New-York tribune., 1907-08-03
literary yNetOs and Criticism,

and better conditions for the employees DR.
howe fortifies his statements by a formidable
array OF hgures showing the capital expenditures
and the returns of large number Of British
municipalities, and by a more detailed account Of
1idSsoW, which is undoubtedly the show city
-oI the advocates of municipal ownership.
iHe TWO arguments which Americans are wont
90 pilh8 against the system Dr. Howe dis
misses with slight attention. Americans COM
plaln he says, OF the British services inferior
To their own. lacking enterprise and initia-
i've; out then they make the same complaint
OF the British tailor or the British hotel The
olher argument brought against municipal own
ership-that il narroWs the field for individual
enterprise, Dr. Howe treats with even more
scorn- This argument merely means according
TO him, that the community ought to allow
handful of men to grow immensely wealthy on
the profits Of these underta kings instead of the
benefits being eQuitably shared among all the
citizens.
1t is unfortunate that Dr. Howe before he
began the writing Of his book. did not consult
some good authority on British local govern
ment. OF London he frankly Confesses that he
does not pretend to know how 1t is governed; ;
and his ignorance extends TO other cities. espe-
cialy where he makes assertions concerning the
history OF British Institutions He rightly dates
the beginning OF modern municipal government
to the municipal reform act of 1880: but his
account OF the decay of local government in the
centuries preceding this act. slight it is, is
lull OF elIolS he quo TUffGHiO proceedings
OF Charles IL were but an incident in the sub
ordination Of the councils as municipal bodies
to the election Of members to Parliament. Nor
were members OF Parliament uniformly elected
by the freemen Of the boroughs. In 43 out of
the 2O3 old boroughs of England and Wales
the election OF members was by the council
not by the freemen-and the council was In
most cases self-elective In sixty-two boroughs
the freemen elected; while. in the remaining
ninety-eight boroughs the election was in the
hands Of inhabitants. taxpayers, or holders OF
the primitive burEage lands.
Even IN regard to the constitution and powers
OF the modern boroughs DR. Howe makes many
mistakes Nowhere does he distinguish between
the county boroughs. which are independent OF
the county councils; the municipal borouEhs
which share their authority regards high
ways and some other matters with the county
councils. the urban districts. and the rural
parishes In regard TO the parishes, he con-
fuses the old name with q church control that
has wholly passed away: and he loses sight
OF the fact, strongly brought out by NiT- and
Mrs Sidney Webb, that the old vestry meeting
really the counterpart of the much vaunted
democratic town meeting of New England.
These are but a few instances OF the ignorance
which DR.. Howe displays OF the constitution
and history of English local institutions As
regards what has come under his eyes in
their modern working, he has shown himself
Quick and accurate observer; but while his
errors may not vitiate his arguments in favor OF
municipal democracy and 6 taxation OF ground
values they do considerably lessen the
fidence of the reader in other OF his statements
that are not so easily tested.