ballots. There is no country in the world, except the United States, where election laws permit this practice. English cities are to-day regarded almost as a model of good municipal administration, yet, not a hundred years ago, they were notoriously inefficient and their reputation was lower, possibly, than that of American cities to-day. In those days it is stated by a writer that municipal boroughs were used as pawns in the game of national politics and thus became almost incapacitated for the performance of any efficient administrative work. The municipal organizations were so bad, as a result of this prostitution of municipal issues in the interest of the national politics of the country, that not only were the various functions of the central government, such as the care of the poor, the sanitary administration and the administration of the public schools, when they developed, put into the hands of officers of the central government, but even the various new functions of municipal administration, the adoption of which was necessitated by the increase of population in the cities, were put into the hands not of the municipal authorities but of new bodies established by special local legislation. Efficiency and uprightness and local self-government had been sacrificed in the interest of party politics. In 1835, after the report of a commission appointed to study the conditions of municipal government, the General Municipal Corporation Act was passed. This act established a general scheme of municipal organization, granting large powers of local government, and transferring to it the various powers and duties which had theretofore been divided among special and outside bodies. The framework was not affected. By the imposition of large responsibilities a new spirit was stimulated and to-day the elections of local officers are largely determined without reference to national party considerations. In Canada there are no party designations on the ballots. The mayor of Ottawa, D'Arcy Scott, writes that "there is a very strong public opinion that party politics should not be considered 7 Prof. W. B. Munro, of Harvard University, in article in Boston Globe, October 31, 1909. 8 F. J. Goodnow in Municipal Home Rule. when aldermen, comptrollers, or the mayor are to be elected." Another Canadian, W. D. Lighthall, Secretary of the Union of Canadian Municipalities, states that "as a rule throughout Canada no party dares avcw openly that it supports a particular man, because public sentiment is everywhere imbued with the idea that party politics ought not to be permitted to enter into municipal affairs." In Australia, whence we adopted the improved secret ballot, there has never been in city elections any party designation on the ballot. Unfortunately we neglected or refused to accept this very important feature of their ballot. We, in America, are apparently just beginning to learn that there is no Democratic or Republican method of running a city. government and that party names are largely used by ward politicians to mislead voters and to cover the abuses President Taft's of the spoils system. A cardinal principle for Sympathy municipal reform should be the entire divorce of municipal affairs from national party politics. On March 10, 1906, in a letter to the Roosevelt Republican Club, of Cincinnati, President Taft stated that he was in thorough sympathy with this principle. The reform is making rapid progress. Four states, by general law, permit its establishment by cities. In ten other states cities. are now operating under a non-partisan plan. In as many more states cities are seeking charter amendments for similar permission. In its annual meeting at Providence, November 22, 1907, the National Municipal League resolved unanimously, "that the exclusion of national politics from municipal elections is desirable; that it can be achieved by the development of a strong public opinion in favor of it; that such development be advocated and promoted; that, whenever public opinion is sufficiently advanced, the laws should be made to favor it." The fact that some cities which have lately adopted it, like San Diego and Los Angeles, discussed and adopted important charter amendments as recently as 1905 and yet at that time made no provision for non-partisan elections, shows what great headway this idea has lately made and that it is now no longer academic, but is one that the people are ready to enforce as a governing principle in their civic life. Municipal In the effort to eliminate national party organizations from city elections, there has been no discrimination in favor of municipal parties. All political designations have generally been debarred. The Haverhill plan expressly forbids anything on the ballot indicative of the candidate's views or opinions. Kansas, in its shortlived law of 1907, did permit the use of three words for the expression of political principles. As there are important and even fundamental local questions about which citizens may properly and logically disagree, and as it is needful that the fullest publicity should be given to the position of candidates upon such questions, it may well be that municipal parties will be organized and given due recognition in the election laws. At the present time, however, in the present stage of the contest against politicians, it is probably wise to simplify the issue, as is now being done where this issue is raised, and leave to time and evolution any necessary modification of the general principle of the elimination of partisanship from cities. The Practical Workings of the Initiative and Referendum in Oregon. JOSEPH N. TEAL, Esq., Portland, Ore. Hon. William S. U'Ren, to whom I applied for information, advises me that the exact date the agitation for the initiative and referendum began in Oregon is somewhat uncerChronology tain. It has been stated that a paper published in Portland some time from 1885 to 1888, called "The Vidette," advocated the measure. Its first introduction into the legislative assembly was in 1893 in the form of a resolution introduced by Senator Vanderburg. Very few of the members at that time. knew what the terms meant. At the session of 1895 the agitation took the form of a demand for a constitutional convention and was defeated by one vote. In 1897 there was no session. At the regular session of 1899 the amendment was passed for submission to the people by a large majority, and in 1901 it was passed for the second time and was submitted almost without opposition in the legislature. Formerly under our constitution all proposed amendments to the constitution had to be passed by two successive legislatures before submission to the people. This amendment was submitted to the people June 2, 1902, and received 62,024 affirmative votes, 5,668 being cast against it. At the election held June 6, 1906, it was applied to local, special and municipal laws. However, the charter of the City of Portland, which was prepared by a charter board, approved by the people at the election held in the month of June, 1902, and passed by the legislature at the session. of 1903, contained provisions for the initiative. It has therefore been in operation in the state for seven years and in this city for six years. While the time it has been in operation is hardly long enough to develop all its advantages and disad vantages, yet its workings have been sufficiently observed to enable one to form some conclusions at to its merits and demerits. While both powers are generally linked together, they should be considered separately. One is a positive force, the other negative. The first stands for affirmative action, the second is a method devised for the veto of legislation the people do not approve. The consequence is that there is very much greater opposition to the initiative than to the referendum. Initiative and Causes for In my opinion the causes which led to its adoption are the same that are in evidence throughout the country generally. The people felt the government was getting away from them and they desired a more direct control, both in the making of laws and in their enforcement, than they enjoyed. More potent, however, than this was the failure of the legislature to respond to the demand of the people for the enactment of laws respecting the control of corporations, taxation and kindred subjects affecting public interests. Boss-riden legislatures and councils were the rule rather than the exception, and the people were tired of coaxing and pleading to secure desired legislation. Legislatures and councils were too often more solicitous for special than for the public interests and the people wanted to secure some effective and direct method of making their influence felt and their wishes respected. The difficulty in securing the enactment of the Australian ballot law and the registration law are examples of laws the people wanted, and which were enacted grudgingly and after long-continued agitation. Other important measures failed repeatedly to pass. The combined effect was to create a sentiment (as shown by the vote) overwhelmingly in favor of the new precedure. After its adoption tax laws and other public measures were proposed under it and passed, the consequence being that the same influences which prevented the passage of the same character of laws by the legislature are the deadliest foes of the initiative and referendum, although this is not to say that there are not very many good citizens who are opposed to it both on principle and in practice. Like all laws or new methods in government, experience has |