St. Paul daily globe., 1896-04-19
HOWARD CHARTER PROPOSES TO
INCREASE POWERS OF THE
COUNCIL
IN Administrative AFFAIRS.
POLICY SIMILAR TO A BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OVERWHELMING
A RAILWAY.
THE INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
Is Lacking. and without 1t There
Can Be No Progress or Sue
cess.

AS compared with the present charter of St..
Paul. the Howard act would place greater
power in the hands of the common council, in
the administrative, or executive, branches of
the city government. It's powers and duties
would remain unchanged in respect to the
many things with which we are familiar as
being within the councils control-licensing
and regulating auctions, saloons, pawnshops,
markets; suppression of vice and disorder;
abatement of nuisances; control of streets
and buildings, and other similar matters.
These things are legislative in character and
are properly dealt with by resolution or ordi-
nance of a deliberative and representative
body. The additional administrative powers
entrusted to the council by the Howard act
are such as the control OF the fire department
and the department of public works.
The policy of the Howard charter in this
regard is comparable. in business affairs, to
giving the responsibility of operating rail-
road to a board of directors instead of to a
general superintendent. 1t would be the
same policy as giving to congress instead Of
to the postmaster general the management of
the postoffice department. The federated COL
onies Of America once tried a similar expert
ment in attempting to govern the colonial
armies through congress. There is nothing
in reason or in experience to Justify hope
for the success Of such a policy. Without
individual responsibility there can be no
progress. Divided responsibility means bad
government From the beginning Of human
organization down to the present time, plural
executive leadership has been the SYNONYM
ir,aT 1oia
and government.
Wnen this system Is applied to city govern
ment 1t meets special difficulties in the special
circumstances of city politics. Councilmen
too often-indeed, generally-look for approval
only to the limited districts or the special
ciques that elect them; and, sometimes dis
regarding even those partial elements Of pop
ular interest, they devote their official power
merely to personal gain. Favoring one an
other in aid of purposes subservient to these
narrow and improper influences, they adopt
measures and methods which no one man, re-
sponsible to the whole community would dare
to undertake. Thus, in the case of the fire
department, the responsibility for it's manage
ment now rests upon the fire board and upon
the mayor, who appoints that board. If polit-
1cal methods were to be introduced into the
department, or corruption were to gain foot
hold, the voters could, with reasonable near
ness, strike the root Of the evil in the next
election for mayor. The situation would be
still better if the mayor were solely respons-
ihle for the department. But under the How
ard charter it is certain that the office of fire
ch1ef-now practically held during good be-
haVior-would be the prize of the political
majority in each new council. AS a politician
he would take office under obligations to that
political majority, which would introduce into
the department the worst features Of ward
politics. The dry rot of party spoilation
which st. Paul is struggling to escape, would
siege another vital organ of the municipality.
What remedy wouids%here be? Each council
man, relying upon his services to his local
machine, and held responsible for the whole
result of maladministration, If at all, with a
dozen others, whom his constituents cannot
reach, would find easy the Endorsement of re-
election.
Then, there are the committees-often USE
full in legislation, but in administration chiefly
instruments of intrigue; and there is the in
definite postponement Of long discussion, and
the convenient previous question for stopping
unpleasant inquiry; the appeal to passion, the
party lash-these, and score of other ele-
ments that under council administration are
an incessant danger. No wonder is it that
Seth Low, the reform mayor Of Brooklyn
said, after his practical experience with a
wiser method: "The unsolved problem with
relation to city governments is the common
council. This point alone seems clear
to me in connection with common
councils, that, whatever powers are lodged
with them, those powers should be. in kind
legislative only" 1t is no wonder, either
that Minneapolis, viewing the recent scandal
Gus incident of her councils administration
of the public works, shows no disposition to
adopt the provisions Of the Howard act.