The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-06-12
How Shall our Great cities be Cow
. eTnedl

ONE of the most important questions that will
come before the New York Constitutional Con-
vention, and the one that viii probably elicit
the most feeling and discussion, relates to the
proper method of governing the city OF New
York. That city has now not far from one
fourth of the whole population of the State,
and probably still larger proportion OF the
wealth. The discussion concerning its gov
ernment is of interest to the public generally,
as bearing upon similar questions which may
arise concerning other large cities in our
country.
That New York is at present badly gov
erned city, we have the concurrent testimony OF
its own citizens of all parties. Indeed, the evils
of bad government there have led to the
growth of an anomalous condition Of affairs
with respect to the method of administering
the affairs of the city. From time to time, as
the weight of corrupt administration has be-
come too grievous to be borne, the Legislature
has been obliged to step in, and give
the control of the city's affairs in certain direc
tions to the State at large. For instance, the
police administration of the city became so
corrupt and abandoned, that the control of the
police was vested by the Legislature in Com
mission appointed by the Governor and Senate.
The affairs of the Central Park have, from the
commencement of the enterprise, we believe,
been conducted by Board of Commissioners.
The Fire Department and the Health Depart
ment are also in the hands of Commissioners.
Thus from year to year the State has been
assuming more and more control of the affairs
of the city, until the City Government elected
by the people has been shorn of large por-
tion of its power. There is no common head
of the Government left The various COM
missions are Independent of each other, and
responsible to no superior power except the
Governor and Senate.
That there must be evils in this method of
government is apparent and that some con-
sistent general plan should be adopted, is the
opinion of all. The chief point at issue is, as
to whether the State at large should take part
in the government of the city. On the one
side, it is maintained that in all that relates to
the city primarily the city should be indie
pendent. The principle of local selfgovern-
ment is extolled as the great remedy for all
present defects in administration.
On the other hand, it is boldly asserted that
the only salvation for the city is in extending
the constituency, and in governing it by the
State at large. The character of the Common
Council and other city authorities now elected
by the people-their total disregard of the in
terests of the city-their shameless and fla
mt MI ION fhair iorOOranaa and hr,I
tality, are pointed to as an example of what
the entire Government would be if committed
to popular vote of the residents alone. 1t is
asserted that the introduction of commission
after commission has been absolutely neces-
saryto keep the city from falling into anarchy.
1t is claimed that the State at large is vitality
interested in the government of the city, and
that there is no propriety in committing it's
destinies solely into the hands of those who
may happen to reside within its limits.
The great argument, however, is that
the city is controlled by the ignorant,
depraved, and vicious, in short, by those
who have demonstrated their inoapacity
for self-government. The New York Times
does not hesitate to say that universal suffrage
has broken down in that city, so that the con-
stituency must either be restricted or en-
larged. 1t has been agreed by writers on gov
ernments generally, that a strictly popular
government is only possible when there is a
geod degree of intelligence and virtue in the
people. These conditions are wanting in New
York city. Moreover, those who favor an in
crease of the constituency by making the
whole State part of the city's voting popula-
tion, maintain that the political unit in our
system is not the city, or the township, or the
county, but the State. And they hold that
there is no more propriety in making city
Independent of the State, than there would be
In making one ward in a city independent OF
all the rest.
This discussion will be watched with inte-
rest. 1t embraces principles of much wider
application than to the case in hand, and
which may hereafter become of practical in
terest to other communities.