local gov veloped in Virginia. If we contrast the physical geography of this section with that of New England we see how every inducement favored the scattering of population and the development of great plantations. The influence of tobacco cultivation and of slavery was in the same direction. Since the desire for individual gain Virginia prompted most of the settlers, there were no strong ties ernment. tending to bind the people into compact communities. There were scarcely any towns in Virginia. Consequently the settlers were driven to select those features of English local government that were best adapted to their sparse settlements. court. The local organization corresponding to the town of New England was the parish. The vestry, a group of The vestry officers originally elected by the members of a church, was given control of matters relating to the church and the poor. Other functions of local government were placed in the hands of the county court, a body com- The county posed of justices originally appointed by the governor of the colony. The county court administered justice, but it also had important legislative functions, for it levied taxes for county purposes, maintained highways, and exercised general control over such affairs of local government as were not in charge of the vestry. Its authority extended over the county, which was sometimes divided into two or more parishes. The other important county officers were the sheriff (who, be- The county sides being a court official, was county treasurer) and type. the lieutenant, or commander of the militia. The original method of appointment in both vestry and county court was changed so that members came to be chosen in each case by the body itself. Thus there appear the two striking features of Virginia local government; first, the conduct of affairs by select bodies of men without the active participation of the mass of voters; second, Contrasts between the two types. The town ship-county type. the exercise of the principal functions of local government (those concerning taxation, police, highways, judicial matters, militia) by officers of the county. There is a third point of contrast between this, the county system and the town system of New England. In the latter the towns sent deputies to the Colonial Assembly, while in Virginia members of the House of Burgesses were sent from the counties. In both cases the voters elected their representatives. The New England type of local government gave the people much practical political education; while that of Virginia developed a class of intelligent, public-spirited leaders. These facts are of great consequence in colonial history, especially in that period when resistance to the English Government made Massachusetts and Virginia leaders in the Revolution. The middle Atlantic colonies present a medium in climate, soil, and physical structure between the extremes of New England and Virginia. This is also true of the methods of settlement and the occupations of the people. Similarly, the type of local government developed in these colonies seems to be a compromise between the two types that we have been considering. It has been called the mixed or township-county system of local government. Like New England, the middle colonies had both townships and counties, but there was a much more equal division of powers between these units. At the same time, the county was not so important as in Virginia. In New York the township was more prominent than the county, while in Pennsylvania county officers performed the most important functions. The colonial systems above described have been much modified. In New England it has been found convenient to enlarge the functions of the county and to diminish those of the town. In Virginia and through out the South the township has become an increasingly important organization. Still, in each of these sections. the system of local government now in use bears the stamp of its origin. In the Western States, the character of local government has been greatly influenced by the origin of the settlers. The general trend of population, as it moved westward from the thirteen original States, was along parallels of latitude. The three types of local government were therefore perpetuated, in some degree, in the Western States. In the South we find the county type prevailing. Nowhere, however, does the pure town. type exist, for the Northern States all have the mixed system. These States may be divided into two groups according as the town or the county is given more extensive functions. The States in the first group (Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Minnesota) have been influenced by the examples of New England and New York. In these States there is the annual town meeting of voters, where officers are elected and matters of town government are discussed. We have here the form of a pure democracy. A town board has general charge of town affairs. In the second group (Ohio, Indiana, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Colorado, Oregon, and California) the county is of more importance in local government. There is no town meeting. A town supervisor (or board of supervisors or trustees) exercises some powers that would be exercised by the town meeting in other States. But here the county board exercises more of such functions; it has extensive powers over the poor, health, highways, taxation, etc. In all the Northern States there is a group of other town officers besides the supervisors-clerk, treasurer, assessor, constables, and various minor officers and boards. The legislative authority of the county in both groups Local gov ernment in the West. Commissioner vs. supervisor system. Villages. Cities. of Northern States is the county board. In the Southern group the members are elected at large or from districts of the county. They are few in number and are called commissioners. Elsewhere in the North the members of the county board, called supervisors, are elected to represent the towns, villages, and the wards of cities. This supervisor system of county government originated in New York in colonial times. The county is the basis of court organization; so there is a judge, a sheriff, and a clerk of the court. Frequently we find several counties grouped into a district or circuit throughout which a single judge holds court sessions. In some cases taxes are collected by the sheriff, but generally there is a county treasurer. Other county officers, most of whom are elected by the voters, are the superintendent of schools, the register of deeds, or recorder, the surveyor, and the coroner. As population becomes dense in certain localities, villages and cities are organized. Village government is sometimes entirely distinct from town government; sometimes it is united with the latter for general purposes, though sustaining its own officers for special purposes. In either case the governing body is a board with an executive head, generally called the president.* Cities have governments similar in general plan to those of villages; but there are more officers and their functions are more extensive. The conditions of city life give rise to new problems of government to which we shall give attention in a separate chapter. Such, in bare outline, is the organization of local government in the States to-day. In the actual processes by which local government is carried on, towns, * Various terms are in use. In Pennsylvania there is the borough with a burgess at its head. In Virginia the corresponding organization is the town, with a mayor as executive officer. villages, and cities (or divisions of cities called wards) are regarded as divisions of the county. Counties are themselves divisions of the State. Now, there are some activities of government in which the local units alone are concerned, as in the maintenance of roads, streets, and bridges, and the care of the poor. But in many important matters the processes merely begin in the local units and are completed by the action of State officials. For example, taxation and election processes involve both local and State governments. The same is true, in many cases, of the administration of justice and the maintenance of school systems. Hence, it will be necessary to take a general view of State government before considering how these operations are carried on. SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTIONS AND REFERENCES. 1. The following references give the history of local government in the colonies: Thwaites, The Colonies, 55-58; Fisher, The Colonial Era, 60, 99, 167; Channing, The United States of America, 37-38; Wilson, The State, 449–458; Lodge, A Short History of the English Colonies, 48-49, 58-59, 414-417; Hart, Formation of the Union, 11-13; Bryce, American Commonwealth, I, 561-565 (589–593) ;* Bancroft, History of the United States, I, 285-286, 449. For descriptions of local systems as they are at present, see Bryce, I, chapters 48 and 49; Wilson, The State, 524538. 2. Make a study of a town: (1) With a map, as to its location, size, and shape. † Compare with other towns in the same county. (2) What officers has the town? For what terms are they elected? How are they paid? What * References to Bryce are given in duplicate; pages enclosed in parentheses refer to the third edition, 1896. + In the West, the congressional township, as determined by the United States Land Survey, frequently determines the boundaries of the town, |