municipalization-respecting these and other unforeseen matters, franchise grants should not run for any definite period, should specifically reserve to the granting power the right, not only of absolute regulation of service and charges, but of revocation at any time, and should insure the grantee company against injury by providing for compensation to that company for the plant in case of revocation, such compensation to be based upon the cost of duplication, less depreciation, depreciation including loss of availability in the plant from invention or any other cause.

GOVERNMENT OF THE CITY OF GLASGOW.

199

THE GOVERNMENT OF THE CITY OF
GLASGOW.

REV. ALBERT LAZENBY, CHICAGO,

Formerly of Glasgow.

It is one of the disadvantages of bearing a good name that you are expected to live up to it. Thanks to Dr. Albert Shaw, the municipality of Glasgow has obtained such a good reputation, especially in this country, that municipal reformers have come to look upon it as the El Dorado of city government. But human nature is human nature in Scotland as elsewhere, and the "best laid schemes o' mice and men gang aft astray." You might have the most perfect plan, the most complete machine of city government, but without angels it wouldn't work, and even with angels it might fail to attain the end desired. I am not saying this in disparagement of Glasgow's municipality. I am only warning you not to expect too much.

Of course it must be remembered that Glasgow was not built in a day. It is the result of a gradual evolution reaching back to the twelfth century. The simple statement of the historian is this: "Glasgow was created a Burgh of Barony in the reign of King William the Lion; a Burgh of Regality in 1450; a Royal Burgh in 1636; the free election of magistrates was granted in 1690; the Municipal Reform Act was passed in 1833, and Glasgow became a county of the city in 1893." That is a brief statement but it covers a great deal. It represents hard-fought battles and hard-won liberties. Each stage marks an advance-a growth towards what it is to-day-a self-governing, democratic city.

Glasgow has been favored by nature, situated as it is on the banks of a river that had easy access to the sea. That river has been deepened and broadened until it is capable of bearing some of the largest vessels afloat. Within an area of twenty to twenty

five miles of the city all the leading coal and iron fields of Scotland are centred. Half the population of the Scotch nation is located in that same area, and nearly two-thirds of that nation's industry is carried on there-not only the coal and iron, the engineering and shipbuilding, but the weaving and all kinds of manufacturing. These have been important factors in the development of the city.

And along with this industrial development has grown up a corporate sentiment, a kind of civic patriotism which has had a great deal to do with its progress. The Scotch are proverbially clanny, and all through the city's struggles there has been that nameless something which is more than clannishness, and which expresses itself in pride of city. Glasgow prides itself on being the second city of the British Empire, and that pride is not an empty boast. It stands for something, and has stood for something, particularly in later years. Sometimes this pride has blinded its citizens to real weaknesses, but on the whole it has worked for their good. Civic patriotism is an invaluable element in a city's growth.

I have said that Glasgow is a self-governing city—and that has been so since the Municipal Reform Bill of 1833. It is true it is subject to Imperial Parliament. All her constitution and bylaws must receive the assent of Parliament. It cannot borrow without its approval. In your conception of a democracy this may seem a limitation of self-government. In one sense it is, but it is a limitation that makes for strength. Parliament with its combined wisdom drawn from all parts of the kingdom, is able to act as a check on any attempt at meddling or peddling legislation. It seldom interferes with any bill based on common sense and sound judgment.

Dr. Shaw, in his Municipal Government of Great Britain, has given a very exhaustive statement of the constitution of the council. For the sake of point, I may mention here: The council is elected by the ratepayers. The municipal voting list consists of all those householders who have lived within the limits of the city a year, have paid their rates and have not received relief from the parochial authorities. Females were admitted to the franchise in 1881, and since then have exercised

their vote in an increasing number. Lodgers are also admitted who occupy lodgings of not less than $50 rent a year, but they have to appear and make good their claim before the revising barrister every year. This explains the fewness of the number on the list. In 1898-99 there were 108,170 male voters, 22,230 females, and 6,017 lodgers, making a total of 136,417 out of a population of 747,000. The franchise, then is actually in the hands of the ratepayers. There is a certain equity in this. The ratepayers are the people who find the money for the upkeep of the city, and it is a favorite principle in British politics that he who finds the money should have the spending of it. It also has the effect of excluding that class who have no interests at stake, and yet under a manhood suffrage have the power of swamping the ballot box. All our voters are more or less responsible citizens.

The city is divided into twenty-five wards, each with three members on the council. These are elected for three years-one retiring each year. There are some seventy-five councillors, who together with the provost, and two ex-officio members, dean of guild and deacon convener of trades'-guild bring the number up to seventy-nine. And here it is worthy to remark that pre-eminently among the British cities Glasgow has succeeded in excluding politics from its municipal elections. The question, "Is a man a Liberal or a Tory, a Gladstonian or a Unionist?" is never asked. There are both Liberals and Conservatives in the council, just as there are, I take it, both Democrats and Republicans as members of this League. But that is not made a test question, nor in any way a qualification. In this respect Glasgow is a striking contrast to the English cities, and I think favorably so. In late years there has been an attempt to elect Socialists-qua-Socialists, and Trades-Unionism has had its representatives. But that has not gone very far. Few Socialists, as Socialists, have been elected to the council. One difficulty has been-the office carries with it no emolument. The duties are all voluntary. Even to the lord provost's chair there is attached no salary. A certain sum is allowed for expenses, but the office is purely honorary. An attempt has been made to endow it with a salary-it being thought that would give the council a wider choice for a lord provost. As

it is, the choice is necessarily limited to men of large means, for the position is an expensive one. But so far the attempt has not been successful. This remains one of the unpaid offices of the city.

In recent years there has been quite a movement in the English cities in the direction of placing one of the titled aristocracy in the chair of mayor or provost. The Duke of Norfolk has been mayor of Sheffield; Earl of Derby, lord mayor of Liverpool; the Marquis of Bule, provost of Rothesay. But as yet Glasgow has not found a gartered duke or titled earl to add grace to its council. It has been limited to its plain citizens. And in its choice it has been happy. It has had men who have been successful in their own business, and proved themselves valuable citizens. Only once during the whole fifteen years I have known the city, has the council placed a man in the chair who has fulfilled the duties in a perfunctory kind of way. He admittedly took the office as a step to a knighthood or a baronetcy. That is one of the great attractions of the position: it usually leads to a title. In a large and important city like Glasgow, something is sure to happen during a man's term of office (three years); an exhibition, or a royal visit, or a royal wedding, or some occasion for an expression of patriotism or civic generosity such as a disaster like that of Galveston-something is sure to happen for honoring the city, and that honor usually takes the form of a "Sir" for its lord provost. Sometimes one is added for its town clerk and city chamberlain.

The lord provost, as I have said, is selected from its citizens, and always from those elected to the council. He is elected by the council and usually from the men who have served the council in various capacities. He has no power of veto like the American mayor. He does not select committees as your mayor does. He is not the autocrat, and he cannot become the autocrat we sometimes see here. He simply acts as presiding officer over the deliberations of the council. He has two votes: one as a councillor, which he must exercise at the same time the others give theirs, and the other only to be used as a casting vote in case of an equal vote.

Shall I be charged with British insularity if I express my prefer