The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-08-20
ABOUT THE NEW CHARTER
John M. Reynolds Expresses
Himself in an Open
Letter.
1t Should Not Be Accepted Simply Be.
cause the City Government
Is Bad.

The following communication anent the
new charter has been submitted for pub
LEGATION by John NJ. Reynolds:
Every citizen should thoughtfully consider
laws that are presented to him for acceptance
or rejection. The proposed new charter is now
one of the most important issues before the
people OF this City. 1t should not be accepted
as good thing simply because the City gov
eminent is not now satisfactory and it should
be rejected If IT, in itself, is bad.
Frank McCoppin very recently clearly out
lined the methods adopted in medieval times
OF selecting officers for towns. He said In his
speech before the Richmond District Improve
ment Club "An acceptable system of town gov
eminent was practiced in way that we might
upon occasion initiate with profit 10 ourselves.
OF towns were summoned by the tolling of
bells 70 place of meeting where they elected
their officers to serve one year. II at any time
the representatives so chosen happened to go
wrong the bell rang out again, and the recalci-
trant magistrates were deposed and their sue
cessors chosen upon the spot"
The above description OF simple and efec-
tive manner OF controlling public servants is
a vivid exposition of what we (who oppose
the new charter) want for San Francisco. We
want charter that will enable the people to
discharge officers who prove unworthy OF the
trust imposed in them. The proposed new
charter does not give the people any right to
depose bad men who NAV get into Office and
the experience of all American cities demon
strates that mayors aldermen and me gstrates
60 wrong under charters similar to the one
proposed here. The public good is made sec
ondary to corporate greed IN all our cities, and
the advocates of the new charter cannot au-
thenticate their false promises of good gov
eminent from it. They give no precedents
where good government has resulted in any
quoted the highest authorities, who disprove
of the system incorporated in the proposed
charter.
Mr.. Frank McCoppin quotes from Lecky's
nar md rfrvB.
question that one of the most prolific sources
of official corruption and incom potency lies in
the multiplication of elective Offices"
Mr.. McCoppin selected a very unfortunate
authority, since it is we'll known that Lecky
declares against government of the people,
claiming that popular government is failure
and IN support OF his contention he cites the
many instances OF fragrant corruption IN
American cities. 1t is to be expected that the
conclusions OF cynic would be opposed to
the ideas OF a tree people. Such is the author
lily used to lead the people into scheme for
the overthrowing of their dearly bought lib
critics.
Undoubtedly the sentence quoted is partially
correct The opponents of the proposed charter
acquiesce in the proposition of curtailing the
number of candidates for Office upon the bal
lots. Most of us agree that because OF this
men who are incompetent and possibly I'M
worthy are likely to succeed We do not ar
que that more men should be elected in order
TO get good government, but we DO insist that
all those who are elected shall be always sub
ject to discharge by the people when they go
wrong. The men who are elected under the
new charter can be just as corrupt as men who
are now elected, and the charter gives the peo-
pie no redress.
are likely to be corrupted under the new char.
ter, we need not go outside of the volume
quoted Uecky), who portrays the venality OF
American officials. To prove further that the
system found in the proposed charter is not
effective, let me quote Leslie's Weekly of July
%, 1896, which shows how similar charters
are operating. Itsays: cit is stated by one of
our newspapers that in single week recently
the trole y cars of Brooklyn violated the CITY
ordinances more than 800 times. It is added
that these corporations pay no sort of atten-
tlOn to the ordinances; and this in
fact, may be said OF similar companies in all
our large cities. The corporations are
coming to own most of our municipalities.
AS rule, no municipal admInistra-
against these defiant corporations"
So it seems the system which Mr.. McCoppin
attempts to defend is discredited by the testi-
mony of his own authority, who declares the
cities are corrupt. and by conservative Jour-
nal which is In a position to know the condi-
ton of affairs in the larger cities.
it would be difficult to bring stronger proof
IN favor OF our contention that one OF the
things needed is that the officials shall truly
be made res ponsible to the people ana that the
people shall have the power to depose the men
posed charter is based upon the contrary prin-
elple OF one-man power Qrresp onsible as we
have now that the charter is opposed.
we also point to private corporations, and
contend that they show that whenever the
private corporation is dominated by one man
or a few men then the interest of the average
stoekholder is unsafe. So it would be with
San Francisco. One-man power or renresanta-
tive power when not subject to the power of
dismissal cannot be trusted, and it is one of
the faults OF the proposed charter that it con-
talns no such provisions; and it is made al
most impossible to change it by the terms OF
the State constitution. JOHN NJ. REYNOLDS.