Direct Legislation by the Citizenship through the Initiative and Referendum | Page 6

cent delegating their sovereign rights to representatives. But in 1870 the referendariship had risen to 71 per cent, only 29 submitting to lawmaking officials; and today the proportions are more than 90 per cent to less than 10.
[Footnote C: For constitutional amendments only.]
The thoughtful reader will ask: Why this continual progress toward a purer democracy? Wherein lie the inducements to this persistent revolution?
The answer is this: The masses of the citizens of Switzerland found it necessary to revolt against their plutocracy and the corrupt politicians who were exploiting the country through the representative system. For a peaceful revolution these masses found the means in the working principles of their communal meetings--the Initiative and Referendum,--and these principles they are applying throughout the republic as fast as circumstances admit.[D]
[Footnote D: While the reports of the Secretary of State and "The History of the Referendum," by Th. Curti, will bear out many of the statements here made as to how the change from representative to direct legislation came about, the story as I give it has been written me by Herr Carl B��rkli, of Zurich, known in his canton as the "Father of the Referendum."]
The great movement for democracy in Europe that culminated in the uprising of 1848 brought to the front many original men, who discussed innovations in government from every radical point of view. Among these thinkers were Martin Rittinghausen, Emile Girardin, and Louis Blanc. From September, 1850, to December, 1851, the date of the coup d'��tat of Louis Bonaparte, these reformers discussed, in the "Democratic pacifique," a weekly newspaper of Paris, the subject of direct legislation by the citizens. Their essays created a sensation in France, and more than thirty journals actively supported the proposed institution, when the coup d'��tat put an end to free speech. The articles were reprinted in book form in Brussels, and other works on the subject were afterward issued by Rittinghausen and his co-worker Victor Consid��rant. Among Consid��rant's works was "Solution, ou gouvernement direct du peuple," and this and companion works that fell into the hands of Carl B��rkli convinced the latter and other citizens of Zurich ("an unknown set of men," says B��rkli) of the practicability of the democratic methods advocated. The subject was widely agitated and studied in Switzerland, and the fact that the theory was already to some extent in practice there (and in ancient times had been much practiced) led to further experiments, and these, attaining success, to further, and thus the work has gone on. The cantonal Initiative was almost unknown outside the Landsgemeinde when it was established in Zurich in 1869. Soon, however, through it and the obligatory Referendum (to use Herr B��rkli's words): "The plutocratic government and the Grand Council of Zurich, which had connived with the private banks and railroads, were pulled down in one great voting swoop. The people had grown tired of being beheaded by the office-holders after every election." And politicians and the privileged classes have ever since been going down before these instruments in the hands of the people. The doctrines of the French theorists needed but to be engrafted on ancient Swiss custom, the Frenchmen in fact having drawn upon Swiss experience.
The Optional and the Obligatory Referendum.
To-day the movement in the Swiss cantons is not only toward the Referendum, but toward its obligatory form. The practice of the optional form has revealed defects in it which are inherent.[E]
[Footnote E: The facts relative to the operation of these two forms of the Referendum have been given me by Monsieur P. Jamin, of Geneva.]
Geneva's management of the optional cantonal Referendum is typical. The constitution provides that, certain of the laws being excepted from the Referendum, and a prerequisite of its operation being the presentation to the Grand Council of a popular petition, the people may sanction or reject not only the bulk of the laws passed by the Grand Council but also the decrees issued by the legislative and executive powers. The exceptions are (1) "measures of urgence" and (2) the items of the annual budget, save such as establish a new tax, increase one in force, or necessitate an issue of bonds. The Referendum cannot be exercised against the budget as a whole, the Grand Council indicating the sections which are to go to public vote. In case of opposition to any measure, a petition for the Referendum is put in circulation. To prevent the measure from becoming law, the petition must receive the legally attested signatures of at least 3,500 citizens--about one in six of the cantonal vote--within thirty days after the publication of the proposed measure. After this period--known as "the first delay"--the referendary vote, if the petition has been successful, must take place within forty days--"the second delay."
The power of declaring measures to be "of urgence" lies with the Grand