Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1920-01-28
CIVIC HOME RULE
AMENDMENT LOST
Constitution Commission Re-
fuses Philadelphia Right to
Pass on Charter Changes
DISCUSS CHARITIES BUDGET

/
proposed changes in the form of their
municipal government.
Eleven members of the commission
voted against the proposed 'home rule
for Philadelphia and only two for it.
1t was considered significant that former
Judge James Gay Gordon and Vance ..
Met COrmick who voted 20 give the
states 5 metropolis Il certain measure of
home rule. are Democrats.
Three So called home rule amend
ments were taken up for consideration
by the commission. The first provided
that changes in the organization of Il
municipality shall be made only by an
act of the General Assembly ratified by
a majority of the electors of the munich
pality voting thereon at a municipal or
special election designated by the act. -
The second provided changes should
be made in the form of city government
"by an ordinance of the municipality
ratified by "A majority of the electors of
the municipality voting thereon at
municipal election
The third proposed changes in mu-
nicipal government ''by a petition set
ting forth the proposed change. signed
by 10 percentum of the electors Of the
municipality presented to the ordinance
ratified by the electors voting thereon
at municipal election"
Gordon's Plea Fails
The last two proposals were defeated
first. Judge Gordon then presented an
amendment to the first proposal which
applied it specifically to cities of the
first class. Philadelphia is the only
first class city in the state so that the
home rule proposal as considered by
the commission applied to it solely,
Former Judge Gordon in opening the
debate said that homo rule yeas very
much misunderstood. He said large
communities had interests which af-
fected them particularly, and should be
permitted to govern themselves accord =
ing to their own desires.
He declared that one of the worst
abuses was that the Assembly enacts
restrictive legislation governing cities
| by hard and fast rule" oftentimes
changing the form of government at will.
and methods not Commerdable, and
distasteful to a majority of the citizens
of the community
The Philadelphia charter con
| tinued Judge Gordon, should not be
molested without the approval of a
majority of the citizens of that inunici
pality. The next Legislature should
have no right to disturb it except at
the will of the people of the city"
! Vance G. Mccormick seconded the
| proposal and said that each community
ought to know its own needs.
T. Dewitt Cuylcr, Philadelphia, sug
gested that such a procedure might lead
ito the widest changes" lie said
there was never a time such as at pres
ent when the strong arm of the state
should be held forth. "
Secession" Says Carson
The most vigorous attack against the
! proposal was launched by Hampton l..
| Carson. former attorney general, who
| called it secession,
He said it was the duty of the Legis-
lature to right wrongs when there
were wrongs, but not mere fancies of
/ to permit city to withdraw from the
sovereignty of the commonwealth"
MIR. Carson declared the proposal
would give over control of a city ito
the minority, which is always noisy.
/ fearless and active because it has moth @.
| ing else to do.
1T would set an example for other
| municipalities, declared Mr.. Carson,
and would lead to a breaking up, first,
Of the commonwealth, and then of n
| breaking of the union of iudiyisable
| states itself. y
In expressing his fears that the next
| Legislature may arbitrarily tinker with
the new Philadelphia charter, Judge
| Gordon said:
In the exigencies of politics. or III
! the ambitions Of parties there may be
an effort to disturb that government in
Philadelphia in the next Legislature.
| should not want TO see that done
without the approval of the people"
Mr.. Cuylcr said that it might cause
IA lack Of stability over the state by
taking away the centralizing power and
would cause agitation all over the state.
Judge Gordon declared it would mean
stability because 1t would stop fire.
quent changes by the Legislature"
Turning TO Mr.. Cuyler, who is di
rector Of the Pennsylvania Railroad, he
asked what stability that corporation
would have of its charter was subjected
to arbitrary changes from any outside
source.
Other Propositions Defeated
Two other home rule propositions
were defeated by the commission before
it adjourned for the week.
Under the existing law municipal
tics. in making their ordinances. must
conform 10 the law set down by the
| assembly, \ proposed new section OF
the constitution. which was defeated
ordinance against which there was nc
prohibition in the general law.
Another amendment 10 the consti-
tuition, defeated, provided that mu
nicipality should have exclusive power
TO regulate the rates to be charged by Il
public service corporation within it,
confines $50 long as the title to such
facility is retained by the municipal
ity. -
4 pronosal to permit counties Of more
than 800 900 to shorten the ballot by
| abolishing or making appointiye certain
county officials now elected by popu'
| lar vote. was defeated.
Charities Budget Submitted
The new draft for the distribution Of
state charitable appropriations was sub
mitted to the commission on revision
and amendment this morning.
The amendment, which was drafted
by the committee headed by Attor
ney General Schaffcr, is expected TO
iron out the difficulties in the commits .
sion on the charitable question
1t provides that the Governor Is 10
| submit the charitable appropriations
10 lump sum in the budget, but the
| Legislature is TO fix the amount and
may add or decrease after the aggre e
gate sum has been presented TO 1t.
The sum is to be apportioned out to
various kinds of institutions on class
basis. This class basis will be. deter
mined by law. Each class will have to
conform TO certain standard of serv
| ice and work. which also will be desig
! mated by law,
..li..I..nI ..hnritnhln nnnrnnria =