New Britain herald., 1922-11-22
AN UNEXPECTED VETO.

AN UNEXPECTED VETO.
 Announcement by Senator-elec'
 Covert and Represcntativc-clcct Al
 ling that they will not be bound by
 the decisions of the charter revision
 committee brings up the interesting
 question whether they are obligated
 by public opinion made articulate through the committee and the com
 mon council.
 There is nothing in the charter or ordinances which throws light on the subject. Revision of the charter Is simply civic habit formed soon after the consolidation of the city and town governments. At that time 1t was decided that certain amendments to the charter were desirable and the mayor was authorized to appoint a committee to weigh recommendations and make report to the council. Since then, a charter revision com mittee has made it's biennial appear ance, has considered amendments, has made recommendations to the com mon council and like the Arabs, has folded it's tent and silently slipped away. The committees report has been discussed by the council, accept ed in whole or in part and has been sent on its way to the legislature. Eventually it has found it's way into the hands of the committee on cities and boroughs and has been sent back, in the form of report, to the General Assembly, where final tiispo- sition has been made of it.
 Sometimes it has been the case that practical politicians, in ways that are my1terious to the ordinary run Of folks. have effected changes in the draft of the amendments after the common council report had reached the committee on cities and boroughs This has not occurred with sufficient frequency to cause alarm but often enough to create the suspicion that, with the proper application of acoustic principles, politicians have been able to reduce the voice of the people to mere whisper
 Because of conditions outlined in the foregoing paragraph, it is desir- able that our representatives in the legislature plead the cause of New Britain, as represented by the charter revision committee and the cof1fmon council, instead of allowing their per sonal preferences to color their judgA ment. It is true that they are not legally bound by any act of a munich pal committee or by the council. Neither can 1t be said that they have . mandate from the people to inter- pret what the people, through the revision committee, have said they want in the way of charter amend ments. To set their own personal opinions against the judgment of the government of New Britain is to endow themselves with an omnis- cience which is non-cxistent.
 If our senator and representatives have the moral right to use their Influence in the General Assembly to set at naught the recommendation of our local government, why bother to have charter revision committed? Would it not save time and mental effort to have the senator-elect and the representatives-e sit as com mission to hear suggestions concern ing the charter, accepting here and rejecting there as they saw fit?
 The danger in arbitrary action by the senator and representative lies in the fact that they are in close contact with the committee on cities and boroughs while the mem bers of the common council and the people, hay AuB to opSiu So iiidby liOufs lilSii daily tasks, are ''outsiders'' more or less dumb. Because of this situa- tion--as well as the practice Of ''back scratching" indulgcd in by cgisla- tors-our representatives are usually able to persuade their colleagues that their way of thinking is the only way to think.
 The progress or tho charter revi- sion report will be closely watched after it leaves the common council. !, There is a possibility that the council | win not recognize it's own child after the tailors in the committee on cities and boroughs fit it to new clothes
 s