The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-09-29
THE NEW CONSTITUTION.
Mr.. Wickersham Discusses the Mat
ter of Home Rule for Cities.

ter Of Home Rule for Cities.
To THE EDITOR OF THE suN-sir: The
most difficult to frame Of all the
provisions OF the revised Constitu-
ton, undoubtedly, was that relating to
home rule for cities. This difficulty
arose out of the very nature of the
problem. II It had been intended to
erect the Greater City of New York
into an Independent State the task,
in a sense. would have been much
simpler. But a State may not devoiye
upon one OF its cities n part of its
W sovereignty. unchecked and un-
controlled by a reserve power in the
State. without violating the Federal
Constitution. That. in effect, would
be to erect a new State, which cannot
be lone without the consent of Con-
gress. Yet certain advocates of
home rule with light hearted dis
regard Of constitutional limitation,
have demanded as complete and alb
solute a severance Of the city from
the power Of the State as though II
were being transformed into an indt.
pendent sovereignty, and have loudly
proclaimed anything less thar his as
bogus home rule" At the same
time these extremists are entirely I'M
willing to the benefits in
sured to the city by continued mem-
bership in the State. The right to
retain and extend the source and
means of transmission OF the citv's
water supply, the right to acquire
and control and outside of the city
limits for sewage purposes, the con-
tinuance Of the great water TRANSPORT
tation route. the barge canal and the
Hudson River; the free use of the
great highways OF the State, the
steady tribute from the products Of
the development of the natural re-
sources of the State and the fruits or
it's manufacture-these and many
other advantages OF membership in the
great Commonwealth, whose south
ern shores are washed by the Attain
tic Ocean while on the west and north
the great fresh water lakes and the
majestic st. Lawrence River form its
boundary. % even the most ardent
advocate OF complete city sovereignty
would dream Of foregoing.
Nor. on the other hand. would any
citizen of the State, dweller on noun
tain oil plain. by lake or river OF
ocean, tiller OF the soil, miner. manu-
facturer or merchant, be willing to
give up his interest In the great me-
tropolls Of the Western World. which
has grown up around the magnificent
harbor to which the argosies Of the
Old and New Worlds increasingly bring
their cargoes. The problem presented
to the Constitutional Convention
therefore. was to formulate as large
a grant of home rule to cities. having
in mind always "a a primary consider.
alton the city OF New York. as is
, consistent with the retention in the
= State OF it's essential attributes o.
sovereignty over all the State. includ'
: ing all its cities. The problem wa.
essentially one for the Constitution
makers because. left TO the Legislature
alone, what was granted by one Legis-
lature could be retaken by the next
and the result in the past has beer
! n constant struggle in the LEGISLATURE
by conflicting interests, a struggle
session In Albany and led to the as
gregation OF conflicting constant!
amended statutes miscalled charters
of the different cities.
Mr., Seth Low, in presenting to tn
Convention the original report of tn
Committee on Cities, said that an,
home rule measure which accom-
plished the results desired by the ad
locates Of home rule must do fou
things:
First, Il must grant 20 the cities AIDE
ouate power to manage their own anair'
secondly, It must give to local authorize
e for the time being the right 10 adjust tn
II local machinery OF the city so that II ca
meet new emergencies and new duties sue
cessfully: thirdly, 1t must prevent IN
Legislature from interfering out OF han
y in the city's affairs, and. fourthly, II mu'
leave power enough somewhere, either
the city or the Legislature. to deal ADJ
! quately with every question,
IS He further pointed out that III
State uses its cities in many respect
as the agents of the state to admin
|" lister the policies of the state as to III
- matters in which the State is col
o cerned: and that M great difficult
In encountered in the committee lay
the impossibility of drawing a sha
line of definition between the city al
fairs and state affairs. Consequent
any home rule provision must he cor
sidered as affecting the things in whic
lr the city is interested in itself, II
things in which the State is intereste
IN in Itself and the things in which hot
!, the state and the city are intereste'
on slight reflection 1t Will be apparei
m that the interest of the State is sue
~ ,hat tho pity cannot he left to fran