Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

troublesome facts; not in the unfairness of the charge, but rather in its perfect fairness and accuracy of presentation.

Juries are more frequently held responsible for miscarriages of justice than judges or prosecuting officers. But is this quite just? The citizen does not volunteer his services, nor is his will consulted. He is summoned without reference to his interest or convenience, and is held without heeding his entreaties or supplications. His position is not unlike Voltaire's characterization of birth, life, and death. He is brought into the jury box, kept there, and sent out of it, involuntarily. Yet he is twitted with his ignorance, satirized for his credulity, or denounced for his obstinacy. But are our own consciences always void of reproach in this connection? Was the judge's "impartial charge" mere colorless laisser aller? Did the prosecutor prepare the case carefully, and place it before the jury faithfully? Or was there but a one-sided presentation, that of the defense; and was the jury overwhelmed with its vigor, ability, and brilliancy? These are pertinent questions when juries are attacked for failures of justice. If the men are ignorant, whose fault is it that they are there? If intelligent and conscientious, think of the requirement of unanimity. Weak and ignorant juries are apt enough to agree; alas! to agree unwisely. But it is hard enough for twelve strong men, in this enlightened age, to agree upon almost any debatable subject. There never was a period when opinions were so varied and so firmly held. The time is coming when the principle of unanimity will have to be modified. The demand for such a change will be greater as the juries improve and as the difficulty in securing conscientious unanimity is found to increase. The presiding justice of this department lately made what seems to me a happy suggestion on this head. He advocated a constitutional amendment making a vote of nine jurors, when approved by the court, equivalent to unanimity. That would prevent disagreements in all but the most evenly balanced cases, while the requirement of judicial approval would operate upon the contending parties-the majority and the minority in the jury room-as a wholesome check and balance.

These suggestions are the result of experience and reflection. I have sought, without taking a rose-water view of the situation,

to clear the atmosphere from loose notions as to miscarriages being the rule. They are certainly not the rule, but the exception. Still, the exception must be reduced to a minimum, and, in future efforts looking to that end, I trust that this discussion may not be found to be wholly unprofitable.

In conclusion let me say, that while these thoughts deal in the main with the machinery of justice, the motor has not been overlooked. Behind the machinery there must be power-power adequate to its efficient working. That power can be supplied only by an enlightened public opinion finding its highest expression in an able, upright, and vigilant press.

GEORGE C. BARRETT.

office.

OBSTACLES TO GOOD CITY GOVERNMENT.

THE question is sometimes asked why it is, when a man tries to do public business in the faithful manner in which he would manage private affairs, that he finds it difficult to do so. The answer is not a simple one, but it may be worth while, nevertheless, to try to make the reason clear. The first difficulty with which such a one must contend often has its beginnings prior to his election. Few people who have not come into contact with political methods from the bottom up, appreciate to what an extent an official may find himself embarrassed through his own mistakes as a candidate. It is not an unheard-of thing for a man who wishes to secure a nomination, or who is a candidate, to bind himself to party leaders by distinct pledges. One so doing must recognize at the time, however, we may suppose, the restrictions he is placing upon his freedom when he shall be in But many men who have the good sense to avoid this error do not appreciate at its full strength the binding effect of circumstances apart from distinct pledges. I do not mean to imply that there are no honorable obligations resting upon a candidate, as toward the party which nominates him, in case of his election; although such obligations are more clear, certainly, in the broader fields of politics in the State and in the nation, where parties divide to a greater extent on distinctive lines of public policy, than they are in municipal politics. The special obligation which it is essential for a candidate to avoid who wishes to be free to do the best he can as a public officer, is the assumed right of any man, any clique, or any body of men, whether large or small, to dictate to him whom he shall, or shall not, nominate or appoint to any office which the law makes it his duty to fill. The occasions are comparatively rare in municipal matters when, by the power of their influence, outsiders seek to control an official's relation to public questions which do not involve patronage.

Another difficulty in the way of good city government springs from the fact that the relation of the great parties to local affairs is an unnatural one. Party lines are drawn upon questions upon which local matters have no bearing. Parties, consequently, are related to the locality simply as organizations seeking to control the local offices. If there could be genuine municipal parties, representing divisions between citizens on questions of municipal concern only, one need have no special fear of party government in its application to a city any more than in its application to the State or the nation. Party government, even in cities, has this advantage over individual administration, that it offers to the community continuous responsibility. But when parties are formed upon lines which have nothing whatever to do with local affairs, the evils attaching to the government of cities by such parties often outweigh whatever advantages the system may

claim.

This leads to the next difficulty which the mayor of a city must face under existing conditions, even if he be free from every obligation that restrains his freedom of decision and action. The duty of the mayor is toward the city. The concern of party managers is for the party. They feel no responsibility toward the city, but great responsibility toward the party. In their eyes the administration of the city should strengthen the party, whatever else it may fail to do. Few managing politicians are able to see that a man serves his party best who serves his city best. Their conception of party advantage is to reward with places as many as possible of the party workers, so that they may continue to put forth every effort on the party's behalf. The mayor, therefore, or, for that matter, any other officer, is exposed to constant pressure from those who are nearest to him, and in the midst of whom he passes his time; which pressure makes first of all for the good of the party, without regard to the effect this or that step may have either on the reputation of the officer or the welfare of the city. It requires courage and faith to resist this pressure, in the confidence that the unseen people will sustain their representative in doing right, as against any party magnates whom he may offend. Temptation comes also in most insidious ways. The mayor, for example, needs, to a certain extent, the

co-operation of the common council, and the help of the representatives from his city in the legislature. When influential men among either of these bodies ask favors, it requires a strong man to maintain his independence, if what they ask is against his better judgment. A public officer having to deal with such influences needs no qualification more than he needs tact; but I am persuaded that an official who will fearlessly adhere to his own views of the right, resisting at every hazard all temptation to make improper nominations, or to do anything which his conscience admonishes him he should not do, will, in the end, accomplish more than one who attempts to make his way smooth by placating this influence or that. The latter process is an endless one, and after a while such an officer will find that the simplest thing cannot be accomplished without some favor on his part granted in return for what ought to be given simply as a matter of duty to the community. The fearless man, on the other hand, wins the respect even of those whom he disappoints. When once they are persuaded that no special favors are to be had in return for the performance of duty on their part, they are not unlikely themselves to approach public questions from the standpoint of public interest.

These are the special temptations which beset a city official on the side of his friends. Public life differs from private business in this other aspect, that there is always an organized opposition whose antagonism must be overcome in every case. This antagonism is as likely to be felt when one is right as when one is wrong. It seems to be part of the code of a political organization, that its adherents must contribute nothing, even by co-operation, to the success of a man upon the other side. The only influence which can modify this opposition is public opinion. This the fearless mayor is apt to have with him, while the man who seeks the support of party managers by docile acceptance of their suggestions is likely not to have it. Therefore, in this larger view, it is equally important for a city officer to be courageous and independent, and to be manifestly the serv ant of the whole people only.

Difficulties such as the foregoing are inherent in our system of government. They can be reduced to a minimum, now, by a

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »