The Monitor-register., 1896-01-24

| but agencies whereby the people are en-
| abled to obtain the first and only desdera-
| tum of an organized state-that is, good
| government for he whole people. When
the popular voice dismisses the represent
atiyes of one party and calls those of the
opposition into office, it is not for the pur-
t nose of enahling the new -incumbents- to-
wreak vengeance on political adyersaries
or merely to strengthen their own organi
zation; it is to improve upon the quality
! of service Heretofore rendered and secure
greater efficiency and devotion to the pub
lie welfare. In so far as may on this oc-
casion with propriety address the represent
atiyes of the party that now assumes con-
troll, would conjure them not to initiate,
but to avoid tho mistakes of their politi
cal opponents. Where they have been weak,
let us be strong; where they have unduly
hesitated, let us be bold; where they have
been excessive, let us be moderate; if they
have been selfish, let us devote ourselves
entirely to the interests of the common
wealth, with an eye single only to her
glory and the prosperity of all her people.
The fairminded and patriotic official can
readily distinguish the line across which
| partisan considerations should not go and
! will find no difficulty in rendering aid
|
| he will govern his conduct by the primary
| motive of true public service.
1t is fortunate that there are few if any
subjects of legislation in our state that
| furnish the occasion for party differences.
| You will therefore be able to give to each
matter your independent, deliberate judg
| ment and to share with your political op-
ponents the labor and responsibility.
f 1t is scarcely my proper function at this
time to call your attention to particular
| topics upon which legislation is desirable.
| If deem it necessary, / will hereafter, by
| special message, communicate to you such
matters as may need especially to be
brought to your notice.
| | consider it most important, however,
that you should at once take into consider
alton the object of restriction in the vol
ume of legislation. The mass of statute
law has now become so immense that it
may be said to be almost beyond the pow
er of the legal mind to acquire it or the
judicial mind to interpret it. 1t was in
| tended by the amendments to the consti-
tuition adopted in 1875 to decrease the
quantity of statute law by the abolition
of special legislation upon several sub
jects, notably the government of counties
and municipal corporations Such decrease
was for several years effected. But gradu-
ally, aided by experience and a sharpen
ed ingenuity, the craftsmen of statutes
came to know how to draw up. laws,
| which, while possessing the form of gener-
ality required by the constitution, had all
the substance of special application to the
desired locality, without becoming fasten-
ed to any unwilling municipality. 1t was
the undoubted object of the constitutional
amendments referred to to provide uni
form system of laws for all the counties,
cities, townships and other political sub
| divisions of the state-a system not mere
ly applicable to all, but to be compulsori-
| ly applied to all, so that all cities, all
counties, all townships of the same class
| should be governed by the same uniform
| systems. Unfortunately our courts have
held that this constitutional requirement
is satisfied in a statute when by its terms
it is applicable to all the members of
class, although as matter of fact it may
be practically applied to only one of the
class. In other words, the courts hold that
it is only necessary that all members of a
class may take the benefit of statute,
but that the law need not be compulsory
on all.
So it has become easy, by means of diff
ferent forms of local option, such as popu-
lar elections for or against the adoption of
| any act, to pass laws in form of the most
perfect universally, which in effect are
special charters for single city. On ac-
count of this unfortunate Interpretation
of the constitutional intent the so called
general laws relative to cities have become
multitudinous. They fill over $50 pages
in the new volume of general statutes,
and the laws under the title of Municipal
| will laS
condition of legislation as to cities might
not have been unexpected in view of the
fact that when the constitutional amend
ments requiring general legislation were
passed all the cities of the state were al
ready in existence under different special
charters
But more striking instance of mani
fold legislation exists in the laws relating
to boroughs. These forms of local govern
ment did not exist until recently. They
were all created under so called general
laws. The spirit and letter of the constitu-
ton required that they should be govern
ed by a uniform system. Yet we find three
different general acts now in force regu-
lating the creation and government of
boroughs At each session of the legisla-
ture numerous amendments to each of
the three systems are passed, until this
one title in the general statutes now COW
ers Ill pages. So variant, inconsistent
and confused are these acts that no legal
adviser or judicial interpreter can safely
say what the law is on many subjects re-
lating to boroughs. Besides boroughs, we
have separate systems respectively for bor-
ough commissions, for towns, for villages,
for seaside resorts and for townships, each
possessing indiscriminately similar pow
| =;
rangement.
For some years past the annual volume
of the laws has been growing in thickness.
AS an example, let me refer to the most
recent, that of 1895. 1t contains 106 differ
ent acts relating to cities, 43 relating to
boroughs, 33 relating to townships, 13 re-
lating to villages. 1t cannot be that any
such number was necessary.
| Take some other subjects. There are
nine separate amendments to the school
law, seven different acts ON the subject of
sidewalks, eight relating to the state
house, five relating to swamps and marsh
es. Similar variety and multiplicity will
be found in any volume of annual statutes
for the last six or seven years.
When we consider that the power of
legislation is the greatest that can be ex-
ercised by any human agency-that every
law changes the rights and modifes the
duties of a greater or less number of citi-
| zens-it is proper to inquire whether pro-
posed laws are sufficiently considered be-
fore they are adopted. The same tendency
30 multitudinous and slipshod legislation
prevails in other states of the Union and
has attracted the attention of many
thoughtful persons.
Besides the uncertainty and confusion
that ensue from the existence of so many
separate statutes, the easy change of ex-
isting law tends to create popular disre-
spect for the sanctity of the law What
can be so readily made and so easily alter
ed can fairly be considered as of small
importance,
The general statutes of the state now in
press will comprise three large volumes of
over 1000 pages each and in bulk will be
about twice as large as the general statutes
of the United States. Unless we are to
have to confess that our legislative system
is failure, we must find a method of
remedying this excess. 1t is not yet too
late to pass system of laws of compre
hensive form for the government of mu-
inequalities, which should be compulsory
upon all, so that the uniformity of local
government contemplated by the consti-
tuition may lie attained.
This increase of laws, affecting almost
every interest in life, cannot continue
without involving many important sub
jects in serious confusion and difficulty.
Many of the ucts relating to one or anoth-
er kind of municipal bodies affect the levy
ing and collection of taxes and the issue
of bonds-matters in which not only the
public but many private persons are finan-
cially interested / shall offer some sug-
gestions which, if adopted, will, in my
| opinion mitioate even If they do not en-