New-York tribune., 1907-09-19
cHLCAGO.S CHARTER ELECTION.

Most outsiders who are interested in the
development of municipal government In this
country will regret the defeat of Chicago 5
proposed charter. Chicago has been for many
years sorey in need of a new charter system
atizing its government and comforting on I"
larger powers of home rule The old charter
was granted in 1872 and simply the gen
eral instrument for the incorporation of Illinois
cities, large and small. For the rest the Ch-
cago government a PATCHWORK OF leSlSld-
tive enactment. The new charter promlsed 10
be- especially interesting to all observers Oh
municipal government because it conferred upon
Chicago larger powers of self-government lhdh
any other American city possesses. For IN
stance the City Council. if sustained by a vote
of the people was authorised to amend the
charter in all respects except as to the pubic
utility section the educational section ana the
revenue section Thus the city could praC
ticalIy make its own charter. independent OF the
State Legislature. Hitherto state legislatures
have drawn up charters, and cities have gen
orally had to take Them whether they liked
them or not. The actual working of this large
measure of local self government would have
been interesting TO observe, and it would nave
started out favorably in Chicago, which is one
of the few cities that have solved the problem
of an efficient and honest city council.
zlinG. for people SO progressive as the Chi
,.,roans must find the old charter restrictions
humiliating to their pride. Public improve
ments in Chicago lag because of the abSurdIy
low debt limit fixed in the existing charter. The
city is i'll paved. and frequently the pavement
goes to ruin because the city has not and can not
raise the money 10 keep the streets in repair
Taxes are relatively low in Chicago. but the
city authorities have practically nothing to say
ahout the distribution of most of the municipal
revenue The tax rate is about per cent upon
a very low assessment valuation, but of the
per cent only $50 per cent goes to the CITY
the rest being divided among boards over
which the city has no authority. The North
and West Side park boards. for instance. are
appointed by the Governor Of Illinois and the
South Side Park Board by the judges Of the
Circuit Court. These boards handle a good
share of Chicago'S revenue.
The charter was defeated chiefly, il would
seem because of the fear that under it taxes
would be increased. Doubtless they would
have been. The main object in getting a new
charter was To enable the city To spend more
money on public improvements. on better
paved and better lighted streets. on larger
police force and on many other things that
would make the city something more than an
ovcrgrown village The voters Of Chicago Ike
10 talk of public improvements. but they evi-
IDENTIFY do not Hike the prospect of paying the
bills Other considerations doubtless contrib
uteyi TO the defeat Of the instrument The rad
icaIs opposed ii because it did not contain sev-
eral of their ideas and because some provisions
of the charter as originally drawn which met
their apDroval were modified at Springfield.
The liquor element preferred TO let We'll enough
alone. thinking that perhaps under the new
charter there would be Sunday closing. Resi-
dents of the richer sections wanted the taxes
they paid TO he spent in the parks Of their own
neighborhood and not TO be apportiOned through
out the whole city.
The result Of the election is a blow TO the
referendum. 1t shows the impossibiiity OF inter
esting voters in referendum even of first class
Importance The charter election has filled as
much space In the Chicago newspapers as reg
ular election. Every effort was made to arouse
the public interest. The need Of a new charter
had been a familiar topic for decade. Yet of
registry containing 361, 1868 names only 1S1.JSe
voted.