Twin city review. [volume] (Champaign, Ill.) 19??-1929, 1922-10-20

sz9s,eing article on the proposed new
- constitution, IS prominent chi
- attorney who, on many occasions,
- repdered valiant service 10 the
king people of the state. Some
- ago he organized a group OF
i.ssrfv loving citizens TO assist the
- unions of the state in an effort
= ,,avnnt the misuse of injunctions
= labor disputes and, with the late
SsaBhen 5. Gregory, former president
- fbe American Bar Association,
,,sat 10 Springfield at his own expense
- support labor's injunction-limita-
,i.r biil. He prepared this article at
fbs request of the Public Ownership
League.)
Illinois needs a new constitution
hof not of the kind presented by the
convention which has just finished its
Isbers. That is Tory document.
II is claimed by the proponents of
the Instrument that in no respent is
+ any worse than our present con-
sfifution and that, in some respects, 1t
i better. They point out the pro-
visions concerning municipal owner
sblp. the clause giving larger power
for local self government TO the City
of Chicago and the greater liberality
Of the amending clause as progressive
features.
II is true that the document does
contain provisions which would enable
the CITY of Chicago TO acquire the
transportation systems operated by
nriyate owners. 1t does not, however,
give the opportunity to the city to
seouire any other public utilities, nor
70 Of har nat tfng
than Chicago TO incur the Indebtedness
necessary to acquire the control OF
public utilities. As for the transpor-
tation systems, they are no longer
profitable to their owners; the cor
porations which now possess them are
more than anxious to let go and
secure an opportunity TO unload the
properties upon the city and expect,
OF course, to make a deal that will
net the stockholders considerable
profit. Whether or not the new con-
stitution is adopted, some plan will be
found such as the Schwartz or the
Thompson plan, or something similar
thereto, to enable the city to acquire
the properties. So, nothing is gained
from the inclusion of that provision
in the constitution.
The Amending llauSe.
The present draft does permit the
submission to the people of amend
ments to two articles at the same
time. The old provided that amend
ments to no more than one article
should be submitted at the same ses-
sion. The reactionaries have always
been able to defeat the submission of
progressive amendments by introduc-
ing resolutions for amendments to two
or more articles and dividing the
forces which were supporting them.
As two-thirds vote in each house
must be secured to authorize the SUBJ
mission of any amendment, 1t was
easy in this way to defeat any propo-
sition which had for its purpose the
giving of greater power TO the peo-
pie. Permitting amendments to two
articles only, however, will not help
the situation. 1t will be just as easy
by the introduction of three or four
proposals for amendments to defeat
two as it has been heretofore to defeat
one.
Alleged Home Rule.
Chicago is given a semblance of
home rule. 1t is authorized by the
proposed constitution to frame its
own charter and pass such laws for
It's own government as it may seem
TIT, except as expressly prohibited by
law, which means that the Legisla-
ture can take away this power when
1t chooses to do so. But the power
OF the city needs more than any 9TH
er, the authority to regulate and con-
trol the utility corporations that furn-
ish the telephone service, the electric
ny; the gas and transportation for
It's citizens is not given it; that re-
mains IN the state legislature and will
De exercised from Springfield as
heretofore
These three are the principal items
oil alleged improvement. They are
not of great value. If more than
1his was not to be given it was hardly
worth while to call a convention for
me voters to take the trouble to go to
the polls TO vote on the question. But
wnlle little of value was given, much
lhat was worth while has been taken
away.
Public Ownership.
Believers in Public Ownership can
not afford to vote for a document
winch, while it may authorize the City
Oh Chicago to take over a street rail-
way system (Which as we have point
60 out it might do without new
eonsttution), gives away properties
Oh much greater value. We have in
thls state the Illinois & Michigan Can
al, constructed with the money of tax
payers. 1t is of little value now.
We are preparing to dig deep water
way from Lake Michigan to the Illi-
hols River, which will be part of the
system designed to provide water
transportation from the st. Lawrence
70 70. the Great Lakes and thence to the
mississippi and New Orleans. When
mat project is completed, parts of the
Illinois and Michigan Canal will be-
come very valuable because of the
gefmlnal facilities they afford. I'm
uet the present constitution, the Illi-
nois q Michigan Canal cannot be
!essed except by the consent of the
people. Under the draft proposed,
sas canal may be leased for terminal
p-fposes without such consent. While
ne public is acquiring the street
Iali@says which the present owners are
anxious to unload, the corporate in
sEieStS will no Uaftipu tar,,nipai ~ crhts