Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 11.djvu/367

 THE MUNICIPAL LEAGUE OF PHILADELPHIA 351

plan of division, we should endeavor to facilitate the expression of the most enlightened opinion of the community.

I have summarized the conclusions of the committee, not only because of their inherent value, but because they foreshadowed, to so considerable an extent, the conclusions reached by a similar committee on charter reform appointed some months later by the National Municipal League. The pioneer work of the Municipal League of Philadelphia, not only along the lines already con- sidered, but in other similar directions, has not been fully appre- ciated not because of any desire to deny to it its full share of credit, but simply because its activities have been so numerous and varied that its own later work has, to a certain extent, obscured its earlier efforts. ,

Another of the bills prepared by the league dealt with the granting of franchises. It illustrated a sound principle of admin- istrative law, of equal validity at all times and under all circum- stances. No matter how strong our desire for municipal home- rule may be, we must recognize the fact that in those cases where there is the possibility of a conflict between the immediate and permanent interests of the municipality some form of central con- trol is necessary. That such a conflict is always present in the case of the granting of franchises has been abundantly proved by the history of American municipalities. It is the function and duty of the state to safeguard the interests of coming genera- tions ; to assure to them a participation in the financial and other resources of the community. Hence the propriety of the appeal to the Legislature to prohibit the granting of franchises by councils for a longer period than thirty years. The fact that our bill was ignored, while the legislative bodies of other cities are prohibited from granting franchises for a longer period than twenty-five years, shows how difficult it is to secure wise and progressive legislation in this state under its present leadership.

The Legislature in no sense encroaches upon the sphere of local liberties when it fixes the standards of action in cases of this kind. On the contrary, it is simply protecting the municipalities against the short-sighted action which results from the lack of proper perspective between immediate and ultimate interests. In