26o
��Local Self-Government.
��the people had been in England, in great part, lost. The responsibility . . . rested, to some extent, on the people themselves, who forgot their birthright: '
In Lieber's " Civil Liberty and Self- Government," the essence of our demo- cratic system is thus expressed, —
" Anglican self-government requires that every institution of local self-gov- ernment shall have the right to pass such by-laws as it finds necessary for its own government, without obtaining the consent of any superior power. . . . The character of self-government is, moreover, manifested by the fact that the right of making by-laws is not de- rived by any grant of superior power, but has been ever considered in the English polity as inhering in the local community, — the natural 7-ight of free men."
Perhaps the writers quoted would not maintain the doctrine to the extent to which it has recently been carried ; but they coincide apparently with the popular belief that local communities can draw a line beyond which the cen- tral government must not go, and can say to it, " You have no right to inter- fere with our affairs. It is our right to settle this matter by ourselves exclusive- ly, — a right which inheres in us, and can never be lost, or rightfully taken away."
Recent historical studies have set forth in a clear light the great part played in Teutonic and English history by the village communities and by the local governing bodies, which have man- aged their affairs so admirably that they have made this country what it is. Deserved eulogy of the community- government, frequent mention of its successful management of local con- cerns, honest admiration for the conflicts
��and triumphs of these communities in defence of their integrity, have led to the present popular belief that there is a right of local self-government in the same sense in which there is a right of freedom of thought. It is an idolized belief. It has come to be associated with Plymouth Rock, with democratic institutions wherever they are successful, and with the integrity and perpetuity of the government. Over and over again every year is it reiterated upon the political stump that the salvation of the nation depends upon the healthful life of the local democratic governments ; and this un- doubted truth carries the erroneous conclusion, that, therefore, a town has rights of its own, inherent and inalien- able.
But this belief cannot bear the strain which comes in the halls of legislation, or when the executive department finds obstacles in the way of enforcing the laws. The radical difficulty underlying this conception of a right of local self- government is that it ignores the larger community of which the city or town forms a part. It fixes the attention upon a small circle, and does not see the relation in which that circle stands to the larger. Theoretically one doc- trine is held, but another is actually practised. In all state legislation the supremacy of the whole body politic is tacitly admitted on every hand ; and this admission is made in respect to the relations of the national government to the States as truly as it is in respect to the relations of the States to the cities and towns incorporated by them. If towns have the right to regulate their own conduct, then the State has no right to compel them to follow a prescribed course. Yet interference by States with town governments is constantly occur-
�� �
