The Washington herald., 1911-02-12

how long the term lot "nlcn ne may
have been elected. may be recalled
or deprived of his Office at any time by
vote of the citizens who elected him.
That general principle applies to the re-
call wherever it is found in use. The
variations are merely in details of the
method to be used in accomplishing the
result.
The recall is generally coupled with
the initiative and referendum in party
Platforms and similar declarations OF
principles. 1t is so coupled in the pro-
gramme of the National Progressive Re-
publican League, which has drawn pub
lie attention sharply to this modern
movement, as to many other reform
proposals. But while the recall partakes
of the nature Of the initiative and refer
endum to the extent that its operation
requires a petition initiated by the people
and a referendum to the people OF the
question at issue, there is really no
essential connection between the two
movements. The initiative and refer
endum relates to measures: the recall TO
men. Both are. however. based upon the
principle expressed in the Declaration or
Independence and embodied in subStan-
TALLY similar form in nearly all Ameri-
can State constitutions, to the effect that
governments derive their just powers
from the consent of the governed and
that the people have the right to alter
or abolish their governments whenever
they see fit to do So
It is difficult to determine whether the
principle of the recall is older than that
of the initiative and referendum or not
The ostraCism of Aristides by the Athe-
rians, in the year 484 B. c.. partOOk in
its essentials of the nature Of the mod
ern recall idea. So. too, it may fairly
be said that all history is filled with
instances of the practical application of
the recall Of the heads Of governments
by a dissatisfied populace. 1t is only
necessary to cite the executions OF
Charles I of England and of Louis XVI
of France and the more recent dethrone-
ment of Abdul Hamid II of Turkey and
Manuel I of Portugal TO illustrate this
point The difficulty with the general
plan of operation of the recall in those
instances has been that il was not legal
unless successful, and consequently was
rot invoked until the grievances against
the recalled officials became absolutely
Intolerable. Until recently there has not
been anywhere in America such a legal
and peaceful system of recalling Unfaith-
full or unpopular public servants as that
which has prevailed in Great Britain for
many years-the system that compels the
ministers of state to stand for re-elec-
tion whenever their programme fails to
muster the support of a majority of the
House OF Commons. This system is a
practical application. in a limited degree,
Of the principle of the recall which has
been adopted in one American State and
in nearly fifty cities.
Tine extension of the recall, like that
of the initiative and referendum. is being
urged in many States. In Kansas, Colo
rado, California, Illinois. Nevada, and
North Dakota both the Republican and
Democratic parties made it part of their
party platforms in 1910. as did the Re
publicans of Wisconsin and the Demo-
Gratis Of Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio. Wyoming,
New Mexico. New Hampshire. Nebraska
| Arkansas, Idaho. Massachusetts, and
South Dakota. The constitution just
drafted for the new State of Arizona
contains the recall provision, as we'll as
provision for the initiative and referen-
! dunn.
In nearly all communities where the
recall is in effect provision is made for
the candidacy of the officer recalled at
the election to fill the vacancy. In fact,
] the practical way in which the recall
| is generally operated is merely to call
a new election for the office in question.
| II the incumbent is reelected it is re-
! garded as a sufficient vindication. Care
is taken in most recalls statutes to re-
auire a considerable percentage of the
voters who elected the offending Off
cial to sign the petition for his recall.
! Necessarily this PERCENTAGE is larger
| than is required in the case of initia-
| tive and referendum petitions. as it could
| hardly be considered justice to allow a
small proportion. say or 10 per cent
OF the voters. TO demand the recall
| might be perfectly satisfactory to
! the remaining 90 or 50 per cent.
| But when quarter of the con-
stituents of an official are agreed that
| he should be recalled, the theory of the
advocates of the recall is that there is
probably just ground for dissatisfaction
| and the voters as a whole should have
the privilege of expressing their opin-
! ion. So y per cent of the total number
| OF votes cast for the office, the incumbent
| of which it is sought to recall, is gen.
! orally required as the number Of sigma
| lures to recall petitions. This is true in
the State of Oregon where every elected
official, legislative, executive, and judi
| cial from governor down, is subject to
recall. The constitutional provision for
the recall in Oregon, submitted by ini-
| tiative petition and adopted by a popular
| vote of 5S,3Sl to 81, ,O02 at a referendum
| election on June l. 1905. is a type OF all
| recall legislation. 1t is as follows:
Every public officer in Oregon is sub
ject, as herein provided. to recall by the
| legal voters of the State or OF the cleo
| toral district from which he is elected.
There may be required D per cent, but
not more, OF the number of electors who
voted in his district at the preceding cleo
! ton for justice of the Supreme Court to
| file their petition demanding his recall by
| the people. They shall set forth in said
| petition the reasons for said demand. If
he shall offer his resignation it shall be
accepted, and take effect on the day it Is
offered, and the vacancy shall be filled
as may be provided by law. If he shall
not resign within five days after the petit
ton is fled a special election shall be
ordered to be held within twenty days In
] hi. said al district 70 determine