New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-03-03
LONDOyS MUNICIPAL CRISIS.

A striking parallel Is to be observed between
London and New-York In respect TO municipal
consolidation. The work was undertaken in
London first. and It's apparent success there
caused 1t to be emulated here. The very name
Greater NewYork." tentatively applied TO this
city was copied from the Greater London
which the Britshers invented, but which they
had the grace TO use less generally and to drop
! more quickly than NEWCOMERS did the cis-At-
lantlc imitation. The same advantages from
consolidation were looked for in both cases.
And now the same disappointment IL felt at the
discovery OF the same kind Of sawdust in each
municipal doll. The Borough Of Brooklyn Is
complaining because Its individuality Of organ
izatlon and OF need Is disregarded. and 1t is
somewhat more than half wishing 1t were free
again from the bond that untes It with Manhat-
tan. In like manner the various parts Of Lon
don find that In some respects they are not so
we'll cared for under centralized as under local
government and the demand for a change Of
system is loud and widespread. The national
government has taken cognizance OF IT, and
bill dealing with the matter Is about to he in
troduced in Parliament And to-days munic-
ipal election In London turns chiefly on the
question whether the present centralized system
shall be maintained or n larger measure Of local
home rule shall be granted TO the various Dor
oughs or other divisions Of the monstrous city,
and the result Of 1t will have commanding in
fuence over the action OF Parliament.
There are arguments In plenty on both sides.
II is urged with reason that there should be
some one general authority over the whole city.
No one, indeed disputes that. Yet even such
authority Is not perfectly existent The London
County Council, established ten years ago,
comes nearest to II. But It has Jurisdiction over
only 75,442 acres and 4,232,11S people. while
the Central Criminal Court controls 269,14O
acres and 5,2606S0 people, and the Metropoli-
tan Police District comprises 442. $50 acres, with
$685. 1O1 inhabitants. The present controversy
deals, however with the jurisdiction Of the
County Council. That Council consists Of rs
Councillors and 10 Aldermen, the former elect
ed by the taxpayers for three years and the
latter elected by the Council for six years
The original theory was that the Council should
be the supreme and sole legislative and execu-
tive authority in the county. But It was soon
discovered that that was impossible. The mass
OF details was too great. 1t was ms though
Congress ut Washington should undertake the
construction Of district schoolhouses in Maine
and OF macadamzed roads in California and
The Council found itself breaking down under
the load. SO the system Of District Boards. or
Vestries, had TO be retained to deal with pure
~ local matters. or with some Of them The
change now proposed is not TO abolish the CEN
trail Council. but TO relieve it OF further petty
details. and to give TO the District Boards fuller
authority over local matters II Is proposed
for example, that District Board shall have
,l,o Ill.
temporarily 10 close part Of n street for repairs
or to take summary action against an unsafe
building or TO suppress a public nuisance with
out the red tape and delay Of reference to and
action by the County Council Such reform
certainly seems reasonable. and II is strange
that it should be bitterly opposed; strangest
of all that it should be opposed by the very DO
tical party that has been most loudly clamor
ing for local home rule in ITS EXTREMIST reso
luton
This latter fact suggests another interesting
parallel between London and New-York In
both cases -partisanshlp. or enforcement OF
municipal from State and National politics, was
enthusiastically agreed upon in advance as the
dominant feature OF consolidation In both
cases that agreement WAS promptly repudlated
Here II was repudatcd before the consolida-
ton was actually consummated. In London
the process was more deliberate. There soon
arose, Of course two parties In the County
Council. the Moderates and the Progressives.
But these were not at first identified with ma
uonal parties. SO soon. however. as the Pro-
gressves gained full control OF the Council
tney showed their political hand. They were
all had'cals or Liberals IN national affairs.
Ihey perceived that their control of munlcIpal
matters could he made OF advantage to the
party NJ large And so they presently made
progressive synonyme Of Radical. and made
municipal politics n mere wheel in the great
niacnine Oh national politics. Naturally, the