1

organization. In many a national election an appeal has been made to the non-partisan voter. The first Republican platform of 1856 invited the affiliation and cooperation of the men of ali politics, and the platform of 1860, after enunciating the principles of the party, appealed for "the coöperation of all citizens, however differing on other questions, who substantially agree with us in their affirmance and support." The Democrats in 1876 appealed to their "fellow-citizens of every former political connection"; and from that day to this the independent element of the nation has not been overlooked in national campaigns.

However, it is in local, and especially municipal, politics that the non-partisan or independent element is strongest. In every great city there is a non-partisan citizens' organization of one form or another. In 1896, the Municipal Voters' League of Chicago was founded to fight corruption in the government of that city. The League is composed of voters scattered throughout the city who express their approval of its purpose and methods by signing cards. The purpose of the League is not the establishment of a new party but the concentration of public opinion and public scrutiny upon the candidates nominated by the other parties. It is, in a word, a publicity committee: prior to each city election it maintains headquarters into which pour suggestions for nominations and criticisms of city officials; as soon as candidates are announced or nominated it sends letters of inquiry to them in order to ascertain what stand they intend to take if elected; and through the campaign it endeavors to secure the widest publicity with regard to the character and policies of the various candidates. It has undoubtedly wielded some influence for good in the city, and party managers in selecting candidates in many wards in the city can no longer ignore its recommendations.

The non-partisan organization of New York is the Citizens' Union, a group of persons united without regard to party for the purpose of securing the honest and efficient government of the city of New York by the nomination and election of candidates or by indorsing the nominations of regular parties whose character and policy the Union can approve. The Citizens' Union, however, differs from the Municipal Voters' League in being a sort of political party with officers, committees, and conventions modeled somewhat on the plan of the older parties. By uniting with the Republican party, which is in a minority in New York

City, it was able in 1901 to contribute powerfully to the election of Mr. Seth Low as mayor; but it was unsuccessful in the next mayoralty contest, and since that time has confined its work largely to political education and the indorsement or nomination of candidates for minor offices.

Cambridge, Massachusetts, formerly had an organization. known as the Library Hall Association. It stood for the principle of non-partisanship in municipal politics but was not a political organization itself—that is, it did not attempt to create political machinery like that established by the Citizens' Union. At first the representatives of the association attended the sessions of the city council and a record of all the members of the council was published in the local newspapers and in pamphlet form. The failure of the voters to take an interest in this work of publication led the association to abandon it and adopt the plan of holding meetings immediately before the city elections for the purpose of scrutinizing the candidates nominated by the various parties and groups. At this meeting the names of all the candidates were discussed and the association decided upon the men it would support. In some instances, however, it made nominations of its own. The association thus prepared a slate of its own and waged a campaign in its support. This association, however, finally went to pieces; and its place has been taken by a "Non-partisan Municipal Party" which is for all practical purposes an organized party, but it is opposed to bringing national issues into city politics.

1 See article in Municipal Affairs, Vol. IV, p. 363, June, 1900.

CHAPTER XXXI

TAXATION AND FINANCE

THE raising and appropriation of revenues is always one of the leading subjects of controversy in state constitutional conventions. This function of government has been a source of logrolling and jobbery of every kind, great and small; and the tendency, everywhere manifest, to misappropriate funds and to rush headlong into debt has forced the adoption of many constitutional provisions in behalf of the taxpayer. No safeguard seems to be too minute to be unworthy of a constitutional sanction: the legislature of Alabama must even buy its fuel according to the rules laid down in the fundamental law of the commonwealth.

The early state constitutions gave the legislatures a free hand, but the reckless abandon with which money was raised and spent soon gave the taxpayers pause, and they began to devise plans for stopping one form of malversion after another, only to find the legislature ingenious enough to discover new loopholes. Before taking up the actual methods for raising and disbursing state revenues, it will be necessary, therefore, to consider the general character of the limitations under which the state legislature must work.

Constitutional Limitations

The ancient rule that money bills must originate in the lower house once so prominent in Anglo-Saxon polity is now laid down in less than one-half of our state constitutions. A number of them, in fact, specifically state that any bill may originate in either house: 'Any bill may originate in either house of the legislature and all bills passed by one house may be amended by the other," runs the New York constitution; but as a general practice the senate concedes to the lower house the right of initiating measures for raising revenues and often general appropriation bills as well. It can hardly be said, however, with due respect 1 Agger, The Budget in the American Commonwealth (Columbia University Studies), p. 22.

for this ancient and honorable doctrine on money bills, that it constitutes any safeguard against careless and corrupt finance in legislatures; and it must be admitted also that it has slowly been declining in public esteem.

Perhaps the most important safeguard against reckless finance is the precise limitation on indebtedness imposed quite generally by the recent constitutions. New York, for example, fixes the debt limit at $1,000,000; and, except for certain urgent reasons - to suppress insurrection and wage war the legislature can create an additional debt only for a specified purpose, which must be submitted to a popular vote and receive a majority of all the votes cast for and against it.1 Ohio goes further: after establishing the debt limit at $750,000 the constitution. provides that no other debt whatsoever may be created by or on behalf of the state, except debts to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, defend the state in war, or to redeem the present outstanding indebtedness. Coupled with this definite limitation, there is usually a clause requiring the legislature, on creating a new debt, to make provision for meeting it when it falls due.

The various devices for restricting the debt-contracting powers of state legislatures have had a decided effect in reducing and controlling expenditures. The total outstanding debt of all the commonwealths in 1870 was $325,866,898; in 1890, $223,107,883; and in 1902 the total debt of the states and territories was only $234,908,873. Massachusetts in 1909 came first with a debt of $78,097,595; New York second with $41,230,660; and Virginia third with $24,986,959. A few of the states, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, Oregon, and South Dakota, were reported in 1908-1909 as having no indebtedness at all. It certainly may be said that the finances of the American commonwealths are on a sound basis so far as indebtedness is concerned.

In a majority of states some provision is made for uniformity in taxation. This varies from state to state. In Pennsylvania all taxes must be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority laying the tax. Ohio adheres to a still older principle: "Laws shall be passed taxing

1 See Readings, p. 461.

2 It is the common practice for the state to exempt from tax the buildings and certain other property of religious, educational, and charitable institutions.

by a uniform rule all moneys, credits, investments in bonds, stocks, joint stock companies, or otherwise; and also all real and personal property according to its true value in money," - except certain public bonds, the property of some institutions, and personal property of any individual to an amount not exceeding $200. In West Virginia, taxation must be equal and uniform throughout the state, and all property, both real and personal, must be taxed in proportion to its value; and no species of property from which a tax may be collected can be taxed higher than any other species of property of equal value.

To secure regularity and publicity in legislative appropriations, it is now quite common to embody in the constitution any or all of the following principles.' Money shall be paid out of the treasury only in pursuance of an appropriation by law; every law imposing a tax must specify the object to which the income is to be devoted; the yeas and nays must be taken on the final passage of a money bill and recorded; the credit of the state may not be given or loaned to any private person or association; the governor may veto single items in the appropriation bill; the general appropriation bill may embrace nothing but appropriations for the ordinary expenses of the state executive, legislative, and judicial departments and for some other specific purposes; no appropriation shall be made for a longer term than two years; and no revenue bill may be passed during the last five days of the session.

Legislative Methods

Finances are handled in our state legislatures in much the same way as they are in Congress, and with similar results with regard to confusion and absence of responsibility. There is usually in each house a committee on ways and means and another dealing with appropriations. In about half the states it is the custom to raise revenues under a general law which stands in force from year to year. In these states the appropriations of the legislative sessions are totalled and a rate fixed on the evaluated property that will cover the expenditures. Such 1 See Readings, p. 459.

2 This power is possessed by more than one-half of the governors and used quite freely, much to the distress of the politicians, but an executive veto of an appropriation is rarely overruled. Agger, op. cit., p. 96; Readings, P. 447.