St. Paul daily globe., 1895-03-21
CITY GOVERNMENT.


Howard bill on the inside, and the
papers that believe that the people
cannot be trusted to govern them
selves and that councils chosen by
the people are no more capable than
the people, and that the only refuge
is in making an autocrat of some
one and lodge in his hands all pos
sible power, are hammering at it
from the outside. The senatorial
hammer is constructive, the press
hammer is destructive of the meas
ure.
The GLOBE has opposed the How
ard bill not because it disapproved
of the vital object of the bill, govern
ment by council, but because it is an
attempt to deprive the cities of the
right to frame their charters and
adopt such form Of government as
each prefers. If a majority of any
city prefer the autocratic mayor,
with powers of appointment and dis
nlissal, and a council having little
more to do than vote taxes, however
much we might deprecate their un-
American ideas of government, we
believe that they have the right and
should be permitted to do so.
For this reason we have urged the
adoption of Senator Sheehan's home
rule bill, and we hope that it will
yet be adopted. We do not see why
there should be any hostility be-
tween it and the Howard bill if the
promoters Of the latter insist on it's
passage. If the Howard bill is en-
acted it does not necessarily displace
the Sheehan bill. That can still be
passed and submitted to the people.
If ratified by them and Minneapolis
or any other city prefers the Howard
plan 1t can adopt it en- bloc, or with
such changes as experience may
have suggested, while those cities
preferring the paternal plan can
frame charters as arbitrary as they
can persuade a majority of the
voters to adopt.
We decidedly prefer the council
plan Of government. We see and
admit the objections that are urged.
but whatever of present evil there
may be in it should be met and en-
dured for the sake of the greater
good to come from it, The motive
OF the opposition to it is apparent in
every argument made, a profound
dlstrust Of the people and their ca
paclty Tor self-government. The as
sumption by the state of the right
and power to legislate for cities, the
denial to the latter of any power not
plainly written in the legislative
grant, is but an expression of this
same distrust
But how are these people of ours
ever TO learn how to govern them
selves wisely if never permitted to
do so? How is the babe ever to
learn how to walk if always carried
In arms? If left to self-control mis-
takes and blunders and worse NAV
come, but the best lessons men have
are those taught by experience, and
aggregations of men must go to the
same school if they would learn the
lessons of free government. We
complain now of the indifference of
the voters to their public duties. but
nave we not been teaching them in
difference by relieving them of re-
sponsibility? If the state assumes a
paternal care of them and their in
terests, how can they be expected to
do else than leave their care entirely
to the state? How can men be made
to be more vigilant except by putting
on them the weight of responsibility?
so let us have the Howard bill and
the Sheehan bill too. The former
VIII serve in the interim of the adon-
tlon OF the amendment proposed bv
the latter and the framing of the
local charters by the various cities
IL the voters ratify it, while the ex-
perlence of four years under the
howard plan will not be lost on the
trainers of the home rule charters