Norwich bulletin., 1910-12-09
CHARTER REVISION 1.-The Experience of Boston
BY A CITIZEN

Charter revision usually means contest between the reformers, well- meaning but too often impracticable on one hand. and the politicians, keen eyed, resourceful and not too scrupu- lous on the other, and when the wish bone is broken the larger half will ire quently be found in the possession ot the professional friends of the plain people" It is a case of soon inten- tiOn vs. better operation and the bet ting generally favors the later. The experience of Boston is largely that of other cities which have grown from a small center to be q metropolis. The increase in business and the spread of territory have brought up problems from time to time which have had to be met by the municipaH- ty. Charters last long time in small and slowly growing communities.
 Waste there is insignificant and graft not worth mentioning, but these two evils creep in rapidly with the growth
 of 5 city.
 For too many years Boston was gov
 crned under a charter of the most
 primitive form. It was in the begin
 ming q good sized city. but it's rise to
 the position of a business center did
 not come until much later The charter
 of 1854 gave it g. commission or com
 lnittee form of government, but of the
 old form. The mayor could appoint
 the members of these commissions, and
 that about exhausted his powers. He ss&d litt4e control over their actions,
 and the Siamese twins of municipal
 government, waste and graft began to
 thrive It was d case of a metropolis
 doing Business under a long-ago out
 grown charter.
 About 1880 a movement began in the
 chief cities of the country to centralize
 the responsibility for municipal affairs
 in the mayor. New York and Brooklyn
 had so changed their form of govern
 meut and Boston was not far behind
 In 1884 the city council appointed a
 commission to report new form of
 charter.
 But this board went too far the other
 way, and besides giving the mayor in
 creased powers provided q single
 chambered city council together with an executive council similar to that of
 the commonwealth to approve the
 mayors appointments. This fell
 through, but the next year the legisia-
 ture amended the old charter.
 It transferred all the executive pow CTS to the mayor to be exercised
 through the various heads of depart ments named by him. It retained both
 branches of the city council. but stop ped one abuse which had got to be mo- torious in that branch. This was the making of contracts; and it also pro- hibited any member from being inter ested directly or indirectly in any city work. 1t gave the mayor veto power over all orders passed by either branch and prohibited the making of any con- tract of over S2,000 without the may or's approval.
 Since then the patchwork system continued to prevail and from time to time changes were made, such as tin- kering with the method of electing members of the board of aldermen to try and make that body republican and ! transferring the appointment of the police commissioner and licensing board to the governor.
 But again Boston had outgrown it's charter There were those who had believed for some time that important i changes were necessary to stop waste and graft in the various city depart ments. This condition couldn't be 1 charged up to any one administration. | It had gradually grown under all of 1 them. republican as well as democrat 1 ic. where political debts had to be paid off and political tramps in many cases attached to the payrOlls.
 There was probably never a more