The news scimitar. (Memphis, Tenn.) 1907-1926, 1919-02-14
n REFERENDUM

Memphis has had many changes in her charter since the act
oilsI9, which abolished her charter entirely and had the governor
appoint five commissioners, who were Judge, sheriff and Jury all
combined for all matters affecting the body polite. Some ses-
stons OF the general assembly since then have made minor
changes. but the general rule has been TO make radical changes.
The usual plan, II the outs controlled a majority OF the
legislative delegation, and were friendly with the governor, was
TO pass an act enlarging the size Of the adermanc body, so that
when the governor filled the positions thus created, the outs
would have a majority of the entire body long before the expira-
ton OF the terms for which The incumbents were elected by the
people.
At hall a dozen sessions Of the assembly acts changing the
charter OF Memphis more radically than the present proposed
charter would have been passed, and in no case has there been
a referendum or popular vote as to whether or not the change
should become effective. The only chance the people had in
any OF these years was to elect TO the general assembly men
pledged TO enact such local legislation as the people of Memphis
wanted, On occasions entire legislative delegations ran on plat
forms pledging them to be guided on local legislation by the
wishes OF the city government, just as the present delegation
pledged themselves to support the manager form OF govern
nnent, and Messrs, Monteverde, Mason and Miller voluntarily
adopted Tor themselves IN their campaign for city commissioners
a platform pledging themselves to the then projected manager
form OF government,
Nothing was said then about a referendum, because there
never had been a referendum in Memphis on n charter change.
and because II was then and still is the opinion of the best
legal talent that no such referendum is legally possible under
the Anticipated state constitution,
During the rush Of charter repeal and e-enactments under
the iour-mIe law, many towns voted to give up their charters,
bu, the voting was purely informal and simply as an instruction
10 their legislators as to how to act.
When the Memphis charter was entirely repealed and
fc.enacted under the four-mie law, there was neither referen-
DUN nor any other vote after the election Of the legislators.
1t is unfortunate that the constitution does not provide spe-
officially Tor a referendum in city charter provisions, No good
citizen could oppose such a constitutional provision, But because
there is none should not and will not prevent Memphis from
securing from the general assembly from time to time such
changes as ought to be made in her charter,
1t is true that tho general assembly has passed some city
charter acts containing referendum clauses, but so far no one has
cited where any OF those clauses has been passed upon by the
supreme court,
The charter proposed now has many points of advantage
over tho present one, and few valid objections can be made to
il, except by those who seek valuable franchises and want to
perpetuate themselves and their crowd in office,
There is no indication in it that a successful court attack
could be made upon it, But it it contained a referendum OF
any other clause OF doubtful consttutionalty, an attack would
be certain; its operation probably would be suspended until
the last court of the state passed upon it, and those now in office
probably would hold over for an indefinite time after the expira-
ton of the terms for which they were elected,
II il be enacted they will all hold office for the terms for
which the people elected them, and they will have the same
chance that any other ~ireeholder has to be elected as their own
successors as heads of the city government-the chance depend
ing upon whether their administration be good or bad from now
until the next election,