

MIS GOVERNMENT OF GREAT CITIES. 307 



the event of their unlawful destruction, the municipality would be liable 

 to respond in damages for their full value — all this for the accommo- 

 dation of a small fraction of the people. It seems to me that the value 

 of these structures, at least so much of it as exceeds a certain reason- 

 able limit, should be taxable. No principle is more firmly imbedded 

 in our political system than that the support of religious worship and 

 institutions shall be entirely voluntary. The exemption of this class 

 of property from taxation violates the principle, in that it is a forced 

 contribution on the entire community to the extent of the exemption ; 

 and it is the less defensible, in that the exemption is in favor of that 

 portion of the community that could with the least difficulty meet its 

 obligations. 



If the matter were presented in the form of a proposition for a direct 

 tax for the maintenance of the churches, it could not find support in 

 any quarter. No community in our land would consent that either the 

 State or the municipality should levy any direct tax to be appropriated 

 for the support of religious services or institutions. Why it is the less 

 objectionable, because it takes the form of special exemption from a 

 common liability, I am utterly unable to understand. 



Another instance of the abuse of municipal authority (and the 

 last to which I shall refer at this time) may be found in the legisla- 

 tion affecting railway corporations. The constantly increasing volume 

 of railway traffic demands almost daily increasing facilities for its ac- 

 commodation. New railways are constantly seeking entrance into or 

 a right of way through all our large cities. The granting of new 

 franchises as well as the regulation of the train-service on all lines ; 

 the protection of those streets which are either crossed or traversed 

 by railway-tracks; the construction of viaducts and bridges, are mat- 

 ters in which the municipality and the railway corporations are mutu- 

 ally interested, and which ought all to be considered and decided sim- 

 ply in accordance with their relation to the public interests. As a 

 matter of fact, the public interests have very little to do with such 

 decisions. The railway companies have learned that any legislation 

 which they may want, however necessary and proper it may be, and 

 however much it may promote the general welfare, must be well paid 

 for ; that any privileges, however legitimate, which affect either their 

 own interests or the interests of their patrons, can only be had by the 

 payment of a price to the city government. 



Within a few years a certain railway corporation applied for a 

 right of way into Chicago, on a route by which a great deal of the 

 most valuable property of the city was seriously damaged. At first 

 no one seemed to think that the project could be bona fide. When it 

 became apparent that the corporation was in earnest, it was still felt 

 that it would be utterly impracticable for the company to secure from 

 the City Council such an ordinance as would enable it to carry out its 

 plans. But the matter was in the hands of able attorneys and shrewd 



