Among the people of this city there is a high average of intelligence and character. If they were permitted to elect and control their city officials, and to determine municipal politics by means of the initiative and referendum, the result here, as in other cities, would be a general revival of public spirit and of popular interest in municipal problems. Washington, the Nation's Capital, can never become the model city of a great and free Republic until democracy and efficiency have been combined in its local government.

Comparison with other forms of municipal government.-Those who are opposed to municipal self-government for the District of Columbia point to the misrule and corruption which have disgraced other American cities where the people enjoy the right of suffrage and go through the form of voting. In point of fact, these cities. have been badly governed, not because the people vote but because the will of the people has been thwarted and defeated by corrupt alliances between the political party machines and the franchiseseeking corporations and other predatory interests.

But municipal democracy is not a failure. Our American cities are being emancipated. The city boss is being dethroned. The people are learning that they can make their votes effective and can control their elected officials by means of the initiative, referendum, and recall. In Des Moines, Iowa, and other cities which have adopted a modern and democratic form of city government, machine rule, graft, and corruption have unquestionably been eliminated, and municipal administration has become not only highly efficient, but democratic and responsive to the popular will.

In each of those cities the people elect and control their mayor and commissioners. In Washington the appointed commissioners and other officials govern the people without their consent.

In these cities no franchise is binding until it is first indorsed by popular vote. In Washington the people have no voice in the granting of franchises to private corporations.

In those cities laws and ordinances are enacted subject to popular vote. In Washington there is no political machinery by which the people can express their approval or disapproval of proposed laws or ordinances.

In those cities the several departments of city government are clearly defined, and there is direct and undivided responsibility for each and every detail of city business. In Washington there is no distinct or definite division of responsibility among the three District Commissioners.

In those cities the people are optimistic and intensely interested in municipal affairs. In Washington the people are inert, despondent, and deficient in civic spirit.

THE RISING TIDE OF DEMOCRACY.

We are in the midst of a great political revolution which is relegating to the rear the old machine politics and the corrupt political bosses who took their orders from predatory wealth, and is bringing to the front a better type of progressive leaders who take their orders from the people and who study their interests. Several of the States are adopting new constitutions with all the modern devices of democ

racy.

These constitutions grant complete home rule to cities, with power either to regulate or to acquire and operate their public utilities. One State after another is adopting the initiative, referendum, and recall. Nine States have extended the right of suffrage to

women.

From the Pacific to the Atlantic a wave of political democracy is sweeping over the country. The voters are shaking off the grip of the machine politicians. The plain people are writing a new declaration of independence against the "powers that prey."

Shall the District government alone fail to respond to this nation. wide revival of the spirit of democracy? Here in the Nation's Capital, at the very heart of the Republic, where the democratic principles of Jefferson and Lincoln should be held in the highest honor, where there should be a system of city government which would serve as a model for all other American cities, shall the people remain disfranchised and taxed without representation? Shall the District of Columbia remain an island of autocracy and plutocracy in the midst of an ocean of ever-intensifying democracy? Shall the people of the District be forced to remain under a form of government which is an absolute denial of the fundamental principles in defense of which our liberty-loving ancestors pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor?

GROWING DISSATISFACTION.

It can no longer be claimed that the people of the District are satis. fied with their present condition of political servitude. On election day, November 5, 1912, the District Suffrage League conducted a "straw vote" at 56 polling places throughout the city. This vote was carefully supervised and the ballots fairly and honestly counted. On the crucial question, Should the people of the District of Columbia be allowed to vote? 944 voted "no," while 10,816, or 92 per cent, voted "yes." Such was the significant result of the first ballot which, in many years, the people of the District have had an opportunity

to cast.

Among the residents of the District there has always been a strong sentiment in favor of municipal self-government and representation in Congress, but many of them have been led to believe that the present system is the only practical one. This erroneous belief has been sedulously cultivated by the organs and agents of the special interests whose power to exploit and plunder the people of the District would be endangered by a change in the form of government. By means of specious objections, gruesome warnings against imaginary dangers, and skillful evasion of the real issue every effort has been made to confuse the minds of the people and to discourage any general protest against the wrongs inherent in the present system.

But in spite of this long-continued policy of concealment and misrepresentation the stock objections to local self-government are losing their influence. An increasing number of the District people realize that there is no valid or sufficient reason for excluding the District people from the rights and privileges of American citizenship.

FOUR COMMON OBJECTIONS.

Four objections to District self-government are commonly urged. They are as follows:

1. It is alleged that the present system is the only practicable one, because the District belongs to the people of the United States and not to the local residents. But if the District is actually the property of the United States, why is the Federal Government compelled to pay enormous prices for land in the District which is needed for Federal buildings and other public purposes? In point of fact, the District is not owned by either the people of the United States or the people of the District. Under present conditions it is owned and controlled mainly by a local combination of landowners, real estate operators, bankers, and corporation magnates.

Under present conditions the people of the United States have very little voice in the government of the District. If a referendum vote could be taken on the subject, the American people would undoubtedly decide that Congress should at once restore to the people of the District the right of self-government in purely local affairs, which is enjoyed in every other American community, which was exercised by the people of the District for three-quarters of a century prior to 1874, and of which they were deprived without their consent.

2. It is alleged that District suffrage is impracticable because Government employees who live in Washington retain the right to vote in the States from which they have been appointed. This argument may have had some weight under the old spoils system, when there was a constant rotation of officeholders. But the basic principle of the present civil-service system is permanent tenure of office. Under this system Government employees come to Washington with their families to live. This is the city in which their children are reared. This is the city where they buy homes and pay taxes. This is the city in whose government they should be most deeply interested. This is the city where they should be not only permitted but required to vote on all municipal affairs. On national affairs they should be permitted to vote either in the District or, until the District may be admitted to the Union as a State, in the States where they have retained a political residence. It is not believed that there would be any great difficulty in framing a Federal statute by which this desirable reform could be realized. Distance and the resultant cost of transportation now prevent all but an inconsiderable percentage of Government employees from voting in the States in which they claim political residence. As in New Zealand, this difficulty, pending the admission of the District to statehood, might be met by permitting such voters to send their votes by mail to their former residences.

3. It is alleged that the people of the District should demand no change in the form of local government which might interfere in any way with what is called the "half-and-half system" of taxation. On its face this argument is mercenary. It implies that the District will cheerfully submit to political servitude if the Nation will continue to pay one-half of its taxes. It implies that the District is willing to sell its political rights for a money consideration. For this unworthy and shameless argument the special interests of the District, who enjoy the lion's share of the local benefits of the half-and-half system,

are alone responsible. It is an argument which misrepresents the real attitude of the fair and honest majority of the District people. The American people take a just pride in their National Capital. Throughout the period of almost 40 years during which the unprivileged people of the District have lived in a state of Babylonian captivity Congress, from the financial standpoint, has dealt fairly and generously with the District. We know no reason to fear a change of policy in this respect. To assume that because, forsooth, our people request the elementary political rights now enjoyed by American citizens in every State in the Union, and soon, apparently, to be conferred upon our island peoples, Congress will wreak vengeance upon the people of the District by repudiating and shifting upon their shoulders the burdens which the Federal Government should bear is to offer to the Congress an uninvited and gratuitous insult.

4. It is alleged that prior to 1874 popular government was a failure in the District and that local suffrage would place the city in danger of negro domination. But the advocates of District suffrage are not asking for a restoration of the forms of government which prevailed here prior to 1874. What we desire is such a modern and scientific form of municipal government as will render impossible the recurrence of machine rule, political corruption, or the domination of our District government by ignorant and venal elements in the electorate. The experience of other cities justifies the prediction that with the safeguards of the initiative, referendum, recall, primary-election laws, a corrupt-practices act, and an effective civil-service system the old conditions of graft and corruption will be rendered impossible. Without graft the old type of corrupt political boss can never return to power. There will no longer be any financial advantage in bribing voters and marching them to the polls to vote for the machine candidates. There will no longer be any excuse for good citizens remaining away from the polls. Character and intelligence will rule. Special privilege will be subordinated to the general welfare.

In the threat of "negro rule" we recognize a cunning but empty menace employed by the privileged interests to frighten the people of the District from attacking an indefensible economic and political condition. With corruption eliminated from our municipal politics and with each municipal issue subject to a vote of the people, thus placing a premium on intelligence, not the slightest possibility would exist that any organized minority of voters of any race or color could ever hold the balance of political power or dominate the government of this city.

CAPACITY FOR SELF-GOVERNMENT.

The average of intelligence in the city of Washington is as high if not higher than in any other city in the United States. The Federal officials and civil-service employees who live here are an educated body of people who have been selected from the best citizenship in every State of the Union. With few exceptions their hours of service are shorter than those of the average business man or wage earner in private industries, and they are therefore in a position to devote more time to municipal affairs and public questions than the average resident of any other city. There is a very small percentage

of illiteracy in this city. An educational qualification, even if it were considered necessary, would exclude very few from the franchise.

In short, the people of the District of Columbia are eminently qualified for the duties and responsibilities of local self-government and participation in national affairs.

APPEAL FOR CONGRESSIONAL ACTION.

In the foregoing statement of facts the form of government which should be established in the District of Columbia to meet the developing needs of this great Capital City has been indicated in a general way. Your memorialists desire that Congress shall appoint a joint committee or subcommittee of Congress to investigate the present form of government in the District, and that this committee, after impartial public hearings, shall draft a bill for such a new form of government as, in the judgment of Congress, will meet the demands of the situation, and that this bill shall be submitted to a referendum. vote or a charter convention of the people of the District before being enacted into law. In this connection it is suggested that, for the guidance of Congress, a special study should be made of municipal governments at home and abroad, and especially of the capital cities of the States of the Union and foreign countries.

It is the desire of the District Suffrage League that Federal powers and functions in the District of Columbia shall remain unimpaired and undiminished and that a free and democratic form of government shall be established in the District of Columbia with representation in Congress and municipal control of purely local affairs.

We shall not presume to dictate to Congress or to the people of the District regarding the details of the model system of government which should be established in the District of Columbia. We will be content with any form of government which, while carefully conserving Federal control of Federal affairs, will insure District control of District affairs. In order, however, that these principles may be fully established and safeguarded, we most respectfully submit for your consideration the following suggestions:

1. Equal suffrage for men and women in the District of Columbia, including municipal suffrage for Federal employees who do not exercise the right of municipal suffrage elsewhere.

2. The concentration of all District governmental powers, legislative, executive, and judicial, in the hands of a responsible commission directly elected by the people and, through the initiative, referendum, and recall, directly subject to the control of the people. 3. Direct primaries.

4. Proportional representation.

5. A corrupt-practices act effectively outlawing bribery.

6. The divorce of national from local issues in elections.

7. A publicity pamphlet, as in Oregon.

We commend to careful consideration the following wise words of Prof. Frank Parsons:

The principle of self-government requires that a city should be as free and Independent in its sphere as State and Nation are in theirs. A State has no more right to impose its judgment on a city with respect to the city's internal S D-62-3-vol 25-72