Direct Legislation by the Citizenship through the Initiative and Referendum.
by James W. Sullivan.
AS TO THIS BOOK.
This is the second in a series of sociological works, each a small volume, I have in course of publication. The first, "A Concept of Political Justice," gave in outline the major positions which seem to me logically to accord in practical life with the political principle of equal freedom. In the present work, certain of the positions taken in the first are amplified. In each of the volumes to come, which will be issued as I find time to complete them, similar amplification in the case of other positions will be made. Naturally, the order of publication of the proposed works may be influenced by the general trend in the discussion of public questions.
The small-book plan I have adopted for several reasons. One is, that the writer who embodies his thought on any large subject in a single weighty volume commonly finds difficulty in selling the work or having it read; the price alone restricts its market, and the volume, by its very size, usually repels the ordinary reader. Another, that the radical world, which I especially address, is nowadays a.s.sailed with so much printed matter that in it big books have slight show of favor. Another, that the reader of any volume in the series subsequent to the first may on reference to the first ascertain the train of connection and entire scope of the thought I would present. And, finally, that such persons as have been won to the support of the principles taught may interest themselves, and perhaps others, in spreading knowledge of these principles, as developed in the successive works.
On the last-mentioned point, a word. Having during the past decade closely observed, and in some measure shared in, the discussion of advanced sociological thought, I maintain with confidence the principles of equal freedom, not only in their essential truth, but in the leading applications I have made of them. At least, I may trust that, thus far in either work, in coming to my more important conclusions, I have not fallen into error through blind devotion to an "ism" nor halted at faulty judgment because of limited investigation. I therefore hope to have others join with me, some to work quite in the lines I follow, and some to move at least in the direction of those lines.
The present volume I have prepared with care. My attention being attracted about eight years ago to the direct legislation of Switzerland, I then set about collecting what notes in regard to that inst.i.tution I could glean from periodicals and other publications. But at that time very little of value had been printed in English. Later, as exchange editor of a social reform weekly journal, I gathered such facts bearing on the subject as were pa.s.sing about in the American newspaper world, and through the magazine indexes for the past twenty years I gained access to whatever pertaining to Switzerland had gone on record in the monthlies and quarterlies; while at the three larger libraries of New York--the Astor, the Mercantile, and the Columbia College--I found the princ.i.p.al descriptive and historical works on Switzerland. But from all these sources only a slender stock of information with regard to the influence of the Initiative and Referendum on the later political and economic development of Switzerland was to be obtained. So, when, three years ago, with inquiry on this point in mind, I spent some months in Switzerland, about all I had at first on which to base investigations was a collection of commonplace or beclouded fact from the newspapers, a few statistics and opinions from an English magazine or two, and some excerpts from volumes by De Laveleye and Freeman which contained chapters treating of Swiss inst.i.tutions. Soon after, as a result of my observations in the country, I contributed, under the caption "Republican Switzerland," a series of articles to the New York "Times"
on the Swiss government of today, and, last April, an essay to the "Chautauquan" magazine on "The Referendum in Switzerland." On the form outlined in these articles I have constructed the first three chapters of the present work. The data, however, excepting in a few cases, are corrected to 1892, and in many respects besides I have profited by the labors of other men in the same field.
The past two years and a half has seen much writing on Swiss inst.i.tutions. Political investigators are awakening to the fact that in politics and economics the Swiss are doing what has never before been done in the world. In neighborhood, region, and nation, the entire citizenship in each case concerned is in details operating the government. In certain cantons it is done in every detail. Doing this, the Swiss are moving rapidly in practically grappling with social problems that elsewhere are hardly more than speculative topics with scholars and theorists. In other countries, consequently, interested lookers-on, having from different points of view taken notes of democratic Switzerland, are, through newspaper, magazine, and book, describing its unprecedented progress and suggesting to their own countrymen what in Swiss governmental experience may be found of value at home. Of the more solid writing of this character, four books may especially be recommended. I mention them in the order of their publication.
"The Swiss Confederation." By Sir Francis Ottiwell Adams and C.D.
Cunningham. (London: Macmillan & Co.; 1889; 289 pages; $1.75.) Sir Francis Ottiwell Adams was for some years British Minister at Berne.
"The Federal Government of Switzerland: An Essay on the Const.i.tution."
By Bernard Moses, Ph.D., professor of history and political economy, University of California. (Pacific Press Publishing Company: Oakland, Cal.; 1889; 256 pages; $1.25.) This work is largely a comparative study of const.i.tutions. It is meant chiefly for the use of students of law and of legal history. It abounds, however, in facts as to Switzerland which up to the time of its publication were quite inaccessible to American readers.
"State and Federal Government of Switzerland." By John Martin Vincent, Ph.D., librarian and instructor in the department of history and politics, Johns Hopkins University. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press; 1891; 247 pages; $1.50.) Professor Vincent had access, at the university, to the considerable collection of books and papers relating to Switzerland made by Professor J.C. Bluntschli, an eminent Swiss historian who died in 1881, and also to a large number of government publications presented by the Swiss Federal Council to the university library.
"The Swiss Republic." By Boyd Winchester, late United States Minister at Berne. (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & Co.; 1891; 487 pages; $1.50.) Mr. Winchester was stationed four years at Berne, and hence had better opportunity than Professor Vincent or Professor Moses for obtaining a thorough acquaintance with Switzerland. Much of his book is taken up with descriptive writing, all good.
Were I asked which of these four works affords the fullest information as to new Switzerland and new Swiss political methods, I should be obliged to refer the inquirer to his own needs. Professor Moses"s is best for one applying himself to law and const.i.tutional history.
Professor Vincent"s is richest in systematized details and statistics, especially such as relate to the Referendum and taxation; and in it also is a bibliography of Swiss politics and history. For the general reader, desiring description of the country, stirring democratic sentiment, and an all-round view of the great little republic, Mr. Winchester"s is preferable.
In expanding and rearranging my "Times" and "Chautauquan" articles, I have, to some extent, used these books.
Throughout this work, wherever possible, conservatives, rather than myself, have been made to speak; hence quotations are frequent. The first drafts of the chapters on Switzerland have been read by Swiss radicals of different schools, and the final proofsheets have been revised by a Swiss writer of repute living in New York; therefore serious error is hardly probable. The one fault I myself have to find with the work is its baldness of statement, rendered necessary by s.p.a.ce limits. I could, perhaps more easily, have prepared four or five hundred pages instead of the one hundred and twenty. I leave it rather to the reader to supply comparison and a.n.a.lysis and the eloquent comment of which, it seems to me, many of the statements of fact are worthy.
J.W.S.
THE INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM IN SWITZERLAND.
_Democratic versus Representative Government._
There is a radical difference between a democracy and a representative government. In a democracy, the citizens themselves make the law and superintend its administration; in a representative government, the citizens empower legislators and executive officers to make the law and to carry it out. Under a democracy, sovereignty remains uninterruptedly with the citizens, or rather a changing majority of the citizens; under a representative government, sovereignty is surrendered by the citizens, for stated terms, to officials. In other words, democracy is direct rule by the majority, while representative government is rule by a succession of quasi-oligarchies, indirectly and remotely responsible to the majority.
Observe, now, first, the influences that chiefly contribute to make government in the United States what it is:--
The county, state, and federal governments are not democracies. In form, they are quasi-oligarchies composed of representatives and executives; but in fact they are frequently complete oligarchies, composed in part of unending rings of politicians that directly control the law and the offices, and in part of the permanent plutocracy, who purchase legislation through the politicians.
Observe, next, certain strong influences for the better that obtain in a pure democracy:--
An obvious influence is, in one respect, the same as that which enriches the plutocrat and prompts the politician to reach for power--self-interest. When all the members of any body of men find themselves in equal relation to a profitable end in which they solely are concerned, they will surely be inclined to a.s.sert their joint independence of other bodies in that respect, and, further, each member will claim his full share of whatever benefits arise. But, more than that; something like equality of benefits being achieved, perhaps through various agencies of force, a second influence will be brought powerfully to bear on those concerned. It is that of justice. Fair play to all the members will be generally demanded.
In a pure democracy, therefore, intelligently controlled self-interest and a consequent sentiment of justice are the sources in which the highest possible social benefits may be expected to begin.
The reader has now before him the political principle to be here maintained--pure democracy as distinguished from representative government. My argument, then, becomes this: To show that, by means of the one lawmaking method to which pure democracy is restricted,--that of direct legislation by the citizenship,--the political "ring," "boss,"
and "heeler" may be abolished, the American plutocracy destroyed, and government simplified and reduced to the limits set by the conscience of the majority as affected by social necessities. My task involves proof that direct legislation is possible with large communities.
_Direct Legislation in Switzerland._
Evidence as to the practicability and the effects of direct legislation is afforded by Switzerland, especially in its history during the past twenty-five years. To this evidence I turn at once.
There are in Switzerland twenty-two cantons (states), which are subdivided into 2,706 communes (townships). The commune is the political as well as territorial unit. Commonly, as nearly as consistent with cantonal and federal rights, in local affairs the commune governs itself. Its citizens regard it as their smaller state. It is jealous of interference by the greater state. It has its own property to look after. Until the interests of the canton or the Confederation manifestly replace those of the immediate locality, the commune declines to part with the administration of its lands, forests, police, roads, schools, churches, or taxes.
In German Switzerland the adult male inhabitants of the commune meet at least once annually, usually in the town market place or on a mountain plain, and carry out their functions as citizens. There they debate proposed laws, name officers, and discuss affairs of a public nature. On such occasions, every citizen is a legislator, his voice and vote influencing the questions at issue. The right of initiating a measure belongs to each. Decision is ordinarily made by show of hands. In most cantons the youth becomes a voter at twenty, the legal age for acquiring a vote in federal affairs, though the range for cantonal matters is from eighteen to twenty-one.
Similar democratic legislative meetings govern two cantons as cantons and two other cantons divided into demi-cantons. In the demi-canton of Outer Appenzell, 13,500 voters are qualified thus to meet and legislate, and the number actually a.s.sembled is sometimes 10,000. But this is the highest extreme for such an a.s.semblage--a Landsgemeinde (a land-community)--the lowest for a canton or a demi-canton comprising about 3,000. One other canton (Schwyz, 50,307 inhabitants) has Landsgemeinde meetings, there being six, with an average of 2,000 voters to each. In communal political a.s.semblages, however, there are usually but a few hundred voters.
The yearly cantonal or demi-cantonal Landsgemeinde takes place on a Sunday in April or May. While the powers and duties of the body vary somewhat in different cantons, they usually cover the following subjects: Partial as well as total revision of the const.i.tution; enactment of all laws; imposition of direct taxes; incurrence of state debts and alienation of public domains; the granting of public privileges; a.s.sumption of foreigners into state citizenship; establishment of new offices and the regulation of salaries; election of state, executive, and judicial officers.[A]
[Footnote A: J.M. Vincent: "State and Federal Government in Switzerland."]
The programme for the meeting is arranged by the officials and published beforehand, the law in some cantons requiring publication four weeks before the meeting, and in others but ten days. "To give opportunities for individuals and authorities to make proposals and offer bills, the official gazette announces every January that for fourteen days after a given date pet.i.tions may be presented for that purpose. These must be written, the object plainly stated and accompanied by the reasons. All such motions are considered by what is called the Triple Council, or legislature, and are cla.s.sified as "expedient" and "inexpedient." A proposal receiving more than ten votes must be placed on the list of expedient, accompanied by the opinion of the council. The rejected are placed under a special rubric, familiarly called by the people the _Beiwagen_. The a.s.sembly may reverse the action of the council if it chooses and take a measure out of the "extra coach," but consideration of it is in that case deferred until the next year. In the larger a.s.semblies debate is excluded, the vote being simply on rejection or adoption. In the smaller states the line is not so tightly drawn....
Votes are taken by show of hands, though secret ballot may be had if demanded, elections of officers following the same rule in this matter as legislation. Nominations for office, however, need not be sent in by pet.i.tion, but may be offered by any one on the spot."[B]
[Footnote B: Vincent.]
_The Initiative and the Referendum._
It will be observed that the basic practical principles of both the communal meeting and the Landsgemeinde are these two:
(1) That every citizen shall have the right to propose a measure of law to his fellow-citizens--this principle being known as the Initiative.
(2) That the majority shall actually enact the law by voting the acceptance or the rejection of the measures proposed. This principle, when applied in non-Landsgemeinde cantons, through ballotings at polling places, on measures sent from legislative bodies to the people, is known as the Referendum.
The Initiative has been practiced in many of the communes and in the several Landsgemeinde cantons in one form or other from time immemorial.
In the past score of years, however, it has been practiced by pet.i.tion in an increasing number of the cantons not having the democratic a.s.semblage of all the citizens.
The Referendum owes its origin to two sources. One source was in the vote taken at the communal meeting and the Landsgemeinde. The principle sometimes extended to cities, Berne, for instance, in the fifty-five years from 1469 to 1524, taking sixty referendary votings. The other source was in the vote taken by the ancient cantons on any action by their delegates to the federal Diet, or congress, these delegates undertaking no affair except on condition of referring it to the cantonal councils--_ad referendum_.
The principles of the Initiative and Referendum have of recent years been extended so as to apply, to a greater or lesser extent, not only to cantonal affairs in cantons far too large for the Landsgemeinde, but to certain affairs of the Swiss Confederation, comprising three million inhabitants. In other words, the Swiss nation today sees clearly, first, that the democratic system has manifold advantages over the representative; and, secondly, that no higher degree of political freedom and justice can be obtained than by granting to the least practicable minority the legal right to propose a law and to the majority the right to accept or reject it. In enlarging the field of these working principles, the Swiss have developed in the political world a factor which, so far as it is in operation, is creating a revolution to be compared only with that caused in the industrial world by the steam engine.
The cantonal Initiative exists in fourteen of the twenty-two cantons--in some of them, however, only in reference to const.i.tutional amendments.
Usually, the proposal of a measure of cantonal law by popular initiative must be made through pet.i.tion by from one-twelfth to one-sixteenth of the voters of the canton. When the pet.i.tion reaches the cantonal legislature, the latter body is obliged, within a brief period, specified by the const.i.tution, to refer the proposal to a cantonal vote.