The sun., 1892-02-21
Tie Greater New York.

The opposition OF tho Kings county As
semblymen to the scheme for Greater
New York was noC Intelligent and 1t was
not fair to tho people they were elected to
represent.
The bill with reference to the subject is
drawn In strict conformity with the demo-
cratic principle of homo rulc. 1t simply
directs the Consolidation Commission to
draw up "a general plan as basis for the
incorporation of tho communities de-
scribed. and to report bill for submitting
tho question OF consolidating said terri
tory into ono municipality and into one
government to vote Of the people of tho
several municipalities and parts of munich
palities comprised within said territory"
The main object OF the measure. there
fore. is to give the people themselves an
opportunity to declare their wishes in the
matter. Yet the Kings county members of
tho Assembly would defeat the whole prof.
ect by refusing to allow the Brooklyn voters
even chance to consider it. II they had
been elected to the Legislature on that
Issue. and Us opponents of tho consolida-
tion, their course would be proper and de-
fensible, for in clcctiug them the Brooklyn
people would have declared their will
oNdluob luo pAoJS'u' ouo tliS iu'Seiou did
not enter into tho canvass and tho public
sentiment rs to it has had no expression
st tho polls or In any other way.
AS individual citizens Of Brooklyn it is
proper for these members of the Legisla-
ture to express opinions against the pro-
posed consolidation. both in the Legislature
and outside OF it. They can use all their
Influence to defeat the project be-
fore the people; but when they unite
to deprive the voters OF Brooklyn
Of an opportunity to say whether they
agree with them or no. they put them
selves in opposition to the principle Of home
rule. Without consulting the popular will.
they arrogate to themselves the right OF
determining a question which has not yet
been discussed or considered by the people.
and which has not been presented to them
in a way to enable them to come to IN in
telligent decision as to 1t.
However the question Of consolidation
was decided. its full discussion would be O
valuable education for the people OF all tho
communities concerned. 1t would broaden
their views. teach them lessons in munc-
ipal government. one OF the greatest Of
political problems In modern times. bring to
their attention the possibilities Of centre
Of population which in the next century will
be by far the largest in tho world. stimu-
late their tmaginations. and give them a
higher conception Of the dignity OF their
citizenship. It Is purely practical matter
TO be settled according to considerations Of
interest alone. but it is SO large that its
discussion would tend to corresponding
enlargement Of the public views of what
their self-interest is.
II the consolidation Is not for the advan-
tage Of Brooklyn. 1t is not profitable for New
York. If 1t is not desirable for one. it Is up-
desirable for both. If it conduccs to tho
prosperity OF either city. it is advantageous
for both. Hence there is every reason to
suppose that IL tho question were submitted
to the people. as the bill proposes. the de-
Cision Of New York and Brooklyn would be
the same. either for or against. The argu-
ments for or against consolidation would be |
- strong in their application to the ono
city as to the other.
II. then. the Kings county members OF |
the Legislature are justified in their op-
position to consolidation. they need not have
any fear Of going before tho people Of
Brooklyn and New York with their argu-
ments. for these will be as effective on tho
one side of the East River Us on the other.
II the plan deserves defeat, they can defeat
It before the people. and there Is neither
excuse nor reason for their attempt to
avoid the ordeal by refusing to commit the
question to popular decision In accordance
with true and sound democratic theory
and principle.