sentative court of justice. By no other process can the members of the representative political body act intelligently in an effort to voice their own opinion or to voice the will of their constituencies. For purposes of inquest into matters of administration, it is necessary that the executive or responsible directing officer be brought before those who are to sit in judgment: unless this is done the members are deprived of opportunity to question them; unless this is done they must accept hearsay evidence as to the facts; unless this is done no opportunity is given to members sitting as a political grand jury to listen to cross-examination to test the creditability of witnesses; unless this is done the case of administration must be tried on information by star-chamber proceedings without opportunity to explain and defend when changes are made, the purpose of which is to convict them of malfeasance or nonfeasance or breach of trust and to rob them of their "character" as public servants in the interest of persons of selfish design. These are essentials not alone to the protection of the public servant, but also to the whole morale of institutions of political and social justice.

How Publicity can be Given to Acts of Government

Provision must be made by the representative body for giving publicity to its inquests and deliberations, for this is the only way that a large and widely scattered electorate may become informed. It is only through such a procedure in the representative body as has been described, and a means of publicity which will make its acts known to the people, that an informed public opinion can be developed. And in making such provision this fact is to be borne in mind, that the only way that a city, state, or nation can be kept informed is through the news columns. The proceedings of the representative body, therefore, must be so staged and so conducted as to make

news.

This means that the proceedings of inquest and deliberation of the representation must be conducted as a public forum in order that the whole people may "listen in through the public press. This means that every issue must be dramatized; it means that the chief actors must be persons who will be listened to that the great leaders must be brought upon the stage where those who are the recognized advocates of the people in the trial of issues of political and social justice may be pitted against each other. The scene in the forum in the trial of issues joined on questions of common welfare and justice, must be a battle of giants recognized champions ultimately must stand before the whole electorate for a verdict of thumbs up or thumbs down. This is the purpose for which the representative body is created: to sit in council as the duly constituted forum of the people and try causes of political and social justice, and to do this in such a manner as not only to make the decision one of deliberative judgment, but to make every act and expression "visible" to the whole people. A primary essential, therefore, is a procedure which will make news of the inquiries, and deliberation of the causes which are being heard by the deliberative branch of the government involving questions of welfare and social justice.

The Need for Responsible Leaders

An opportunity must be given for appeal from the decision of the representative body to the whole electorate - that is, when the chosen leader of a majority in the deliberation body or responsible head of the administration whose acts are under review, may not deem the action taken to be to the highest interest of the public, opportunity should be given to sound public opinion though the electorate. It is only by giving an opportunity to leaders to make an appeal to the electorate as the final authority in a democracy that popular opinion can

control. Nothing short of this will enable the people to express their will on issues that they have not already passed on, nothing short of this can prevent representative government being controlled by an oligarchy - a designing minority. Since group opinion organizes itself around the proposals of leaders in the representative body, it is only by giving to leaders the right of appeal that they can be made responsible to the people. In no other way can action or proposals for action be brought to a final test. And the appeal must be taken at the time when a question at issue is under discussion, when the facts and the arguments may be voted on without confusion. This is a recognized rule in every deliberative proceeding. It is even more important in making an appeal to the country than it is for obtaining a vote in the representative body.

Another principle must also be borne in mind: that in taking a vote on any question which involves executive responsibility or leadership, the continuing confidence of the people in the man is quite as important as the measure or act in controversy. Responsibility is a personal thing. The vote to be taken must therefore be a vote for or against the officer whose act or proposal has been the subject of inquest and deliberation in the forum of the people where the issue may first be tried. The initial proceeding must be had in a duly constituted forum, in order that the decision may be based on evidence, with full opportunity given for hearing and argument. It is only by such proceeding that a deliberate decision may be reached by the representatives. It is only after such a proceeding, with full publicity given, that judgment on appeal may be deliberate; it is only by process of appeal on a record thus developed that the electorate may act as a positive constructive force in voicing the popular will,

Appeals to the People

Appeal to the people must be taken before them and conducted by recognized advocates. If leadership is to be made responsible, these advocates before the people must be leaders; and the issues must be those actually developed in the transaction of the public business. This is vital to effective exercise of popular control. The process of appeal must necessarily be one of "election "of choice between men who stand for measures. If the real leaders are not the ones who go before the people and if the issues which the people are asked to decide are framed in camera, by irresponsible persons or groups who have not been required to stand up in a forum constituted by the people for inquest, trial, and discussion, if the contest is not framed under such conditions that evidence can be adduced, witnesses examined and cross-examined, the whole process of popular appeal is degraded to a mock trial, and action by the people decides nothing except who, among irresponsible leaders, shall be given a chance to work out his selfish designs. Under such conditions the electorate has no opportunity to exercise its true constitutional function; and the Constitution itself, by which popular control is sought to be established, becomes a dead letter.

CHAPTER II

ESSENTIALS OF POPULAR CONTROL LACKING IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS

- al

AMERICANS have been characterized as "a goodnatured people dominated by an irresponsible political boss." This observation may have been apt in times past, but it is not to-day. We are still dominated by an irresponsible political boss, but we are no longer goodnatured about it. We resent the fact of this autocratic control; we resent any characterization which assumes that we willingly accept autocracy in any form though we can not and do not deny that we are still a boss ridden people. Every page of our political history since the days of Jackson fairly shouts boss rule. And it is a part of the personal experience of every citizen that when one boss has been overthrown another has stepped into his waiting shoes. Following every campaign to crush boss rule, "the system" has insidiously found its way to the forefront of political organization and leadership, first to surprise and later to madden the people.

Attempts made to Account for "Social Unrest"

Many attempts have been made to account for this most persistent of all our political phenomena. Some have thought of it as an inherent weakness of democracy

the only alternative remaining after monarchy and aristocracy have been laid aside. Others have explained it as an Americanism the necessary political result of a dominant commercialism. Still others have attributed it to lack of public spirit on the part of our citizenry and