely 
 escaped the notice of the principal critics of 
 American government. This is the peculiar or- 
 ganization of the administrative side of our 
 state government. A great deal has been writ- 
 ten about state legislatures and state courts, 
 and about the power and activity of the gov- 
 ernors of States, but very little has been said 
 about state administration. The advocates of 
 the short ballot have touched the subject, in 
 so far as the elective state officers are con- 
 cerned, but this is only a beginning. We have 
 all known that state government is, compara- 
 tively speaking, inefficient. It is admittedly in- 
 ferior to the efficiency displayed in private busi- 
 ness, and even to that of our national govern- 
 ment and our better organized cities. In gen- 
 eral, we have undertaken to explain this fact by 
 the inferiority of our legislatures, or, at fur- 
 thest, by the consequences of the long ballot. 
 The worst feature, however, of state govern- 
 
 179 
 
180 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ment is the lack of centralized responsibility in 
 the state administration. 
 
 As we have seen, the principal state officers 
 are elected by the people, and so removed from 
 the control of the nominal chief of the State. 
 Further, there is no correlation of their func- 
 tions except as their good nature and good 
 sense may dictate. Their only responsibility 
 is to the people. We have seen how ineffective 
 this responsibility is. It is true that a very 
 strong governor may, if the other state officers 
 belong to his own party or faction, morally 
 dominate them sufficiently to produce some co- 
 herence of administration, but it is only such 
 a combination of circumstances which can pro- 
 duce this result. Altogether our long state 
 ballot removes six or eight of our most impor- 
 tant departments from any possible part in a 
 S}Tnmetrical scheme of administration. When 
 we come to the appointive officers who are, of 
 course, very numerous, we find a condition of 
 confusion almost as serious in kind and even 
 more significant in extent. Some of them are 
 appointed by the Governor outright, and some 
 by and with the advice and consent of the state 
 senate. Many officers have fixed terms with no 
 provision for removal except by the courts or 
 by impeachment, methods by which the most 
 serious offenses only can be reached; others 
 
STATE ADMINISTRATION 181 
 
 are removable only with the consent of the state 
 senate; while a small, but happily growing, 
 class are removable at the pleasure of the 
 Grovernor. No officer can be said to control 
 his subordinates unless he has the power of 
 removal. The power to select officers as va- 
 cancies occur is in itself an important part of 
 the political power of the Governor, but it leaves 
 him helpless to reg-ulate the administration at 
 any given moment. It is apparent that the 
 governor, although he is by the constitution and 
 the terms of his oath of office supposed to care 
 for the faithful execution of the laws, really 
 controls only a limited number of his subor- 
 dinates. Many readers will at once recall the 
 effort of Governor Hughes of New York to re- 
 move Insurance Commissioner Kelsey whom 
 the insurance investigation conducted by Gov- 
 ernor Hughes had shoA^Ti to be incompetent. 
 The Senate, under the leadership of its machine 
 Republican bosses rallied to the support of Mr. 
 Kelsey, and Governor Hughes was denied the 
 right to direct the policy of that department in 
 which he was most interested. By no conceiv- 
 able twist of the imagination could Governor 
 Hughes be held responsible for the Insurance 
 Department under Mr. Kelsey. It could be 
 theoretically assumed that Mr. Kelsey was re- 
 sponsible to the Senate and the Senate to the 
 
182 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 people, but it is obvious that, as a practical mat- 
 ter, he was responsible to nobody. 
 
 The difficulty of which we have been speaking 
 would be much less if all state officers retired 
 at the beginning of the term of each succeeding 
 Governor. Such, however, is not the case. 
 Their terms of office expire at intervals 
 throughout the term of the Governor. He can 
 appoint but a few at a time, and never enough 
 to stamp upon the administration his own 
 policy. The characteristic feature of all state 
 administrative systems is the board, the mem- 
 bers of which retire in rotation. The manage- 
 ment of state institutions, reformatory, chari- 
 table and educational, is generally entrusted 
 to such boards, and the Governor can only after 
 some lapse of time appoint enough members of 
 these boards to even insure that they shall be 
 of his general way of thinking, much less to 
 control them. The result is that the Governor 
 fixes the personnel of the administration, in 
 part, for his own term, and, in part, for that of 
 his successor, a system which it is hard to 
 justify upon any principles of administrative 
 science. 
 
 It is impossible to conceive of a private busi- 
 ness being conducted on such a princi]Dle. In 
 private business, there is never a break in the 
 chain of responsibility between the employer 
 
STATE ADMINISTRATION 183 
 
 and employee. In the corporation, from stock- 
 holder to directors, from directors to general 
 manager, from general manager to Ms various 
 subordinates, and so on down to the office boy 
 and the scrubwoman, there is a regular hier- 
 archy of authority and absolute power of disci- 
 pline. It is possible to hold each department 
 head responsible for what takes place in his 
 department, to hold the general manager re- 
 sponsible for the general conduct of the busi- 
 ness, to hold the directors responsible for their 
 choice of the general manager, and thus to put 
 into the hands of the stockholders ultimately the 
 power to protect their own interests. Under 
 our system of state administration, the Gov- 
 ernor is the only state officer whose responsi- 
 bility to the people is at all effective. The 
 other elective officers divide with him the execu- 
 tive power, possessing each in his own depart- 
 ment the power of appointment and of control 
 of his appointees, subject, however, to a mythi- 
 cal control by the people. The Governor has, 
 it is true, a great power of appointment; but, 
 since he can exercise it at fixed intervals only, 
 and it is accompanied by no adequate power 
 of removal, it is impossible to hold him re- 
 sponsible for the conduct of even his own ap- 
 pointees. Much less is it possible to hold him 
 responsible for the acts of a great number of 
 
184 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 public servants who are tlie appointees of his 
 predecessor. The wonderful thing is that with 
 such a system we can have any kind of a state 
 administration at all. It is only the American 
 faculty of getting along, and the w^ealth which 
 enables us to pay for inefficient service, that has 
 kept the Ship of State oif the rocks so long. 
 
 The disorganization of our state administra- 
 tion is in strong contrast to the highly cen- 
 tralized form of Federal administration. The 
 President appoints, in the first instance, the 
 heads of departments, and, in the second place, 
 all the other officers possessing any consider- 
 able degree of discretion. Every officer whom 
 he appoints is removable at his pleasure. It 
 is true that the President's power of appoint- 
 ment has been somewhat limited by the princi- 
 ple of senatorial courtesy, which obliges him 
 to accept the suggestions of United States Sen- 
 ators of his own party as to appointments 
 made from their States. This limitation is 
 much less effective on a strong president than 
 on a weak one, and it is probably declining in 
 importance. The controversy between Con- 
 gress and President Johnson resulted in a tem- 
 porary suspension of the President's power of 
 removal, the famous Tenure of Office Act mak- 
 ing it necessary to obtain the consent of the 
 Senate to a removal. This policy, however, 
 
STATE ADMINISTRATION 185 
 
 was abandoned when Congress and the Presi- 
 dent came to be on good terms again, and it is 
 not likely to be repeated. The officers ap- 
 pointed by the heads of departments, who, of 
 course, constitute by far the greater number 
 of officers, are almost altogether named under 
 civil service regulations on the basis of com- 
 petitive examinations. The civil service regu- 
 lations, however, have put no limitation upon 
 the power of removal, so that every officer in the 
 service, from Secretary of State to messenger 
 boy, is removable either by the President di- 
 rectly or by some one whom the President can 
 remove. The result is that the President can 
 control the administration in its least details, 
 if necessary. Of course, it is physically im- 
 possible to direct the details of the whole ad- 
 ministration, but if news of inefficiency or ill- 
 doing comes to him from any quarter of the 
 country, he possesses the immediate power to 
 cure the evil. He may, therefore, be held re- 
 sponsible for whatever occurs throughout the 
 whole range of the administration. The ad- 
 ministrative service of the United States is, in 
 consequence, relatively efficient. There is no 
 confusion of authority, no division of responsi- 
 bility; the whole system is organized on lines 
 calculated to produce the speedy and economi- 
 cal dispatch of social business. The respect 
 
186 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 whicli we have for Federal authority contrasted 
 with our apparent disrespect of state authority, 
 well illustrates the difference in result of the 
 two systems of organization. One notable in- 
 stance was the unanimity with which liquor sell- 
 ers, even in Prohibition States, paid their in- 
 ternal revenue tax while boldly violating the 
 state law. 
 
 Another cause which contributes to the in- 
 efficiency of state administration is the almost 
 universal application to it of the spoils system. 
 In our national government the civil service 
 regulations prescribe admission to the majority 
 of governmental positions on the basis of com- 
 petitive examinations. Of those members of 
 the lUnited States service who are not subject 
 to examination, the great majority are labor- 
 ers, mechanics and fourth-class postmasters — 
 positions to which a competitive examination is 
 scarcely applicable. Many of our cities have 
 more or less effective civil service regulations 
 in force, but only a few of our States have ap- 
 plied the system to their administrative service. 
 The result is that there are no recognized stand- 
 ards for appointment to state positions, and no 
 security of tenure. Every change of adminis- 
 tration means a change in the personnel of the 
 service. 
 
 Under such circumstances, it is impossible to 
 
STATE ADMINISTKATION 187 
 
 get men and women of the best type to accept 
 state appointments. Few people who are ca- 
 pable of holding well paid positions of a per- 
 manent character with a private firm or cor- 
 poration are willing to give them np for the 
 sake of a few years at most on the state payroll. 
 In consequence, our state servants fall much be- 
 low the standards of private business. Fur- 
 thermore the political value of such positions 
 has led to their creation without due regard 
 to their administrative necessity. Department 
 after department is overmanned. This leads 
 to idleness and that mischief to which idle hands 
 are prone. 
 
 It is highly desirable, therefore, that state 
 civil service laws be enacted providing for 
 merit appointments on a basis of the comple- 
 tion of a recognized course of study or the 
 passage of an examination. Strict regulations 
 should prevent the interference in politics of 
 those in the service. On the other hand, the 
 power of removal by the appointing authority 
 should not be restricted more than to require 
 the filing of a statement of the reasons for the 
 removal in each case. The tenure of the in- 
 cumbent is sufficiently protected if the appoint- 
 ing authority is not free to put into the place 
 thus vacated his own choice for the position. 
 He is not likely to displace a good man simply 
 
188 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 for the privilege of filling a position from the 
 first three names submitted to him by a civil 
 service commission. On the other hand, the 
 power to remove an inefficient officer should be 
 instant and complete. To make it necessary, 
 as some civil service laws do, practically to 
 prove by legal evidence that the person re- 
 moved has committed something tantamount 
 to a crime, is simply to enact incompetency into 
 the service. That highly pampered individual, 
 the New York policeman, whom nothing short 
 of judicial proceedings can ultimately force out 
 of his place, is a striking example in point. 
 
 The necessary reorganization of our state 
 administration should be, in the first place, by 
 making all of the elective state offices except the 
 Governor and Lieutenant Governor, and possi- 
 bly the Controller, appointive at the pleasure of 
 the Governor. The various branches of the ad- 
 ministration should be classified into groups or 
 departments. At the head of each of these 
 departments should be an officer appointed by 
 the Governor without any civil service require- 
 ments whatever, removable at his pleasure, and 
 a member of his official family or cabinet. 
 These officers should be the direct personal ad- 
 herents and friends of the Governor. They 
 should be regarded as political officers and their 
 duty should be to assist the Governor sympa- 
 
STATE ADMINISTRATION 189 
 
 thetically in the administration of state affairs. 
 Each of them should be allowed a confidential 
 deputy or assistant to be appointed without ref- 
 erence to the civil service regulations. Every 
 other officer in the service should be appointed 
 perhaps in a few instances by the Governor, 
 but in the majority of cases by the head of the 
 department under strict civil service provisions. 
 The lower ranges of positions may be filled as 
 is done under our ordinary type of civil service 
 laws. We will discuss the method of filling the 
 higher positions in the next chapter. 
 
 Such a system w^ould give proper coordination 
 and responsibility, and by these means we 
 would have laid the foundation of efficiency in 
 administration. A complete power of appoint- 
 ment will not alone put the Governor into con- 
 trol. Departments and services must be 
 grouped together under the headship of the gov- 
 ernor ^s immediate subordinates. With state 
 administration thus rationally organized, the 
 valuable but often vexatious work of Boards of 
 Control will no longer be necessary. 
 
 A SUGGESTED SCHEME OF STATE ADMINISTRATION 
 
 Governor. (Eesponsible to the people.) 
 
 I. Secretary of State. (Appointed at the 
 
 pleasure of the Governor. Member 
 
 of cabinet.) 
 
190 GOVEKNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 1. Recording functions. 
 
 2. Authentication of commissions and other 
 
 documents. (Great Seal.) 
 
 3. Licenses (automobile, etc.). 
 
 4. Custodianship of Capitol Building and 
 
 Grounds and of historical relics, parks, 
 etc. 
 
 IL The Controller. (Appointed at the pleas- 
 ure of the Governor. Member of cabi- 
 net.) 
 
 1. Custody of State's money. 
 
 2. Auditing. 
 
 3. Supervision over business efficiency in sev- 
 
 eral departmentsfand institutions. 
 
 4. Purchasing agent for all state purposes. 
 
 5. Preparation of annual budget. 
 
 6. Supervision over city and county finance. 
 
 7. State printing. 
 
 III. Secretary of Corporations. 
 
 (Appointed at the pleasure of the 
 Governor. Member of cabinet.) 
 
 1. Corporation licensing. 
 
 2. Railroad regulation. 
 
 3. General corporation regulation. (Blue 
 
 Sky law.) 
 
 4. Bank regulation. 
 
 5. Insurance regulation. 
 
 6. Building and loan regulation. 
 
STATE ADMINISTRATION 191 
 
 IV. Secretary of Labor. (Appointed at the 
 
 pleasure of the Governor. Member 
 of cabinet.) 
 
 1. Administration of labor legislation. 
 
 2. Industrial accidents and insurance. 
 
 3. Social insurance, minimum wage laws, etc. 
 
 V. Attorney General. (Appointed at the 
 
 pleasure of the Governor. Member 
 of cabinet.) 
 
 VI. Director of Public Health. (Appointed 
 
 at the pleasure of the Governor. 
 Member of cabinet.) 
 
 VII. Director of Charities and Corrections. 
 
 (Appointed at the pleasure of the 
 Governor. Member of cabinet.) 
 
 1. Prisons. 
 
 2. Eeformatories. 
 
 3. Insane asylums. 
 
 4. Homes for feeble-minded. 
 
 5. Charitable institutions (as veterans^ 
 
 homes, etc). 
 
 6. Institutions for adult deaf, dumb and blind. 
 
 7. Supervision of local and private charities, 
 
 county jails, etc. 
 
 Vin. Director of Public Works. (Appointed 
 at the pleasure of the Governor. 
 Member of cabinet.) 
 
192 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 1. Building construction. 
 
 2. State highways. 
 
 3. State-owTied utilities (docks, wharves, 
 
 etc). 
 
 IX. Secretary of Natural Resources. (Ap- 
 
 pointed at the pleasure of the Gov- 
 ernor. Member of cabinet.) 
 
 1. Agriculture (except education). 
 
 2. Mining Laws. 
 
 3. Fish and game laws. 
 
 4. Water conservation. 
 
 5. Forestry. (Including custody of state 
 
 reservations.) 
 
 6. Veterinary inspection laws. 
 
 7. Horticulture inspection laws. 
 
 8. Land registration. 
 
 X. Board of Education. (Seven members 
 
 appointed for seven years, one retir- 
 ing each year. Appoints Superin- 
 tendent and other officers.) 
 
 1. General educational administration (ex- 
 
 cept University, which should have sep- 
 arate Board of Regents). 
 
 2. Schools for defectives. 
 8. Normal schools. 
 
 4. Examinations for admission to all profes- 
 
 sions. 
 
 5. State library. 
 
STATE ADMINISTRATION 193 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 See Bibliography under Chapter VI. 
 
 Annual Reports of the United States Civil Service 
 Commission. 
 
 Barrows, D. P., ''Reorganization of State Adminis- 
 tration in California," California Law Review, 
 January, 1915. 
 
 Beard, C. A., ''American Government and Politics," 
 pp. 499-515. "Readings in American Government 
 and Politics," pp. 436-438, 453-456. 
 
 Bryce, James, "American Commonwealth," vol. I, 
 chapter XLI. 
 
 FiNLEY and Sanderson, "American Executive and 
 Executive Methods. ' ' 
 
 GooDNOw, F. J., "Politics and Administration." 
 
 Hemenway, H. B., "The Organization of the State 
 Executive in Illinois," Illinois Law Review, June, 
 1911. 
 
 fiuGHES, Charles Evans, "Conditions of Progress i-n 
 Democratic Government," pp. 32-58. 
 
 Johnson, Hiram W., "Inaugural Address," Janu- 
 ary, 1911. 
 
 Mathews, J. M., "American State Administration." 
 
 Reinsch, p. S., "Readings on American State Gov- 
 ernment," pp. 1-10. 
 
CHAPTEE XII 
 
 THE PLACE OF EXPEETS IN STATE AND LOCAL 
 ADMINISTRATION 
 
 Not only is our state and local administration 
 defective in its organization and in the charac- 
 ter of its rank and file but, in comparison with 
 other systems, it suffers from the absence of 
 expert service. In this country, the actual car- 
 rying out of the details of government is left, 
 as we have seen, to officers selected for almost 
 every other reason than administrative ability, 
 and whose tenure of their office is dependent on 
 the turn of the political wheel. In England and 
 on the Continent of Europe, similar work is 
 performed by men specially trained for the 
 tasks, who are sure of their positions so long as 
 they keep up to the established standard of ef- 
 ficiency. The governments of these countries 
 differ from our own and from one another in 
 numerous other particulars. They are alike 
 distinguished from ours only in this. The effi- 
 ciency and economy of governmental adminis- 
 tration in England, France and Prussia has 
 been so frequently commented upon by Amer- 
 
 194 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPERTS 195 
 
 ican observers as to have become commonplace. 
 If we are to find the reason why municipal gov- 
 ernment in Prussia has been more efficient than 
 in New York city, or why the state adminis- 
 tration of Saxony gave better results per unit 
 of cost than that of California, we must not for- 
 get the presence there and absence here of the 
 expert. 
 
 We do not mean that all government offices 
 demand the service of experts. Those who per- 
 form purely mechanical or clerical duties, no 
 matter how skillful talent or experience may 
 have made them, are not experts. This partic- 
 ular discussion has nothing to do with such du- 
 ties or with the means of selecting persons to 
 perform them. We are interested, for the pres- 
 ent, only in those positions which call for the ex- 
 ercise of some considerable discretion — ^places 
 of responsibility in the administrative service. 
 We are, in this chapter, concerned with the 
 ^'commissioned officers" of administration. 
 The navy yard mechanic, the mail distributor, 
 the department copyist, are as proficient in 
 this country as in Europe. Of experts in re- 
 sponsible positions, however, we have but an 
 accidental few. We govern largely without the 
 aid of men who know; and it is small wonder 
 that cost and efficiency lose all proper relation 
 under such a system. It is far more important 
 
196 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 that the men in the responsible places should 
 be well selected than that their more or less 
 mechanical subordinates should be carefully 
 chosen. 
 
 The reason for our lack of experts in public 
 service is to be found in our characteristic 
 American confusion of the functions of admin- 
 istration and representation. Deeply imbued 
 with the democratic ideal, we have falsely 
 thought that any man of reasonable intelligence 
 was qualified to fill any position in the govern- 
 ment, whether it be that of a legislator or an 
 administrator. We have a boundless faith in 
 the ubiquitous genius of our fellow countrymen. 
 Now comes the dull awakening to the results of 
 overconfidence. We have conceived of every 
 position as representative and, in consequence, 
 have accepted the ^^ average American'' as the 
 proper incumbent of every position. Nat- 
 urally, too, we have applied the principle of 
 popular election to as many administrative of- 
 fices as possible. As for the rest of the iDlaces, 
 our ideal of the ^^ average American" has led 
 us to be indifferent and careless as to the 
 method of, or reason for, his appointment. 
 
 As a matter of fact, there is a very clear dis- 
 tinction between the functions of representa- 
 tion and administration, and between the quali- 
 fications needed by those who are performing 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPERTS 197 
 
 them. It is the purpose of representation to 
 reflect as closely as may be the will of the peo- 
 ple. The representative requires no special 
 training'. The possession of learning or capac- 
 ity may make him more effective, but it fre- 
 quently withdraws him from the point of view 
 of the mass of the people, and actually hinders 
 his performance of the representative function. 
 In representative bodies it is desirable that all 
 classes in the community should be represented, 
 and this means, in general, the selection of good 
 average specimens of each class, who, in the 
 long run, will be the best possible reflectors of 
 the ideals and interests of their constituents. 
 Of course, representatives should be elected, 
 and should be subject to every possible check to 
 make them responsive to the wishes of those 
 whom they represent. If elected for long 
 terms, they should be liable to recall, and their 
 conduct should be subject to review by the ini- 
 tiative and referendum. They should act 
 w^holly in the public eye, and should be con- 
 stantly amenable to the high court of public 
 opinion. To men thus chosen and thus checked, 
 should be entrusted the determination of all 
 matters of general policy. They would include, 
 in our country, besides members of distinctly 
 legislative bodies, the President of the United 
 States and his Cabinet, the Governor and the 
 
198 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 heads of the chief departments of state admin- 
 istration and the mayors and councilmen of 
 cities. 
 
 The administrator, on the other hand, has no 
 concern with ^^ policy,'' except to offer such sug- 
 gestions and advice as his experience warrants, 
 and to abide by it loyally as determined by his 
 representative superiors. His duty is simply 
 to carry out the policy, and there is no reason 
 why the public should not have its policies ad- 
 ministered by men as competent as those who do 
 similar work for private corporations. The 
 administrator's relation to the people is the 
 same that is borne by the general manager and 
 other principal executive officers of a corpora- 
 tion to its stockholders. 
 
 The administrator must possess special train- 
 ing. It is of no consequence as to what class 
 of society he comes from. He should be ap- 
 pointed, not elected, and should be removed as 
 far as possible from the immediate effects of 
 public opinion. His tenure of office should be 
 made secure so that he may be willing to make 
 the necessary sacrifices to prepare for the po- 
 sition. In every respect, his qualifications 
 should be the exact opposite of those of a rep- 
 resentative. In private business the stress of 
 competition ordains that the responsible posi- 
 tions shall be filled by experts. In public busi- 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPERTS 199 
 
 ness, there is no such *4ron law," and men are 
 too frequently appointed because they are good 
 mixers, clever organizers, specious talkers, or 
 because they have ''a pulP' with some man of 
 power. Public business can never be carried 
 on with the efficiency of private business until 
 for the absent law of competition we substitute 
 a well considered popular volition to be served 
 by experts. In European countries this act of 
 will has been made by the people, or for them 
 by enlightened authorities. In this country it 
 is yet to be made. 
 
 It is one of the regrettable incidents of the 
 present day progressive movements that few 
 of the leaders who are fighting earnestly for 
 more honest and more representative govern- 
 ment, and for the adoption of measures reme- 
 dial of many of our economic maladjustments, 
 are awake to this fundamental distinction be- 
 tween the functions of representation and ad- 
 ministration. There are few of them whose 
 ideas of civil service reform extend beyond the 
 routine position. Even in that late phase of 
 municipal reform, the so-called commission gov- 
 ernment of many of our cities, this confusion 
 has been, if anything, intensified. The underly- 
 ing idea of commission government is that all 
 powers of government, legislative and executive 
 alike, should be centered in the hands of a small 
 
200 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 council, or commission. In this respect, it does 
 not differ strikingly, except in the size of the 
 council, from the English system of municipal 
 government, or from that which prevailed in our 
 earlier American cities. If we consider the in- 
 dividual commissioners as mere committees of 
 one upon the various departments into which 
 the city government is divided, the analogy to 
 the British borough council with its committees 
 is almost exact. This system has resulted in 
 establishing our city government upon an hon- 
 est basis. The organization is so simple, the 
 number of officers to be elected so few, the fix- 
 ing of responsibility so easy, that our commis- 
 sion governments have become thoroughly rep- 
 resentative, giving the people exactly what they 
 ask, without opportunity for graft or corrup- 
 tion. It has gone only a short way, however, 
 toward making the government of our cities 
 more efficient. It offers no greater opportunity 
 for the expert than the older and more compli- 
 cated forms which it supplants. Unlike a mem- 
 ber of the English borough council, our commis- 
 sion government councilors are, in almost 
 every case, salaried officers who are expected 
 to give all, or a very large proportion of their 
 time to the work of the city government, and 
 themselves to do the actual work of adminis- 
 tration. They are not only representatives, 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPERTS 201 
 
 but administrators. In general, it may be said, 
 that they fulfill the functions of representation 
 admirably, but those of administration only tol- 
 erably. 
 
 Take for example the city of Berkeley, Cali- 
 fornia. The mayor of the city is paid a salary 
 of $2400 a year; the councilmen salaries of 
 $1800. They are not required to give their 
 full time to the work, but, as a matter of fact, 
 they ordinarily put in at the city's business the 
 equivalent of a full day's effort. The salary is 
 not large enough to attract the larger business 
 men, or the men most experienced in aifairs. 
 This is typical of other American cities under 
 the commission form of government. The first 
 mayor, an attorney and an admirable type 
 of public servant, was replaced, after one term, 
 because of his lack of the graces of popularity, 
 by a Socialist. The latter was undoubtedly a 
 representative of a high order, the spokesman 
 of a large class in the community. As an ad- 
 ministrator, however, he had no special fitness, 
 either by training, experience, or natural apti- 
 tude. His qualities were those of a propa- 
 gandist. The third mayor was a young lum- 
 ber merchant, of limited experience ; the fourth, 
 a corporation executive, able but unrepresen- 
 tative. The commissioner of finance and 
 revenue, another Socialist, had conducted sue- 
 
202 GOVEKNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 cessfully for some years a small bicycle busi- 
 ness in our city. He is a man of excellent char- 
 acter, thoroughly representative of the section 
 of the city from which he comes, but his business 
 had not adequately prepared him to handle the 
 affairs of a ninety million dollar corporation. 
 The members of the city council have always 
 been respectable gentlemen, of good average 
 ability, admirably fitted to serve on a represent- 
 ative council in any city. No exception can be 
 taken to their characters. They have handled 
 their departments honestly and, within their 
 limits, capably. They are not, however, and 
 never will be, experts. They are amateurs in 
 the art of administration ; and whether it be in 
 athletics, or billiards, or the business of govern- 
 ment, amateurs cannot successfully compete 
 with professionals. 
 
 This limitation upon the success of commis- 
 sion government is now very generally recog- 
 nized by the ablest students of municipal ad- 
 ministration. The cry now goes up, **We have 
 honesty, give us efficiency;'' and, without the 
 assistance of men who know, efficiency is impos- 
 sible. The demand for expert service in the 
 municipal field is finding expression to a cer- 
 tain extent in the creation of voluntary and offi- 
 cial ** bureaus of efficiency." This is an efiPort 
 to obviate the effects of the amateurishness 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPERTS 203 
 
 of the regular city administrators, by sub- 
 jecting them to expert criticism, and by sup- 
 plying through detailed investigations of par- 
 ticular departments, efficiency data plain enough 
 to be used even by amateurs. Of course, it is 
 obvious that such a method of introducing the 
 expert element into the city government can not 
 be permanently successful. It has the same 
 limitation as the process of keeping the indi- 
 vidual organism at high pressure by the use of 
 cocktails or hypodermics. It can not take the 
 place of a rationally developed system of ad- 
 ministration in which expert service is em- 
 ployed. 
 
 Another expression, and as experience 
 shows, a more satisfactory one, of the demand 
 for expert service, is the City Manager. This 
 is simply the plan by which the city council 
 should employ, at a comparatively high salary, 
 an acknowledged expert to play the same part 
 in the fortunes of the city administration that 
 a general manager does in those of a private 
 corporation. For cities not too large to make 
 it impossible for one man to have a sure grasp 
 of the situation, this method promises excellent 
 results, provided the business manager is ap- 
 pointed for merit and given sufficient per- 
 manency of tenure. The first city to put this 
 idea into effect was Staunton, Virginia, in 1908, 
 
204 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 when its council of the antiquated bicameral 
 type gave over by ordinance all matters of an 
 administrative nature to a ^^ general manager." 
 The new plan was first completely formulated 
 as a charter in Lockport, New York, in 1911, 
 apparently independently of the earlier mani- 
 festation. This charter, which remains the 
 most complete draft of the city manager idea 
 was, however, smothered by the State legisla- 
 ture. It remained for Sumter, South Carolina, 
 to put the first charter into actual operation in 
 1912. It was soon followed by other small 
 cities. It was not, however, until Dayton, a 
 city of over 116,000, took advantage of the home 
 rule provision in the new Ohio constitution and 
 the wave of civic patriotism following the flood 
 of March, 1913, to carry a city manager char- 
 ter, that the idea was raised to the dignity of a 
 ^^ permanent movement.'' Dayton has had the 
 new form in operation since January, 1914, and 
 from official reports seems to be prospering 
 mightily under it. Other cities are now rapidly 
 adopting this device for putting their govern- 
 ments into the hands of an administrative ex- 
 pert. A City Manager, properly selected, and 
 independent in his position, with power to ^^hire 
 and fire" subordinates, subject, of course, to 
 proper civil service restrictions, seems the ideal 
 mode of administration for a small city. It 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPERTS 205 
 
 has taken the first hesitating steps toward adop- 
 tion, and we may confidently look forward to its 
 rapid progress in the next few years. 
 
 We have already referred to the successful 
 administration of government on the Continent 
 of Europe as a result of the use of experts in 
 their proper places. A word or two as to the 
 method of selection of these experts may be 
 worth while. In England, the higher civil serv- 
 ice, or, to use the English nomenclature, the 
 first-class clerkships of the English government 
 are filled on the basis of competitive examina- 
 tions of the same standard as the honor exam- 
 inations in classics at Oxford, and in mathemat- 
 ics and modern languages at Cambridge. No 
 effort is made in these examinations to test the 
 fitness of the candidate for any particular posi- 
 tion. They are simply a test of his general 
 training, and they insure that the men who are 
 admitted to the first-class clerkships are the 
 best of the graduates of the two great English 
 Universities. Of course, there is nothing in the 
 successful completion of the university course 
 which insures the possession of administrative 
 qualities of a high order, but there is more prob- 
 ability of getting men of capacity from among 
 such university graduates than among any 
 other class in the community. They are the 
 class who supply the leaders of the bar, the pul- 
 
206 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 pit and the business world. The selection of 
 experts by the English municipality is ham- 
 pered by no civil service restrictions. Any bor- 
 ough council is at liberty to employ any person 
 for any position, with or without qualifications, 
 and to continue his employment for as long or 
 short a period as they desire. An enlightened 
 public sentiment, however, absolutely requires 
 that appointments shall be made on the basis 
 of efficiency, and forbids removals for anything 
 but wrongdoing or incapacity. The larger 
 cities look among the officers of the smaller 
 cities for men who have made good, and then 
 translate them to a larger field of usefulness. 
 The result is that municipal service of various 
 sorts becomes a regular profession into which 
 young men enter, usually in subordinate posi- 
 tions in small cities with a fair prospect of 
 working up to the very highest places. One 
 officer in the English borough deserves special 
 mention. This is the town clerk. He is always 
 a solicitor, in the largest cities always a man of 
 great experience in the office. He is not only 
 an expert in the legal intricacies of the munici- 
 pal corporations* acts, but by his long connec- 
 tion with city government is qualified to be a 
 general adviser with regard to all sorts of mu- 
 nicipal problems. He is, in short, a sort of 
 municipal factotum, corresponding, in a way, 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPEKTS 207 
 
 to the proposed business manager of our Ameri- 
 can municipalities. 
 
 In France, entrance to the higher civil service 
 is ordinarily achieved by pursuing a certain 
 prerequisite course of study, the passing of an 
 examination set by the department in which the 
 applicant desires to take service, and then by 
 probationary service, frequently without any 
 compensation whatever, for a period that some- 
 times extends as long as two years. This, of 
 course, limits the higher French service to the 
 children of families of some substance, a thing 
 which we could not for a moment think of dupli- 
 cating in America. French municipalities are 
 left as free as are the English municipalities in 
 the choice and retention of their officers, but 
 in France as in England custom dictates that 
 they shall be chosen for their real merit. There 
 is in France, also, a very effective supervision 
 of municipal affairs by the expert officers of the 
 central government. 
 
 In Prussia, admission to the higher service 
 was even more difficult than in France. The ap- 
 plicant must have completed a university course, 
 passed an examination, and written a thesis. 
 If he cleared these hurdles, he was then given a 
 four years' probationary term of service, with- 
 out pay, at the end of which he must pass still 
 another examination. This made the service, 
 
208 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 even more than in France, the exclusive prop- 
 erty of the well-to-do. It was, in many respects, 
 a very admirable service, its members being 
 almost universally competent, and its chief de- 
 fect being a dehumanized red tape and rigidity. 
 The Prussian municipalities have a form of 
 organization full of helpful suggestion for us. 
 A large, unpaid city council is the basis of it, 
 the principal business of this council being to 
 select the Magistrat, This body consists in 
 part of paid and in part of unpaid members. It 
 is presided over by the burgomaster, who, in 
 the smaller places, is sometimes the only paid 
 member. He is a general municipal expert to 
 an even greater extent than the British town 
 clerk, and corresponds even more closely to the 
 business manager. He and the other paid mem- 
 bers of the Magistrat are always selected on 
 a strict business basis by the council. If a 
 burgomaster is wanted, the city council will in- 
 sert an advertisement in the papers throughout 
 the country reading something like this: 
 ^^ Wanted, a burgomaster; applicants will apply 
 
 at the town hall of ." Then, from among 
 
 the candidates so applying, one is selected on 
 the basis of the good work which he has previ- 
 ously done. The tenure of office of the paid 
 members of the Magistrat is twelve years, with 
 the assurance of a liberal retiring allowance at 
 
• THE PLACE OF EXPERTS 209 
 
 the end of that period if they are not reelected. 
 The admirable administration of the German 
 cities no longer seems a thing to wonder at 
 when we consider the training of the men who 
 are carrying out this work. 
 
 In England and Prussia, the relation between 
 the expert administrator and lay officials has 
 been most carefully worked out. The charac- 
 teristic feature of English administration is a 
 responsible lay officer and a subordinate expert 
 to whom the former looks constantly for assist- 
 ance. This is true of Cabinet Minister and 
 Justice of the Peace alike. The various 
 branches of city administration, for example, 
 are assigned to committees of the council whose 
 first business is to select an expert to manage 
 the department. As long as he retains their 
 confidence he has a free hand. He recommends 
 policies to them and they ordinarily accept his 
 suggestions. The power of decision, however, 
 in every matter rests with the committee and 
 ultimately with the council as a whole. In 
 Prussian cities there is ample provision for the 
 consultation of the lay members of the ** Depu- 
 tations'' which oversee each branch of the ad- 
 ministration but, except in financial matters, 
 where the council prevails, the professional of- 
 ficial is the deciding factor. The English model 
 is certainly better fitted to our situation than 
 
210 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 the German. Power, at any rate, should never 
 be granted to experts apart from lay super- 
 vision and control. In state affairs each de- 
 partment should have at its head a layman re- 
 sponsible to the Governor. In city affairs, 
 either the lay board of commissioners should 
 collectively choose and regulate a business man- 
 ager, or individually they should supervise the 
 activities of experts in their several depart- 
 ments. 
 
 Lay government is awkward and inefficient. 
 Expert government is stiff and red taped. Ex- 
 perts are never wholly sane. They are mono- 
 maniacs, more or less pronounced, upon their 
 own subjects, and an administration left en- 
 tirely to them soon becomes formal, rigid and 
 devoted to the fulfillment of purely technical 
 aims. Further, no method of selecting expert 
 officials is possible, except by lay supervisors. 
 Popular election can not be counted on because 
 the qualities of the expert are by no means those 
 which most make for popularity. Further, 
 popular election is uncertain and well trained 
 experts will not submit themselves to its 
 chances. Permanency of tenure is a pre- 
 requisite of expert service. On the other hand, 
 experts must be responsible to some one. 
 Hence the appearance in every good system of 
 administration of the selecting authority which 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPEETS 211 
 
 acts as a ^* shock-absorber'' between expert and 
 official. Such a system insures responsibility, 
 sanity and efficiency, things to be desired above 
 fine gold in the business of government. 
 
 How can we secure the advantages of expert 
 service in the United States? The first step 
 is the awakening of American public opinion 
 to a recognition of the distinction between the 
 functions of administration and representation. 
 We must come to understand that our business 
 is worthy of being conducted by the best trained 
 and most competent of men. We must leave 
 behind forever the fallacy that any American 
 can do anything. If we could so affect public 
 opinion as to create an immediate and insistent 
 demand that only men of sufficient qualifications 
 be appointed to public offices, and that, once in, 
 they should remain as long as they make good, 
 there would be no need of any legal enactments 
 on the subject. It is probable, however, that 
 such a state of public sentiment can not be 
 brought to pass within a reasonable time. We 
 need an example of the results that may be 
 accomplished by experts to put the finishing 
 touches on this course of education. In default 
 of a perfect state of public sentiment, we must 
 provide by law for the filling of the higher ad- 
 ministrative places by some system of merit ap- 
 pointment. The first step in this direction is to 
 
212 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 divide the civil service into two great classes — 
 the lower and the higher. In the first, put 
 purely clerical or routine positions ; in the sec- 
 ond, those involving the use of discretion on a 
 large scale. Admission to the former should 
 be, as now, by competitive examinations on the 
 present basis. Admission to the lower grades 
 of the second or higher class should be based 
 upon the completion of a satisfactory course of 
 study, or by the passing of an equivalent ex- 
 amination. No true American will advocate 
 for a moment closing the door to the higher 
 positions on those who have missed the oppor- 
 tunity of a formal education. This being true, 
 there must be a way into this service by exam- 
 ination. More responsible positions must nat- 
 urally be filled by promotion from below. A 
 good deal of progress has been made in the 
 United States civil service toward the accom- 
 plishment of these results. Higher and higher 
 positions are constantly being included in the 
 classified service. In our States and cities, the 
 situation is very different. There the require- 
 ment of a course of study or the passing of an 
 examination for the higher positions would be 
 almost revolutionary. 
 
 The eligible list for positions in the United 
 States service would naturally be drawn up, as 
 now, by the United States Civil Service Com- 
 
THE PLACE OF EXPERTS 213 
 
 mission. The eligible list for state and mu- 
 nicipal and other local positions should be all 
 prepared by a state civil service commission. 
 There are not enough positions requiring ex- 
 perts, and not enough experts to become candi- 
 dates for them in the average city to bring 
 about anything like effective competition. The 
 state eligible list, from which the State or any 
 town or county might draw, would obviate this 
 difficulty, and at the same time give a better 
 assurance of fair and thorough examination. 
 As to providing the experts to fill these posi- 
 tions, our American universities are, without 
 any very striking increase of their present 
 teaching force, or any great addition to their 
 budgets, in position to train every variety of 
 governmental expert. The writer recently pre- 
 pared a set of proposed courses in preparation 
 for certain municipal positions, based upon 
 courses now offered in the University of Cali- 
 fornia. He found that it would be necessary to 
 offer but three new courses in order to train 
 practically any kind of municipal expert that 
 might be required. Our universities can turn 
 out the men as soon as the field is open to them ; 
 as soon as some assurance can be had that a 
 man who has taken a proper course of study 
 can get a place and keep it. 
 What is the place of an expert in state and 
 
214 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 municipal affairs? There is no place for any 
 one else in any responsible administrative po- 
 sition. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Amencan Political Science Review, February, 1913. 
 
 FouLKE, William Dudley, ''Expert City Manage- 
 ment,'^ National Municipal Review, October, 1912, 
 pp. 549-561. 
 
 GooDNOw, F. J., ''Comparative Administrative Law," 
 vol. II, 27-61. "Municipal Government," pp. 
 209-233. "Municipal Problems," pp. 247-281. 
 
 Lowell, A. L., "Permanent Officials in Municipal 
 Government," in Proceedings National Municipal 
 League, 1908, pp. 215-222. "Government of Eng- 
 land," vol. I, pp. 145-194. "Expert Administra- 
 tors in Popular Government," American Political 
 Science Review, February, 1913. 
 
 Lowell, A. L., and Stephens, H. Morse, "Colonial 
 Civil Service." 
 
 Moses, Robert, "The Civil Service of Great Britain." 
 
 MuNRO, W. B., "The Government of European 
 Cities," pp. 62-91, 164-208, 281-308. 
 
 Shaw, Albert, "Municipal Government in Conti- 
 nental Europe," pp. 289-322. "Municipal Gov- 
 ernment in Great Britain," pp. 63-68. 
 
 Woodruff, Clinton Rogers, "Civil Service Reform 
 at Los Angeles," in National Municipal Review, 
 October, 1912, pp. 639-646. "The Selection and 
 Retention of Experts in Municipal Office," ihid, 
 pp. 646-649. 
 
CHAPTER XIII 
 
 THE ADMINISTRATION OF EDUCATION" 
 
 The general principle which should control the 
 organization of the administrative side of gov- 
 ernment we have seen to be the concentration 
 of power and responsibility. We, therefore, 
 must show strong grounds for recommending 
 any deviation from this principle. Upon edu- 
 cation, our state and local governments employ 
 upwards of twenty per cent, of their total reve- 
 nues. The number of teachers and adminis- 
 trative officers engaged in educational work far 
 surpasses the numbers engaged in any other 
 branch of government. The success of the edu- 
 cational system is more important to a larger 
 proportion of the community than is the success 
 of any other administrative department except 
 that of justice. Granted, then, the enormous 
 importance of educational administration and 
 the marvelous opportunities for the political 
 manipulator which it offers; granted, also, the 
 present state of public sentiment with regard 
 to the employment of experts in public service ; 
 there is grave reason for believing that, while 
 
 215 
 
216 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 logically educational administration does not 
 differ from other kinds of administration, some 
 unusual precaution should be taken to keep it 
 out of the field of politics. Our well-nigh uni- 
 versal practice in the United States is to pro- 
 vide a separate and peculiar administrative 
 machinery for education, and, on the whole, we 
 have been justified by the facts of the situa- 
 tion. 
 
 There are six possible methods of organizing 
 the state administration of education. The 
 first of these is the bureau system, which means 
 simply that education should be administered 
 by a superintendent or secretary appointed by 
 the Governor in just the same way that other 
 departments are administered by similarly ap- 
 pointed heads. The bureau system of manag- 
 ing educational affairs exists in England, 
 France and Germany. In so far as the United 
 States government has educational functions at 
 all, the bureau system is applied to them. The 
 city of Sacramento, California, has pursued the 
 unique policy of intrusting the administration 
 of education to the city council itself, one of the 
 city councilors being the Commissioner of Ed- 
 ucation. With this one exception, American 
 States and cities have uniformly avoided the 
 bureau system. The bureau system fits in log- 
 ically with the general scheme of administra- 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF EDUCATION 217 
 
 tion, but, as we have already seen, the dangers 
 which surround it in a country like ours are so 
 great as to render its adoption an invitation to 
 disaster. 
 
 Another possible form of administration is 
 that by a commission, the members of which are 
 paid salaries and are expected to perform the 
 actual detailed and professional work of ad- 
 ministration. This means applying to educa- 
 tion the same system of administration which is 
 so commonly applied to the regulation of public 
 utilities and the conduct of many other branches 
 of state business. It is open to every possible 
 objection which may be alleged against the bu- 
 reau system, without the logical merit of fitting 
 into a consistent scheme of administration. 
 This method is not employed by any State, but 
 in several cities, notably in San Francisco, it 
 has been tried with rather unfortunate results. 
 In that city, the Superintendent of Schools, who 
 also possesses independent administrative au- 
 thority, is elected by the people. The result is 
 a confusion of responsibility and a division of 
 authority incompatible with genuine success. 
 As to the working of the commission plan with- 
 out such complications, we have no data. 
 
 The third possible arrangement is that of a 
 board made up in a majority, at least, of edu- 
 cational experts, who may be appointed either 
 
218 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 by the Governor or occupy their position ex 
 officio. This system is employed with consid- 
 erable variations as to detail in some eight of 
 our States, including Virginia, West Virginia, 
 Indiana and, until 1913, California. On its 
 face, a board of education thus composed should 
 be exceedingly efficient, especially if it is so ar- 
 ranged as to secure representation on the board 
 of all sorts of educational interests. Great 
 criticism has been directed against the system 
 formerly in vogue in California because the ma- 
 jority of the board members were principals of 
 normal schools, while secondary and elementary 
 education were unrepresented. The members 
 of such boards are thoroughly familiar with 
 educational work and very competent to render 
 sound judgment. The great difficulty of the 
 system is that these expert members of the 
 board are already fully occupied in the perform- 
 ance of important duties, so that they have 
 very little time to give to the supervision of 
 education. They can, indeed, give no more time 
 to it than a board of laymen, and in the time 
 at their disposal there is very little opportunity 
 for them to employ to advantage their expert 
 knowledge. Furthermore, in all the States in 
 which these expert boards exist, the superin- 
 tendent of public instruction, who is the execu- 
 tive officer of the board and the real head of the 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF EDUCATION 219 
 
 educational administration of the State, is 
 elected by the people. We have already seen 
 that it is impossible to secure a permanently 
 wise selection of experts by popular election. 
 Popularly elected superintendents of public in- 
 struction are sometimes excellent men, but they 
 are always politicians, and almost never educa- 
 tional experts. The result is that in this sys- 
 tem we have an absolute reversal of what we 
 have already seen to be the normal constitution 
 of any administrative system. Instead of lay- 
 men performing representative functions, in- 
 cluding the appointment and control of experts, 
 we have a body of experts set to criticise and 
 control a lay administrator. In other words, 
 we have the expert in the wrong place. As this 
 system has worked out there has been little to 
 commend it. It is not now supported by any 
 considerable authority on the subject of educa- 
 tional administration. 
 
 The fourth possible system is that of an ex- 
 officio board of state officials, to which may be 
 added certain appointive members. Colorado 
 has this system in its purity, with the Superin- 
 tendent, Secretary of State and Attorney Gen- 
 eral as its Board of Education. Florida has 
 the same system, with the addition of the Gov- 
 ernor and the State Treasurer. If, of course, 
 the number of appointive members is in a ma- 
 
220 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 jority, it will be proper to place such a board 
 under the sixth order of classification. There 
 is little that can be said in defense of ex-officio 
 boards of state officials. Such boards, whether 
 they are set to supervise education or any other 
 branch of administration, are singularly ineffi- 
 cient. They seldom do anything, each member 
 being usually more interested in avoiding re- 
 sponsibility than in promoting the work of the 
 board. The work of a board of education so 
 organized is not the business of any particular 
 member on it except the superintendent, whom 
 the board is expected to supervise. It is a safe 
 conclusion, then, that such boards are simply 
 incumbrances and have no excuse for existence. 
 They are neither logical nor practical. 
 
 The fifth possible plan is that of Michigan, 
 by which a board of education, consisting of 
 three members, is elected by the people. No 
 one would, I think, seriously recommend the 
 adoption of this plan anywhere else. We have 
 seen enough of the evils of the long ballot to 
 wish to avoid any increase of the number of 
 elective officers. 
 
 The sixth plan is that of a board of laymen 
 appointed by the Governor. If we include 
 those States in which the board is partly ex- 
 officio but in a majority appointive, this plan is 
 the one in force in a majority of States. It, 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF EDUCATION 221 
 
 too, is subject to abuse if the terms of the board 
 are no longer than that of the authority appoint- 
 ing them, so that the Governor can control the 
 complexion of the board. It is possible for it 
 to become a mere instrument in his hands for 
 politically directing the administration of edu- 
 cation. If, however, the members of the board 
 are given a long term and are retired in rota- 
 tion, so that it is impossible for any one Gov- 
 ernor to get control of the board, we have prac- 
 tically absolute protection against the introduc- 
 tion of politics in a bad sense into the schools, 
 and have a basis for a system of educational 
 administration which is worthy of some future 
 notice. In most States having this form of 
 board, a superintendent of public instruction is 
 either elected by the people or appointed by 
 the Governor. In Massachusetts, Connecticut, 
 Rhode Island and Ngw York, the Superin- 
 tendent of Public Instruction is appointed by 
 the Board. Where the Superintendent of Pub- 
 lic Instruction is an independently elected 
 state officer, and, as is always the case, a 
 member of the board, the control which the 
 board has over him is not very effective ex- 
 cept, unfortunately, in those matters in which 
 the partisan exigencies of the majority of the 
 board may lead them to act as a unit. In other 
 words, upon all educational matters they are 
 
222 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 likely to show little interest and exercise little 
 power. Furthermore, under such a system 
 there is expert knowledge neither in the board 
 nor in the superintendent. Where, however, 
 the superintendent is appointed by the board, 
 he ordinarily is selected because of his fine 
 record as an educational expert. This system 
 establishes what we have seen to be the ideal re- 
 lation between lay representatives and expert 
 administrative officers ; in other words, we have 
 a standard organization for an administrative 
 department different from other departments of 
 administration only in the fact that the lay au- 
 thority is, in this case, a separate, independent 
 board, instead of being a single officer directly 
 responsible to the chief executive or the people. 
 We have, therefore, protected the educational 
 system against any incursion of political hordes 
 and, at the same time, provided it with an in- 
 ternal administration of a standard sort. 
 
 It would be easy to demonstrate, not only by 
 the line of a priori reasoning in which we have 
 just indulged, but by the profitable experience 
 of those communities where the system has been 
 tried, the eminent desirability of the system of 
 lay boards and expert superintendence. The 
 two best systems of state educational adminis- 
 tration that we have are those of Massachusetts 
 and New York, in which an expert is appointed 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF EDUCATION 223 
 
 by a lay board. The typical form of organiza- 
 tion of the local administration of education is 
 that of a lay board elected by the people and 
 an expert superintendent appointed by them. 
 On the whole, this system works admirably, the 
 exceptions usually arising from the fact that 
 either the board or the superintendent fails to 
 recognize the proper sphere of their activities. 
 Sometimes the superintendent endeavors to run 
 the politics of the board; sometimes the board 
 endeavors to perform the technical work of ad- 
 ministering the school system. Where the 
 board leaves the superintendent a free hand in 
 the administration of the technical side of edu- 
 cation, so long as they retain confidence in him 
 and his methods, and where he confines himself 
 strictly within his bounds, leaving to the board 
 the determination of the broader matters of 
 policy, the system works to perfection. In- 
 deed, this may be taken as a typical example 
 of the relation that ought to exist between the 
 expert and his lay superiors. 
 
 We may conclude, then, that educational ad- 
 ministration should be, in accordance with the 
 almost universal local practice, and with the ex- 
 perience of the States having the best systems, 
 entrusted, as far as the State is concerned, to 
 a board appointed by the Governor for a long 
 term, its members retiring in rotation, this 
 
224 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 board to have the power of appointing the 
 superintendent. Locally, it should be entrusted 
 to either elected or appointed boards of laymen, 
 who, in turn, should appoint the local superin- 
 tendents. 
 
 It is objected to this system by those who 
 distrust the ability of boards of laymen to han- 
 dle technical questions of education, that the 
 board ought to contain persons who have had 
 experience in educational work. To this we 
 would reply that the function of a board of edu- 
 cation is not to handle the details of educa- 
 tional administration, but simply to determine 
 broad matters of policy and select a superin- 
 tendent. If an expert board should select an 
 expert superintendent, as it might be reason- 
 ably expected to do if it had the power of ap- 
 pointing him, we would have a system in which 
 the lay point of view would have no place. 
 This would be highly undesirable. A touch of 
 lay sanity is needed in every branch of adminis- 
 tration, perhaps more so in education than any- 
 where else. A lay board with an expert super- 
 intendent gives us the right combination of 
 lay and expert opinion, of an expert board and 
 the publicly elected. 
 
 Still another type of mind contends that in 
 spite of all that is said about the danger of 
 politics entering into school administration, the 
 
ADMINISTEATION OF EDUCATION 225 
 
 only logically consistent thing to do is to adopt 
 the bureau system. To these people who are 
 so rash as to wish to run the risk of what might 
 happen to our system of education under direct 
 political control, we would reply that, granted 
 everything else which they have alleged, their 
 system would provide no adequate supervision 
 of the activities of the superintendent. Few 
 governors, by training or by disposition, are 
 fitted to undertake a close supervision of a 
 superintendent of public instruction. Further- 
 more, the Governor has no time for it. Serv- 
 ice for several months in the office of the most 
 efficient and industrious Governor the State of 
 California ever had, has convinced the writer 
 that there is no chance in such an office for the 
 super\Tlsion of the highly technical work of 
 its superintendent of public instruction. In 
 France, where the bureau system of education 
 prevails, not only is the Minister of Public In- 
 struction responsible to the Chamber of Depu- 
 ties, in which there are many members inter- 
 ested in education and ready to call him to ac- 
 count for his least mistake, but provision is 
 made for a great council of education, composed 
 of educational experts who supply advice upon 
 educational questions and settle appeals from 
 minor educational authorities. In England, 
 the President of the Board of Education, al- 
 
226 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 though the Board is a mere phantom, is also 
 responsible to the House of Commons. A 
 board of education seems to be necessary in or- 
 der to secure adequate supervision of the ac- 
 tivities of the professional expert superintend- 
 ent. 
 
 Last of all, there is a class of people who be- 
 lieve that it is necessary to retain the superin- 
 tendent of public instruction as a publicly 
 elected officer in order to obtain the representa- 
 tion of popular views in the state administra- 
 tion of education. They demand that the peo- 
 ple shall not be deprived of their *^ tribune,^' 
 the state superintendent. There is a not incon- 
 siderable class of politicians who delight to ap- 
 peal to this point of view, although they must be 
 aware in their own hearts of the fact that an 
 elected state superintendent has never been 
 and never will be a tribune of the people. We 
 have already seen, in our discussion of the long 
 ballot, how little attention the people give — not 
 through any fault of theirs — to the minor state 
 officers. To this class the superintendent of 
 public instruction belongs. He has, like the 
 other minor officers, been picked out by the 
 ring politicians who have habitually made up 
 the party slate. In the old days this choice 
 used to be ratified by the party convention. It 
 is now generally ratified by the direct primary. 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF EDUCATION 227 
 
 The people, however, in voting in the direct 
 primary, have no more interest in or informa- 
 tion about the superintendent or other minor 
 candidates than they formerly had in voting at 
 the election. The result is that our superin- 
 tendents of public instruction have, in general, 
 been representatives, not of the people, but of 
 the controlling political clique in the State. It 
 is true that such political cliques usually put 
 up men for this position who have some kind 
 of qualification for it, but to claim that the 
 superintendent of public instruction should be 
 retained as an elective officer because he is a 
 ^'tribune of the people*' is to ignore the actual 
 facts of practical politics. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Balliot, E. p., '* French Educational System, '* Edu- 
 cation, 1906, vol. 26, p. 385. 
 
 Butler, N. M., ''Problems of Educational Adminis- 
 tration,'' Educational Review, vol. 32, p. 515. 
 
 Chancellor, W. E., **Our City Schools; Their Ad- 
 mmistration and Supervision" (1908), pp. 1-77. 
 
 CoMPAYRE, G., ''Recent Educational Progress in 
 France," Educational Review, vol. 27, p. 19, (1904). 
 
 Draper, A. S., "Educational Organization and Ad- 
 ministration," in "Monographs on Education," 
 edited by N. M. Butler, vol. I, pp. 17-22 (1904). 
 
228 GOVEENAiENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 Button and Snedden, *' Administration of Public 
 Education in the United States/' pp. 54-72. 
 
 Elliott, E. C, "State School Systems," U. S. Bureau 
 of Education Bulletin No. 3, pp. 1-156 (1906). 
 
 Fairchild, E. T., ''Province of State Boards and 
 State Superintendents in the Administration of 
 Public Education," National Educational Associa- 
 tion Proceedings, 1909, pp. 423-26. 
 
 Fairlie, J. A., ''State Administration in New York," 
 Political Science Quarterly, vol. 15, p. 50 (1900). 
 
 Illinois Education Commission: "A Tentative Plan 
 for a State Board of Education," Bulletin No. 1 
 (1908). 
 
 Illinois School Report, 1908-1910, pp. 278-296. 
 
 McMillan, T., ' ' School Laws in New York, ' ' Catholic 
 World, vol. 70, p. 834 (1900). 
 
 Massachusetts: Annual Report of the Board of Edu- 
 cation for 1909-1910, pp. 15-19, 89-91. 
 
 MacLean, G. E., "Unification of a State's Educa- 
 tional Forces," New England Magazine, vol. 44, p. 
 355 (1911). 
 
 New York State Educational Department Annual 
 Report for 1904, p. 16. 
 
 New York (State) Legislature: Final Report of the 
 Special Joint Committee on Educational Unifica- 
 tion (1904). 
 
 Perkins, H. A., "Educational System of France," 
 Educational Review, vol. 41, pp. 245-60 (1911). 
 
 Prince, J. T., "School Administration," pp. 21-31 
 (1906). 
 
 School Review: "Proposed Unification of Educa- 
 
ADMINISTRATION OF EDUCATION 229 
 
 tional Administration," vol. 11, p. 423 (1903). 
 *' Appointive or Elective Boards of Education," vol. 
 16, p. 136 (1908). 
 Thurber, C. H., ''Principles of School Organization, 
 A Comparative Study Based on Systems of the 
 United States, England, Germany, and France" 
 (1900). 
 
OHAPTER XIV 
 
 what is the matter with the 
 presidency! 
 
 For a long time there has been a vague feeling 
 on the part of the American people that there 
 is something the matter with the Presidency. 
 Entirely apart from the success or failure of 
 the men who fill the position there can be no 
 doubt that the excitement, bitterness, treach- 
 ery, fraud and demagogism of a Presidential 
 campaign is proof sufficient that there is about 
 the office some unfortunate quality which pro- 
 duces these unfortunate conditions. The truth 
 is that the office is too big. Not perhaps too 
 large for the right man to administer success- 
 fully, but too attractive, tempting, seductive, 
 for the preservation of the honor and self- 
 respect of candidates. The prize is too great 
 for men to strive for it fairly. The impor- 
 tance of winning transcends all respect for the 
 rules of the game. 
 
 The office is too big. In no other country 
 of the world is there any such office to be dis- 
 posed of by election. In the democratic mon- 
 
 230 
 
MATTER WITH THE PRESIDENCY 231 
 
 archies, of which England is the type, some 
 nominal power and a great deal of real dignity 
 rests with the king. The actual governing au- 
 thority belongs to a group of men, the Cabinet, 
 who must compete for a place in the popular 
 mind with the splendid though somewhat un- 
 substantial chief of state. In the French Re- 
 public, the President lives in a palace and 
 spends his time and a large income impress- 
 ing his dignity upon the people. Although the 
 position carries with it little real power, there 
 has never been any difficulty in inducing the 
 most successful of French politicians to ac- 
 cept it. The Council of Ministers is like the 
 English Cabinet in its relation to this gorgeous 
 semblance of power. In no other country 
 where popular government prevails is there an 
 officer like the President who combines the dig- 
 nity of apparent primacy with the possession 
 of substantial power. There is no doubt that 
 it is the greatest office in the world. Of recent 
 years it has been made an incomparable agency 
 for the direction of the political opinions of 
 the people, thus giving to the President a 
 political potentiality of the first magnitude. 
 President Wilson has even been able to em- 
 ploy its opportunities to make a strong bid 
 for the mastery of the world's affairs. There 
 have been and doubtless will be again weak 
 
232 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 presidents but the power is there for the master 
 brain to use for the weal or woe of the nation. 
 If Archimedes lived today possessed by his 
 old time desire to move the world, he need 
 only wish to be the President of the United 
 States. 
 
 Every politician who comes within the mag- 
 netic area of this gigantic office is inevitably 
 deflected from the straight course by his de- 
 sire to secure it. Even in the days when the 
 Presidency was much less, and the United 
 States Senate much more, than now, great men 
 destroyed their higher reputations straining 
 for this Hesperidean prize. Calhoun, finding 
 he had no chance to achieve it, in bitterness 
 of spirit turned his back on a record of gen- 
 erous nationalism to become a baneful prophet 
 of secession. As to Clay, one need only quote 
 the brilliant dictum of Carl Schurz. *'Even 
 his oft quoted word that he would * rather be 
 right than be President,' was spoken at a time 
 when he was more desirous of being President 
 than sure of being right." The colossal Web- 
 ster was accused of stultifying himself in the 
 hope of conciliating the sentiment necessary 
 for an election which he never received, and 
 there can be no doubt that when he became cer- 
 tain that the prize was not for him he spent 
 his latter years in uncharitable petulance. 
 
MATTER WITH THE PRESIDENCY 233 
 
 Once come near it and men forget both their 
 friends and their principles. According to 
 their several tempers they beg, bargain, 
 truckle, threaten or abuse. Some would 
 wreck the party they cannot control, while 
 others would steal from their party the nom- 
 ination which they cannot honestly secure. 
 There may be honor among thieves, but among 
 Presidential candidates rarely much. The ex- 
 ceptions emphasize the rule. The Presidential 
 office is too big for poor human nature, and it 
 is unfortunately true that political nature is 
 among the poorest of the human variety. 
 
 At the same time that the Presidency is of 
 such overweening attractiveness to those who 
 come within reach of it, the office has never 
 supplied any rational incentive for good men 
 to go into politics. It may be safely assumed 
 that the man of parts and character will de- 
 mand of a political, as well as of any other 
 career which he has in contemplation, that 
 there shall be in it a progressive opportunity 
 for increased usefulness and for personal ad- 
 vancement. Our political system has never 
 supplied such an incentive. Up to a certain 
 point there seems to be a sort of succession 
 from that smallest office known to man — the 
 place of justice of the peace — up to the second 
 branch of the state legislature, and even to the 
 
234 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 lower house of Congress. Here the rule of 
 succession actually operates to the disadvan- 
 tage of the state legislature and the national 
 House of Representatives because few men of 
 ability are willing to undergo the long appren- 
 ticeship in insignificant positions. To the 
 higher places, however, the governorships, the 
 United States Senatorships and the Presi- 
 dency there is no orderly succession. There 
 is no line of political endeavor which seems 
 to give any advantage in candidacy for these 
 positions even as against an absolute outsider. 
 Hiram Johnson and Woodrow Wilson never 
 held political office until their election to the 
 Governorships of California and New Jersey. 
 It is true that the majority of the members of 
 the United States Senate have had previous 
 political experience of a somewhat extensive 
 kind, but the variety of offices that have been 
 held is so great that it is impossible to imagine 
 a career the logical conclusion of which is a 
 seat in that body, unless, indeed, it be a money- 
 making career. 
 
 The situation is even more marked when we 
 come to the Presidency of the United States. 
 If we begin with 1860 we will find that our 
 Presidents for half a century have come to 
 the office for almost every other reason than as 
 the culmination of a great and success- 
 
MATTER WITH THE PRESIDENCY 235 
 
 ful political career. Lincoln bad served in the 
 Illinois legislature and a term in the House of 
 Representatives of the United States, but so 
 had a great many other persons whose legisla- 
 tive records were as distinguished as his. He 
 was nominated because his utterances in an un- 
 successful campaign had made him available as 
 a compromise candidate when the leading men 
 of his party proved to be deadlocked for the 
 honor. He was a most fortunate accident. 
 Grant received two terms on the basis of his 
 military record and Conklin's reference to the 
 ' ^ Sour Apple Tree ' ' nearly got him the nomina- 
 tion for a third. Hayes was, when nominated. 
 Governor of Ohio. His record was sound but 
 unimpressive. He was nominated because of 
 his * ^ availability. ' ' Garfield's fine military 
 and Congressional record may be taken as a 
 mild exception to the rule. Cleveland's sole 
 distinguishing service had been as Governor 
 of New York. Harrison was, at the time of his 
 nomination, in the United States Senate. He 
 was not, however, a man of great prominence. 
 He was nominated at the suggestion of Blaine 
 because he was untouched by scandal, had a 
 good military record, and was the grandson of 
 a most popular President. McKinley is per- 
 haps a second exception to the rule because he 
 had a congressional record of some length and 
 
236 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 prominence and had been Governor of Ohio. 
 He was, however, much less well known than 
 his opponent for the nomination, Thomas B. 
 Reed, whose political service had been infinitely 
 more distinguished than McKinley's. Roose- 
 velt of course came into the Presidency by acci- 
 dent and achieved a second term by a popular 
 majority greater than any other President in 
 our history. His career has violated all rules 
 and theories and may safely be set aside in 
 considering the ordinary road to the Presiden- 
 tial chair. Taft more than any other chief 
 magistrate since John Quincy Adams worked 
 his way up to the Presidency through distinctly 
 logical gradations. Aside from a brief two 
 years as Governor of New Jersey, Wilson had 
 been a political scientist rather than a statesman. 
 The only natural approach to the office of 
 President which can be discovered from the 
 facts just outlined is that by way of the Gov- 
 ernor's chair. Even this way of drawing nigh 
 unto the coveted honor has been used but four 
 times since 1860. The truth is that the first 
 nomination comes to a man more frequently 
 because of his ** availability" than for any 
 other reason. To be ** available" a man must 
 have a clean record, with a touch of the mili- 
 tary in it if possible. He must be agreeable 
 — not the first or even the second choice of 
 anybody — but agreeable to everybody. In 
 
MATTEE WITH THE PRESIDENCY 237 
 
 other words, his career must have been color- 
 less. Finally, he must live in New York or 
 Ohio. The explanation of this latter point 
 opens the way to the discussion of one of the 
 incidental defects of the Presidency — the elec- 
 toral system. Since all the States, from mo- 
 tives of pride or desire for influence in na- 
 tional elections, now choose their electors by 
 general ticket it is very much more significant 
 to carry certain of the large States by even the 
 smallest of majorities than it is to secure the 
 general approval of the people of the whole 
 country. Not only does this lead to the selec- 
 tion of candidates from a limited list of large 
 and doubtful States to the exclusion of the tal- 
 ent of the rest of the country, but it sometimes 
 results in minority elections. This is properly 
 to be expected when, as in 1860 and 1912, three 
 or more candidates are in the field. The evil 
 lies in the fact that a candidate with a majority 
 of the popular vote may be defeated as was 
 Cleveland in 1888. There is no temptation to 
 bring out the minority vote in States which are 
 certain one way or the other and there is little 
 use in rolling up large majorities anywhere. 
 We have never had a President from west of 
 Illinois. We have not had a President from 
 south of Ohio since Buchanan nor one from 
 New England since the second Adams. In the 
 
238 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 last ten Presidential elections we have chosen 
 the occupant of the White House three times 
 from New York and five times from Ohio, while 
 Woodrow Wilson comes from New Jersey 
 which is only a suburb of New York. In the 
 two instances in which an Ohio President has 
 died in office he has been succeeded by a Vice- 
 President elected from New York. It is fool- 
 ish to assume that all the Presidential timber 
 in the country comes from the political forests 
 of those States. A small group of populous 
 eastern States have elected all our Presidents 
 for fifty years, sometimes in defiance of the 
 will of the whole people, and they will continue 
 to do so as long as the present highly irrational 
 and outworn system of choice prevails. The 
 original purpose of the electoral college was 
 never fulfilled. It serves no useful purpose of 
 inducing reflection and deliberate judgment of 
 competent persons in the selection of the Presi- 
 dent. It merely gives a few States in a par- 
 ticular section more power than they ought to 
 have. 
 
 One modification of the previous paragraph 
 perhaps deserves attention, and that is that 
 nominations for a second term are secured not 
 on the basis of the State a man comes from or 
 for other reasons of availability. A national 
 convention renominates a candidate for a sec- 
 
MATTER WITH THE PRESIDENCY 239 
 
 ond term not so much because it wants to as 
 because it has to. It may, of course, inci- 
 dentally want for reasons of principle or ex- 
 pediency to make the nomination, but it is a 
 very poor President who, desiring such a term, 
 — and most of them do, — cannot manage the 
 comparatively simple matter of a nomination. 
 It has been peculiarly easy for Republican 
 Presidents to bring to pass this consummation 
 because of the fact that in the South practically 
 the only important Republicans are the hold- 
 ers of Federal offices within the gift of the 
 President, while at the same time the South is 
 represented in the Republican convention with 
 a full complement of delegates on a popula- 
 tion basis. A Democratic President has no 
 such patent machinery for the corruption of a 
 convention ready to hand, but the two Demo- 
 cratic Presidents since 1860 were renom- 
 inated, Cleveland after a more desperate strug- 
 gle than has usually characterized conventions. 
 A President plays the game for renomination 
 with loaded dice. Not only does he shape his 
 policies to catch the favor of the people, not 
 only does he have his ear ever to the ground to 
 get advance information as to the best shape 
 to give his policies, but with offices and influ- 
 ence in legislation he leads or drives the poli- 
 ticians into line. Instead of studying to serve 
 
240 GOVEKNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 the people and trying his best to fill the job 
 they have hired him to fill fo.r them, he spends 
 his time trying to make as far as possible their 
 approval or disapproval of his official conduct 
 entirely nugatory. The explanation of such 
 dereliction in otherwise honorable men is 
 found to be the size of the office on which we 
 have already commented at length. Motive 
 and means together are a terrible menace to the 
 integrity of our government. Many persons 
 exclaim with alarm at the prospect of any man 
 having a third term in the White House even 
 when a period of years has elapsed since the 
 candidate's last incumbency. The real dan- 
 ger lies not in the number of terms, but in the 
 use of patronage and other improper means 
 to perpetuate a President in power. If the 
 present system is otherwise to remain in force 
 some limitation on reeligibility is imperative. 
 It is now many years since Woodrow Wil- 
 son, then a young man, wrote his famous criti- 
 cism of the relation of the executive to the legis- 
 lative in this country.^ He pointed out the lack 
 of coordination between these two great de- 
 partments, and strongly urged that Congress, 
 which he conceived to be the increasingly vital 
 force in our system, be given such control over 
 
 1 Woodrow Wilson, " Congressional Government/' Boston, 
 
 1885. 
 
MATTER WITH THE PRESIDENCY 241 
 
 the executive as the English Parliament has 
 over its executive instruments, while at the 
 same time the suggestion of policies should 
 be left to the latter. In other words he pleaded 
 for the responsible ministry form of govern- 
 ment. His book attracted at that time some 
 attention among the cultured few, but it never 
 made any practical impression on the great 
 mass of the people. So far as they heard of 
 its theories at all it was only to smile at the 
 vagaries of the youthful professor. The oc- 
 casional essays of Congressional committees in 
 the same direction have never broken the calm 
 popular assumption that the form of our gov- 
 ernment was the only possible and the best im- 
 aginable for this country. Nevertheless the 
 lapse of time has served only to establish, on 
 somewhat different grounds it is true, the un- 
 satisfactory character of the relation of Presi- 
 dent and Congress. The President today is 
 much more powerful than President Wilson 
 painted him in 1885. A good example is Mr. 
 Wilson's own domination of Congress. He 
 played as President a very different role 
 than he put on paper as a student. The criti- 
 cism now pertinent is that the President does 
 not have a proper influence on legislation. 
 This does not mean that the President is not 
 legislatively powerful. On the contrary his 
 
242 GOVEKNMENT FOE THE PEOPLE 
 
 power is enormous. He may not only veto 
 measures, and it is next to impossible to pass 
 them over his veto, but, what is frequently more 
 important, he can threaten to veto. A member 
 who will stand out against the President's ex- 
 pressed or implied threat to hamper his legis- 
 lative career with the veto is a brave man. 
 The President has a vast patronage which is 
 choice bait to catch votes in Congress withal. 
 He has the ear of the people as no member of 
 Congress or combination of members of Con- 
 gress has, and he may, if he has talent and dis- 
 position for it, determine the character of 
 legislation by his popular appeals. The diffi- 
 culty does not lie in the quantity of his power, 
 but in the fact that it can be exercised only 
 with the taint of political jobbery and, even so, 
 only on certain matters of great popular mo- 
 ment. There is no assurance in our system 
 that the needs of the executive department 
 will be adequately met, that receipts and ex- 
 penditures will be properly coordinated, or 
 that any definite policy emanating from any 
 responsible source will be carried out. In fact, 
 every one knows that these things are not in 
 practice accomplis-hed. The declarations of 
 the political parties are largely left to be car- 
 ried out by a score of independent committees 
 who have little or no responsibility in this re- 
 
MATTER WITH THE PRESIDENCY 243 
 
 gard. A very strong President may, by the 
 exercise of the various means of influence at 
 his command, get some of what he wants if 
 neither House of Congress has a majority of 
 an opposing party. Otherwise we have the 
 situation well illustrated by the Sixty-second 
 Congress wherein no constructive work of any 
 serious kind was accomplished, and nowhere to 
 lay the blame for it. 
 
 We have already discussed that significant 
 development in American political life — ^the al- 
 most uninterrupted augmentation of the power 
 of the Speaker of the House of Representa- 
 tives. From the point of view of the student 
 of institutional evolution it has been simply an 
 illustration of the natural tendency of all nu- 
 merous bodies of men to seek and accept leader- 
 ship. Being in mass incapable of genuine ini- 
 tiative our four hundred representatives are 
 inevitably reduced to acquiescence in the meas- 
 ures projected by their leaders. The revolu- 
 tion in the House Rules which accompanied the 
 fall of Cannon did not destroy the power of the 
 speaker, only transferred it to other and less 
 responsible hands. As a matter of fact such 
 power is necessary in Congress as it is in the 
 British Parliament. The real need is a strong 
 and responsible leadership. If our Cabinet, 
 like that of England, was part of the House 
 
244 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 of Eepresentatives and responsible for bring- 
 ing in a comprehensive programme of legisla- 
 tion as well as for an efficient administration 
 of the government, we would have all the ad- 
 vantages of our present system in securing the 
 dispatch of necessary business and at the same 
 time the possibility of holding the right par- 
 ties responsible for whatever of good or evil 
 ensued. The function now performed by the 
 Speaker and Rules Committee of controlling 
 the time of the House would be performed by 
 the Cabinet. In short, the system of responsi- 
 ble ministry government would give us not 
 only relief from the overwhelming power of 
 the President but at the same time afford a 
 responsible direction to the legislature. 
 
 An almost equal degree of importance at- 
 taches to the added control which the legisla- 
 ture would have over the executive. The fact 
 that its existence depends on fulfilling the ex- 
 pectations of the House in matters of adminis- 
 tration would make the work of every execu- 
 tive department more careful. There would 
 be a constant and effective supervision of ad- 
 ministration by the legislature instead of oc- 
 casional and resultless inquests by committees 
 which can do nothing more than recommend 
 futilities. The farce of Congressional investi- 
 gations would be at an end. Of course under 
 
MATTER WITH THE PRESIDENCY 245 
 
 such a system the President would become a 
 figure-head and the real executive would be the 
 Cabinet. The more numerous honors of Cabi- 
 net rank to be earned most readily by credit- 
 able service in Congress would attract the best 
 brain and heart of the country to that service. 
 The power of the House of Representatives 
 would be greatly increased, a thing that its 
 previous record would hardly seem to warrant. 
 If, however, we remember that its powerless- 
 ness has been a moving cause in keeping good 
 men out of it, we can easily reconcile ourselves 
 to the change. The Senate would naturally 
 shrivel to the proportions of second chambers 
 in other countries where the system of minis- 
 terial responsibility prevails. There has been 
 little in the recent history of that body to make 
 the retention of its present potency desirable, 
 and it is beyond doubt that there would be room 
 for the mental activities of its present per- 
 sonnel even in a sphere much more restricted 
 than that of the Senate in France. 
 
 There is no reason to suppose that the new 
 plan will work perfectly. From England there 
 has recently come a good deal of criticism of 
 this system as it operates there,^ and it is com- 
 mon knowledge that in France the plan has 
 hardly suited the Gallic temperament. No 
 
 1 Belloc and Chesterton, "The Party System," London, 1911. 
 
246 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 system of government is ideal and tliere is none 
 that will always and inevitably work out the 
 best results. A responsible ministry, however, 
 modeled somewhat on that of England, would 
 correct several of the more obvious defects in 
 the organization of our government, and in- 
 volve only the difficulties incidental to all demo- 
 cratic constitutions. 
 
 It would be idle to suppose that it is prac- 
 ticable at once to make the suggested change 
 in its completeness. Prejudice, especially the 
 prejudice against everything English which 
 will not even permit us to call a department 
 officer an *^ Under Secretary,'' will operate to 
 prevent it. Inertia and self-satisfaction will 
 be among its enemies. Then there is, too, the 
 real danger of upsetting existing machinery of 
 a sudden. There is nevertheless one reform 
 often recommended and of plain utility. It is 
 a measure which may be taken safely even if 
 there is no intention to go further. That is 
 the giving of members of the Cabinet, seats and 
 the right, at least to speak in the House of 
 Representatives and Senate. Thus far we can 
 proceed without fear of revolution. Let us 
 march on. 
 
MATTER WITH THE PRESIDENCY 247 
 
 BIBLIOGEAPHY 
 
 Beard, "American Government and Politics," pp. 
 166-186 and 205-214. 
 
 Belloc and Chesterton, "The Party System" (a 
 hostile criticism of the English system). 
 
 Bryce, James, "American Commonwealth," vol. 1, 
 chapters V-VIII, XX, XXL 
 
 CoRWiN, E. S., "The President's Control of Foreign 
 Relations." 
 
 Dougherty, J. Hampton, "The Electoral System." 
 
 FoLLETT, M. P., ' ' The Speaker of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives. ' ' 
 
 Fuller, H. H., "Speakers of the House." 
 
 Hill, J. P., "The Federal Executive." 
 
 Johnston, Alexander, "American Politics." 
 
 Lodge, H. C, "Daniel Webster" — American States- 
 men Series, 2 vols. 
 
 Lowell, A. Lawrence, "Government of England," 
 vol. 1, chapters II, III, XVII, XVIII. "Govern- 
 ment and Parties in Continental Europe," vol. 1, 
 pp. 1-145. "Essays on Government" (gives con- 
 trary view to Wilson, cited below). 
 
 McConachie, L. C, "Congressional Committees." 
 
 Reinsch, p. S., "American Legislatures and Legisla- 
 tive Methods." 
 
 Schurz, Carl, "Henry Clay" — American Statesmen 
 Series, 2 vols. 
 
 Stanwood, "A History of the Presidency." 
 
248 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 Taft, W. H., ''Our Chief Magistrate and his Powers." 
 Von Holst, Hermann Eduard, "John C. Calhoun" 
 
 — American Statesmen Series. 
 WiLLOUGHBY, W. W., "Correlation of the Organiza- 
 tion of Congress with that of the Executive." 
 Proc. Am. Pol. Sci. Assn., Feb.. 1914. 
 Wilson, Woodrow, "Congressional Government." 
 Wilson, Woodrov^: "Constitutional Government in 
 the United States," Ch. III. 
 
CHAPTEE XV 
 
 THE UNITED STATES AND THE WORLD 
 
 Until her entrance into the Great War, the 
 United States always found herself politically 
 self-sufficient. Washington's parental warning 
 to the infant republic that she avoid entangling 
 ^alliances had been obeyed as few parental in- 
 junctions are. Inclination jumped with pre- 
 cept. In Washington's day the European 
 world was weeks — even months — away across 
 a perilous sea, while to the West there opened 
 the boundless opportunities of a virgin con- 
 tinent. Year by year the sea grew narrower, 
 but the development of the mighty continent 
 lured men with ever more potent charm. Even 
 when a world economy had replaced national 
 economy as the basis of living our minds lagged 
 behind the truth. In other words our political 
 thinking did not sweep beyond the bounds of 
 our own country, certainly not of our own con- 
 tinent, although our economic life was as wide 
 as the world. 
 
 It required the shock of the Great War to 
 prove that the old days of exclusiveness were 
 
 249 
 
250 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 gone and that henceforth our citizenship must 
 be, while none the less of the United States, a 
 citizenship of the World. Indeed, there are 
 many of our people, in and out of the United 
 States Senate, who even yet do not realize what 
 has happened. One need not run far to hear 
 loudly proclaimed the time-worn doctrines of 
 the older and narrower Americanism. It is all 
 the more important therefore that we should 
 form exact notions of our place in the world 
 scheme. We must divorce ourselves at once 
 from sentimental internationalism and mawkish 
 nationalism. Since the world is reeling a bit, 
 it is important that we should keep our heads 
 level and our feet well planted. 
 
 One must be blind to every sign of the times 
 to believe that the days of nationalism — and 
 aggressive nationalism — are past. The Euro- 
 pean settlement has been based largely on na- 
 tional lines and the cry of ** self-determination *' 
 is on the lips of each small but aspiring people. 
 There is a clear prospect that national strug- 
 gles will fill the histories of the future. Large 
 nations have a natural reluctance to admit the 
 claims of their racial minorities to territorial 
 independence. There is undoubtedly a limit 
 as to the size of the units to which ^'self-deter- 
 mination ' ' should be applied, but where to draw 
 
THE WORLD 251 
 
 the line may well be the subject of controversy. 
 The German people, unconvinced of defeat and 
 restless under the requirements of the peace 
 treaty, await only opportunity to assert again 
 their scarcely diminished strength. France, on 
 the other hand, still tingling with the smart of 
 the inhuman wrongs inflicted upon her is equally 
 determined that the Teutonic terror be kept 
 down. Japan, chafing in her narrow bounda- 
 ries and seeking room for her expanding popu- 
 lation and new fields for her merchants and 
 bankers to exploit, threatens the integrity of 
 China and even menaces the Pacific shores of 
 America. With the world stage so set, there 
 is nothing more certain than that, unless some 
 more potent influence intervenes, the curtain 
 which has just fallen upon a welter of warring 
 nations will rise again upon a sanguinary scene. 
 Just for the moment, of course, the world is 
 wearied with slaughter, but the forces which 
 have produced wars in the past are still tugging 
 at the minds and hearts of men. Pride, hate 
 and greed, pursued with craft and violence 
 brought on the Great War, and these demons 
 have not been exorcised even by the stupendous 
 blood offering that has been made to appease 
 them. There are those who believe that they 
 may be successfully opposed by meekness and 
 
252 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 submission. It was a delightful pre-war fancy 
 that a German army landed on our shores might 
 be met by bands of school-girls bearing garlands 
 and turned back by sense of shame. Not even 
 the most cheerful of idiots dreams such a dream 
 today. Greed and violence have no respect for 
 weakness. They can be overcome only by su- 
 perior force, and no real man will hesitate to 
 raise his hand against them. Submission to 
 wrong is treachery to the race. As long as the 
 selfish passions of men breed violence, so long 
 must righteous anger arise to self-defense — un- 
 less, of course, some other means of restrain- 
 ing violence be found. 
 
 It is a serious mistake to assume that the 
 racial vices which foment wars belong exclu- 
 sively to the peoples of the late Central Empires. 
 The iterated repetition of even the obvious 
 truth that they excelled all other nations of 
 their time in aggressiveness, disregard of honor, 
 and sustained belief in force, may degenerate 
 into a thoughtless song of hate. Not only does 
 the disturbed condition of Southeastern Europe 
 give occasion for all sorts of international diffi- 
 culties, but the fierce and warlike character of 
 the rugged Balkan peoples promises that these 
 occasions will not be neglected. No sane man 
 can doubt that Japan proposes to push with 
 
THE WORLD 253 
 
 vigor a policy of Imperialistic Expansion in 
 the Far East. The success of this policy may 
 well create in them an overweening pride and 
 self-confidence similar to that which pushed 
 the German people into the Great War. No 
 one can forsee with exactness the effect of the 
 temptations of success and power upon any 
 people. The best and wisest and most Demo- 
 cratic of nations may find itself standing upon 
 the pinnacle of the world with the Devil at its 
 elbow. Will it say, ^'Get thee behind me, 
 Satan!''? We are all familiar with the indi- 
 vidual who can resist anything but temptation. 
 It is easy for men or nations to be good while 
 they remain weak and obscure. To become 
 overwhelmingly powerful and retain their vir- 
 tue is a result which few have ever achieved. 
 
 The next great war will be more destructive 
 than the last, unparalleled as has been its 
 slaughter. The inventive genius of man, stim- 
 ulated by the conflict, has devised many devil- 
 ish engines of destruction, the use of which was 
 prevented by the timely arrival of peace. New 
 gases infinitely more dangerous and difficult 
 to escape, new artillery, new explosives, await 
 the beginning of the next holocaust. Civil pop- 
 ulations suffered terribly, even in far away un- 
 fortified places, in the Great War — their suffer- 
 
254 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ings will be multiplied many fold in the com- 
 ing war. Now that airplanes and dirigibles 
 have proved their power to cross the Atlantic, 
 we can no longer rest on the assurance of the 
 ocean barrier between us and Europe. When a 
 submarine sunk a few merchantmen off the 
 Jersey coast New York thrilled for a moment 
 with the possibility of an attack. The great 
 electric signs on Broadway were kept dark and 
 the pleasure seeking throngs stumbled weirdly 
 among the subway ruins. There was no real 
 fear, however, and the theatres and cafes were 
 as well filled as usual. In the next war New 
 Yorkers will retire to their cellars more often 
 probably than Londoners or Parisians have 
 done in this. It is true we are now surfeited 
 with slaughter, but as heavy eating becomes a 
 habit, so does heavy killing. We have become 
 accustomed to slaughter. Habit has steeled 
 our hearts to the wails of dying thousands. 
 God pity the world in the next war ! 
 
 Must there be a next war? We have seen 
 how many are the opportunities for it, how 
 powerful the inducements to it. Is there a 
 force in the world sufficient to lay these evil 
 spirits? There is, and there is but one. Men 
 living together in society are subject to the 
 same play of forces as are nations. Pride, 
 
THE WORLD 255 
 
 ambition, greed, cunning, induce to aggression 
 while equally powerful motives of honor and 
 self interest call to resistance. There are in 
 the life of the individual two forces which hold 
 him to ways of peace. One of them is love. 
 As between men of the highest civilized stand- 
 ards — men who live on the plain of mankind's 
 ultimate idealism — the appeal of love is well- 
 nigh irresistible. It is this fact which has mis- 
 led the pacifist. He reasons that because he 
 would not dash aside the pleading hands of non- 
 resistance no one else would. Or, if he reckons 
 on the existence of any so cruel as to resist the 
 plea of weakness, he counts upon the unanswer- 
 able appeal of martyrdom to overwhelm the 
 oppressor. The appeal of love is lost, however, 
 on those too degraded to understand its motive. 
 ^'The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the 
 church?" Yes, within the sweep of a common 
 civilization as that which grew up within the 
 Pax Eomana. But the Cannibal Islander puts 
 the non-resistant missionary in his pot, and the 
 tribe smack their lips over his well seasoned 
 bones wdth no compunctions on the score of 
 his martyrdom. We can find no trace of real 
 compunction in Germany over the fate of mar- 
 tyred Belgium, nor can we imagine there would 
 have been much softening of her iron heart if 
 
256 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 Belgium had bent the knee without a blow. We 
 cannot rely on the force of love alone to keep 
 the nations at peace. Even among the com- 
 mon run of individuals it does not serve to pre- 
 vent the strong from bearing heavily upon the 
 weak! If this is true among men of the same 
 race, language and culture, how much more 
 must it be true among nations of variant breed, 
 tongue and tradition. Germany did not know 
 the language of love. Does Japan! Do the 
 wild hordes of Southeastern Europe? What 
 people, indeed, does? 
 
 The one force which can be relied upon for 
 the preservation of Peace and Order in civil 
 society or in the society of nations is law. A 
 law is a rule of conduct. In this respect, it is 
 not unlike the moral precepts to which the 
 pacifist pins his faith. It is however, some- 
 thing more than a mere rule of conduct. It is 
 a rule of conduct enforced. Within the United 
 States or any other civilized state there are 
 regularly organized agencies of society for 
 making, interpreting and enforcing law. Upon 
 this fact the good order and prosperity of the 
 community depend. We have already (see 
 Chapter 1) insisted at some length upon the 
 relation the law bears to civilization. It is 
 obvious that the real service of law cannot be 
 
THE WORLD 257 
 
 achieved unless it be clearly stated, authen- 
 tically interpreted, and effectively enforced. 
 Within the limitations which are attributable to 
 all human institutions, our legislatures, courts, 
 and executives fulfill these functions. There 
 are persons who deny that there exists any law 
 among nations. They are wrong. Interna- 
 tional law is somewhat vague and uncertain 
 and only haphazardly enforced. There are, 
 however, numerous rules regulating the con- 
 duct of nations which are recognized to exist, 
 and which are upheld at least by the public 
 opinion of all enlightened peoples. Beginning 
 with the invasion of Belgium, Germany per- 
 petrated a culminating series of violations of 
 these rules. It seemed for the time that inter- 
 national law had lost all force and effect. The 
 public opinion of the world, however, rallied to 
 its defense. Germany was tried, found guilty 
 and sentence executed upon her. We have 
 learned that the world will vindicate the sanctity 
 of international law whenever it is grossly and 
 inhumanly violated. The only means for such 
 vindication, however, now available is war, and 
 war is the very thing which we are seeking to 
 avoid. It would seem so obvious therefore as 
 to require no demonstration that if we are to 
 avoid future wars there must be some mechan- 
 
258 GOVEENMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 ism established for the clear determination and 
 orderly enforcement of international law. 
 
 One of the most clearly defined tendencies in 
 the history of civilization is the gradual ex- 
 pansion of the units within which the rule of 
 law prevails. Among primitive peoples law is 
 a thing of the village, or at most, of the tribe. 
 Within the peace of the tribe there are well 
 understood rules of conduct even savagely en- 
 forced. As one tribe conquers another, or as 
 the dominion of some sturdy chief expands over 
 several tribes, the area grows within which life 
 and property are protected by such rules. The 
 breaking up of Western Europe into a vast 
 number of little feudal dominions, each with its 
 own law, and each at war with all the rest, was 
 coincident with the almost total eclipse of civil- 
 ization. As these feudal dominions were con- 
 solidated, and as the areas within which peace 
 was enforced by law grew in extent, civilization 
 crept from behind the dark obstruction of war. 
 This process has gone on until today there are 
 in the world onl}^ a few states, half a hundred 
 or thereabouts, within most of which a regime 
 of law prevails. The process has not gone far 
 enough yet to stop war, but it has gone far 
 enough to diminish vastly the number of wars. 
 The existence of the great national states of 
 
THE WORLD 259 
 
 Europe and America has been largely respon- 
 sible for the marvelous advances of the nine- 
 teenth and twentieth centuries. This process 
 by which law and peace have moved forward 
 pari passu must be extended to cover the world 
 if the world is to have permanent peace. 
 
 The League of Nations is the beginning of the 
 establishment of the rule of law among nations. 
 Incomplete in its design and imperfect in its 
 mechanism as it doubtless is, it does establish 
 for the first time a definite method of making 
 international law. It provides in a sense for 
 an international legislature. It further pro- 
 vides for the enforcement of international law. 
 The force of the League is pledged to the 
 preservation of peace and to the orderly settle- 
 ment of international disputes. Undoubtedly 
 the greatest weakness of the plan is the absence 
 of any judicial machinery. The decision of dis- 
 puted facts and law alike rests with an admin- 
 istrative body, the Council. It would have 
 been far better if the consideration of such ques- 
 tions could have been left to some body not 
 directly concerned with the vital questions of 
 international politics. As we have already 
 seen (see chapter 10) respect for law is largely 
 dependent upon the impression of wisdom and 
 impartiality which the courts create. It is 
 
260 GOVERNMENT FOR THE PEOPLE 
 
 doubtful if any ready reverence will attach to the 
 decisions of a body upon which each of the great 
 powers is politically represented. The govern- 
 ment, too, falls short of perfection as a means 
 of preserving peace in that it does not assure 
 a decision in each question of dispute. The 
 Council and Assembly proceed by common con- 
 sent rather than by majority action. Such an 
 arrangement partakes of the wisdom which 
 would deliberately train a colt to be balky. At 
 the most critical moment the League may fail, 
 indeed, is likely to fail, to act decisively. 
 Nevertheless, with all its imperfections the 
 League is a beginning, and as such, should be 
 welcomed by every lover of peace. A perfect 
 League of Nations was impossible. There is 
 no substantial agreement as to what such a per- 
 fect League should be, and no likelihood that 
 a perfect League would be acceptable to the na- 
 tions. To refuse to begin because the begin- 
 ning must be slow would be like refusing to 
 have children because they are not born 
 equipped with a college education. The Ar- 
 ticles of Confederation which loosely united the 
 Thirteen Colonies in their first bond of union 
 were loaded with imperfections and weaknesses. 
 They paved the way, however, to the Constitu- 
 tion of the United States. 
 
THE WORLD 261 
 
 We must set our faces then steadily toward 
 the establishment of the rule of law among na- 
 tions. We must not be discouraged that it is 
 slow in coming. We must not in rapt en- 
 thusiasm neglect the question of National De- 
 fense. The cause of humanity can ill afford 
 that the United States should suffer in her in- 
 tegrity or honor through a premature reliance 
 upon international institutions. We must be 
 prepared to defend our material prosperity and 
 our high idealism during this formative period. 
 While all this is true, however, we should not 
 forget that the rule of law cannot be established 
 unless we are prepared to subject ourselves to 
 it. There are people who have expressed the 
 desire for a League of Nations by which the 
 United States is bound to nothing. There can 
 be no least League which does not involve a 
 mutuality of obligation. To insure permanent 
 world peace, each nation must give up some- 
 thing of its independence, and we must be pre- 
 pared to make our sacrifices with the rest. 
 
 There would be grave reason for despair if 
 out of the horror of four years of war there 
 should not have come at least a determination 
 to save the world from another plunge into the 
 maelstrom of destruction. The shrill cries of 
 the tortured, the bleak despair of the bereaved. 
 
262 GOVERNMENT FOE THE PEOPLE 
 
 the heroic sacrifice of the soldier will have been 
 in vain if there cannot be achieved a stable basis 
 for permanent peace. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Chamberlain, Capt. Thos. G., ''Why We Fought." 
 CooLiDGE, A. C, "The United States as a World 
 
 Power." 
 CoRWiN, E. S., ''The President's Control of Foreign 
 
 Relations. ' ' 
 Elliot, Edward, "The Future of International Law" 
 
 in California Law Review, May, 1918. 
 Fullerton, William Morton, "Problems of Power." 
 Hart, A. B., "The Monroe Doctrine." 
 Hicks, F. C, "The New World Order: Making of 
 
 Pledges in Relation to International Law and In- 
 ternational Cooperation." (Doubleday, Page & 
 
 Company, 1919.) 
 Johnson, W. F., "America's Foreign Relations." 
 McMaster, J. B., "The United States in the World 
 
 War." 
 Moore, J. B., "Law and Organization" in American 
 
 Political Science Review, February, 1915. 
 Phillips, W. A., "The Confederation of Europe." 
 Root, Elihu, "Outlook for International Law," in 
 
 American Journal of International Law, January, 
 
 1916. 
 Scott, J. B., "President Wilson's Foreign Policy 
 Sherrill, C. H., "Modernizing the Monroe Doctrine. 
 Smith, Munroe, "The Nature and the Future of In 
 
 
THE WORLD 263 
 
 ternational Law," American Political Science Re- 
 view, February, 1918. 
 
 *'If ye break faith with us who die, 
 We shall not sleep 
 Though poppies grow 
 In Flanders fields." 
 
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY, 
 BERKELEY 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE 
 
 ON THE LAST DATE 
 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 Books not returned on time are subject to a fine of 
 50c per volume after the third day overdue, increasing 
 to $1.00 per volume after the sixth day. Books not in 
 demand may be renewed if application is made before 
 expiration of loan period. 
 
 ^01/ ^ 
 
 
 OfC 12 IP25 
 
 
 •^■^■iy'QlDfi 
 
 1 
 
 Tr- '" ''"*' ■' ♦■-"■^. 
 
 
 m\ 
 
 y 
 
 ^^' 
 
 
 
 25(H-7.'25 
 
 <P^Ji!^W 
 
 «^*".»'if|i iWik 
 
U.C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES 
 
 CD3T3SDfi3S 
 
 4TJTRTn 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
I