The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1907-05-31
Initiative and Referendum.

League, m interesting pamphlet
showing the growth and benefits of
the initiative and referendum. For
the benefit of those who have been
deceived, Mr.. Bigelow describes the
the initiative and referendum in
this way:
1t is proposed that this power of
direct legislation shall be exercised
through what are known as the in =
itiave and referendum. Under the
initiative it is provided that if the
representatives refuse to pass a GER
tain law, this law may be enacted
by direct vote Of the people, pro-
vlded there is sufficient demand for
the law to cause Il reasonable
percentage Of the electors to peti.
ton for its submission Under the
referendum it is provided that no
act passed by the legislature shall
take effect until the expiration of a
designated time, aud that any law
may be vetoed by direct vote of
the people provided there is suffi-
cent opposition to the law to cause
within the time designated, a rea-
sOnable percentage of electors to
petition for its submission.
Thus it is made optional with the
people whether or not they will take
the trouble to bring questions to
direct vote. Under this system they
have the convenience of Il represent.
atlye government, but when in their
opinion their government ceases to
represent them, they may enact or
repeal laws by direct vote at the
polls, thus exercising directly the
law making function.
II it were made necessary to get
the popular sanction for all laws,
the convenience of the represent
alive system would he sacrificed |
But it is an abuse of this system
that any law should be passed in |
defiance of public sentiment. To
secure convenience Of the represent.
alive system and yet escape its
abuses the optional initiative and |
referendum are needed, whereby |
the people can leave everything to
their representative if they wish, |
but do not surrender the right TO
participate in legislation directly |
when they desire.
Mr.. Bigelow gives an illustration |
from the experience of Cincinnati.
Read the following:
Cincinnati is unique among the
cities of America in that she is own,
CT Of a steam railroad. The history
of this railroad furnishes Il most
significant example of use of the
referendum. In 1896 the politi-
rlanS resolved TO sell this property.
They had to proceed under an en-
abling act which the Ohio legisla-
ture had passed ten years before.
The Cincinnati council took the
preliminary steps and the road was
to go for a song.
But it CHANGED that the legisla-
lures had placed in the enabling
net the provision that the sale, to
be valid, must be ratified by di.
rect vote of the people. The vote
was taken and the road was saved
Subsequently the people. ratified :
a sixty-year lease of the road.
What that one referendum vote was
worth to the city of Cincinnati may
be determined by a comparison of
the two contracts--the one which
the people rejected and the one
which they accepted. A member
Of the board of sinking fund trus-
tees, Mr. George w Harris, was
asked for an opinion as to what the
1896 referendum saved the city.
In reply Mr.. Harris made an an
alysis of these contracts in letter
which is appended to the present
Mr.. Harris conclusion
is that this referendum in one hun.
dred years time will have saved
the city 5000 100000. Two and
quarter million year for 100 years
this is what the politicians would
have squandered if that enabling
act had not contained u referendum
clause.
These are startling figures and
they have profound lesson. The
people of Cincinnati had no con.
stitntional right to vote on the sale
of their railroad. That was right
conferred upon them by an act of
the Legislature. The legislature
might have omitted this referendum
feature. In that case the people T.
would have had no power to pre-
vent the sale of the road.
ANY Ohio legislature could pass
a law empowering the Cincinnati
an,.,,,l b., al Al