Evening star., 1932-10-23
BY LOUIS BROWNLOW,

the International Congress OF Local
Authorities.
"HE principal problems Of the
city are problems common to
all cities. That statement is
i usually met with unbelief eX-
pressed in all the ranges from
the lie direct to the pitying raised eye
brow Yet 1t is supported by noun
famous mass Of rapidly accumuiating
evidence, the truth of which, were it
recognized would be seen in the i'm
proved condition of the taxpayer S
pocketbook.
1t is a dificult thing to believe. The
prime article of faith in the credo OF
the citizen has been that his partic-
ular city is unique. OF other cities he
saws: Il wouldn't live there if you gave
me the place" Or, if that other city
has some outward and visible symbols
of superiority to his own home town, he
will say: Well. New York is all right
as a place to visit, but you couldn't pay
me to live there" The booster is to tie
city what the patriot is to the nation,
and the scolding of smart aleck pens
dipped in ink of cynical superiority can
abash a booster no more than 1t can
bulge a boob.
Hence. when you tell a citizen that
the problems of his city are problems
common to all cities everywhere he re-
sists YOU because he senses in your
strange saying something that will tend
to deprive his city of its unique quality,
its singularity, its difference" that he
loves so much or hates so hotly. What
he usually says Is: But you don
know the local situation mere; tell you
its peculiar"
Cities, being but mass groupings OF
individual citizens. take their tone from
the Individual, so that they go on. year
after year, each in its own particular
way. trying to solve its own problems
as If there vas never such prooiem
anywhere else in the world.
Losses to Taxpayer.
All of which may be very natural and
all that but which costs the citizen and
the taxpaver untold millions of sheckels
and untold losses in conveniences, COM
forts and amenities.
This universal similarity OF prlnclpai
municipal problems was striklngiy re-
yealed by the testimony OF munlclpai
administrators from A different nations
of the world who met last Summer IN
London in the Fifth International Con-
gress of Local Authorities.
Some 400 men and women we're pres
emf As each speaker had his say MS
words we're translated simultaneously
into four other languages and compre-
hension was manifest by mods or mead
shakings as he proceeded.
RIt despite this babel the pentacostal
miracle of the Common Tongue was
demonstrated as the discussion went on,
and it became apparent that thele "ao
common understanding based on CON. :.
mon experience with grave proplems VI
common concern.
THE first formal topic was The Piac,
tical Working of Local Authorizes anu
the testimony from all over tne "oIiu u
showed that there is difference ard a
very real difference between the tCrmal
Structure and the actual working OF
local government.
II was even more significant tnat
sneaker after speaker from nation alter
nation veered away from his explanation
of the differences between the conStltu-
tional and the actual practice OF local
government in his country to oS-
cussion of the immediate problem now
enprossing his attention. The veerlng was
always in the same direction. Inc
nroblem was always the same. 1t was
Stated in as many different ways as
there we're speakers, but In substance
it was this:
How shall municipal government sur
viue the crisis?
An American speaker perhaps would
have said the depression, but most OF
the rest of the world uses the haroer
word. An American lay citizen perhaps
would have thought first only OF the
nal officials and administrators, with
their deeper appreciation Of the facts,
agreed that the financial question is not
the only one. What is involved Is TIE
whole future of local government,
brought by the crisis into new relations
with central governments (natlonal'
state and provinciaD and faced with
RAPIDLY increasing demands that are
not the less insistent despite the fact
that rerenues are no less rapidly de-
creasing.
Central Government Aid.
E-ervwhere cities have been forced
to turn to central governments for alo
in meeting the cost of caring foi the
bare necessities of the unemployed the
central governments have given aid al
the price of exercising a measure OF
control, this mas leSSeneQ IHe power auu
scope of home rule within the munich
pality. Accompanying this loss Of au-
tonomy there has been resentment Of
local citizens, often accompanied by a
loss Of interest in local affairs. This
loss Of interest in turn has made it in
creasingly difficult to introduce meas
ures of efficient administration, result
ing in further measures of control by
the central government, and so on down
the descending spiral.
Stated thus badly and much too
simply. the prospect might seem hope
less, but such was not the general out
look of the men in this international
assembly.
Perhaps the way out was indicated
by none more clearly than by an
American, Luther Gulick, Of the Insti-
tute of Public Administration of Colum-
bia University, who emphasized three
important tendencies in local govern
ment in the United States. The first,
the growth Of executive administrative
power in nearly all the American units
Of local government Except the coun'