Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-05-06
PROGRESSIVE
OR REACT|ONARY?
New Zealand Lacks Initiative
and Recall, Alleged Tests
of Progressivism.
USES AND LIMITATIONS
OF THESE NOVEL DEVICES
Not More Opportunities to Vote, But
More Voters Constitute Vital
National Need.

| v.
EDITORIAL Correspondence Of The Star
BY THEODORE w. MOVES.
In discussing the radical progressive
| laws of New Zealand. / have not includ-
ed the initiative. referendum and recall
TO the American who has been assured
with fervor in the recent president al
/ campaign that belief in these devices is
the acid test of modern progressivism
this omission may bring surprise and
curiosity.
But the chapter on the initiative and
recall in New Zealand duplicates the
chapter on Snakes in Ireland in the
records of the Emerald Isle. There are
no snakes in ireland and there are nc
initiative and recall in New Zealand
Restricted use is made of the referen-
dunn In New Zealand. and efforts to en-
, large and extend this use have been I'M
successful. There is general periodi-
cal referendum in relation to the sale of
LIQUOR in the shape of a license or no
license referendum every three years. the
| vote involving the question of both local
and national prohibition. In addition
to the liquor referendum the legislature
| may. il it wishes. refer certain ques-
tons to the direct vote of the people.
This form of referendum. instead of being
a. critical and hostile review of laws en-
acted by the legislature with the people
rigidly scrutinizing the legislatures acts
as a court of last resort, is utilized as a
device by which legislators shift response
bility for the decision of embarrassing
issues from themselves to the people.
and protect themselves from being ex-
PEELED from parliament or driven from
control of parliament In favor OF the op-
position because they have inaccurately
gagged public sentiment on some doubtful
and troublesome question. This referen-
dunn, therefore, instead of STRENGTHENING
the peoples direct control of the legisla-
ture protects the government control
ing parliament and the individual legis-
iators. since the government and the legis-
sues, shall be thus referred. How useful
and comforting this kind of referendum
wound be to the congressman in whose dis
trict both the prohibitionists and the
brewers. or distilfers are strong! Instead
OF lodging record on liquor legislation
which would injure him inevitably with
some Of his constituents. he Is relieved of
all responsibilities and EMBELLISHMENTS by
direct reference of the awkward issue to
the decision of the dear people, The
New Zealanders make no use whatever
OF the initiative or the recall. The pop
uIar recall of judges and judicial decisions
would shock public sentiment as power
fully In New Zealand as in the United
States.
No Initiative or Recall.
The teaching OF New Zealand's expe-
rience Is that the initiative. recall and
full referendum are either undesirable or
unnecessary In her affairs. And II be-
lief In these legislative novelties is in
fo nt -
test of progressivism, then the New Zea-
landers. In the birthplace" and home
of progressive legislation. instead of be-
ing genuine. original, "blown-in- the bot
tie progressives. are convicted as reac-
tionaries.
legislative novelties has been exaggerated
in the American discussion of them. They
have been treated as the panacea of all
political Ills and as displacing discredited
representative government by the wise
and honest direct rule Of the people.
They are merely devices. sometimes use
full. especially in the smaller political
subdivisions like municipalities, to enable
the voting public on special occasions to
act directly in the legislative. executive
stead OF acting through their representa-
tiyes. Through the medium of the in
tiatiye the voting public can legislate
directly. regardless of the legislature;
through the referendum it can reverse or
approve the acts and .refusals to act of
the legislature, and through the recall it
can pull back. into private life and sub
stitute another in the place of an un-
satisfactory administrative official.
The theory, Of the necessity or supreme
value Of these devices, as supplying i'm
proved and full direct government by the
people in place Of indirect or representa-
tive government Is based on the assump-
ton that the voting fraction of the people
are wiser and better than their repre-
sentatives. and are better fitted to make
and construe laws than selected legis-
lators and judges; that the voters, who
are boss-led and incapable of selecting
the right men as representatives, will
not be boss-led, but will act with wisdom,
in dealing directly with the measures that
have. been heretofore enacted, construed
and executed through the agency of Sc
lected representatives.; that an electorate
which does not know enough to elect a
good man "a man of wisdom and in
tegrity) to legislate for 1t will know
enough to initiate sound legislative prop
ositions and to enact wise laws by direct
action: that voters who are bOss-led, weak
and inefficient for good IL they vote for
men to serve as experts to enact or con-
strue their laws for them will be en-
dowed with the wisdom of Solomon If
permitted under the initiative and the
referendum to propose and enact laws by
direct action for themselves. But will the
men be wiser In enacting and constituting
measures? Is 1t not as much a slur upon
the infallibility of the dear people to sug-
gest that they do not or, cannot select the
right men for legislators and judges as
to suggest that they cannot wisely make
and construe laws? Is not the reflection
upon their natural ability to read human
nature and to separate the honest from
the dishonest, the reliable from the un-
reliable among men. more slurring in
It's disbursement than merely a refiec-
ton on their technical and artificially
ACQUIRED ability to frame laws and AZ
experts to construe their meaning?
Initiative and Recall No Panacea.
The initiative, referendum and recall
dncluding recall Of judges and judicial
decisions) are thus machinery for in
creasing the powers and responsibilities
Of the voters OF the community and for
diminishing the responsibilities and in
dependent powers delegated by the
voters to representatives. performing ex-
ecutive legislative and judicial functions
Whether this machinery Is a benefit or
an injury turns on the question whether
the voters Of the community In question
are in fact more honest and more intelli-
gent than the representatives whom they
elect. II 1t is true that the majority of
the voters OF the community under con-
knowing and loving the right. and know
ing how to attain II. they VIII under the
old system as well as under the new
give effective operation to their govern
| mental wishes. provided they are as
active and earnest in the performance
! ted mentally and morally to perform
them For. IL this wise and honest ma