One Mayor put it in force in to get it through the Legislature. and another Mayor kicked it out. your Model Charter, this leaving own rules. I want you all to feel that here in Indianapolis and in Indiana we have a hospitable field and we have a warm welcome for this reform movement. In the years of study I have put on this question in a private way, unassisted, and with many disadvantages, I have come to the conclusion that this question of city government is only a part of a larger question, the question of local government, and that as you proceed in the development of this problem you will find that a part and parcel of the problem is the government of the small town, of the small city, the county, the borough, the township, or whatever you call it. If I am not mistaken it is one and the same plan, and I stand here to-night in the attitude of a prophet when I say that this magnificent League will in a few years to come find that they can make no hard and sharp division between the city and the county in respect to the problems for which you are seeking a solution; that you will find that the problem is but part of a great general problem. I think the principles which must govern cities in the end, if they are sound, will be principles that are applicable in their general theory to the government of the small cities, the small towns, the counties and the townships. Without elaborating that notion, if that be true, we come to a practical difficulty, for here is a territory where we stand covered by the political corporation of the county, the town, the city and the school corporation, and it seems to me a question of great doubt whether you can give to each corporation liberty to select its own government. It seems to me that in the long run, when we reach the full scope of this problem, we will find that the State will have to define precisely the sphere of action of the city, the township, the county and the school corporation, leaving large room for the application of this important principle of local self-government. MR. FOULKE: There is a suggestion I would like to make. I understand that the by-laws of the League provide for the election of the officers at the May meeting. The May meeting was postponed on account of the war which then prevailed, and none was held. I suggest that a motion be made that the present officers and committees of the League be continued as at present until the next annual meeting. Mr. Deming moved that the present officers and committees of the League be continued as at present until the next May meeting. This motion, which was duly seconded, was carried. MR. BUTLER: I desire to present the following report of the committee appointed to audit the Treasurer's account. National Municipal League: GENTLEMEN: The undersigned committee appointed to audit the accounts of the Treasurer, beg leave to report that they have checked the vouchers from May 5, 1897, to December 1, 1898, and find the balance as shown by his cash book, $385.72, is correct. F. N. HARTWELL, Which report, upon motion, was accepted. LIST OF DELEGATES. City Club of New York Horace E. Deming. Municipal League of Philadelphia George Burnham, Jr. Charles Richardson. Clinton Rogers Woodruff. Municipal League of Pittsburg— George W. Guthrie. Capt. D. C. Irish. David E. Bayard. Civic Club of Pittsburg E. Z. Smith. Municipal League of Milwaukee John A. Butler. Capt. I. M. Bean. Charles E. Monroe. Hon. Francis B. Keene. Joseph T. Gilbert. Citizens' Reform Club of Dubuque, Iowa Hon. William Graham. Good City Government Club of Louisville, Ky. Frank N. Hartwell. Hon. Edward J. McDermott Lafon Allen. F. C. Nonnemacher. Municipal League of Boston Samuel B. Capen. Citizens' Association of Cleveland Professor Henry E. Bourne. National Civic Service Reform Association Lucius B. Swift, Indianapolis. Charles Richardson, Philadelphia. Hon. Wm. Dudley Foulke, Richmond, Ind. League of American Municipalities- Hon. Samuel L. Black, President. Commercial Club of Indianapolis C. D. Denny. W. P. Fishback. Samuel O. Pickens. C. C. Foster. Bement Lyman. C. J. Buchanan. S. P. Sheerin. Robert H. Lamb. S. E. Morss. Cleveland Chamber of Commerce Hon. L. E. Holden. Commercial Club, St. Paul Theo. F. Smith. Indianapolis Board of Trade Albert Baker. Allen M. Fletcher. Dayton Board of Trade E. M. Thresher. BOSTON'S DEPARTMENT OF MUNICIPAL STATISTICS. A brief description of the Department of Municipal Statistics, recently established in this city, may be of interest to the members of the League. The department is the first of its kind to be established in this country, and is the result of an investigation made by Dr. Edward M. Hartwell, at the instance of Mayor Quincy, of similar offices in European cities. The department is in charge of an unpaid board, consisting of five members, one of whom is appointed by the Mayor each year to serve for the term of five years, and of the City Engineer ex-officio. The paid staff consists of Dr. Hartwell, the Secretary, and five assistants. The powers of the board are broadly defined. They are, to collect and publish such statistics relating to the city of Boston as they may see fit and such statistics relating to other cities as are useful for purposes of comparison. Naturally, the first work of the board was to examine the statistical material already available, either in public reports of the city, or in the records of the several departments. Such an examination at once disclosed that a considerable body of facts were recorded, which had never been brought together in such a way as to furnish the greatest amount of information with the least labor to the persons seeking it. Our next step was to consider what questions regarding city affairs would naturally be asked by those charged with the duty of administering them, or by the citizens in general, and collect and present the facts which would furnish an answer to such questions in the simplest and most intelligible form. Believing that the financial aspect of the city's affairs was not only of great importance in itself, but was at the moment a matter of special public interest, the board turned its attention to the compiling and issuing of a comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the city for a period of five years. In order to more clearly determine the value of the items in the Treasurer's accounts, they were divided into four classes: First, the ordinary receipts and expenses; second, the extraordinary receipts and expenses; third, the trust funds of the city, and fourth, the merely bookkeeping items. It is common knowledge to every person conversant with ordinary business that the difference between ordinary receipts and expenses and extraordinary receipts and expenses is a fundamental one. It seemed to the board that the proper line of distinction to be drawn between the two was that drawn by every commercial organization between operating expenses and plant; in other words, that the housekeeping of the city, which is provided for by taxation, stood upon a wholly different basis, and was essentially different from the expenditures made for the purchase of machinery with which to do municipal business. It was considered that for the establishment of a modern city a considerable investment of capital was required for the providing |