DES MOINES OF YE OLDEN TIME. 349 old Saylorville if they could. That is the meaning of the "Des Moines plan." The fight made over the location of public buildings is because of conflicting property interests. And why are real estate owners of the west side pushing the center of business farther and farther to the westward? Once Second street was the center, now great business blocks are going up on Ninth, and the time is near when Twelfth street will be the heart of business, if the real estate owners to the west can bring it about. East Des Moines and West Des Moines will be a mile and a half or two miles apart, and soon Rising Sun and East Des Moines will sit on the same cutty-stool-that is, if the real estate speculators of West Des Moines gain their end. Nor do the people of the other divisions of the city stand cheek by jowl in interests with the west side speculators. The great hungry shark will swallow the little fish, which is the manifest purpose of West Des Moines' "greedy monsters of the deep," in demanding autocratic rule for the city. Now, think of three commissioners elected from "Grand avenue on the Hill" (which is likely enough to result), what care will be bestowed by them on East or North or South Des Moines or Highland Park for the advancement of realty values in those divisions of the city? What parks will be improved satisfactorily or anything else be done whole-heartedly for the good of the east, north and south divisions by the three and their backers who own the lands and lots westward to Walnut creek? What valuations will be placed on realty property for taxation outside of the reservations of the elect by the assessor appointed by them? Then will the city's population south of the Raccoon and east of the Des Moines rivers appear on the tax books rich, West Des Moines' population (owners of automobiles untaxed) poor. That may be flattering to the vanity of the east and south sides, but costly to the pocket. There will be no way to avoid this. Can the commission form of government give better satisfaction to Des Moines as a whole, dealing more fairly by all localities, than the republican form that the wisdom of Washington and Franklin and the other great statesmen of our fathers' day devised for us in 1787, in which every part is severally represented-the nation by states and subdivisions of states, Iowa divided into eleven congressional districts, the states governed by senatorial districts and counties, represented at the capitals severally, and the cities by wards? Des Moines to be fairly and satisfactorily governed ought manifestly to be divided into a score or more of wards, two alderman for each ward and twenty or more elected at large, ample power and responsibility being placed in the executive for the law's enforcement within the fifty-four square miles of the city's limits. One alderman for every square mile would be more satisfactory than the commission. Is Des Moines prepared to submit to the autocratic rule of a committee of three empowered to pass ordinances, sit in judgment and execute the laws-power forbidden by the fundamental constitution of the state of Iowa to be in the possession of the same personslegislative, executive and judicial power-the power of a czar? It is nothing short of military rule. True what Lyman Abbott says: "A page of experience is worth a whole volume of theory;" but equally true is the old adage that "experience teaches a dear school, but fools will learn in no other." YE 265TH LESSON. Des Moines of Ye Olden Time. Des Moines was a democraty in ye olden time. From 1852 to 1857 she elected at large her aldermen. How many voters had she then? In 1852, 120. They elected eight aldermen and a mayor, and all subordinate officers were elected by the people-recorder, treasurer, marshal and street commissioner-a councilman for every sixteen voters. In 1857 the number of voters had increased to 400-one alderman for every 50 voters. In that year the city was divided into seven wards and two aldermen for each ward. Twenty years later (1877) a backward step was taken, when the city council was reduced to nine members, and it has remained the same till now-seven ward councilmen and two elected at large with the mayor. So then, in 1852, Des Moines, with a total population of not to exceed 700 men, women and children (127 in 1846; 502 in 1850), had a mayor and eight councilmen. In 1860, with a population of 2,965, she had a mayor and fourteen councilmen-one for every 283 inhabitants, old and young, 56 of whom were voters. In 1870, a mayor and fourteen councilmen; the same up to 1877. In 1907, with a population estimated at 80,000, we still have a mayor and only nine councilmen, two of the latter elected at large. Counting one-fifth of the number of people as voters, we have one ward councilman for every 2,857 voters. How many of the voters of each ward know the candidate for alderman, of their ward personally and well for whom they cast their ballots? Very few indeed. Now this is not as it ought to be. The need of the hour is an alderman for every 300 or not to exceed 500 voters in a ward, which would be about one for every unit of the number of square miles of the city, or fifty-four councilmen. Then may the voters select for alderman a man they all know and respect for his integrity and honor, and elect no man that seeks the office. Reader, turn over the leaves of the history of Polk county, published by the Union Historical Publishing Company, 1880 (pages 670 to 677), and note the names of the grand men who served as councilmen of Des Moines down to the date of the publication of the book. Not one of them, I dare say, ever sought the office. In 1880 the population of Des Moines was 22,696, of whom 4,000 were voters-500 for each ward, approximately. Now we have nearly 3,000 voters for each ward, and ward politicians seeking office, and not one voter in a hundred, knowing well, if at all, the greedy and dishonest "cuss' for whom he may be compelled to cast his ballot, if he vote at all. Much more restricted in knowledge of the candidates will he be if he vote for five "commissioners at large." Give the people the townmeeting plan-wards of few voters, where they may all meet in one small room, talk over the needs of the city and choose the good man they wish to have represent them on the council in the city hall. That is as our fathers meant that the people should govern, and as they did govern the town-meeting is the unit in New England-the meeting at the county courthouse the unit in the South, because the South was sparsely populated, the voters far apart on their plantations. So was Des Moines governed in ye olden time. Let us, the sons of the grand old pioneers who gave us our free commonwealth, raise high the standard of democracy, not trail it in the dust, as the "Des Moines plan" implies. Those who have lived long in Des Moines know that her people are patriotic, and if need be will make the greatest sacrifices for liberty's cause. See what she did at one time in the past. In April, 1861, she heard the drum-beat to arms. Think of it! She then had a population of not more than 5,000 souls-1,000 voters. The national flag had been fired upon by southern rebels desiring a change of government no more radical than is now contemplated for Des Moines by a money-hungry club of 300 "business men," that is to say, rich men ("Scarcely shall a rich man enter the kingdom of God!"), their attorneys and others, their dependents. Nor was secession so dangerous to our fundamental liberties as is this later movement. To sever the union in twain the slave owners of ten states rose in arms against their country, but not to do away with a republican form of government, as is the purpose of the 300 club of Des Moines-God forgive them! In the county of Polk, outside of Des Moines, in 1860, as shown by the national census of that year, there dwelt 7,600 people, old and young. Added to the 3,965 of Des Moines gave for both city and county 11,925-the number of voters 2,500. The whole county, including Des Moines, sent to the front during the war, 1,400 volunteers and 100 drafted men. Of these 281 lost their lives in the service, and of Des Moines' own 91. Of both city and county, 99 were killed in battle and died of wounds, and 7 were starved to death in the Andersonville prison pen. Yes, Des Moines "did things" then for the "good old cause" of liberty and right. And today the "good old cause" that animated the hearts of the Ironsides at Marston Moor and Naseby, and of the men in blue at Gettysburg, Vicksburg and Appomattox, is again endangered-the cause of popular liberty. A change is threatened in the form of government for cities from the republican to the oligarchic type, and for the nation as well. A wealthy man said to me only yesterday that he is in favor of the election of the chief magistrate of the nation for life! It is no idle rumor that was of late wired to Italy from our country that a movement is on foot in the United States to this end. The same rank of men that are behind the Des Moines plan are behind this treasonable design, that is to say, representatives of moneyed interests, trusts, combines, monopolies and privileged corporations. Nothing short of the utter destruction of the democratic order is contemplated by the enemy. Beware of government by self-appointed clubs of designing speculators-a "commission" of five obedient licksp.its to do their bidding, as exemplified in Galveston and Houston, Texas, and as is designed for Des Moines by men blind to the public weal and greedy of gain. YE 266TH LESSON. Blind Samson. When we have parted with the form of popular government we shall soon lose its substance and when we have accepted the form of autocratic rule we shall very soon be cursed with its substance. We have become the mad votaries of commercialism. We think of nothing but commercial interests. There is an interest far above these. When the Persians invaded Greece, the Athenians, Gillies says (History of Greece, page 110), "were willing to relinquish all for the sake of their country, which they well knew consisted not in their houses, lands and effects, but in the constitution of government which they had received from their ancestors and which it was their duty to transmit unimpaired to posterity. This constitution it was impossible for them to defend unless at the risk of their lives and everything dear to them." The Athenians abandoned their city and temples to the torch of the enemy and went behind the "wooden walls" of their ships and at Artemesium and Salamis defended with their lives the liberties of Greece. Better that all the cities of the United States be laid in ashes and ruins like San Francisco than we give up the government of our cities to "one man government" (a king) or to that of a commission like that of the city of Galveston (a triumvirate). What is the meaning of this call for one man power or a triumvirate? Is there behind it a conspiracy to overthrow the government of the people in America in the interest of corporation despotism? One man or three men to govern a city-the city council, if there be one, only "a counseling body?" Does the city council of Indianapolis pass the ordinances (laws) for the government of the city, or does 352 THE CITY AND BUSINESS CORPORATIONS. the one autocratic mayor (king) make them, as does the triumvirate of Galveston? We know that the rights of men (the blacks and poor whites) are trampled under the feet of an oligarchy in the exconfederate states of the south. It is not true to say that the Galveston triumvirate were elected by the voters of Galveston. They were appointed by the governor in the first place. Now with the whole power of appointing all the city officials and of employing all the city employees and the city treasury at their command-they re-elect themselves, and can do so to the end of their lives. In 1860 the northern people were blind and deaf and dumb, and only the firing on Fort Sumter caused them, like the god, Jupiter in Milton, to "raise their heads and shake their invincible locks." What can lead them now to comprehend the meaning of the conspiracy begun in the ex-confederate state of Texas and carried forward by the "business men" (plutocrats) of the north owning and controlling the federalist (Hamiltonian) press? What is the meaning of the Tory cry for autocratic rule and the subversion of popular rule of cities? It means the same for the states and the nation. “A Dictator at Washington appointing 'commisions' to govern the states, and these appointing other 'commissions' to govern the cities." THE PATRIOT'S WARNING. Beware, beware He "all in all," puffed up with pride, See, see him bound to override, Beware, beware The millionaire! With tyrant hand struck freedom down She sank and left but the renown Of Greece and. Rome! Beware, beware The millionaire! A deadly foe, a deadly foe To thee, O workingman, to thee, Beware, beware The millionaire! Ah, one by one our rights are blown, And Samson blind! YE 267TH LESSON. The City and Business Corporations. A The advocates of bureaucratic rule for American cities say that a city should be governed as a "business corporation." Let us see. business corporation is instituted for the good of a few; a city for the common weal. A business corporation is a money-getting institution THE CITY AND BUSINESS CORPORATIONS. 353 exploiting the public. The city is administered, not for money making, but for distributing benefits, not to the few, but to all. A business corporation is devoted to the same end that the armies of old were, or Sherman's "bummers" on the march to the sea-living off the country-spoils-public plunder; and it is governed autocratically-directed by one mind-that of a "general" or "king" of finance. A city is a commonwealth, a family incorporated for the benefit of each member impartially, and to fulfill its purpose it must be ruled democratically. One holds office in a business corporation for what he can get out of it; in a city, if true to his trust, for what he can give of benefits. He is a servant of the people. Every schoolboy knows, or ought to know, that theoretically all public service is gratuitous, so exemplified by Washington at the sacrifice of his private interests. Hence short terms of office. In Massachusetts a year for the governor; in other states two, and for the President of the Union, four. And why? Because it is presumed that he could not rightfully be drafted for a longer term to the neglect of his interests and he is presumed to be ever anxious, as was the Father of his Country, to return to his farm-employment or other profitable or productive work whence he derives supplies for the needs of his home. Of old the soldier served without pay, furnishing his own outfit— horse, armor, arms, etc. This, then, is the theory of free government of cities, states and nations. Not so of business corporations. The business is a means of livelihood and office is, as a rule, a sinecure for life. The salaries are measured by what the business will bear, reaching $150,000 per annum for the presidents of some insurance corporations. The corporation takes much and gives back little. That is the end and purpose of its existence the accumulation of wealth for the exploiters of society, robbers of widow's houses. It has no soul. No sooner had one of the Texas cities (Houston) set up business government than the toilers who work for the city government at manual labor had their hours of daily servitude increased from eight to ten. That is "business," a business method, satanical, of course, as all "business methods" are. See the wrong: The poor laborer is robbed by "business methods" of 604 hours (752 days of 8 hours) yearly-the boon bestowed by Union Labor, to be devoted to home affairs. "Pshaw!" sneers the rich man who would govern our cities as "business corporations" grinding the faces of the poor (forgive him Christ!) lessening the taxes of the greed-swollen whose heads are turned with "prosperity." "Pshaw," he says, "the toiler would spend those extra hours in the saloon!" He that says this is a misanthrope, a cur! Now But business government for cities of Iowa increases the yearly salary of the Mayor from $2,500 to $3,500, and of the other members of the “council" (so-called) from $200 under the old regime to $3,000 under the "Galveston plan." Will not the hours of labor of the hardhanded toilers be increased? Certainly. That is "business." the only object of human effort, beyond "going about doing good," is subsistence. It is presumed to require as much bread, clothing, etc., for the subsistence of the toiler and his wife and children as of the "Commissioners" severally and theirs. Ought not the income of each be the same? We have reached the day-dawn of a new era. It is the era, not of "getting rich," but of equality. The rich man must step down, or rather, up to Nature. All salaries must be the same, of Mayor, Governor, President, worker in the mine, brakeman, hodcarrier, etc.-the same income to each and every one as each and every one has the same needs for self and family. America is a commonwealth; the states are commonwealths; the cities are commonwealths; and all wealth will be made common. It is a fine thing to have 300 financiers boss a city and brow-beat a legislature into doing what the Iowa legislature has been hounded on, by those madmen to do-pass an un-American law |