all of the local governments, including the city's proportionate share of the revenue of the County and the Sanitary District, was only $20 per capita as compared with $29 for New York City, $40 for Boston, and an average of $26 for all American cities having a population of over 300,000. Furthermore, the debt of the city of Chicago was proportionately far below that of any other great city in the world. Including the debts of the various local bodies and the city's proportionate share of the debt of the Sanitary District and the county, the total indebtedness was only about $60,000,000, or $30 per capita. The average debt of all American cities over 30,000 is $58.48. In fact, the debt of the city corporate had scarcely been increased at all since 1870.

In order to overcome these very grave difficulties, the charter provided for an increase in the maximum tax rate of about two mills, or a city rate of 5 per cent to be levied on a valuation which is legally one-fifth of the assessed valuation. This would have made possible, on the basis of the valuation at that time, an increase of about $6,000,000 a year. It was also provided that the debt of the city might be increased to 5 per cent of the assessed value of the property of the city, providing that the city assumed the debts of all the governing bodies consolidated with it and its proportionate share of the debt of Cook County and of the Sanitary District. The present limit is 5 per cent on the one-fifth valuation. This would have made possible an increase in bonded indebtedness of about $40,000,000 and a total debt of about $100,000,000. Authority was given to levy a tax to pay the interest on the debt incurred and to provide the necessary sinking fund. It was stipulated, however, that no issue of bonds could be made unless the proposition had been submitted to the people and approved by them. No opposition was made to these revenue features of the charter in the convention, although representative men of all classes were members of that body.

Along with these provisions, there were important changes in the special assessment law. The most significant of these was the requirement that the city should hereafter pay one-half of the expense of

2 These facts were analyzed and discussed in the writer's report to the City Club on the Municipal Revenues of Chicago (1906).

repaving streets of the city once paved after the adoption of the charter. At present, practically nothing is contributed for this purpose. At the same time, the city was authorized to provide for a special tax upon all vehicles used upon the streets of the city, and the proceeds of this tax were to be devoted exclusively to a street repair fund. At present practically no appropriation is made for the repairing of streets. The city was furthermore authorized to exact compensation for the use of subsidewalk space, and to license all trades, occupations, and businesses.

Other important changes made in the charter were the introduction of a direct primary law, a corrupt practices act, the elimination of the party circle from the ballot, the change in the date of electing municipal court judges from November, the date of general elections, to June, and the extension of civil service regulations to the employees of the municipal court. An effort was made to secure a provision for the nomination of candidates for elective office by petition only. This was strongly urged by Mr. Walter Fisher and others, but was finally defeated by a vote of 22 to 30. Although the party circle was removed from the ballot in accordance with the provision of the charter, the party column was retained. The subject of woman's suffrage was debated at length, but the extension of the ballot to women was finally defeated by a tie vote. Especial provision was made for tenement house regulation and control (ix, 16).

Some important changes were also made in the organization of the city government. The term of aldermen was extended from two years to four years in order to meet the change in the term of the mayor made in 1905. At the same time the salary of the aldermen was increased from $1500 to $3500. The city clerk was taken out of the list of elective officers, leaving the mayor and the city treasurer the only administrative officers to be chosen by popular vote.

The public utility sections of the charter were of great importance. The city was authorized to own and operate any public utility including "street and other intramural railways, subways and tunnels, telephone and telegraph, gas and electric light, heating, refrigerating and power plants," and to fix the rate and charges for the service rendered. by means of such utilities; to require publicity regarding the business of public service corporations; and to acquire, by purchase, condem

nation, construction, or otherwise, whatever property, real or personal, might be necessary or appropriate. The provisions of the Mueller law authorizing the issue of special certificates constituting an obligation against only the property acquired by the city, were by this section extended to all local public utilities. In addition to this, an optional referendum, in case of all franchise grants for a longer period than five years, was provided. If, within sixty days after passing of any such ordinance, a petition signed by 10 per cent of the registered voters of the city was presented, then the ordinance should not go into effect until it had first been submitted to popular vote, and had been approved by a majority of those voting on it.

The public school system was made a department of the city government, instead of a half-independent body. The number of members of the board of education was reduced from twenty-one to fifteen, appointed by the mayor for a term of three years. The board was required to appoint a superintendent of education, a business manager, and a secretary for terms of not more than four years; and these officers were made removable for cause by a majority vote of the board. The superintendent was given general supervision, subject to the board, of the courses of study, text books, educational apparatus, and discipline and conduct of the schools. Appointments, promotions and transfers of teachers, and introduction' of text books and apparatus, might be made only upon the recommendation of the superintendent, except by a two-thirds vote of the board. The business manager was given general care and supervision of the property and routine business of the department, but was subject to the general direction of the board. Under the business manager were the chief architect, in charge of a bureau of buildings and construction, and a chief engineer in charge of matters relating to heating, ventilation and sanitation of buildings.

Appropriations for educational purposes were to be made by the city council on the request of the board of education, as in the case of parks and library.

Finally, the board was given a grant of authority to exercise all powers that might be requisite or appropriate for the maintenance and fullest development of an efficient school system, and the powers not specially enumerated were not to be considered excluded, as would ordinarily be the case (section 26).

Other less vital features were the authorization of the council to investigate any department of the city government, the official acts and conduct of any city officer or employee, and the negotiation, terms and performance of any public contract, and the accompanying power to compel the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of relevant books and documents (art. vi, 9). The anti-pass section forbade any municipal officer or employee to ask or accept any "free pass, frank, gratuity, gratuitous service or discrimination from any person or corporation holding or using any franchise, privilege, or special license granted by the city, or from any public service corporation whatever" (art. vi, 7). Another clause provided that "the city might maintain an action to restrain by injunction a violation of any of its ordinances, even though the ordinance provided a penalty for violation" (ix, 19).

These were the most important provisions in the charter as it was prepared by the convention, and presented to the legislature in March, 1907. In the meantime, however, a fierce battle had been begun over the choice of a mayor of the city of Chicago. Little or nothing was done with the charter until after the April election, when a republican mayor was chosen for the first time in fourteen years. The consideration of the charter was then begun by the State legislature, and occupied its attention during much of the remaining part of the session. The strongest opposition to the charter in Springfield centered around the home rule features of the document. It was declared that these provisions were equivalent to an ordinance of secession, and that Chicago was endeavoring to separate herself from the rest of the State. A strong effort was made to secure the passage of a constitutional amendment providing that the representation of Chicago in the new legislature should never exceed one-third of the total number, regardless of the population of the city. This was defeated by reason of inability to secure the necessary two-thirds vote to initiate the amendment. An attempt was also made to limit the city to a series of enumerated powers, particularly specified. In the end, however, the home rule sections of the charter were passed substantially as presented to the legislature by the convention except that the power to regulate the observance of Sunday was omitted. The revenue features of the charter were also left practically undisturbed, except that

the charter provision authorizing the city to exact compensation for subsidewalk space was eliminated from the bill.

While these broad powers were granted to the city and while ample revenues were allowed, many other progressive features of the charter were badly butchered by the legislature. The charter provision for a direct primary law was entirely eliminated and an antiquated act inserted in its place. The provision for publicity in regard to campaign receipts and expenditures was stricken out. The party circle was restored to the ballot without much discussion. The provisions for extending the civil service to the employees of the municipal courts were quietly disposed of, and the change of the date of the election of municipal court judges was also consigned to oblivion. This was not all, however, for the number of wards in the city was changed from thirty-five, the present figure, to fifty, and the city was gerrymandered in a wholly unjustifiable way. For years the city council has been practically evenly divided between republicans and democrats, but, under the proposed apportionment, the council would stand at 32 republicans to 18 democrats. Furthermore, the apportionment was drawn distinctly in the interest of certain factions of political parties; and finally it was provided that the lines so drawn should not be altered until after the census of 1920.

The civil service provisions of the charter were also altered by the legislature. Heads of departments were given authority to discharge employees for cause and the present right of trial of municipal employees under such circumstances was taken away. It was provided that the civil service commission might, in its discretion, require a trial; but this was placed entirely in their option. A number of other minor changes were made by the legislature none of which was vital in its nature, but the total of which produced an unfavorable impression. For example, the "anti-pass" section was restricted by the provision that the persons or corporations concerned must be those "whose business is confined to the city of Chicago." One of the revenue sections was carefully trimmed by omitting the italicized words in the following clause:

"12 3. The city council shall have power to impose an occupation or license tax upon any trade, occupation or business carried on wholly or in part within the city limits, and upon all persons, firms or