St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-08-05

so strong that the ambitions of en-
perors or the exigencies of dema-
gogue-led parties cannot break it.
HOME RULE FOR CITIES.
The experience of New York city
in the matter of enforcing the Sun
day closing law is an instructive
lesson in the propriety and necessity
of home rule for cities. 1t was pro-
posed, when the constitution of the
state was gone over by a conven-
ton last year, that this privilege
should be granted. 1t was a little too
great an advance, however, for the
people, and the affairs of the metrop-
oils are still directed and determined
by the legislature which meets at
Albany. That system has been in
the past prolific source of political
corruption. Not only will it continue
to be that, but it interferes directly
with the management by the people
of their own affairs in their own way
in many respects that touch them
nearly.
For instance, the Sunday laws.
against which the New Workers pro-
test so loudly, are not city ordinances
but enactments of the state legisla-
ture. Its argued that, although public
sentiment in New York itself might
be strongly against their enforce
ment, there would be no relief even
II the matter were brought again to
the attention Of the legislature at
an extra or regular session. AS long
as members from the country con-
stltute a majority of that body, their
peculiar views will control it's ac-
ton. Representatives from the rural
districts and from smaller towns
usually have positive convictions on
the subject Of Sunday liquor sell
ing. There is no public opinion in
favor Of it in the constituencies from
which they come. The open saloon
on Sunday is an unqualified evil in
those places, and to permit it to
exist would be to run counter to
popular opinions of great strength
and force.
Suppose it to be true that the peo-
pie OF New York would like a diff
ferent and more lenient law on the
subject. 1t is not proved that thew
would. 1t is by no means certain
mat a submission of the question
to popular vote in that city would
not furnish a great surprise in the
shape Of a demand by the majority
that the present strict enforcement
OF the law as it stands should con-
tlnue. But whether this or the on
poS1te is the case, it remains tr1e
that the municipality is limited and
controlled in matters peculiar to
itself by the determination of a body
of men only small portion of whom.
comparatively, either know or care
anything about the conditions pre-
Vailing in the community most af-
fected. New York city cannot have
laws to suit its people, laws relating
to purely local affairs, unless these
also approve themselves to the rep
resentatives of the people of the
whole state.
This is a hardship and an injus-
tice severely felt because it is so
entirely unnecessary. There is no
assignable reason why an aggrega-
ton of people numbering prob
ably two millions, and having
vast interests peculiar to itself
should not be allowed to conduct
and regulate them in it's own way.
1t is a simple proposition of popu-
lar liberty which lies behind the de-
mand for home rule for cities. If
1T were acknowledged in New York.
! there would not be the conflict that
there is between local sentiment and
state law. Nobody would have an
excuse for condoning non-enforce-
ment on the ground that repeal is
lmpracticable. The sense of the
community would be taken on each
subject, and the minority would
have to acquiesce quietly in the ma
Jority's decision. Local self-govern-
ment is the system of rule for cities
everywhere. 1t is to the credit of
Minnesota that it will be established
here when the home rule amend
ment to the constitution, approved
at the last session of the legislature,
SHALL have been ratified by the peo-
pie. Every other state where it does
! not already prevail must follow suit.
It is in the interest not only of fair
play and popular liberty, but of pub
lie order and the enforcement of law
in all our states.